MMike1981

http://www.caranddriver.com/news/car...hotos_and_info

BMW claims the base 2011 X3 xDrive28i can make it from zero to 60 mph in 6.7 seconds. That’s nearly a half-second quicker than the last X3 we tested, which packed 20 more hp than the xDrive28i’s 240-horse, 3.0-liter inline-six. Doing the same trick in a claimed 5.5 seconds is the new X3 xDrive35i, the first X3 powered by BMW’s direct-injected, turbocharged inline-six (the single-turbo N55 engine) with 300 hp at 5800 rpm and 300 lb-ft of torque from 1200–5000 rpm. An eight-speed automatic is the only available transmission. With two more ratios than the current car offers, we expect fuel economy close to the current levels of 16–17 mpg city and 23–24 highway—although BMW won’t provide official figures until closer to the X3’s arrival in U.S. dealerships, which the company promises by year’s end.

corduroygt

As I said before, this looks to be the RDX replacement we're all looking for. The 28i should give similar performance to the current RDX, it has less torque, but a 8-speed auto should offer lower gearing to make up for it, and the 35i is a rocketship, a bit unnecessary in this class of vehicle imo.

The 28i will easily get 27-28 mpg EPA highway...

It also looks quite good, they managed to pull off the chunky, tough truck look without sacrificing glass area. I absolutely loathe cars that have small windows, like the camaro for example. I was in a coworkers 2010 tucson and I disliked the less than RDX visibility. The RDX is pretty good in that regard.

bgillette79

Now that's what I'm talkin about!!

bgillette79

This looks like something that should cost 35-45k. The RDX looks like a KIA compared to this!

DaChef320

iTrader: (1)

its nice but still too small for a family car X5 FTW!

DaChef320

iTrader: (1)

BTW u should move it outta RDX and change it to car talk

vash337

put the damned manual in it!

MMike1981

its extremely relevant to this forum because it, at least it was, a direct competitor to the RDX

MMike1981

Q5 still has the best interior, but this definately closes the gap

MMike1981

With EDC, drivers will also get Performance Control which, when selected, adjusts the torque split of the xDrive system to 20/80 front/rear in steady-state cornering, and simultaneously applies the brake to the inside rear wheel and directs more power to the outside

WHAT IVE BEEN ASKING FOR FOREVER!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

BMW is getting it done....offering it all and letting the driver decide what they require

and uhhhh THIS: BMW’s ConnectedDrive mobile-internet system will be among the high-zoot options available. !!!!!!!!!!!11

MMike1981

http://www.motortrend.com/roadtests/...ook/index.html

MT's article - better pics - the cargo area has built in floor rails with what looks like metal fasteners built right into it, looks great, and looks big

cwepruk

That thing is the perfect CUV. I want. I'm guessing it will price itself to 50+k in no time though.

mav238

I know I have very different opinion on the X3. But IMHO, the car exterior styling still looks inferior to it's big brother the X5. The X3 still looks somewhat awkward, while the X5 just plain looks sexy.

The interior of the X3 is still too "retro" for what it represents. The center stack for the climate and audio, looks odd, trapezoidal panel looks odd and like what it could be found in a say 70s american car, olds or pontiac, just with more modern matrials.

Why can't they do something like the Audi or even the Lexus, or the Acura MDX? The BMW interior of the X3 and 3 series, just looks blahh... JMHO.

My old E46 330i back in 2001, had a much more attractive interior, more spirit in the design.

stoxxsp500

here's videos of the new x3
http://strada.posterous.com/2011-bmw-x3

personally, i never took a liking for the body shape of the X3 - found it odd especially how the rear cuts off. maybe this new one will be better. im no fan of the wooden panels either. let's see how they price this. based on pics, id still prefer the Q5. heck i even like the GLK better than Q5 or X3. but in the end, value for $ = base model SH- AWD rdx (for now) IMHO...

stoxxsp500

yes, i prefer the X5 over the X3 too!

mav238

Well, if one is going for the value factor, the honda product RDX will win hands down; in all areas, pricing, features, standard items, reliability.
But all the folks I knew (including myself when I bought my 2001 330i 9 years ago), wanted to have that blue/white propeller emblem on the hood. The projected luxury perspective and also the taste of the ultimate driving machine performance. Not sure the X3 2.8 will qualify for the performance factor, but my old 2001 330i with M-spec suspension, was one heck of a performer, even with only 225HP. BMWs are not the most reliable cars, like most european cars.

Between the X3 and Q5 or GLK, I will take the Q5 or maybe the GLK, but the X3 just does not do it for me. I don't care if they make a X3 335, 300HP CUV is a ridiculous notion, IMHO. 300HP large SUV makes sense, as you may need the extra ommph to move the hitched load. Sound like X3 bashing, but I really dislike the X3 interior, I am not sure what Chris Bangle and his legacy thinking of... can't they just look at what is out there in the market competition, and figure what the heck is wrong??? Even some of the upscale GM SUV products have nice design cues, albeit the materials used could be better. Chris Bangle took a good design foundation and totally brutalized it. Now the current designers are struggling to correct it. It is coming along, actually the latest 5 series and 7 series look pretty cool. The 3 series still suffer from some nasty exterior design flaws of Chris Bangle leadership. When they replaced the E46 with Chris Bangle's design, I literally gawked at it...

MMike1981

yea no question with the 50k sticker. I think they are really taking it to Audi, and rightfully so. The turbo engine is one of the best around. I cant wait to drive it. With added size, the X3 may unseat the Q5, altho i still prefer the interior and exterior of the Q, the X looks to deliver in many other areas and is not just a luxury box but a performance monster in the CUV category. who could possibly COMPLAIN about the powerplant

stoxxsp500

yep, the interiors man... i cant fathom why it's like that. maybe they did that on purpose for you to focus on the road. Q5 interior is tops definitely for my personal taste. performance, i agree BMW has better performance but i just cant get it to buy a $50k SUV with that interior. I guess that's the reason why Acura survives - people like us/me who buy their vehicle sensing it's more "value for $" LOL... [btw, disclaimer: im not a "fan" of the wooden trims so...]

MMike1981

im not so sure i follow the complaints about the X3 interior, IF ANYTHING, its basically the same as the Q5, almost the same identical layout with the same vent designs and almost the same speedo layout w/computer. not following the complaints at all. If you dont care for the X3, then I dont see how the dash layout or appearance of the Q comes on to you. Remove the Silver or colored outlines from the Audi dash and its basically the same.

Im no champion of BMW interiors as they havent changed much since, well, forever, BUT there is something to be said about understated elegance. Acura should tear a page from Audi, BMW etc and put away their 'how would a 13 yr old want the inside of a car to look like' book; more buttons, brights colors and outlines everywhere isnt exactly the way to go either, it looks ricey and actually low class. The interior of the RDX, if you stripped the name plate off, looks exactly liek how i would picture something costing 15k less. fine for a CRV but not for luxury or even near luxury. Something meeting in the middle would be the best. Acura interiors looks like someone had a panic attack

brizey

Hopefully available without wood trim--never could stand that. It's a car, not furniture. But otherwise, interior really is just not that important to me. It seems like the last few years everyone is hung up on interiors. We should be talking about the power train and performance numbers--interior talk is kind of effete to me somehow. I think 300 hp is merely adequate in a 4000 lb vehicle, especially one with performance aspirations. Switch to SC from Austria scares me. Not the most reliable brand to begin with, and it matters to me. I'd guess I do a 36 or 39 month lease.

mav238

I know it is a matter of personal taste, but the overall design, both exterior and interior matters to me as much as reliability and performance, if I am purchasing a car in this category. If performance was what drives my purchase, there are other cars in the same price range out there that is focused mainly on that, like the mitsu EVO. And If I am focused on perfomance alone, I would not be looking at an "SUV" or CUV. Different cars, different purposes, JMHO.





Somehow the Audi interiors are just more distinctive and pleasing to the eye. The BMW interior seems always to be "stone grey cold"...

stoxxsp500

hmmm...mav's posting of this m interior is more to my liking - no wooden panels. i find the audi's more eye-appealing as well strangely enough. but what really made me sold on rdx interior were the numerous blue and white lights plus the numerous gadgetry and confusing (for others) buttons and the like. maybe i am a nerd at heart. as well i love looking at the turbo boost meter believe it or not LOL. yes very illogical but am just stating an opinion. overall the M class interior that's posted here is good for me (no wooden trim), but the audi's is still better personally with the lights... - i like the bmw's more buttons on the steering wheel though.

stoxxsp500

LOL. heck i dont even like wooden trim in my furniture... i find these things look "old" -- no offense intended ok?

MMike1981

ok so u put a pic up of the 2010? what is relevant is the 2011 which is much improved (the 2010 is not exactly a poor cabin, either)

again, im not saying much, but understated elegance has its value, i think the old X3 was MAJORLY over priced, and so do many ppl, but i find a hard time arguing against the 2011 so far.

Id prefer an interior between the Q5 and X3, the X3 w/ a tad more flare, and the Q toned down a bit from all the shiny bits. I used to be a fan of the aluminum look back in the early to mid 2000's when many makers started to change from wood to other finishes, but now, some like Acura the most, have just thrown up all over the dashboard with them, which could be why im feeling the new X3

MMike1981

sport package

mic43

with the X1 coming i am sure BMW will be raising the price on this already expensive SUV to help distance the two models...add in the money for the optional torque-proportioning AWD system and the turbo and you are talking X5 money (after $4,500 bmw rebate, dealer discount, and government incentives my basic X5 diesel was $45,xxx)

I am excited about the 2.0 liter turbodiesel Q3 in terms of efficiency, fun to drive, and its very distinctive styling- 295lb ft of torque, dual clutch automatic, driver select/giant carbon brakes optional, electronic center/rear clutches all while getting an estimated 40MPG and costing thousands less than the Q5 or X3

the Q3 and X1 are what will compete in terms of price so i don't think its fair to compare the acura to more expensive models

http://www.caranddriver.com/news/car...di_q3-car_news

[IMG]file:///C:/Users/Mic/AppData/Local/Temp/moz-screenshot-2.png[/IMG]

MMike1981

you cannot play the price game - its vehicle type - i could compare a fully loaded blown out CRV to a pilot but why would you..the Q3 has no where near, at least it looks like, the utlity and space of a Q5, X3, RDX etc. its a 4 Dr coupe style. no thanks.

fair to compare to more expensive models? the RDX in pitted AGAINST THEM DIRECTLY at least thats what acura wants you to believe - how could you make such a statement, thats like saying hey, here is a 36k TL, but please dont compare it to 3 series because of price. r u kidding me - so then, what should the RDX be compared to? RAV4? CRV? CX-7 GT - we could make those similary priced if we wanted to

if acura cant have its RDX compared to the Q5 or X3 - then the RDX is DEAD- the intial and PRIMARY TARGET for the inception of the RDX WAS THE X3 and that is acuras spin - similar performance, similar features, similar everything for less money that doesnt mean its not a competitor, far from it

mic43

the RDX is a 5 speed, the BMW is an 8 speed

the BMW offers cutting edge electronic gizmos while the acura doesn't even have a smart key that can even be found on Kia s

the BMW is 6 cylinders with superior power to the acura's 4

the BMW is bigger, smoother, more sporty, and more comfortable

the RDX has an interior that looks like it came from a honda fit, the BMW has one that of rich leather and classy metal accents

in every way the BMW is superior to the Acura except in price...therefor it is not so much a competition between the two as it is with Audi and bmw than it is a question of how much money do you want to spent

MMike1981

well u just did a good job of highlighting how BAD the RDX is in its positioning in the market - still does not change a single thing of what it should be compared to.

should i not compare a TL to a G37 or a 3 series? A maxima to an accord or camry? A civic to a jetta? I mean, price is not what segments the market, its certainly an attribute - but what the X3 shows, and the Q5 etc is just how much the RDX has fallen off, that does not mean the RDX is not in the same market as those vehicles. So i still say, what then, is the RDXs competition? A Q5 or a Rav4? or does it compete with itself? on price alone, the RDX really has no competition it would seem under your theory. Should I not compare an Accord to a sonata due to price

the RDX lacked MANY features that other vehicles in the same category had throughout the years. Just because one may have a feature and the other doesnt does not mean they should not be compared. And price does not change that argument.

its ALWAYS a question of how much money you spend - but by no means is a sticker a measuring stick for the product you are buying. the RDX may not stack up against the new X3, and of course i think the X3 and Q5 will have their own inner battle, but you cannot just toss out vehicles in the same exact segment due to sticker price. When the RDX came out, every professional opinion highlighted the sticker of the Acura vs BMW as one of its best features/value in comparing them. The consumer decides that. As far as im concerned, the Acura is IN THIS SEGMENT, whether or not its a contender is why we compare them.