[unfoundnemo]

Originally Posted by Transfer

Yeah the extra 150 HP from real M S58 engine, new exhaust, new M xDrive with M diff, new suspension, new brakes, new wheels, new interior, better paint options, new exterior tweaks... Not much to differentiate it.

I'd spend the extra just for the interior/seats... M xDrive would be a close second, but that becomes exponentially more expensive with the additional consumables (tires) that I'd be cycling through.

[Art__Vandelay]

Originally Posted by bobbylechat

Imho it doesn't differ enough from a regular X3 m sport to be a real M model. Like others said, i don't doubt that the performance will be there but as far as visual goes, I'm not convinced

I agree. I consider the X3 M as my possible next car, but it looks a bit "boring". The only "M-looking" part is the front, everything else looks almost like a regular M Sport X3. The black rear diffusor and the black exhaust tips are bland looking as well (I'd prefer more contrast there).

And I can't understand why you can have the competition version only with the silver/black wheels, while you can have the full silver version (which I prefer) only with the regular X3 M. I can't stand black wheels or wheels with the inner black part, which make the wheels look flat (you lose the concavity/3D look).

[bkfastwagon]

When Porsche first came out with cayenne, there was a similar uproar from the purists. Porsche at the time explicitly stated that Cayenne was created to become a "cash cow" and that significant portion of that money will go into creating GT models with bespoke engines. To P's credit they delivered on their promises- ie Carrera GT and 918 Spyder. Their GT cars continue to come with NA high revving engines despite regular 911s going turbo. Porsche understands the importance of keeping the purists happy. Is x3m a "cash cow"for BMW and M division? Probably. As long as they understand what Porsche understood years ago...

[rarlyl8]

I don't get it. Don't see much of anything sporty, stylish, or even an suv.

[Max Well]

Interesting to read all of the negatives on the 'appearance' here on a(n) M subforum. This is our first venture into the M world with our X3M Comp we're planning to order, although I've followed the M Forums for years (mainly the M5 lineages). The reason we're 'moving up' is the engine, suspension, M-tweaks, and interior cabin appointments it supposedly offers over our G01 M40i's.

Frankly, could care less if it resembles our G01 M40i's. Actually that's a positive as we prefer to fly under the radar. Knowing what we have at our disposal under the hood and cabin is why we're buying. But to each their own. And not denigrating those who feel they need to make an aggressive statement with their vehicles - just a bit surprised from M Enthusiasts that so many of the comments are on the aesthetic, not the potential performance and handling and engineering precision they're bringing to the table.

[Richierich32]

Originally Posted by kramerz500

Attachment 2013334

Attachment 2013335

Attachment 2013336

Attachment 2013337

Me likey black grills and trims..want some for my M40d

[paliknight]

Originally Posted by Transfer

Yeah the extra 150 HP from real M S58 engine, new exhaust, new M xDrive with M diff, new suspension, new brakes, new wheels, new interior, better paint options, new exterior tweaks... Not much to differentiate it.

I'm pretty sure he meant visually. The performance will be noticeable but visually they'll be difficult to distinguish unless you get closer and read the badges. Compared to the differences between the other base cars and their M counterparts, this M is lacking the visual differences M cars usually have.

[eksigned]

I don't love it, I don't hate it. Wish they'd do something with that crazy badging.

[SCOTT26]

I would get a genius in there with a bottle of BMW Leather cleaner right away.

[Mako]

Originally Posted by PureModelsOnly

That's so strange the M40i comes with black rails and the M doesn't.

It's an option. Satin or black roof rails were options on Config

[Art__Vandelay]

Originally Posted by Max Well

Interesting to read all of the negatives on the 'appearance' here on a(n) M subforum. This is our first venture into the M world with our X3M Comp we're planning to order, although I've followed the M Forums for years (mainly the M5 lineages). The reason we're 'moving up' is the engine, suspension, M-tweaks, and interior cabin appointments it supposedly offers over our G01 M40i's.

Frankly, could care less if it resembles our G01 M40i's. Actually that's a positive as we prefer to fly under the radar. Knowing what we have at our disposal under the hood and cabin is why we're buying. But to each their own. And not denigrating those who feel they need to make an aggressive statement with their vehicles - just a bit surprised from M Enthusiasts that so many of the comments are on the aesthetic, not the potential performance and handling and engineering precision they're bringing to the table.

The performance is the most important part, it always will be for me. But this is a thread about pics of a spotted X3 M and I think it's normal that we comment on the look of the car.

We still have to wait for the first reviews and test drives.

[soulcrft]

Originally Posted by alex2364

The rear badging looks way too busy.

Yeah, my same thoughts exactly. First thing that jumped out at me.
The rest is cool.

[Max Well]

Originally Posted by PureModelsOnly

Well put any same generation M3 next to its regular 3 series counterpart and the visual differences are obvious and the M has much more presence. Look at the F80: wider fenders, carbon roof, power dome roof, almost all the body panels are unique to the M. The X3M just has front and rear bumpers and the spoiler.

You know you are preaching to the choir, at least with the CFRP roof, where it would make a significant difference in the physics of the taller X3 (and X5, and X6). Other than cost, and maybe some don't like the look, difficult to think of an argument for why a CFRP roof shouldn't be placed on every high performance offering. But the visual differences you suggest, such as the body panels, as long as they don't degrade the weight or aerodynamics - go for it. Suspect that is more of a cost-savings move by BMW. These are the first X3/4M models produced, and with the global economy, and electric, ... suspect the finance team suggested a soft opening to see how they fly. If they do well, wouldn't be surprised to see more invested into some of the finer points you mention, again, depending on where the world is heading from an economic perspective.

But I would suggest that 'wide fenders', while looking aggressive on low platform vehicles, which can get by with wide tires as their SSF is great and they aren't worried as much about rollovers, they do affect the vehicle's wind field. For track and grand prix cars which need the traction and grip wider tires provide, wide fenders provide an aerodynamic way of reducing the turbulence caused and are worth any potential drag cost. But for the taller SUV/SAV platform, which is already one of the most common groups to experience roll-overs (which initiated the reforms and dynamic stability research etc), wide tires with better traction can potentially increase risk of such in sudden high velocity small radius turning maneuvers.

So what's the point of having wide wheel flares if you can't safely option really wide tires? Does it not become a parody of the very thing most M Enthusiasts decry - fake breathers, fake vents, fake wheel well flares, all just for looks? If the fake items don't increase drag (Cd) or frontal area (A), then fine - makes for an aggressive statement and many are pleased. But I've never seen a wind tunnel test which compares two identical vehicles, adds some fake wide wheel flares, and shows that the wider fake vehicle has better aerodynamics than the slimmer, stream-lined vehicle. And I suspect BMW's M design team would like to present an aggressive look - they've been doing it for years, but on the X3 (and to some extent X4), I have to think they've done exhaustive wind tunnel testing and, considering they know the physical limits of the size tires they can reasonably place, that they don't want to waste the Cd x A on such an aesthetic. One could argue that the X5 and X6 have more aggressive looks, but I would also counter that those have not gone up against the likes of the F-Pace SVR, Maserati Levante Trofeo, Alfa Stelvio Quad (and in it's new guise coming), Lamborghini Urus, Aston Martin DBX, and the list will continue to grow. They're great vehicles in their own right, but their size makes the X3 and X4 the best chance BMW has to make a high performance SUV product to be competitive with other Mnfrs.

And the power dome? Same point - does the X3M or X4M need the room for 'the dome'? Clearly, no. Do the smaller profile M vehicles need it to fit their large engine/size? Clearly, yes. Would be a mockery if BMW placed the dome just for aesthetics, as it clearly cannot improve Cd x A. Form vs function. Do anything you want to make the look more aggressive, won't have any argument here, but if it worsens the aerodynamics and performance characteristics without any gain other than looks, then I'll pass.

[M3 Adjuster]

Originally Posted by bkfastwagon

When Porsche first came out with cayenne, there was a similar uproar from the purists. Porsche at the time explicitly stated that Cayenne was created to become a "cash cow" and that significant portion of that money will go into creating GT models with bespoke engines. To P's credit they delivered on their promises- ie Carrera GT and 918 Spyder. Their GT cars continue to come with NA high revving engines despite regular 911s going turbo. Porsche understands the importance of keeping the purists happy. Is x3m a "cash cow"for BMW and M division? Probably. As long as they understand what Porsche understood years ago...

sales of the X3 indicate yes... it is a cash cow for BMW

[ASAP]

little dissapointed

badging looks like someone really wanted to slap a fake M badge on their car

the booty and overall widthwith no flares doesnt impress

[kramerz500]

Originally Posted by cfm56d7b

@kramerz500, thanks for sharing the picture. Where was it taken?

Originally Posted by cfm56d7b

@kramerz500, thanks for sharing the picture. Where was it taken?

This photo was shared to me off of a Facebook group. This unit is at BMW of West Houston for a reveal or showing tonight the 19th.

[Roch M4]

Those seats are gorgeous, but I can clearly imagine after few months how this white perforated leather will become gray and wear and tear will be more noticeable than any other color

[ProperBimmer]

Originally Posted by mose121

The word "competition" should never be used in reference to an SUV of any kind. PERIOD. Can't believe they chose to use it that way. Absolutely ridiculous. Can't wait for the X7M Competition.

I agree 100%! The word competition should never be used on an SAV/SUV's (these aren't even SUV's right? Aren't they crossover SAV's?) lame either way. Ruined the purpose of M

[Brasko]

I was hoping for wider rear section/fenders and I'm not a fan of the new "Competition Package" badging.

Was really hoping to pick one up for the daily, but think I'm going to hold off for now.

[dmboone25]

Originally Posted by PureModelsOnly

Good lord why can't anyone in this thread comprehend that this is either a pre-production or press model that gets beaten up and dirty from all the testing.

What does that matter?

Will that change the idiotic rear badging?

[b4hand]

Saw the X3 and X4 this weekend at the 12 Hours of Sebring. Its GORGEOUS in person. It has much more presence and stance then the pics make it seem. Its subtly aggressive and I really like it. It confirmed me and wifey's plans to get one this year!

[M3_WC]

Originally Posted by Brasko

I was hoping for wider rear section/fenders and I'm not a fan of the new "Competition Package" badging.

Was really hoping to pick one up for the daily, but think I'm going to hold off for now.

The lack of some simple lip flares like the X5M is disappointing. It does look too narrow.