Thanks Jeff, I can't believe he ever bought a car.

 

Had an X5 and will never go back to BMW. My experience was perhaps isolated, but after owning a Cayenne for a while now, I believe the Cayenne to be the best all around vehicle on the market today. Great towing, fun to drive, good space for family trips (I just retunred from a trip to the beach) great performance, and very easy to drive in an aggressive manner. I cruise between 120 and 130 for an extended period of time during the 500 miles trip and this car was rock solid and very predictable at high speed.

 

I agree with Doug. I've had back-to-back X5's, a 2000 and a 2002, both 4.4's, both loaded with every option but the BMW phone, and I'll never own another BMW, because while the X5's were fun to drive, they were also constantly in the shop. I experienced more problems with both of these X5's than you care to read about.

On the other hand, I've never had a real problem with a Porsche. So, to me, performance starts with reliability...if you can't trust the truck to start when you turn the key, the 0 to 60 stats become kind of meaningless.

I'm now about 5000 miles into my Cayenne Turbo, and loving every minute of it. I will admit that I really liked the Sport setting on the X5 tranny, however.

 

I spent alot of time driving the X5, 4.4 and 4.6 while I was waiting for my Cayenne to show up. Considered the 4.6 as a viable alternative, at least from a spec sheet point of view. Then the Cayenne arrived and I drove both the Turbo and the S. Frankly, I thought the Cayenne had a much better ride, better handling, better braking and it tows like a dream.

As far as quality goes, the new JD Powers Survey indicates that Porsche actually had fewer defects per 100 cars than Toyota/Lexus in intial owner reports. Not sure what the time period is and I am not sure whether the Cayenne was included in this survey (it was reported in this mornings USA Today). In my first 5K of driving the Cayenne, I have had only a couple issues, leaky rear window washer and a small trim issue on the dash. No major issues with engine, trans, diff or anything.

I think the X% is a terrific vehicle, although it's style is somewhat aged now (needs an update), the lack of real off road capability, and the chuckwagon ride convinced me to buy the Cayenne. I know that some put alot of stock in what "automotive experts" say, but I have never found a great deal of accuracy in most of the reviews that I have read, probably due to the relationship between the magazines and advertising dollars. I think the reviews of the Cayenne are every bit as suspect.

My own personal reviewer, my wife, probably gave the Cayenne the best review I have seen. Namely, she feels like it takes 10 years of age off of her everytime she drives it. She is trying to convince me to give her the S and "allow" me to buy the Turbo. I think one Cayenne is enough for now, however, I am working on the GT3 instead.

 

I test drove an early X5 4.4 when they first came out and was not impressed. I took another look when my local dealer had a used X5 4.6 for sale and, again, was not impressed. For what you get (no off-road capability, minimal cargo capacity) unless you really need to tow something, you're much better off with an Audi S6. Better performance and more practicality.

If you want off-road capability (even if it's just for piece of mind) and decent cargo capacity, the Cayenne is a much better choice. BMW readily admits the X5 is not an SUV - it has little real-world utility. It is essentially a jacked up 5-series wagon. It's amazing they've been able to cash in on the anti-wagon stigma as much as they have.

If I didn't need to tow a 5,000 pound boat, I'd likely have an S6 rather than the Cayenne, but it does provide that utility.

 

C'mon Jim.

While I'm not saying you have to (or should) be impressed with an X I will counter that according to everything I've read the offroad capabilities of both vehicles is roughly equal. Make that nil when they're on performance tires.

Personally I would be reluctant to venture very off road in anything that did not have a spare tire. Any serious off road vehicle includes one as standard equipment. Porsche didn't- you get a subwoofer instead. I'd say that speaks "volumes" about their commitment to instill real world off-road capabilities in the vehicle, their market research on how it would really be used and the commitment to save a few dollars hoping the customers wouldn't notice or care.

And I don't know the exact cargo carrying capacities but my back to back comparison revealed that the Cayenne has little, if any, more room than the X.

I use the X to tow our Porsche to the track (it never goes off road) and would much rather do it with an uberwagen. An S6 or 540 wagon that towed would be heaven. I wish Porsche had made that instead of another SUV.

 

George,
I don't know what you've read, but the writer(s) of any such documents must be incredibly suspect. BMW have repeatedly pointed to the onroad performance - check your X's owner's manual! The C can go places (even on standard tires) that no X could approach. That's what I like @ the C over the X! As to whether or not I'll use it offroad, well - that's irrelevant. I don't do 150 in my Boxster, but I could!
J

 

Take comfort, it has the same balanced "feel" as a boxster on the autocross track. Maaybe your wife is just ahead of the crowd!

 

Both are still in the running for my purchase decision (along with the FX45). Having owned BMWs and Porsches I have come to the conclusion that BMW overdesigns their cars - unnecessarily so. The newest BMWs are the extreme - so much complexity and electronic control that the car is difficult to maintain and expensive to repair.

My M5 is another example - incredibly complicated suspension system with electronically dampened suspension. A new set of shocks cost well over $5K in parts alone.

Thanks for all the posts

 

Given all the X5 bashing, I thought I would add my vote in favor of the X5 (now my second). Very pleased with the vehicle. Personally, I do not see the appeal of the C.-- more money, more weight and not attractive exterior. I'd buy the VW instead if I needed the off road ablility.

 

I'm sure there's plenty of good things said about the X series on all sorts of websites. I see great value in the Cayenne, and plan on purchasing one later this year, and I do hope that somewhere on the web I'll be able to "toot it's horn". If that's bashing other SUV's, well.... I can't answer to that. And no, I don't care a wit about the VW.
J

 

[QUOTE]Originally posted by JeffES:
[QB]This may be a really stupid question, but in this case what is better than seat of the pants? We can throw facts at each other until sunrise, yet prove nothing.
I'm lucky enough to be able to buy either. Unless BMW do something spectacular, the C will wind up in my driveway. That's why I hang out here, and not on an X5 board.
My .03

Well, I am on a Porsche board because I do not nor have I ever owned a suv. no need to be on X5 board. I have owned a 2002 C2, 2003 C4S and my current car all within the last year along with dozens of other high end cars within the last 5 years. So I think I am more than qualified to sit on any high end car forum especially when it has to do with a BMW and a Porscheand I have driven pretty much every high end car you can think off and have driven a cayenne S for an entire day and an X5 4.4 sport numerous times and for numerous miles. I am 29, do not have a family so my answers may sometimes not consider some things you married folks need. you want to know what test is more important than seat of the pants??? None but when a guy comes from driving an Ml430 an electric car will feel tight in comparison. So, seat of the pants you want, X5 (excluding new model) and Cayenne feel about equal in acceleration with the Cayenne having a big surge of power in middle of rev rangee. x5 handles much better and I can take a corner with greater speed, cayenne feels top heavy. X5 sport has tight communicative steering, Cayenne numb. Brakes X5. The biggest thing I noticed is drive down the steet in your Cayenne, not a person takes a 2nd look. Whe the x5 first came out with large 19in wheels and athletic hunkered down look, everyone would turn and look when I test drove one. I myself still look at the x5 4.6is when it is coming down the street. I cannot say the same for the Cayenne. (The 4.4 has lost some of its original appeal since there are so many on the road. The cayenne is a great truck and I am sure all of you will enjoy it for many years to come. If you want more info when making your desicion, look at the 2004 X5, it will be far faster(performance silmilar to4.6is), far lighter, brakes better and handles better, Oh and did I menntion $10k less expensive than the Cayenne. There is your answer Cayenne faithful. Go buy the less expensive, faster, better handling, better braking, lighter truck that is going no closer to off-road than the Cayenne will. We can talk about one persons feeling of seat of the pants feeling or how this other gut drove an X5 3.0 non-sport and it got beat by the VW toureg. Or simply look at any major magazine and look at the numbers. That will save us all from one individuals percetion of great handling and speed versus someone elses. You can pick up any major magazine and verify these numbers for less powerful 2001-2003 X5 4.4 i sport. If you prefer we can wait till the 04 X5 comes out and compare those numbers but, that will only further the distance between these two vehicles. That is my opinion and is based on facts. I do not see how it is possible to discuss further. I'm done, thank you, its been great, I think I have already spent enough time on this forum. I am sure the last thing someone wants to hear is how truck X is better becuase____

Enjoy your trucks, take care.

-Lou

 

My previous vehicles include an E39 M5 and a 996 C2 coupe. I do not consider myself to be paricularly biased towards either marque.

So, with that out of the way, let's look at some numbers. The base price of the X5 4.4 (as the 4.6 is being discontinued) is US$49,950. Base price of the Cayenne S is $55,900. For the math-challenged that's a difference of US$5,950 (not $10K as previously cited).

BMW X5 4.4 does 0-60 in 7.5 sec, Cayenne in 7.2 sec. Curb weight of the X5 is 4,824 lbs vs. 4,949 for the Cayenne (a whopping 125 lb difference). Engine output is 290 hp at 5,400 RPM for the X5, 340 hp at 6,000 RPM for the Cayenne.

Ground clearance for the X5 is 7.1" vs. 8.54" for the Cayenne with steel springs (X5 doesn't offer air suspension). Maximum cargo capacity for the X5 is 54 cu. ft., 63 cu. ft. for the Cayenne. Max towing capacity is 6,000 lbs for the X5, 7,716 lbs for the Cayenne.

I haven't actually seen any slalom tests comparing the X5 to the Cayenne (let alone a single test under similar conditions with identical tires, etc.) but I would be happy to read them if someone can provide a link. Having driven both, I find it unlikely that the X5 would outperform the Cayenne in any objective test.

 

!

 

Sorry Lou I disagree, you are an arrogant bigot, get a life somewhere where lack of objectivity and masses of ego are normal.

Isn't it time you got married settled down on a budget and began to make practical decisions instead of blurting out verbal @$@%^$

Apologies to the board for this posting, but this type of person ! honestly how are they raised.