[dfcoelho]

Hi,

BMW just announced it's now offering the new X3 in Sdrive configuration (rear wheel drive only) with the 143bhp 2.0 Diesel engine in the UK. As it is only RWD the Hill Descent Control is not available, but apart from that the equipment level will be the same.

Model BMW X3 sDrive18d
Power 143 hp
Torque 360 Nm
0 – 62mph 9.9 (10.3)seconds
Top Speed 121 (118) mph
Combined 55.4 (52.3)mpg
CO2 Emissions 135 (142) g/km

http://www.whatcar.com/car-news/2wd-...evealed/263707

[RichardBR]

Originally Posted by dfcoelho

Hi,

BMW just announced it's now offering the new X3 in Sdrive configuration (rear wheel drive only) with the 143bhp 2.0 Diesel engine in the UK. As it is only RWD the Hill Descent Control is not available, but apart from that the equipment level will be the same.

Wow. Not sure if I like this. And BMW told us when they released the F25 that they would never consider 2WD on the new X3...

So much for their promise.

[powertech83]

Originally Posted by RichardBR

Wow. Not sure if I like this. And BMW told us when they released the F25 that they would never consider 2WD on the new X3...

So much for their promise.

Profit vs Promise... hmmm

I guess BMW would only sell this in certain market where sdrive would make more sense (or profit?) rather than xdrive.
Like where I live for example, for some unknown reason we pay more import taxes on cars with 4x4 system of any sort. Which is why the majority of SUV here are 4x2 (BMW don't even sell xdrive X1 here).

[philtrick123]

I think the reason for bringing out the X3 18d Sdrive in the uk is due to company car taxation. With the lower co2 output, and lower list price, it will save a company car driver a few hundred pounds per year in tax.

The price also drops into Audi Q3 territory.

I guess most X3's are never driven seriously off road, so 2wd will be suffice.

[troggy1969]

I struggle to see the point of 2 wheel drive on this type of car.

I bought mine due to living in the hills and being unable to go out when it snows for weeks without a 4x4 (I had a 4x4 for winter before but got fed up with having 2 cars). If I didn't need it I would have bought a 3 or 5 series with better handling & economy.

Looking at the figures there doesn't seem to much of a savig 5g/km co2 (auto) and you a losing 40hp and adding 2 seconds to the 0-60 time. I guess the big saving is purchase price.

[philtrick123]

Originally Posted by troggy1969

I struggle to see the point of 2 wheel drive on this type of car.

I bought mine due to living in the hills and being unable to go out when it snows for weeks without a 4x4 (I had a 4x4 for winter before but got fed up with having 2 cars). If I didn't need it I would have bought a 3 or 5 series with better handling & economy.

Looking at the figures there doesn't seem to much of a savig 5g/km co2 (auto) and you a losing 40hp and adding 2 seconds to the 0-60 time. I guess the big saving is purchase price.

I worked out that there could be a £500 tax saving going for the 18d. (dependant on comparison being a 20d or 20d Eff Dynamic version)

Unfortunately there are a lot of 4x4 which never leave the tarmac (esp in Berkshire & London). People buy them for the 'lifestyle' image, or they just like sitting higher. I very rarely need a 4x4, apart from an occasional ski trip- but I do like sitting higher up + higher load level + I prefer the look of a SUV + i'm irrational (unusual for males )

[brissim]

In years gone past I used to snear at these "pretenders" who bought SUVs with only 2-wheel drive. But over the years I've done a complete U-turn on my opinion of these vehicles. Its come with the realisation that (at least here in Australia) that the majority of people who bought SUVs were not going to head off-road and simply did not need either AWD or 4WD. They bought SUVs because of the driving position, the ease of getting things in and out of them (especially kids in and out of child seats) and really were simply a family wagon with - in most cases - more room.

Its not for me, but still well done BMW for addressing what probably will be only a niche market with - as posters have pointed out above - a not so insignificant saving in price.

Tony

[96_Impreza]

Originally Posted by troggy1969

I struggle to see the point of 2 wheel drive on this type of car.....

Less iron to haul around.
"...Combined 55.4 (52.3)mpg..."

[lbjgh]

What's this co2 thing you speak of?

The sounds like some sort transfer of wealth scheme.

I wonder what the co2 emissions are like on the ship that delivered your car.

[philtrick123]

Originally Posted by lbjgh

What's this co2 thing you speak of?

The sounds like some sort transfer of wealth scheme.

I wonder what the co2 emissions are like on the ship that delivered your car.

In the uk most car related taxes (purchase tax, yearly road tax, company car tax if you get a car with work) are based on CO2 output, which is directly related to fuel economy. The theory being- people who can afford large/fast cars, can also afford to pay the tax. The rest are 'pushed' towards smaller more fuel efficient cars. So called 'Green' Agenda

Fortunately BMW engines generally have very good CO2 output.

[ozbmwx3]

Originally Posted by brissim

In years gone past I used to snear at these "pretenders" who bought SUVs with only 2-wheel drive. But over the years I've done a complete U-turn on my opinion of these vehicles. Its come with the realisation that (at least here in Australia) that the majority of people who bought SUVs were not going to head off-road and simply did not need either AWD or 4WD. They bought SUVs because of the driving position, the ease of getting things in and out of them (especially kids in and out of child seats) and really were simply a family wagon with - in most cases - more room.

Its not for me, but still well done BMW for addressing what probably will be only a niche market with - as posters have pointed out above - a not so insignificant saving in price.

Tony

Tony,

we may not see this version in Oz. IMHO It just doesn't sound like something BMW Australia would do. But we'll have to wait and see.

[Chris55]

In that case, I think a SKoda Yeti would be a better option - awd and good performance. Of course, that's just my opinion.

[MattUK]

Sounds like a painful car to drive!

[SR40X3]

Originally Posted by Chris55

In that case, I think a SKoda Yeti would be a better option - awd and good performance. Of course, that's just my opinion.

Just traded a Yeti for an X3. Would agree a 4wd Yeti would be worth considering vs a 2wd 18d X3 for sure. Yeti was a good car....considearbly smaller than the X3 though - closer to Evoque size (but not quality) than the X3.

[mattlinguini]

Hi all, a lot of companies in the UK who have company car schemes do not allow drivers to have a 4x4, however they stupidly allow 2x4's due to them not knowing anything about cars!! So a number of drivers are opting for these kind of vehicles (xc60 / evoke) instead of getting an estates for extra family space

[troggy1969]

The wonders of marketing and goverment tests.

The biggest 2 factors for fuel use are aerodynamics and weight and the 4 x 2 is virtually the same as the others. You need a certain amount of power (hence fuel) to move a vehicle at a certain speed so a small engine working hard will use the same fuel as a large engine having a easier time. I doubt you would get much over 45mg from the 1.8D and I can get that from a 3.0D!!!!

[philtrick123]

Originally Posted by troggy1969

The wonders of marketing and goverment tests.

The biggest 2 factors for fuel use are aerodynamics and weight and the 4 x 2 is virtually the same as the others. You need a certain amount of power (hence fuel) to move a vehicle at a certain speed so a small engine working hard will use the same fuel as a large engine having a easier time. I doubt you would get much over 45mg from the 1.8D and I can get that from a 3.0D!!!!

Agreed- but the year 1 cost difference between the 1.8d and 3.0d are not insignificant. Roughtly £7k price difference + £1.2k additional per year if the pay company car tax on the 3.0d. So with car leasing rates it could work out at circa £5k over 3 years out of your pocket. I would pay the difference to get the extra power, a lot wouldn't.

[monza2t]

Originally Posted by troggy1969

I struggle to see the point of 2 wheel drive on this type of car.

I bought mine due to living in the hills and being unable to go out when it snows for weeks without a 4x4 (I had a 4x4 for winter before but got fed up with having 2 cars). If I didn't need it I would have bought a 3 or 5 series with better handling & economy.

Looking at the figures there doesn't seem to much of a savig 5g/km co2 (auto) and you a losing 40hp and adding 2 seconds to the 0-60 time. I guess the big saving is purchase price.

I always find it interesting when people 'need' AWD. I lived in montana for years and survived getting around with 2wd

[dnw]

Wow, slow. Q5 slow in fact and that was 0-60 in about 6 months. Too underpowered for this weight of car, the 20d already is bare minimum.

Please can we have something else at the top end to balance this out BMW? An M40d maybe? Pretty please...?

[sids911]

I personally would hesitate but more choices are a good thing, not bad. Let consumers vote with their money.

I just wish the US had more engine choices ... we hardly get any diesel choices.