TOP GEAR Season 14 EP 4

[Pariah]

The Cayenne was the Porsche for people who didn't like Porsches. It was a status symbol SUV when there was no one else in the market. The X5M is just a souped up X5. The average person will never notice the difference between an X5 and X5M, something rich people looking to flaunt their money aren't going to like.

Also, put down the crack pipe. Driver talent being remotely equal, an X5M is not hanging anywhere near a Gallardo on the track. Not even the 6 year old original Gallardo which set a time of 1:25.8 in the wet. That's a 2.4 sec advantage which is a bigger gap than the X5M beat a Volkswagon Golf R32 MkV. The current gen Gallardo posted a time of 1:19.5.

 

[EightySix Four]

The Cayenne was the Porsche for people who didn't like Porsches. It was a status symbol SUV when there was no one else in the market. The X5M is just a souped up X5. The average person will never notice the difference between an X5 and X5M, something rich people looking to flaunt their money aren't going to like.

Also, put down the crack pipe. Driver talent being remotely equal, an X5M is not hanging anywhere near a Gallardo on the track. Not even the 6 year old original Gallardo which set a time of 1:25.8 in the wet. That's a 2.4 sec advantage which is a bigger gap than the X5M beat a Volkswagon Golf R32 MkV. The current gen Gallardo posted a time of 1:19.5.

The 1st generation Gallardo Spyder posted nearly the exact same time as the Gallardo Coupe on a dry surface, which was within 2 seconds of the X5M on a wet surface.

I would argue the X5 itself is just a status symbol and those with money will buy the nicer one because they can. It is directly comparable to the Cayenne Turbo in this regard, which is just a souped up status symbol SUV as well.

 

[rh71]

Cars with half the horsepower and 1/3rd the cost. What am I supposed to be impressed about again? Clarkson was right, it's completely pointless.

because all it took was a bigger engine to do that right?

The Cayenne was the Porsche for people who didn't like Porsches. It was a status symbol SUV when there was no one else in the market.

why is a nice luxury SUV a status symbol; super-performing luxury SUVs on-par with some supercars still a status symbol... when you have those supercars with not nearly as nice interior amenities and only 2 seats even worse... impractical & non-purposeful... what's with the double standard?

 

[DivideBYZero]

All supercars shit on fast SUV's.

/Thread

 

[Arkaign]

The Jeep SRT8 is a lot more impressive to me, considering they cost 1/3 to 1/4 the price of the top end nutball SUV's it can functionally equal. Too bad the tranny apparently doesn't take too well to extreme power mods.

 

[rh71]

All supercars shit on fast SUV's.

/Thread

still looking for a good reason why given all the givens... thought not.

 

[Jawo]

Just watch episode 4...and the Twingo review was the best part...although it looks like he never made a full circle of tube...more like fell down that last 1/4 circle or so. The airport vehicle race was ok, but they have done it before (with RV's at least) so it wasn't original. Where's the race across Europe on a tank of gas? RS4 racing a skiing down a skier down a mountain?????

 

[SSSnail]

it's not the execution, it's the concept i don't care for. take a fake off-roader and turn it into a fake super car.
9.5 out of 10 for technical merit, minus several million for clarity of purpose.

Soccer moms would disagree with your sentiments.

 

[Pariah]

The 1st generation Gallardo Spyder posted nearly the exact same time as the Gallardo Coupe on a dry surface, which was within 2 seconds of the X5M on a wet surface.

No it wasn't. 1:25.7 is not within 2 seconds of 1:28.2. It just isn't. The top gear power laps aren't exactly the most reliable comparison basis anyway, with the significant variables of different drivers, and vastly different conditions the laps are done in.

because all it took was a bigger engine to do that right?

You're right. It's pretty obvious that the X5M kept up with an Evo X because it has a better suspension, not because of the 264HP advantage (555HP vs 291HP = 91% more). Not sure what I was looking at, sorry.

I don't get the point you're trying to make about a double standard. I wasn't comparing the purpose of these pointless SUV's to anything, so how can there be a double standard?

 

[EightySix Four]

No it wasn't. 1:25.7 is not within 2 seconds of 1:28.2. It just isn't. The top gear power laps aren't exactly the most reliable comparison basis anyway, with the significant variables of different drivers, and vastly different conditions the laps are done in.



You're right. It's pretty obvious that the X5M kept up with an Evo X because it has a better suspension, not because of the 264HP advantage (555HP vs 291HP = 91% more). Not sure what I was looking at, sorry.

I don't get the point you're trying to make about a double standard. I wasn't comparing the purpose of these pointless SUV's to anything, so how can there be a double standard?

I'm sorry... 2.5 seconds... My bad.

The point is, this is a Big Fucking SUV (from this point on known as BFSUV) which weighs 5368lbs matching the performance of a small sports car on a track with a talented driver... and the track was wet when the BFSUV ran it. (5368lbs vs 3131lbs = 71% more weight with a higher center of gravity)

Your main point is that the SUV has no purpose, but we can argue that about nearly any vehicle. It is a useless vehicle in your opinion, but to someone else it is exactly what they have been waiting for. It gives BMW to charge out the ass for a vehicle they have already developed with a bigger motor and stiffer suspension. It is also a test platform for the technologies that will go in the next generation of M road vehicles. If they can do that with the X5M, imagine what the next M5 will be able to do.

And yes, 99% of them will never see a track. Neither will 99% of evo's, 'vettes, mustangs, camaros, porsches, bmws, ferraris, etc. Get over it.

 

[Pariah]

Large SUV comparable in performance to smaller sports cars = impressive.
$89,000 (base MSRP) SUV comparable to $30,000 range sports cars = not impressive.

X5M 2.4 seconds slower than 6 year old Gallardo (BOTH are 4wd) = looks impressive
X5M only 2.2 seconds faster than $23k Golf GTI = performance vs Gallardo no longer impressive, 2.4 secs is a huge gap.

The X5M was only 1.1 secs faster than a Focus RS. So while you want to wax poetic how close the BMW is to last generation supercars, the cold reality is, that it competes more closely with current gen hot hatches that cost a quarter of the price.

 

[EightySix Four]

Large SUV comparable in performance to smaller sports cars = impressive.
$89,000 (base MSRP) SUV comparable to $30,000 range sports cars = not impressive.

X5M 2.4 seconds slower than 6 year old Gallardo (BOTH are 4wd) = looks impressive
X5M only 2.2 seconds faster than $23k Golf GTI = performance vs Gallardo no longer impressive, 2.4 secs is a huge gap.

The X5M was only 1.1 secs faster than a Focus RS. So while you want to wax poetic how close the BMW is to last generation supercars, the cold reality is, that it competes more closely with current gen hot hatches that cost a quarter of the price.

I'm not sure how many times I need to explain the difference between having water on the track and not having water on the track. If the entire reason it performed as well as it did was due to the power like you said, then there is a ton of performance still on the table since it would be harder to put that power down.

The DBS for example had a difference of four seconds between wet and dry. I'm sure a lot of the performance of the X5M comes more from the trick AWD system and suspension, so I'd give it a 2 second gain on a dry track, which is as fast as an LS2 corvette. It's impressive. I'm sorry you don't think so.

 

[Pariah]

It's a 5000 lbs AWD vehicle. Why you would think the rain would have any significant affect on its performance is beyond me. A 3000 lbs RWD car, yes. It's highly unlikely the Gallardo coupe which is AWD as well, was 2 seconds faster than the AWD convertible, yet, that's what you are implying when you dismiss the Gallardo's time in the rain while focusing on the spyder in the dry. You're not even consistant with your own arguement so why should you be taken seriously?

 

[EightySix Four]

It's a 5000 lbs AWD vehicle. Why you would think the rain would have any significant affect on its performance is beyond me. A 3000 lbs RWD car, yes. It's highly unlikely the Gallardo coupe which is AWD as well, was 2 seconds faster than the AWD convertible, yet, that's what you are implying when you dismiss the Gallardo's time in the rain while focusing on the spyder in the dry. You're not even consistant with your own arguement so why should you be taken seriously?

The Spyder is nearly 10% heavier and doesn't have as stiff a frame as the coupe. Is it that hard to believe that could account for a 2 second time?

 

[Atheus]

I'm sorry... 2.5 seconds... My bad.
Your main point is that the SUV has no purpose, but we can argue that about nearly any vehicle. It is a useless vehicle in your opinion, but to someone else it is exactly what they have been waiting for.

Yea but why shouldn't this person just buy 2 cars? You could have a Lotus Exige AND a good off-road/people-carrying diesel thing, saving money not only on the purchase price, but on fuel too.

 

[RichUK]

At the end of the day, it really is a pointless car/SUV/tank, whatever.

It's just like the Humvee - pointless.

Even worse, the Lambo jeep/SUV/tank:

 

[PlasmaBomb]

I'm sorry... 2.5 seconds... My bad.

The point is, this is a Big Fucking SUV (from this point on known as BFSUV) which weighs 5368lbs matching the performance of a small sports car on a track with a talented driver... and the track was wet when the BFSUV ran it. (5368lbs vs 3131lbs = 71% more weight with a higher center of gravity)

pssst... the wiki weights are wrong the official UK weight of the X5M is 5236 lb and the evo x is 3527 lb, a mere 48.5% more...

Isn't the Top Gear track a power track anyway?

(values taken from manufacturers sites).

 

[PlasmaBomb]

Although it is faster than the Porsche 911 Turbo (996) in the wet...

 

[EightySix Four]

Yea but why shouldn't this person just buy 2 cars? You could have a Lotus Exige AND a good off-road/people-carrying diesel thing, saving money not only on the purchase price, but on fuel too.

Why should they need two cars when they can have one?


BTW, I'm just playing devil's advocate here because I think the car is a solid win for BMW. It's meant to be a low volume rich soccer mom car and it will do well in that setting. I personally have a two seater coupe with no trunk

 

[DivideBYZero]

still looking for a good reason why given all the givens... thought not.

1 - Post doesn't contain decent sentence construction and carries no decipherable meaning

2 - If you like fast SUV's so much, why don't you just get one, rather than fighting people on the internet who think they suck harder than a Dyson?

 

[rh71]

1 - Post doesn't contain decent sentence construction and carries no decipherable meaning

2 - If you like fast SUV's so much, why don't you just get one, rather than fighting people on the internet who think they suck harder than a Dyson?

--> Originally Posted by rh71
still looking for a good reason why, given all the givens... thought not.

There, I added a comma so you can comprehend it... real difficult. Like crazysob, I'm pointing out the fact that it looks like there are double standards here. Clearly you cannot defend your position with anything other than "hey they're not cool".

I also stated that there should be no reason someone should go out and buy 2 cars when 1 will do. Do you spend X-thousands to buy separate cars for every purpose? If you had the money, would you buy a supercar and then a Ford Escort, Explorer, or F150? It makes no sense to do that when there is a solution out there that would satisfy the speed demons and the everyday tasks too - that is not the definition of no purpose.

 

[misle]

While I haven't seen episode 4 yet, this season has been rather "meh" as well. Plus no crazy ass feature episode (Artic, Botswana, Vietnam, etc). The best part has too be when James May flew the airship over the airport....Where's the races across Europe, Skiier vs Rally car down a ski resort, or British Military involvement?

They're going to Bolivia this year.

 

[Pariah]

The Spyder is nearly 10% heavier and doesn't have as stiff a frame as the coupe. Is it that hard to believe that could account for a 2 second time?

Maybe if those numbers were accurate. I can't find weights for the original Gallardo's, but the difference between the current models is 110lbs (3417 vs 3307), according to Lamborghini's website. That would be 3.3% heavier. How is that "nearly 10%?" Also, the Spyder was released 2 years after the coupe and had a 20HP bump over the original coupe. So, you think that adding 110lbs while also adding 20HP would equal a 2 second slower lap time? No chance. Not unless the driver was different, which is also possible considering they were tested 2 years apart.

 

[Pariah]

I also stated that there should be no reason someone should go out and buy 2 cars when 1 will do. Do you spend X-thousands to buy separate cars for every purpose? If you had the money, would you buy a supercar and then a Ford Escort, Explorer, or F150?

Absolutely I would. The better question is why wouldn't you? For the $89k base of an X5M, I could get a nicely equipped F150 and BMW M3 sedan. One would blitz the X5M around the track with room for 5, while the other would be a much more versatile and effective cargo mover. Why buy a vehicle that is mediocre at everything, when for the same price you can buy multiple vehicles that excel at the same tasks? The fact you can't drive both at once is irrelevant. When has anyone ever had to haul a bunch of 2x4's or 3 passengers around a race track as fast as they could? You'll never need both capabilites at once.

 

[rh71]

Absolutely I would. The better question is why wouldn't you? For the $89k base of an X5M, I could get a nicely equipped F150 and BMW M3 sedan. One would blitz the X5M around the track with room for 5, while the other would be a much more versatile and effective cargo mover. Why buy a vehicle that is mediocre at everything, when for the same price you can buy multiple vehicles that excel at the same tasks? The fact you can't drive both at once is irrelevant. When has anyone ever had to haul a bunch of 2x4's or 3 passengers around a race track as fast as they could? You'll never need both capabilites at once.

1) The M3 blitzing the X5M around the track? Where are you getting your times?

2) You missed the point about having to get in a stumblin' bumblin' truck after being in a performance vehicle. Is that what a guy who doesn't have to put up with it wants, when a clear choice exists for him? And to call this type of performance mediocre is absurd.