[spta97]

Originally Posted by R N M

I just went through this and ended up with X3 M40i over X5.
X3 and X5 have equal legroom but the floor on X5 is higher and therefore rear seat is actually less comfortable. This also is an issue for the cargo space in the back - the X5 loading floor is higher and space from back seat is the same. Go to dealer- park them side by side and you will see. The X5 does have a much more luxurious interior.

I had a 2020 X5 40i loaner when my X3M was in for the break-in service.

For a $60k vehicle I was extremely unimpressed. It did have a plush ride (which I found disconnected me from the road) but it was slow, did not handle well, and I found the interior cheap looking.

The wood trim reminded me of station wagons of the 70's and 80's with the wood paneling on the side.

I also wasn't a fan of the iD7 gauge cluster setup (so glad I got a MY2020 for my X3M).

I suppose it is personal opinion, but I felt the interior on my X3M was a lot more luxurious looking and far more sleek and technical.

I would have looked at the X5M when I was shopping but it is out of the budget.

[ellipsis212]

Originally Posted by akkando

What's in it for them to do it correctly though? nothing. They make a video, then they make another. It doesn't matter if they do things right.

I guess not looking like a know-nothing in front of their audience?

But you're right. There are lots of popular car channels on YouTube where the reviewers are definitely not genuine car enthusiasts.

[heavyD^2]

I enjoyed the review but I have to disagree with his comments that they could have dialed back the handling to make the ride more compliant. If you want a less sharp SUV that's more compliant in the street and still very fast in a straight line BMW offers exactly what you are looking for in the M40i. The X3/4M are proper M vehicles which have always prioritized performance over comfort so it's a matter of simply understanding that these vehicles aren't designed to satisfy the masses.

[04cobra]

Note to self, when racing one of thees in my trackhawk, use launch control since the BMW owner most likely doesn't know how to

[euro*]

Originally Posted by 04cobra

Note to self, when racing one of thees in my trackhawk, use launch control since the BMW owner most likely doesn't know how to

::

[Young04]

Originally Posted by vcx

I must be the only guy not impressed by the X3M.

I actually drove an X4M competition and was surprised by the important lag of the engine, especially for a twin turbo engine, much more noticeable than in my 340i.

The engine felt embarrassingly weak until 3 or 3.5k rpm.

Maybe it's the weight of the car.

The only good surprise were the breaks: very powerfull and sharp.

I was much more impressed by the X6 M850i that I drove that same day. I was expecting a heavy and dull SUV and was shocked how quick and responsive it was. That V8 is a beast, the power delivery is great.

I'm guessing that you meant X6 M50i. I have an X3MC and was debating the X5 M50i as well. The V8 definitely has more low end grunt and feels quicker than the X3MC. However, the X3M carries more speed with it than you feel whereas with the X5 M50i I thought I was going faster than I actually was. So the X5 M50i may be quicker in normal driving but I think part of that is merely perceived speed.

For sure, above 3.5K is the S58's strength. But I wouldn't say it is "embarrassingly weak" below that. When I putz around town in Efficient/D1, I pull away quicker than most cars even keeping the revs below 3K RPM.

[akkando]

Originally Posted by heavyD^2

I enjoyed the review but I have to disagree with his comments that they could have dialed back the handling to make the ride more compliant. If you want a less sharp SUV that's more compliant in the street and still very fast in a straight line BMW offers exactly what you are looking for in the M40i. The X3/4M are proper M vehicles which have always prioritized performance over comfort so it's a matter of simply understanding that these vehicles aren't designed to satisfy the masses.

Or just get the x3m instead of x3mc

[heavyD^2]

Originally Posted by akkando

Or just get the x3m instead of x3mc

I suppose the standard 20" wheels may offer more sidewall but is the suspension setup that much different for non-Comp versions?

[ThumperMCS]

Promise you....if they had made the suspension softer everyone would be complaining that its "not a real M car" and the like...

[vcx]

Originally Posted by Young04

I'm guessing that you meant X6 M50i. I have an X3MC and was debating the X5 M50i as well. The V8 definitely has more low end grunt and feels quicker than the X3MC. However, the X3M carries more speed with it than you feel whereas with the X5 M50i I thought I was going faster than I actually was. So the X5 M50i may be quicker in normal driving but I think part of that is merely perceived speed.

For sure, above 3.5K is the S58's strength. But I wouldn't say it is "embarrassingly weak" below that. When I putz around town in Efficient/D1, I pull away quicker than most cars even keeping the revs below 3K RPM.

You are right it was a X6 M50i actually.

Concerning the X3M, it was slow in the low range rpm comparing to what I was expecting from a 510hp bi-turbo engine, but of course not if you compare it with a normal car.

[stein_325i]

Since when did a real M car NEED a harsh suspension? I don't think people would be complaining about a nice riding vehicle and then saying "oh its not a real M car because it isn't back breaking." You can still have great handling and a nice ride, just look at Porsche.

All of this reminds me of Jeremy Clarkson's comments on the Z4.

"Its an American car that's why it rides so hard [in stereotypical southern accent] cause hey its sporty! That's sporty, got no suspension!"

[AlexFL]

Originally Posted by vcx

You are right it was a X6 M50i actually.

Concerning the X3M, it was slow in the low range rpm comparing to what I was expecting from a 510hp bi-turbo engine, but of course not if you compare it with a normal car.

Yeah, S58 is definitely tuned for the high end power rather than low end torque. And dyno shows 550 bhp. BMW underrated the power once again.

[Transfer]

Originally Posted by jstein55

Since when did a real M car NEED a harsh suspension? I don't think people would be complaining about a nice riding vehicle and then saying "oh its not a real M car because it isn't back breaking." You can still have great handling and a nice ride, just look at Porsche.

But it doesn't have a harsh suspension.

I would not want it softer.

[stein_325i]

Originally Posted by Transfer

But it doesn't have a harsh suspension.

I would not want it softer.

It does though. Almost every single review or publication has mentioned the harsh ride and I agree with them after thoroughly driving one in the city, highway and suburbs.

[heavyD^2]

Originally Posted by jstein55

It does though. Almost every single review or publication has mentioned the harsh ride and I agree with them after thoroughly driving one in the city, highway and suburbs.

Here's the latest C&D review on the 718 Cayman GT4;

https://www.caranddriver.com/reviews...y-the-numbers/

LOWS: [This space intentionally left blank.]

The GT4 is not the Cayman for everyone. Depending on road conditions where you live, its ride may be too harsh as a daily driver. The GT4 is not happy merely puttering about. On the highway, the Michelins thrum and reverberate over impacts, the exhaust drones, and the engine whirs behind your head. The steering requires constant attention, and even small ruts and bumps jostle occupants. Under part throttle, there's a little vibration through the structure from the engine. The whole car is just so taut, so tightly strung. But this is not a negative.

The problem is that even the magazines waffle on this stuff as it's clear that the fantastic engine is enough for this writer to overlook what to me certainly looks like what would be negatives for a lot of people. If you come back and say the person that buys a GT4 is expecting a harsh ride and and general unrefinement then why does an M-vehicle get judged to a different standard?

I actually feel that a few casual drives in one of these vehicles is not enough as over time you get used to the ride and it really does start feeling less harsh. Maybe not enough for everyone but a lot of us don't have an issue with it and it appears we are the target audience and like the GT4 it's a vehicle that's not the X3 for everyone.

[stein_325i]

Originally Posted by heavyD^2

Here's the latest C&D review on the 718 Cayman GT4;

https://www.caranddriver.com/reviews...y-the-numbers/

The problem is that even the magazines waffle on this stuff as it's clear that the fantastic engine is enough for this writer to overlook what to me certainly looks like what would be negatives for a lot of people. If you come back and say the person that buys a GT4 is expecting a harsh ride and and general unrefinement then why does an M-vehicle get judged to a different standard?

I actually feel that a few casual drives in one of these vehicles is not enough as over time you get used to the ride and it really does start feeling less harsh. Maybe not enough for everyone but a lot of us don't have an issue with it and it appears we are the target audience and like the GT4 it's a vehicle that's not the X3 for everyone.

Using a GT4 as your point is Apples and Oranges, one is a pure-bread track car and the other is a high-performance SUV, not even in the same realm, and there isn't a single M car that compares to a Porsche GT car at the moment. M cars are street cars first, and many people use them as daily drivers. A GT3/4 is not in the same caliber at all. Compare Apples to Apples, and you will see that a Macan Turbo (or any other Macan trim) handles very well and still has a compliant suspension despite that. The point was that a vehicle doesn't need to be overly stiff to perform well, especially one that is designed to carry children, pets, and haul around cargo. This is an SUV and Daily Driver first and foremost. This is not a vehicle you buy to only drive on weekends/on track and then store in a garage for the rest of the year. The suspension is most definitely harsh. I am not arguing as to whether that is an issue with the fellow owners, as clearly they have bought one, but it is most certainly not true to say that the suspension on the X3 M isn't harsh riding. Even BMWBlog has addressed that BMW knows about their suspension issues and complaints and will be addressing them in certain vehicles.

[Max Well]

Enjoyed the review. Agree they should do their homework on the LC - basic stuff and would've edited that out for sure. And suspect we'll keep seeing this suspension issue repeated endlessly. The caution has been set for months now for those interested to be sure to try out these models before they purchase, so they have received notice (over, and over, and over).

I still am trying to figure out the wide variation of subjective response to this issue, though. My wife and I wouldn't change a thing about our X3MC suspensions, and we don't have a 20 year Hx with M vehicles. Still wondering if it is a body habitus issue, or perhaps as has been previously suggested, more related to one's past experience with higher echelon performance vehicles where perhaps higher MSRP luxury models have a more cushioned ride. For what one gets at this price point, though, it seems tough to beat. Strictly IMHO...

[dereksM3]

This was the EXACT same complaint many of the F80 early M3 cars received, well more of the unsettling chassis and traction issues. Couple years later and some iStep software changes and many were happier. I bet with continued feedback to BMW they will release an EDC update and the suspension will get altered dampening curves. Seems they go one way and everyone complains "TOO SOFT" M cars have lost their touch. They got back to being a true M car and people complain "TOO HARD". Granted, it's proven with Porsche as the example a stiff but compliant suspension can be produced. Hell any modern day set of Ohlins proves this theory. Frankly, it seems like BMW has had a tough time with suspension tuning since the E9x days, my E92 M3 was darn near perfect. Stiff when needed but compliant enough to drive around town and go on road trips all day. I have yet to drive the X3M Comp but it's on my short list of next vehicles...this whole stiff debate has me interested to see. Seattle roads will clearly outline that scenario within the first block of driving...

[AlexFL]

Originally Posted by dereksM3

This was the EXACT same complaint many of the F80 early M3 cars received, well more of the unsettling chassis and traction issues. Couple years later and some iStep software changes and many were happier. I bet with continued feedback to BMW they will release an EDC update and the suspension will get altered dampening curves. Seems they go one way and everyone complains "TOO SOFT" M cars have lost their touch. They got back to being a true M car and people complain "TOO HARD". Granted, it's proven with Porsche as the example a stiff but compliant suspension can be produced. Hell any modern day set of Ohlins proves this theory. Frankly, it seems like BMW has had a tough time with suspension tuning since the E9x days, my E92 M3 was darn near perfect. Stiff when needed but compliant enough to drive around town and go on road trips all day. I have yet to drive the X3M Comp but it's on my short list of next vehicles...this whole stiff debate has me interested to see. Seattle roads will clearly outline that scenario within the first block of driving...

There is an easy fix available for X3 M. MSS Urban HAS kit makes the ride much, much softer, even when the car is dropped by one inch. Honestly, almost too soft for my taste.

[strohw]

I agree that where it's been repeated that firm doesn't need to be harsh. I think there is room for improvement in the suspension settings without even changing spring rate to make comfort mode more acceptable. Personally, the car is completely fine to me and I live in Michigan. But this isn't my first SUV like this one so I'm use to it.

The primary comment that I see a few times in this thread that I don't agree with is that the Macan can do it so BMW should be able to as well. I'm sorry but a Macan is not in the same price range as the BMW. The Macan is a vehicle with LESS overall space than a X1 that costs 17k MORE base price. If you equip a X3 M40i to similar specs as a Macan GTS, the GTS costs 15K more. If you spec a Macan Turbo and just change the color, put 21" wheels on it and do nothing else it costs 88k. By the time you spec it similar to the X3M Comp it costs 15K more.

After you add in the fact that BMW has MUCH better incentives consistently and gives much better base MSRP reductions there should be no questions as to why there is a difference. Of course Porsche gives you a better quality interior and a better suspension setup...you're paying way more and you're getting it.

BMW has 7 SUVs and Porsche only has 2. It would be nice if BMW allowed you to option the shit out of their line up like Porsche but it's not going to happen.

[Transfer]

Originally Posted by jstein55

Using a GT4 as your point is Apples and Oranges, one is a pure-bread track car and the other is a high-performance SUV, not even in the same realm, and there isn't a single M car that compares to a Porsche GT car at the moment. M cars are street cars first, and many people use them as daily drivers.

Fair, but then compare it to M3/4 and the X version is more comfortable while still maintaining highly sporting characteristics.

A GT3/4 is not in the same caliber at all. Compare Apples to Apples, and you will see that a Macan Turbo (or any other Macan trim) handles very well and still has a compliant suspension despite that.

X3M is faster and handles better than the $100k+ Porsche which is important to a lot of us.

The point was that a vehicle doesn't need to be overly stiff to perform well, especially one that is designed to carry children, pets, and haul around cargo. This is an SUV and Daily Driver first and foremost. This is not a vehicle you buy to only drive on weekends/on track and then store in a garage for the rest of the year. The suspension is most definitely harsh. I am not arguing as to whether that is an issue with the fellow owners, as clearly they have bought one, but it is most certainly not true to say that the suspension on the X3 M isn't harsh riding. Even BMWBlog has addressed that BMW knows about their suspension issues and complaints and will be addressing them in certain vehicles.

I guess it's not for everyone, but after living in mine for 2500 miles... myself, wife, and dog (beagles have opinions too) all approve with no complaint. Due to COVID I haven't had passengers to comment. So I'd be interested to side by side my car with some of these tester vehicles to see what the fuss is about, but of course that isn't going to happen. My direct point of comparison is my B9 Audi SQ5 which I just turned in at lease end for my X3M. It had the extremely comfortable air suspension which is basically the same on Macan, and the SQ5 did also handle well. Yes my X3M is more stiff compared to that luxury air ride but there is no loss of comfort IMO. If I'm the niche buyer for this vehicle then great, because I've been waiting since 2013 for them to make it since I sold my first E9x M3!

[MrItaly]

Originally Posted by heavyD^2

I enjoyed the review but I have to disagree with his comments that they could have dialed back the handling to make the ride more compliant. If you want a less sharp SUV that's more compliant in the street and still very fast in a straight line BMW offers exactly what you are looking for in the M40i. The X3/4M are proper M vehicles which have always prioritized performance over comfort so it's a matter of simply understanding that these vehicles aren't designed to satisfy the masses.

Heavy, completely agree with you. BMW offers that solution to that segment in the M40i. It is "smarter than the average bear" compared to most SUVs on the road. The M variant is extreme, as is its suspension and engine. Package deal. Those that want the extra power without track rigidity need to dial back the suspension merely by swapping out the springs. A true M car could have never been launched with something as compliant as the MSS Urban offering. I'm ok with that, despite the additional cost, and respect their decision to remain faithful to the M badge it dons.