Facts and figures
 |
|
|
|
The Incredible bulk
28.05.2008 |
 |
Time for a confession: I’m no good at predictions. So bad, in fact, that I haven’t committed one to print since 1994, when I solemnly announced in these pages that no one would ever build a quicker car than a McLaren F1. Thanks for that, Bugatti. But I’m now going to make another, and by the time I am exposed once more as a poor replacement for Nostradamus we will all have more important things to think about. So here goes. In as few as 10 and no more than 20 years from now, people will look upon the BMW X6 as evidence and quite possibly proof of a time when the world went mad. They will recall that BMW actually chose to build a vast, sky-high car weighing over two tonnes yet capable of seating just four people, and two of them in somewhat less than sprawling luxury. They will remember, too, that this car was no svelte coupé but one of the most awkward shapes BMW ever produced.
Finally, and with the greatest incredulity, they will recount the fact that people, of their own free will and by the thousand, went out and bought them. Of course, that is the excuse for this car’s existence, and a damned fine one it is. However much you may dislike the idea of the X6 – and you’ll be doing well to trump me on that score – the fact is that this year’s production is sold out before all but a handful of customers have so much as sat in one. And there is another, potentially more thorny issue with which X6 detractors must grapple. Even if you rate the concept behind it somewhere on a scale between flawed and foolish, there is no escaping the inconvenient truth that its execution is exceptional. One day on the road in the company of a Range Rover Sport is all you need to convince yourself of that.
The first question in search an answer is what, precisely, is the X6? I may have to get back to you on that, but in the interim BMW can be relied upon to produce another excruciating acronym with which to define the indefinable. It is an SAC, or more precisely a Sports Activity Coupé, or, most precisely of all, the Sports Activity Coupé, as no other car maker has yet been so, er, enlightened as even to intimate that it’s going to follow BMW down this highly original and courageous path. What you should not call it, at least in polite company among those with blue and white propellor devices on their lapels, is a cramped, ugly, impractical and expensive X5. What light can be shed by the silver Rangie hiding around the corner of the castle in Scotland where BMW has chosen to introduce us to the X6? At first glance, it seems the X6 is doing more to inform about the Land Rover than vice versa because, for the first time in my memory, the Range Rover Sport almost looks well proportioned and even handsome. It is the closest thing to a rival the X6 currently has, even if its upright appearance and horizontal roofline smack of conventional design. Naturally it has Land Rover’s 3.6-litre V8 diesel under its bonnet, not only because its outputs rival most closely those of the sequentially turbocharged, 3.0-litre straight six diesel that up to 90 per cent of X6 owners will choose but also because with the 2.7-litre V6 that is also available in the Range Rover Sport (and whose price more closely matches that of the BMW), it was going to get stuffed. Here’s why. BMW’s engine may be smaller and a little light on the cylinder count, but its 282bhp still eclipses the 268bhp offered by the Range Rover. Moreover, while the 2185kg X6 clearly has a weight issue, the 2675kg Range Rover Sport wouldn’t look out of place on Jerry Springer. Land Rover may be able to cling to a scrap more torque for the coldest of comforts, but the power-to-weight ratios are unavoidable: 129bhp per tonne to the X6, 100bhp per tonne to the Range Rover. This translates to a sub-7.0sec lunge to 62mph for the BMW, and a more leisurely supra-9.0sec stroll for the Land Rover. Yet, and to my surprise, the Range Rover Sport never feels sluggish or even slow. Perhaps this is because it is higher still or perhaps it’s because the level of expectation is not so great, but using the same six-speed ZF gearbox as the BMW the Sport offers a level of performance that all will find adequate for this kind of car. Yes, it’s sobering to see how quickly the X6 you’re following can turn itself into another unidentifiable dot among the Highland heather, but not once was I frustrated by either the power of the Range Rover or its charming, deep-throated delivery. Indeed, it has something on the BMW here. By any objective measure the German engine is superior, sometimes laughably so when fuel efficiency and CO2 outputs are considered. But it is less characterful and, with its spikier torque delivery, more clearly intended for a lighter, less lazy road car application. By contrast, the Land Rover V8 was clearly designed entirely and exclusively to power an overweight leviathan. I wish to take nothing away from the X6 here, because it is impossible to conceive of another engine in existence that could confer this level of performance on a car this heavy, yet still keep its emissions out of Band G and its official combined fuel consumption in the mid-30s. All I would say is that, out there in the wide open spaces of Caithness and Sutherland, the gap between them is sizeable but nevertheless less than the chasm you might expect. Until, that is, you reach a corner. Here the X6 does things that, had I not witnessed them for myself, I’d dismiss as pure fancy for such a high and heavy car. It should be said now that the X6 I drove had optional active anti-roll bars that near enough eliminate body roll, and optional 20in wheels clad with, at the back, a 315/35-section tyre. So equipped, it generated levels of pure lateral adhesion beyond anything I’ve ever seen any quasi-off-roader achieve. I recently spent a week in the company of a Porsche Cayenne GTS and believe me, this BMW does things that Porsche could scarcely conceive.
Thanks in no small part to a trick rear diff that works in much the same way as the anti-yaw control of a Mitsubishi Evo (except that, unlike the Evo, it also works on the overrun) by directing torque away from the unladen inside wheel. Understeer is almost entirely mitigated and the intervention of stability control delayed until you probably really do need it. The Range Rover Sport has little stomach for such activities, which is perhaps as well as it has little aptitude for them either. Imagine entering Nelson’s Victory into an offshore powerboat race and you have some idea of the conviction with which the Rangie fails to follow the X6 through a fast, off-camber curve. Try to flick it into the corner and it will reward you with a disconcerting lurch, but if you guide it gently it will heel over majestically and corner faithfully and rapidly enough not to cause embarrassment. Its progress is slower and altogether more regal than that of the X6, but again the BMW doesn’t have it all its own way, because it is the British car that has the better feel to both its steering and brakes. It rides a whole lot better than the X6 too, though, being fair, you’d have to go down a long flight of badly laid stairs in a poorly designed supermarket trolley before you’d find another that absorbs bumps with substantially less elegance than the X6. On smooth, open roads you can convince yourself that the X6 has merely firm suspension settings, but as soon as you slow down for a town, so great are the jolts caused by everyday ridges and potholes that you will suspect the ride quality is close to unacceptable. Rear passengers will readily confirm this, too. By contrast, the Range Rover Sport seems almost pillowly and pleasantly reminiscent of the Discovery 3 upon which it is based. Indeed, if you’re anyone other than the driver, the Land Rover is the clear pick of the two. The seating position is more commanding in front or rear, affording a better view of the world around you, while the seats themselves are less supportive but more cosseting. The dash design is less industrial than that of the X6 and more attractive as a result, and while some unworthy plastics continue to cheapen the effect as a whole, it still works better than the BMW cabin thanks to the inclusion of an effective touch-screen sat-nav that fares favourably against BMW’s ever-improving but still flawed and occasionally infuriating iDrive controller. When you sit in the back of the Range Rover Sport there is adequate space for your knees and all the headroom you could wish for. In the X6, that sloping roofline reduces rear headroom to what I suspect is less than that of a 3-series Touring. And while legroom is superficially better than that of the Range Rover, it’s much more difficult to tuck your feet under the seat in front. Even average-sized adults will be no more than reasonably comfortable here, at least until the car hits a bump and their skulls rise up to greet the headlining. I put these issues and many more to Martin Sloan, who product manages all X-rated BMW products in the UK, and concluded that I couldn’t see a logical reason why anyone would buy an X6. And he was good enough to concede, “The customer for this kind of car is not too concerned with logic.” No one will ever justify the X6 better than that. It doesn’t matter that a 335d Touring powered by the same engine is better by a mile in every dynamic discipline from handling and ride to performance and economy, while offering comparable boot space and possibly a superior rear seat package, and saving you the best part of 10 grand in the process. It doesn’t matter that a normal X5 3.0sd is not one kilo heavier and offers all but indistinguishable performance, economy and emissions yet can seat nearly twice as many people for less money. What matters, to the people at BMW at least, is that the X6 is a car they can sell, so sell it they will. But there remains a case for the Range Rover Sport, because the truth is that neither of these cars is that great to drive and, given that, I’d understand entirely those who chose to tool around in the one with some rear headroom, half-decent looks and the ability to let their kids bring a couple of mates home from school. However incredible the X6 is to drive, it is only so within the context of something that high, huge and heavy.
By the standards of something lighter – the 335d springs back to mind – it’s nothing special at all. But this contest is between only those cars you see here, and a winner needs to be found. The Range Rover Sport is not only technically inferior to the X6 in every significant area but also another 10 grand more expensive, so I guess its greater charm cannot prevent victory going to the BMW. But in not many years cars such as these will have ceased to exist altogether, replaced by a more efficient, less wasteful generation. They will be hundreds of kilos lighter, and as a result they will also be cheaper to run and more responsible to own. Most importantly, however, they will also be massively more fun to drive. As far as I’m concerned, that day cannot come too soon.
