View Full Version : The X3 is...
a total POS! :twisted:
I had a base 2.5 today. Only option wasauto trans., MSRP $32,7XX. What the *uck ever! :loco:
I had a 3.0 earlier in the week. I can't say that I'm a fan....
lemming
06-24-2005, 08:15 PM
i TOLD you guys.
i TOLD you guys.
:lol:
:rant: <- lemming :)
told us what? that you didn't like it?
lemming
06-24-2005, 10:44 PM
told us what? that you didn't like it?
i'm on the record here as saying that the x3 is substandard BMW interior material quality at an absurdly high price and that it's slow.
but if people want a ford escape with the BMW Roundel on it, then they deserve to be ripped off.
Again...TOTAL POS! If I was going to spend that kind of cash I would rather have a loaded explorer. :lol: (joking)
I wouldn't buy one since I am not into small SUV's but when I took out the X3 loaner my sister had gotten, I was really impressed.
The car felt quick with the 2.5, it handled like a good handling car and everything fely very solidly built. To sum it up, it felt like the sports cars of SUV's like the 3er feels like the sports cars of sedans ...
kognito
06-28-2005, 07:52 AM
I wouldn't buy one since I am not into small SUV's but when I took out the X3 loaner my sister had gotten, I was really impressed.
The car felt quick with the 2.5, it handled like a good handling car and everything fely very solidly built. To sum it up, it felt like the sports cars of SUV's like the 3er feels like the sports cars of sedans ...
:rolleyes: :?
some people just don't "get it"
I wouldn't buy one since I am not into small SUV's but when I took out the X3 loaner my sister had gotten, I was really impressed.
The car felt quick with the 2.5, it handled like a good handling car and everything fely very solidly built. To sum it up, it felt like the sports cars of SUV's like the 3er feels like the sports cars of sedans ...
:rolleyes: :?
some people just don't "get it"
So then explain 'it' so I understand your reply ... are you for the X3 or against it
kognito
06-28-2005, 12:37 PM
IMO it is a useless lemming car. What is it good for?? Who in thier right mind would pay 35-42K for a fancy, almost AWD Yugo?
IMO it is a useless lemming car. What is it good for?? Who in thier right mind would pay 35-42K for a fancy, almost AWD Yugo?
sarafil?
:eeps:
I wouldn't buy one since I am not into small SUV's but when I took out the X3 loaner my sister had gotten, I was really impressed.
The car felt quick with the 2.5, it handled like a good handling car and everything fely very solidly built. To sum it up, it felt like the sports cars of SUV's like the 3er feels like the sports cars of sedans ...
:rolleyes: :?
some people just don't "get it"
In the big picture, we may be the ones who "don't get it." I have so little interest in the X3 that I have never even sat in one or examined one at an auto show (and I go to a lot of auto shows, although not always new car shows). But lots of people are buying them. I can't imagine they are all crazy. It's much easier to accept our small group of 'mudgeons are the crazy ones.
Alan gets that he was impressed with the X3 for what it is. I get that I don't even care enough to sit in one and see how bad the interior really is.
elbert
06-28-2005, 02:49 PM
IMO it is a useless lemming car. What is it good for??
Car and Driver says the X3 has a larger cargo area than the E6x (?64) wagon.
Tried to check on bmwusa.com to verify, but I wasn't able to find interior volume numbers.
IMO it is a useless lemming car. What is it good for??
Car and Driver says the X3 has a larger cargo area than the E6x (?64) wagon.
Tried to check on bmwusa.com to verify, but I wasn't able to find interior volume numbers.
Which I suspect is pretty useless (i.e. small) unless you have the rear seats folded down. In which case, the car is effectively a 2-seater. A slow, poor-handling 2-seater. I can't imagine the point when you have kids to haul around. Same goes for any of the wagons I've seen short of the Caprice.
You'd be so much better off with a car that has a trunk. But that's probably an alltogether different conversation.
Which I suspect is pretty useless (i.e. small) unless you have the rear seats folded down. In which case, the car is effectively a 2-seater. A slow, poor-handling 2-seater. I can't imagine the point when you have kids to haul around. Same goes for any of the wagons I've seen short of the Caprice.
You'd be so much better off with a car that has a trunk. But that's probably an alltogether different conversation.
:? huh?
Which I suspect is pretty useless (i.e. small) unless you have the rear seats folded down. In which case, the car is effectively a 2-seater. A slow, poor-handling 2-seater. I can't imagine the point when you have kids to haul around. Same goes for any of the wagons I've seen short of the Caprice.
You'd be so much better off with a car that has a trunk. But that's probably an alltogether different conversation.
:? huh?
Yeah, he lost me too. :?
elbert
06-28-2005, 03:22 PM
Car and Driver says the X3 has a larger cargo area than the E6x (?64) wagon.
Tried to check on bmwusa.com to verify, but I wasn't able to find interior volume numbers.
Which I suspect is pretty useless (i.e. small) unless you have the rear seats folded down. In which case, the car is effectively a 2-seater. A slow, poor-handling 2-seater. I can't imagine the point when you have kids to haul around. Same goes for any of the wagons I've seen short of the Caprice.
You'd be so much better off with a car that has a trunk. But that's probably an alltogether different conversation.
:? The X3 has a larger cargo area (30 cu ft) than the new 5er wagon (17.6 cu ft), which in turn is larger than the 5er sedan (ie, car with a trunk, which is 14.0 cu ft).
You do realize the X3 has more cargo volume than the X5, right?
:? The X3 has a larger cargo area (30 cu ft) than the new 5er wagon (17.6 cu ft), which in turn is larger than the 5er sedan (ie, car with a trunk, which is 14.0 cu ft).
You do realize the X3 has more cargo volume than the X5, right?
It doesn't matter. They are all smaller than his Nissan Armada. :)
elbert
06-28-2005, 03:38 PM
It doesn't matter. They are all smaller than his Nissan Armada. :) :lol: I guess if you're gonna get an SUV, might as well get a big one
IMO it is a useless lemming car. What is it good for??
Car and Driver says the X3 has a larger cargo area than the E6x (?64) wagon.
Tried to check on bmwusa.com to verify, but I wasn't able to find interior volume numbers.
Which I suspect is pretty useless (i.e. small) unless you have the rear seats folded down. In which case, the car is effectively a 2-seater. A slow, poor-handling 2-seater. I can't imagine the point when you have kids to haul around. Same goes for any of the wagons I've seen short of the Caprice.
You'd be so much better off with a car that has a trunk. But that's probably an alltogether different conversation.'
Are you kidding? Our Volvo wagon carries WAY more stuff than any car with a trunk could even dream of.
:? The X3 has a larger cargo area (30 cu ft)
With the rear seats folded down, right?
lip277
06-28-2005, 05:05 PM
It doesn't matter. They are all smaller than his Nissan Armada. :) :lol: I guess if you're gonna get an SUV, might as well get a big one
Big?
Suburban - 90 cu ft.
:)
elbert
06-28-2005, 05:35 PM
:? The X3 has a larger cargo area (30 cu ft)
With the rear seats folded down, right?
That's what I was trying to check, but like I said before, BMW doesn't seem to list actual volume measurements. Car and Driver made it seem like that number was with the seats up.
Car and Driver made it seem like that number was with the seats up.
That could be with the seats up....considering the x3 cargo area is much taller than a typical sedan trunk. :dunno:
Car and Driver made it seem like that number was with the seats up.
That could be with the seats up....considering the x3 cargo area is much taller than a typical sedan trunk. :dunno:
Not a chance. I don't see how that could be with the seats up. That's a volume of space equal to 10' x 3' x 1'
elbert
06-28-2005, 06:10 PM
Not a chance. I don't see how that could be with the seats up. That's a volume of space equal to 10' x 3' x 1'
OK, I looked it up on Edmunds. It is 30 cu ft with the seats up, 71 with the seats down.
http://www.edmunds.com/new/2005/bmw/x3/100488945/specs.html?tid=edmunds.n.researchlanding.leftsiden av..8.BMW*
Car and Driver made it seem like that number was with the seats up.
That could be with the seats up....considering the x3 cargo area is much taller than a typical sedan trunk. :dunno:
Not a chance. I don't see how that could be with the seats up. That's a volume of space equal to 10' x 3' x 1'
Right. Except it's not 10x3x1, it's more like 4 x 3 x 3 which is easily doable. Your spatial estimates are a bit off b/c (I think) you are thinking in terms of trunk height.
SARAFIL
06-28-2005, 08:00 PM
IMO it is a useless lemming car. What is it good for?? Who in thier right mind would pay 35-42K for a fancy, almost AWD Yugo?
sarafil?
:eeps:
http://www.bimmerfest.com/photos/data/500/3632DSC00728.JPG
It's not worth the $44,145 MSRP to me, but it's the best use of $296 per month plus tax that I've seen.
How realistic (or safe & legal) is it to stack cargo up to the ceiling in back? The real, usable area behind the rear seats, in my opinion, is no higher than top of the rear seats. Yes, you can carry taller items when needed. But for everyday hauling (groceries, etc), I doubt the rear area is any bigger than a sedan's trunk. By looking at the X3, I'd say smaller. :dunno:
http://forums.carmudgeons.com/album_pic.php?pic_id=746
How realistic (or safe & legal) is it to stack cargo up to the ceiling in back? The real, usable area behind the rear seats, in my opinion, is no higher than top of the rear seats. Yes, you can carry taller items when needed. But for everyday hauling (groceries, etc), I doubt the rear area is any bigger than a sedan's trunk. By looking at the X3, I'd say smaller. :dunno:
Cargo net. $80 or so.
What about rearward vision?
How realistic (or safe & legal) is it to stack cargo up to the ceiling in back? The real, usable area behind the rear seats, in my opinion, is no higher than top of the rear seats. Yes, you can carry taller items when needed.
um, yeah
that's kind of the point
What about rearward vision?
side mirrors? :dunno:
SARAFIL
06-28-2005, 10:47 PM
How realistic (or safe & legal) is it to stack cargo up to the ceiling in back? The real, usable area behind the rear seats, in my opinion, is no higher than top of the rear seats. Yes, you can carry taller items when needed. But for everyday hauling (groceries, etc), I doubt the rear area is any bigger than a sedan's trunk. By looking at the X3, I'd say smaller. :dunno:
http://forums.carmudgeons.com/album_pic.php?pic_id=746
That's a bad angle...
From this view, the rear cargo area looks pretty big.
http://www.bimmerfest.com/photos/data/500/3632x3_001.jpg
The car has much more usable cargo room in the back than our 325i does. There is much more height (even if you only load up the top of the seat back) and a little more depth to the cargo area.
lemming
06-28-2005, 10:59 PM
for 44k, i'd be a pretty happy camper with an fx45.
believe me, i can very much understand the appeal of the x3, it's just that no one denys that the interior is almost saturn-esque (1), it's still slow with the top rated motor (2), and the rubbermaid bumpers bother me (3). remember, this is 44,000 USD. somehow it's okay to constantly jab cadillac for its interiors at the money they cost or to jab at the interiors of subarus, and we're not all hopping like madmen on this bandwagon?
somehow it's okay to constantly jab cadillac for its interiors at the money they cost or to jab at the interiors of subarus, and we're not all hopping like madmen on this bandwagon?
I think most everybody has stated that they think the X3 interior is quite bad. :dunno:
kognito
06-29-2005, 07:38 AM
mirrors? :dunno:
Oh, that's how they make it look like it holds so much stuff, they do it with mirrors.
:twisted:
What about rearward vision?
side mirrors? :dunno:
True. There's no need for the rearview mirror, because you can see everything with the side mirrors. I'm considering ripping mine off, actually.
kognito
06-29-2005, 07:56 AM
another thing that really annoys me about the X3 has nothing to do with the vehicle itself. I don't know if it is a national, or local commercial, but there is a commercial running in my area where your typical "BMW couple" are shopping at a outdoor center. They return to the parked BMW with a cart full of plants and topsoil (husband is riding the cart like it is a huge skateboard) Then, as they are leaving the parking lot, they swing around two other SUV's that are backing out of their parking places.
To me, this just enhances the "I drive a BMW, and I'm more important than anyone else" attitude.
That commercial alone makes me feel like I would never want to drive one :dunno:
WTF were they thinking when they filmed that one??
How realistic (or safe & legal) is it to stack cargo up to the ceiling in back? The real, usable area behind the rear seats, in my opinion, is no higher than top of the rear seats. Yes, you can carry taller items when needed.
um, yeah
that's kind of the point
um, well, that's not my point. My point is that you're not going to be stacking stuff up over the rear seats in an SUV or wagon, unless you like the opportunity to be bombarded with potentially injury-causing objects if you rear-end someone. Or even hit the brakes hard. And I don't believe that cargo nets extend high enough to hold down items up to the ceiling. Not even close.
Say what you want, but I still contend that the usable, everyday space in the back of small SUVs and wagons (with the seats up) is not more than the usable area in a sedan's trunk. That's my opinion, and I'm stickin' to it.
That's a bad angle...
From this view, the rear cargo area looks pretty big.
[pic]
You forget who you're talking to... :P :P :P
http://www.familycar.com/RoadTests/NissanArmada/Images/Hatch2.jpg
This is just with the 3rd row folded flat. The 2nd row folds flat as well, exposing a space big enough to fit your X3. :twisted:
As much as I hate owning something this big, we make use of its space and hauling abilities on a very regular basis.
That's a bad angle...
From this view, the rear cargo area looks pretty big.
[pic]
You forget who you're talking to... :P :P :P
http://www.familycar.com/RoadTests/NissanArmada/Images/Hatch2.jpg
This is just with the 3rd row folded flat. The 2nd row folds flat as well, exposing a space big enough to fit your X3. :twisted:
As much as I hate owning something this big, we make use of its space and hauling abilities on a very regular basis.
Shit that's pretty big. But frankly, with one or two kids, that is just way too big. Most people can get by fine with a medium size SUV or large wagon. If one ever needs more room than that, there is always rental Expeditions, etc.
Say what you want, but I still contend that the usable, everyday space in the back of small SUVs and wagons (with the seats up) is not more than the usable area in a sedan's trunk. That's my opinion, and I'm stickin' to it.
well, you don't have to believe sarafil if you don't want to ;)
John V
06-29-2005, 08:52 AM
How realistic (or safe & legal) is it to stack cargo up to the ceiling in back? The real, usable area behind the rear seats, in my opinion, is no higher than top of the rear seats. Yes, you can carry taller items when needed.
um, yeah
that's kind of the point
um, well, that's not my point.
:lol: :lol: :lol:
Shit that's pretty big. But frankly, with one or two kids, that is just way too big. Most people can get by fine with a medium size SUV or large wagon. If one ever needs more room than that, there is always rental Expeditions, etc.
:lol: Indeed. I see people with 2, 1, or even 0 kids driving Armadas and Expeditions down here all the time, and I just want to shoot them.
And to be honest, now that our family dog is no longer with us, plans are in the works to unload this monstrocity for something smaller. I'm so flippin sick of owning big vehicles, even though I haven't erally had much choice.
Trying to find a sedan that will accept 3 child seats in the back. It's looking like the new Toyota Avalon (and Lexus GS) will provide the required space, plus lots of legroom and massive trunk. The Avalon is well-built, and priced right...starting at around $27K sticker. Even though it's FWD (the GS is RWD), I'm all over it. Right now, I can't think of a better alternative.
John V
06-29-2005, 09:09 AM
Trying to find a sedan that will accept 3 child seats in the back. It's looking like the new Toyota Avalon (and Lexus GS) will provide the required space, plus lots of legroom and massive trunk. The Avalon is well-built, and priced right...starting at around $27K sticker. Even though it's FWD (the GS is RWD), I'm all over it. Right now, I can't think of a better alternative.
My father has one of the new Maximas. The thing is honest to god huge in the back seat and trunk. It's got a nice motor too.
kognito
06-29-2005, 09:12 AM
Trying to find a sedan that will accept 3 child seats in the back. It's looking like the new Toyota Avalon (and Lexus GS) will provide the required space, plus lots of legroom and massive trunk. The Avalon is well-built, and priced right...starting at around $27K sticker. Even though it's FWD (the GS is RWD), I'm all over it. Right now, I can't think of a better alternative.
seriously, have you driven a chrysler 300 sedan??
seriously, have you driven a chrysler 300 sedan??
I drove the Dodge Magnum, which is the same thing, and was woefully unimpressed. That thing was horribly overweight, and bobbed and bounced over uneven pavement more than an old Cadillac. Not that I expect the Avalon to be much better.
With the Toyota, I know that the car probably won't fall apart after 30K miles. And I'll also get 31 MPG highway.
hockeynut
06-29-2005, 10:45 AM
I've had a few 3.0 X3s as loaners and I was impressed. Not sure its worth $40k though...
hockeynut
06-29-2005, 10:47 AM
Trying to find a sedan that will accept 3 child seats in the back. It's looking like the new Toyota Avalon (and Lexus GS) will provide the required space, plus lots of legroom and massive trunk. The Avalon is well-built, and priced right...starting at around $27K sticker. Even though it's FWD (the GS is RWD), I'm all over it. Right now, I can't think of a better alternative.
My father has one of the new Maximas. The thing is honest to god huge in the back seat and trunk. It's got a nice motor too.
Maximas are great, and would be even better if they would go to RWD/AWD.
elbert
06-29-2005, 10:48 AM
another thing that really annoys me about the X3 has nothing to do with the vehicle itself. I don't know if it is a national, or local commercial, but there is a commercial running in my area where your typical "BMW couple" are shopping at a outdoor center.
That commercial annoys me, too. The woman looks snotty, and her boy-toy looks rich and dumb.
And I don't believe that cargo nets extend high enough to hold down items up to the ceiling. Not even close.
This is a bad picture, but you get the point. You will just have to trust me that the barrier reaches the ceiling. True, I am talking about one particular kind of car, but I have at least three options for floor to ceiling cargo containment and would be quite comfortable packing up to the ceiling. I have a wagon and a sedan . . . the wagon holds 10x the stuff with the seats up and 20x the stuff with the seats down (but I admit that thing you drive is HUGE - nice contrast with the S2000).
http://www.volvocars.us/NR/rdonlyres/AF71FB8D-22C3-4E85-84E8-687CBEB47EB1/0/V70_12_3_44.jpg
That's the only way I'd feel comfortable stacking stuff higher than the rear seats: with a rigid floor-to-ceiling barrier like that. The regular nets that you can buy aren't very good insurance against flying cargo in the event of a collision.
I wonder what those barriers secure to in the ceiling? If it's just the headliner, that doesn't seem very sturdy. Still, better than nothing.
Trying to find a sedan that will accept 3 child seats in the back. It's looking like the new Toyota Avalon (and Lexus GS) will provide the required space, plus lots of legroom and massive trunk. The Avalon is well-built, and priced right...starting at around $27K sticker. Even though it's FWD (the GS is RWD), I'm all over it. Right now, I can't think of a better alternative.
My father has one of the new Maximas. The thing is honest to god huge in the back seat and trunk. It's got a nice motor too.
Maximas are great, and would be even better if they would go to RWD/AWD.
Then they would be G35s.
Honestly, given the price point of the G35 and Maxima, I don't know who buys the latter.
clyde
06-29-2005, 02:28 PM
That's a bad angle...
From this view, the rear cargo area looks pretty big.
[pic]
You forget who you're talking to... :P :P :P
http://www.familycar.com/RoadTests/NissanArmada/Images/Hatch2.jpg
This is just with the 3rd row folded flat. The 2nd row folds flat as well, exposing a space big enough to fit your X3. :twisted:
As much as I hate owning something this big, we make use of its space and hauling abilities on a very regular basis.
The more I look, the more I want one.
TI wonder what those barriers secure to in the ceiling? If it's just the headliner, that doesn't seem very sturdy. Still, better than nothing.
There are "slots" for them to secure to built into the car. I don't know how sturdy they are. There are also a variety of cargo nets that will use the same type of connection points.
Since that last post, I have started thinking about cargo in back, over the height of the seats with a baby in the back seat. I think I changed my mind - rigid is the only way to go. Just in case. Actually, maybe rigid for quick stop protection along with a cargo net for smaller item protection . . .
Now look what you have done.
John V
06-29-2005, 02:41 PM
Trying to find a sedan that will accept 3 child seats in the back. It's looking like the new Toyota Avalon (and Lexus GS) will provide the required space, plus lots of legroom and massive trunk. The Avalon is well-built, and priced right...starting at around $27K sticker. Even though it's FWD (the GS is RWD), I'm all over it. Right now, I can't think of a better alternative.
My father has one of the new Maximas. The thing is honest to god huge in the back seat and trunk. It's got a nice motor too.
Maximas are great, and would be even better if they would go to RWD/AWD.
Then they would be G35s.
Honestly, given the price point of the G35 and Maxima, I don't know who buys the latter.
I don't entirely disagree with you. My father shopped both. The Maxima won because
1) They were willing to deal more on price
2) He claimed the back seat and trunk were bigger on the Maxima (he drives on several golf trips with four people in the car a year, so to him it matters) - I don't know if this is true, but it's what he said.
3) The nearest Infiniti dealer to him was over 50 miles away and the Nissan dealer told him they weren't certified to work on the Infiniti should he buy it
4) He said the G35 sedan was ugly (which it is).
Since that last post, I have started thinking about cargo in back, over the height of the seats with a baby in the back seat. I think I changed my mind - rigid is the only way to go. Just in case. Actually, maybe rigid for quick stop protection along with a cargo net for smaller item protection . . .
Now look what you have done.
My work here is done :)
For purposes of discussion:
http://www.vlvworld.com/photo_pieces/VA97_34A.jpg
This barrier net stores in the top of the back seats and attaches to built in fittings in the roof. It also works to protect the front seats with the seats folded all the way down. I have seen one and it appeared to be sturdy enough for comfort - as long as you don't have a baby without the ability to protect itself in the backseat.
*sigh* We will probably get both. Just in case.
vBulletin® v3.7.1, Copyright ©2000-2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.