Under Sporty SUVs, the Toyota Rav4 Limited V6 had the highest overall score.

83-Toyota Rav4 best buy, excellent reliability
78- BMW X3 (half a black mark for reliablity) and not recommended
75-Nissan Murano recommended, avg reliability
72-Acura RDX, very good reliablity, recommended
71-Infiniti FX35, very good reliability, recommended
62-Mazda CX-7 Grand Touring, New, not recommended

They also tested off road SUVs. The Nissan Xterra won. The FJ was not recommended.

I'm still reading egads, these cute utes get horrible gas mileage. The X3 gets 19mpg, the RDX 18mpg with the Mazda!! The FJ was 17mp.

The X3 did 0-60 in 7.9, the RDX 7.4 and Mazda 9.1. The FJ did 8 flat.

did they give a reason why the FJ was not recommended? is it because of it's relative "newness"?

I'm guessing here.....may have something to do with the huge blindspots.

did they give a reason why the FJ was not recommended? is it because of it's relative "newness"?

Very reliable but claimed it did not perform well in road tests.

ahhh...well i think toyota wanted this FJ to be more offroad...i'm sure it wont affect it's already stellar sales figures

Besides reliability, which CR values above all other, what other things did they value? And conversely, despite getting a higher score than the rest (except Rav4), how can the X3 be not recommended? Just because of the half a black mark? Which goes back again to them valuing reliability above all else.

CR, most of their readers and surveys, are about being 'sensible', not having fun. If you want to be mainstream and sensible, buy what CR says. Excuse me if I don't wanna party with you though, I've got some cracks to spackle over instead, lol

Besides reliability, which CR values above all other, what other things did they value? And conversely, despite getting a higher score than the rest (except Rav4), how can the X3 be not recommended? Just because of the half a black mark? Which goes back again to them valuing reliability above all else.

CR, most of their readers and surveys, are about being 'sensible', not having fun. If you want to be mainstream and sensible, buy what CR says. Excuse me if I don't wanna party with you though, I've got some cracks to spackle over instead, lol

Well bit, I am happy to see another viewpoint. It seemed to be written by actual buyers and not some ex race car driver telling me every car sucks b/c it handles not as good as a Cayman.

They complained all rode stiff for one. The X3 without I-drive had the best controls to them and the upgraded interior was better. The RDX had too many buttons and handled well. The Mazda had lag under acceleration and felt cramped in the back.

I was on the Caddy forums and a guy posted "Got damnit I like the cushy ride and don't want a Euro ride" as he sees Caddy with the harsher suspensions.

MMarshall made that point too. The small tire, stiff car madness is ridiculous, even though the cars do handle better.

CR, most of their readers and surveys, are about being 'sensible', not having fun. If you want to be mainstream and sensible, buy what CR says. Excuse me if I don't wanna party with you though, I've got some cracks to spackle over instead, lol

Is there a universal definition of "having fun" ? It can mean drifting, doing donuts to playing with electronic gadgets or the stereo & everything else in between . :)

I give it up to Toyota for the newfound power option for the RAV4. It's powerful enough to beat passenger cars that are either half the size or twice the price. I remember when they brought a RHD JDM 2 Door RAV4 for the first time in the US to the LA Auto Show in 1995. What a difference.

love the V6 in the Rav4, but the rest is .. blah.. Except for the CX7, I would pick the rest over the Rav4 any day. Seriously, I don't give a rat a$$ about CR ranking but some people do really read and follow it like a bible.

I can't believe the FJ is not recommended.. CR usually weight more on functionalilty and practicallity than anything so maybe the big blind spot and the 2 door really killed it for CR.. Oh well

what about the new Honda CR-V?

so whats good with the V6 Rav4 other than the power and mileage from the V6 and the reliability?

I love consumer reports, but you have to do your own testing & not rely soley on magazines.. I did and that is why I am in an X3 now:thumbup: The best out of the litter imo.

I am happy to see the RAV4 did well. Good for Toyota. :thumbup:

Still strange some of those 0 to 60 times.

what about the new Honda CR-V?



A pedestrian SUV, not fun and no V-6. Clearly it does its task well as it gets uglier and uglier and sells more and more.

FX, X3, and RDX are not SUVs, they are perverted oxymorons.

FX, X3, and RDX are not SUVs, they are perverted oxymorons.

Then neither is the Rav4, Murano, MDX, RX350, X5, CRV, Edge, Highlander, and every SUV based on a car chassis :D

Then neither is the Rav4, Murano, MDX, RX350, X5, CRV, Edge, Highlander, and every SUV based on a car chassis :D

No, at least these, especially the MDX have a large cargo capacity, while X3 and FX couldn't carry as much crap as a compact sedan.

How do say the RDX has above average reliability when it has an all new turbocharged 6? Just because its a honda? Every other car brand seems to get no reliability rating when its a new platform because basically they dont really know.

the RDX has a turbocharged 4-cyl.

I too dont know how they came up with the conclusion that the rdx is above average since it barely came out.:uh:

love the V6 in the Rav4, but the rest is .. blah.. Except for the CX7, I would pick the rest over the Rav4 any day. Seriously, I don't give a rat a$$ about CR ranking but some people do really read and follow it like a bible.

I can't believe the FJ is not recommended.. CR usually weight more on functionalilty and practicallity than anything so maybe the big blind spot and the 2 door really killed it for CR.. Oh well
except that Rav4 is pretty sporty... now you get to decide when does it matter :P

It matters in your favorite brand, but it doesnt matter in Rav4 :-).

Besides reliability, which CR values above all other, what other things did they value? And conversely, despite getting a higher score than the rest (except Rav4), how can the X3 be not recommended? Just because of the half a black mark? Which goes back again to them valuing reliability above all else.

CR, most of their readers and surveys, are about being 'sensible', not having fun. If you want to be mainstream and sensible, buy what CR says. Excuse me if I don't wanna party with you though, I've got some cracks to spackle over instead, lol
I would think that CR is big on reliability, so i really dont imagine them reccomending car that they dont consider reliable. That would pretty much go against everything that CR stands for.

Besides, not even the germans like the X3. It just lost to Rav4 in last month's Autobild.

They complained all rode stiff for one.

The category is 'sporty SUVs'. Why would they not be stiffly sprung!?

Of course to CR anything that doesn't ride like a Camry is stiff. :egads:

The X3 without I-drive had the best controls to them and the upgraded interior was better.

Comparing vehicles like the X3 with facelifted interior and the FX35 and the RDX to the SPARTAN cheap Rav4 makes no sense. I guess without reading the article and how they scored them, I can't figure it out. :uh:

Is there a universal definition of "having fun" ? It can mean drifting, doing donuts to playing with electronic gadgets or the stereo & everything else in between . :)

OK, I'm talking about DRIVING fun, not playing with the stereo. :p This category is SPORTY SUVs after all.

the RDX has a turbocharged 4-cyl.

I too dont know how they came up with the conclusion that the rdx is above average since it barely came out.:uh:

Because it's Honda and they automatically assume Honda and Toyota will be reliable no matter what questionable factors are in the design and yet to be proven.

My dad recalls back when he was much younger - I wanna say 30-35 years ago, consumer reports was absolutely IN LOVE with the VW Rabbit. I mean no matter what came out the Rabbit was the absolute best car in its class, and reliable beyond question.

I think we can all look back and kinda laugh at that assessment. CR isn't infallible - they have their biases just like everyone else, and so do their readers, whom they commonly limit their polling to.

No, at least these, especially the MDX have a large cargo capacity, while X3 and FX couldn't carry as much crap as a compact sedan.
I wouldn't say that until I'd tried stuffing one. I had a 2-door 1996 RAV4, and it was truly amazing how much stuff I could put in it with the back seats down.

I wouldn't say that until I'd tried stuffing one. I had a 2-door 1996 RAV4, and it was truly amazing how much stuff I could put in it with the back seats down.

Yeah, with the back seat down you can carry some cargo, but you lose the back seat.

I like to read Consumer Report as just another guideline. They're way too conservative for me. I'll take the 73 point Infiniti FX, pay a little more for the V8, and have a little fun in my life.

The X3's cargo area is by no means small. It is quite deep without the seats being folded down. More than enough cargo room for the Home Depot type like me:) The BMW X3 is the only vehice in the bunch that corners better than the competion and many cars including every Lexus ever made. When cornering in an suv, your natural instinct is to put your foot over the brake to go slowly around a corner/curve. In the BMW x3, it begs to be driven hard in the corners/curves.. No body roll at all, compliant suspension, and you can drive with confidence. The X-drive system is amazing.. It makes this vehicle stick like glue to the road. It feels/drives no different than a 3 series sedan/coupe, but does cost more than the 335.. I test drove the other vehicles except the Mazda C7, and none of them drove like the X3. The controls in the X3 are simple to use. Here is a pic of the controls in mine.

http://www.clublexus.com/gallery/data//3876/P2170168.JPG

http://www.clublexus.com/gallery/data//3876/P2170175.JPG

I bet 3 series wagon has more cargo space, and handles better, and has better acceleration.

Yeah, with the back seat down you can carry some cargo, but you lose the back seat.
That was true of the 2-door RAV4, but not the 4-door, and probably not the other compact SUVs.

I bet 3 series wagon has more cargo space, and handles better, and has better acceleration.The X3 actally outhandles the 3 series coupe/sedan with .88g on the skidpad. Tied with the M3 comp package, and edges the M5's .87 g..I posted the results on this board somewhere. Slalom numbers, I will have to look up. Acceleration mid 7's for the x3 but feels hell a quick compared to a LEXUS IS250 I testdrove. The 3 series wagon has smaller interior space compared to the x3, along with lower ground clearance. Can't drive over those icebergs people throw in the street in NYC:p

The BMW X3 is the only vehice in the bunch that corners better than the competion and many cars including every Lexus ever made.

Sorry but that is ridiculous. I've posted the reviews and links, universally regarded as the WORST BMW made.

Sorry:sad:

Sorry but that is ridiculous. I've posted the reviews and links, universally regarded as the WORST BMW made.

Sorry:sad:Reviews...Those vary.. Have you driven the vehicle yourself?

Skidpad numbers are not an indication of handling. In any case, I agree with 1sicklex, X3 is hands down the worst BMW ever made. It looks cheaper than Honda Element for Christs sakes.

LOL, speaking of the reviews, check out this X3 review, its hilarious

http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-8041007346093600149&q=top+gear+x3&hl=en

Skidpad numbers are not an indication of handling. In any case, I agree with 1sicklex, X3 is hands down the worst BMW ever made. It looks cheaper than Honda Element for Christs sakes.
And both of you never owned or driven one, so how can your truly know how it drives handles etc.?? I own the vehicle and drive the vehicle:) Drive the cars instead of going by someone elses opinion. Heck when the 2nd gen GS came out in 98, those same magazines hailed the GS as quite a handler:uh: Were they right?? You know what they say about funneled information...;)

The BMW X3 is the only vehice in the bunch that corners better than the competion and many cars including every Lexus ever made.

have you driven Infiniti's FX45?

have you driven Infiniti's FX45?
Yea i have. I test drove it at Atlantic Infiniti here in NY. I did not like it. It did not have that tossable feel.

Yea i have. I test drove it at Atlantic Infiniti here in NY. I did not like it. It did not have that tossable feel.

oh, just curious. b/c thats my favorite out of the bunch.

LOL, speaking of the reviews, check out this X3 review, its hilarious

http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-8041007346093600149&q=top+gear+x3&hl=en
I have an 06 x3. That video and most of the ones bashing the x3 are old videos. The vehicle has been revised in suspension and features..
I wonder why such a vehicle would be rated so high in the very magazine being mentioned in this thread if it is soooo horrible? Again, have you driven the vehicle?

The X3 actally outhandles the 3 series coupe/sedan with .88g on the skidpad. Tied with the M3 comp package, and edges the M5's .87 g..I posted the results on this board somewhere. Slalom numbers, I will have to look up. Acceleration mid 7's for the x3 but feels hell a quick compared to a LEXUS IS250 I testdrove. The 3 series wagon has smaller interior space compared to the x3, along with lower ground clearance. Can't drive over those icebergs people throw in the street in NYC:p

Can I quote you on bimmerfest. :D This is the most rediculous comment I have ever seen posted.

The X3 is the only BMW I have driven that drives like a Chevy. It is a truck for Christs sake. Yes a good handling truck. But as good a coupe/sedan. :uh:

Since you guys want to be stuck on 2004 vids, here is one on the X3:)

http://www.edmunds.com/insideline/do/VideosMakeModelIndex/make=BMW/model=X3#1

Can I quote you on bimmerfest. :D This is the most rediculous comment I have ever seen posted.

The X3 is the only BMW I have driven that drives like a Chevy. It is a truck for Christs sake. Yes a good handling truck. But as good a coupe/sedan. :uh:Sure you can.. I am a member:) Would you like to bite your words?

Stat fact sheet:p

Road & track 11/06 skidpad #'s

BMW M5 .87g
BMW M3 Comp Coupe .88g
BMW X3 .88g
BMW M6 .88g
BMW M roadster .89g
BMW 330I .83

Lexus IS350 .80g
Lexus GS450H .83g
Lexus IS250 .84g

Stat fact sheet:p

Road & track 11/06 skidpad #'s

BMW M5 .87g
BMW M3 Comp Coupe .88g
BMW X3 .88g
BMW M6 .88g
BMW M roadster .89g
BMW 330I .83

Lexus IS350 .80g
Lexus GS450H .83g
Lexus IS250 .84g


Wow, those people with M3's and 3 series on the track must be idiots. I guess they don't read R&T and consequently have no idea their car is not a good as a truck on the track. :uh: :egads:

But yeah, you can believe a truck will outhandle a car just because some number you read in a magazine says so.

2004 and 2006 X3 is the same car, the newer one is slighly revised, so there's not a whole lot of difference. The bottom line is - X3 is the worst BMW ever built.

Wow, those people with M3's and 3 series on the track must be idiots. I guess they don't read R&T and consequently have no idea their car is not a good as a truck on the track. :uh: :egads:

But yeah, you can believe a truck will outhandle a car just because some number you read in a magazine says so.This is the phrase I was looking for...You said it all:thumbup: Get behind the wheel folks before you pass judgement. One more article on the M5 this time.. .87g's again? why?

http://www.fast-autos.net/vehicles/BMW/2006/M5/

Anyway, if i was in the market for a faster BMW, I would of bought one:)

I bet 3 series wagon has more cargo space, and handles better, and has better acceleration.

http://www.bmwusa.com/vehicles/3/328iSportsWagon/techdata.htm
http://www.bmwusa.com/vehicles/X3/30si/techdata.htm

Both have the same roof load. 165lbs
The wagon can have more of a payload:D 1102 lbs the X3 1036 lbs
The wagon is 500lbs less and has a lower drag cd.
The wagon has more passenger volume:D
http://www.bmwusa.com/Vehicles/3/328iSportsWagon/compare.htm

I am trying to find the wagon cargo capacity.

LOL a Ford Crown Victoria pulls .86 on skidpad, must be handling as good as M3.

2004 and 2006 X3 is the same car, the newer one is slighly revised, so there's not a whole lot of difference. The bottom line is - X3 is the worst BMW ever built.And you own.......??????

LOL a Ford Crown Victoria pulls .86 on skidpad, must be handling as good as M3.

LOL I wonder if folks understand what the skidpad results actually mean. :dunno:

Skidpad numbers are only a very small part of the story - they alone are almost meaningless when it comes to representing handling performance, especially when the numbers are generated under different environmental conditions and on different pads.

You can always tell people that don't understand racing dynamics by the ones that cling to skidpad values as the answer to every handling comparison.

The X3 is just absolutely not going to outhandle a 3-series sedan or coupe, much less an M3. The X3 gets its suspension and chassis setup from the 3 series but is heavier and sits up higher, so logic would dictate it couldn't exceed the capabilities of the 3 series from which its derived.

And you own.......??????

Not sure what owning has to do with anything. Most car reviewers own an older car, they don't own 911s or Ferraris.

It is fine for you to like the X3, clearly, you own it. Univerally though, it is the other way around.

Skidpad numbers are a number. If you really keep the argument the X3 handles better or as good as a M5 or M3 b/c of a number, one number, when those cars are universally praised for their handling, then no point in debating with you.

Perhaps braking, slalom, and other stats would hush the critics..But this is indeed preaching to the choir..Once again, lol... none of you who are bashing the vehicle owned or driven the vehicle. Perhaps in 1:18 scale? I am actually selling those in the classifieds including an sc430:p

1Sick, exactly, its fine to own and like whatever the car maybe, even if its an X3, but it's plain out silly to make retarded claims that X3 outhandles an M3. It's like me saying my LS outhandles 911 turbo.

Perhaps braking, slalom, and other stats would hush the critics..But this is indeed preaching to the choir..Once again, lol... none of you who are bashing the vehicle owned or driven the vehicle. Perhaps in 1:18 scale? I am actually selling those in the classifieds including an sc430:p

OMFG, dude, seeing that you are from NYC, I wish I still had my old Honda so that we could meet up and I would school your silly little BMW wannabe. And with the backseat reclined, I'd carry more crap too.

Perhaps braking, slalom, and other stats would hush the critics..But this is indeed preaching to the choir..Once again, lol... none of you who are bashing the vehicle owned or driven the vehicle. Perhaps in 1:18 scale? I am actually selling those in the classifieds including an sc430:p

I have driven an X3. I'm not bashing it. It was fun for an SUV (though the interior and ride quality was not nearly as nice as the RDX in my opinion), but it absolutely will not outhandle a comparable 3-series sedan or coupe. That's all there is to it - magazine race all you want with numbers that suit your desired result, but the fact is you're proud of the X3 because you own it and that's why you're borderline delusional here with some of your claims. Until you take your X3 out to a track and beat a similar year and motor 3-series with a comparably skilled driver, you're just magazine racing, which of course the rest of us are too, but you have to admit your claims go against basic logic, that the X3 SUV would outperform the very car which it is a heavier lifted version of.

Ok let get past the ying yang talk now.. To get back on topic, here is a vid of the top two Suv's in the Consumer Reports going head to head. The Euro version of the 06 Rav 4 is as small as my 02 Rav4. The US market gets the longer version of the 06 Rav4

http://video.yahoo.com/video/play?p=bmw+x3+handeling&ei=UTF-8&b=10&oid=198e7c360c8b1632&rurl=www.zdf.de&vdone=http%3A%2F%2Fvideo.yahoo.com%2Fvideo%2Fsearc h%3Fp%3Dbmw%2Bx3%2Bhandeling%26ei%3DUTF-8%26b%3D11

Why are you posting some meaningless video in some foreighn language?

OMFG, dude, seeing that you are from NYC, I wish I still had my old Honda so that we could meet up and I would school your silly little BMW wannabe. And with the backseat reclined, I'd carry more crap too.You are obviously too childish for me. the igore list for you:)

Yeah, and you're simply not too bright.

CR isn't infallible - they have their biases just like everyone else, and so do their readers, whom they commonly limit their polling to.

Yes, it's often called "group think" just like a bunch of 'believers' see a religious symbol in a cloud or potato chip shape and other flock to see it. :D And they can't understand why others don't 'see' it. :uh:

I have driven an X3. I'm not bashing it. It was fun for an SUV (though the interior and ride quality was not nearly as nice as the RDX in my opinion), but it absolutely will not outhandle a comparable 3-series sedan or coupe. That's all there is to it - magazine race all you want with numbers that suit your desired result, but the fact is you're proud of the X3 because you own it and that's why you're borderline delusional here with some of your claims. Until you take your X3 out to a track and beat a similar year and motor 3-series with a comparably skilled driver, you're just magazine racing, which of course the rest of us are too, but you have to admit your claims go against basic logic, that the X3 SUV would outperform the very car which it is a heavier lifted version of.

Reminds me of an event several of us on here were at, and that's driving through the "Tail Of The Dragon" on the NC/TN border. It's 318 turns in 11 miles, mostly hairpins and tight turns! :eek2: It's the best handling terrain I've ever seen. Anyway, a guy who used to be busy on CL drove his stock *RX300* through the dragon along with the highly modded IS, GSes and Porsches, Miatas, S2000s, etc. :D We're not sure how he went so fast, and some noticed that he almost went down into a ravine a couple of times :yikes: but it did amazingly well.

A lot is down to driver ability too and knowing the limits of a vehicle. I watched an old beat up 525i go through an autocross course screeching the entire way with more lean than the Titanic, but the driver knew exactly how far he could roll the suspension in turns and got a GREAT time. Then I saw a Caterham 7 go through and the guy didn't brake once and was flat as a pancake. :p

An X3's handling is going to feel GOOD by any standards, because BMW makes 'em that way, and it's not just about skid pad numbers, it's brakes, steering, throttle response, gearing, weight balance, intrusiveness of stability control :rolleyes:, and of course, the driver. :)

I drove an X5 with sport package one time and its handling clearly was greater than my ability to exploit it. It would lean some, and of course is taller than a sedan, but that sucker would hang on very well, and it would be ME that backed off, not the car.

My problem with the original X3 is that I didn't care much for the looks in or out, but then I don't like the 5, or the 7 either. They've 'freshened' the X3 some recently, which is a good thing. But regardless of how they look, BMWs still ALL drive GREAT in their categories. It's certainly not just a numbers comparison.

Many of the naysayers are not familiar with the BMW X-drive system and how it plays a role in handeling.. skidpad numbers aside, the choir needs to vist some dealerships, and drive these vehicles instead of getting pudgy, reading magazines, and dreaming about cars :p This vehicle does it for me considering the nasty weather NYC encountered to date. In the dry, this vehicle feels more stable and controlled than my GS400 with Bilstein Coilovers on the twisty Jackie Robinson Parkway in NYC. Sure M3, M5, will out do the x3 in other categories. But, i am more than pleased with my decison in buying this vehicle. It suits my needs at this time.. No regrets.. When I am ready and in the market for a rush, I can shell out the doe for a 335.

deleted...........

RDX would be my choice out of all!

BMW CCA had this to say about the Consumer Reports issue..

Consumer Reports knocks BMW X3 over reliability
BMW News

Dec. 6, 2006

BMW’s X3 is the second-best sporty SUV but worse-than-average predicted reliability keeps it from being recommended by Consumer Reports.
BMW’s X3 is the second-best sporty SUV, says Consumer Reports, but it’s not recommended. “While the X3 performed well in our testing, its predicted reliability has dropped to worse than average,” CR says in its January 2007 issue. Among six sporty SUVs, CR rates them in this order: Toyota RAV4, BMW X3, Nissan Murano SL, Acura RDX, Infiniti FX35, and Mazda CX-7 Grand Touring. All are check-rated excepted the BMW and Mazda (which is too new to have reliability scores yet).

Consumer Reports said it liked the X3’s “agility, steering, braking, fit and finish, and controls,” but not the “ride, price, premium fuel, and touchy throttle.” The magazine noted that while “previous X3s had a punishing ride … this one is still choppy, but more tolerable.”

The magazine also reviewed off-road SUVs and check-rated the Nissan Xterra S, Kia Sorrento LX, and Jeep Liberty Sport V6. It warned that the fourth-rated Toyota FJ Cruiser had handling problems, including lifting both inside wheels on an emergency handling simulation before stability control intervened. The Hummer H3, the only tested vehicle with a much-worse-than-average predicted reliability was fifth and the Jeep Wrangler Unlimited Sahara was sixth.
login to post comments
I have been driving my new
Submitted by 364450 on December 15, 2006 - 8:58am.

I have been driving my new 2007 X3 3.0si for something like 100+ miles now and I think the Consumer Report testers need to awake from their comas. These are not high performance oriented auto people. What they referred to as touchy throttle is in my view exceptional, immediate throttle response--even better than the original N52 255 HP engine in the 530i and 330i. The power delivery is incredible. I have been very gentle with the throttle depressing it no more than about 1/4 of an inch during the break in period and keep RPMs well under 5000 rpm except for a few short light throttle breaks when I have had to pass something.

While I havn't driven the competitive small SUVs, my experience with some of the Japanese vehicles is such that I seriously doubt the Acura is on the same planet with this BMW in handling precision and competence. I am still totally amazed the way this tall vehicle takes turns and I have to remind myself it's not 530i in the corners.

Finally, if you look closely at the reliability scores for the most recent X3 CR had data on, the 2006,it received high marks in every area other than the radio in terms of reliability. Yet the authors of the test report rated it below average in predicted reliability--this despite the fact that it now has basically the same drivetrain and engine as the highly rated 530xi and 330xi. Is this incompetence, stupidity or are the Japanese making contributions to the author's retirement funds?
» login to post comments
I've had my X3 2.5i since
Submitted by A305288mike on December 18, 2006 - 2:35pm.

I've had my X3 2.5i since new in 04 and with 40K on the odometer I can only assume that it's now vogue for auto testers to pan BMW products whenever they can. Either that, or these guys just don't like cars. I have a 330i as well and agree that the X3s handling is outstanding even by comparison to the standard bearer of all autodom. I've also run against MB G wagons on some dusty Mexican roads and can say with confidance that the X drive is far superior to anything else out there. Foot to the floor, dust spraying from all sides, and the Benz crabbed and wallowed while we sailed on tracking straight and in full control.. FOR LESS THAN HALF THE PRICE...

The "old" 2.5 six has been flawless and the "new" 3.0 is even better. What's not to love. So let the rest of the "Sporty" SUV crowd dote over Toyota RAV4, Nissan Murano SL, Acura RDX, Infiniti FX35, and Mazda CX-7.. Remember, no matter how many articles criticize, the above mentioned vehicles will never be bimmers.

Submitted by billhoward on January 4, 2007 - 8:52pm.

Whether Consumer Reports' conclusions are right or wrong, their auto testers are car nuts, starting with the guy at the top (of the car group), David Campion, who's a wicked fast autocrosser. It's possible copy passes through copy editors / rewriters who may put in some digs, but the car guys don't hate cars. And the reliability results are based on surveys of subscribers, not the whims of the testers. You don't think a bunch of car-haters would have sneaked a $40K Lotus Elise on the CR testing budget two years ago, do you?

Bill Howard
Editor, bmwcca.orghttp://www.bmwcca.org/node/6215

Just enjoy your X3. It doesn't hold a candle to the V6 RAV4, no matter how much you try.

My dad recalls back when he was much younger - I wanna say 30-35 years ago, consumer reports was absolutely IN LOVE with the VW Rabbit. I mean no matter what came out the Rabbit was the absolute best car in its class, and reliable beyond question.



Mods: I'm sorry, I know this is off-topic, but I want to address this statement that was posted.

No offense, friend, but you and your dad need to actually go back, find some old copies of CR (or other CR sources ), and re-read what they actually had to say.


I've been reading Consumer Reports since the late 1960's. CR, in the mid-1970's, cautioned readers numerous times about the unreliability of the 1975 VW Rabbit, 1974 Dasher, and the almost identical Audi Fox....all three cars came from the same basic platform. The 3 cars gradually improved with age, but remained well below average in reliability for some time. The Dasher was enlarged, redesigned, and renamed the Quantum, the forerunner of today's Passat. The Rabbit became the Golf ( the Golf name was always used overseas ), and the "Rabbit with a trunk" Jetta expanded the car's appeal to non-hatchback lovers. But all of these products have been average or below in reliability throughout the years......VW has never really gotten the FWD/AWD reliability formula down as well as it did with the reliable air-cooled RWD designs for decades.

In addition to the findings of CR, I also saw some of this for myself. In the mid-1970's the time I worked in a Federal building right down the street from a VW dealership. Every buisness day, in the morning when the shop opened up, a line of Rabbits and Dashers would start at the door to the service shop and extend literally down the street hundereds of feet......most of these would be getting warranty work. You would see more or less the same thing at the Audi shops with the Fox and Audi LS, although, at the time, not many Audis were sold here in the U.S...its popularity did not take off until later, but was almost ruined by a media story in 1985 about "unintended acceleration" on the Audi 5000.

the x3 is the worst BMW i've ever driven. I've daily driven a 01 325xi, 03 x5 4.4, 88 635csi, 03 bmw designed range rover, and various 7, 5 and 3 series over the years. I've driven the x3 as a loaner car many times and it sucks. The quality is horrible, its slow and doesnt move like a bmw at all. Im not bashing your car at all, your choice thats fine, but stop hyping it up like it not the worst bmw ever made. Not to mention its ugly and overpriced so much you could get an x5 for the same money which is 10 times the vehicle.

the x3 is the worst BMW i've ever driven. I've daily driven a 01 325xi, 03 x5 4.4, 88 635csi, 03 bmw designed range rover, and various 7, 5 and 3 series over the years. I've driven the x3 as a loaner car many times and it sucks. The quality is horrible, its slow and doesnt move like a bmw at all. Im not bashing your car at all, your choice thats fine, but stop hyping it up like it not the worst bmw ever made. Not to mention its ugly and overpriced so much you could get an x5 for the same money which is 10 times the vehicle.

What did you think of the X3's ride? In spite of its unreliability, this has actually been the chief owner complaint with the vehicle ( a complaint even shared by enthusiast mags like Car and Driver/ Road and Track )........so much so that BMW redid the suspension on newer models.

the x3 is the worst BMW i've ever driven. I've daily driven a 01 325xi, 03 x5 4.4, 88 635csi, 03 bmw designed range rover, and various 7, 5 and 3 series over the years. I've driven the x3 as a loaner car many times and it sucks. The quality is horrible, its slow and doesnt move like a bmw at all. Im not bashing your car at all, your choice thats fine, but stop hyping it up like it not the worst bmw ever made. Not to mention its ugly and overpriced so much you could get an x5 for the same money which is 10 times the vehicle.I question your credibility here, and buddy I am good at that.
So, you went from an 01 325xi, 03 x5 4.4,03 bmw designed range rover, and various 7, 5 and 3 series to a 92 ES300????:confused: Ok:rolleyes: "the worst BMW you ever driven?? lol. So which car was the x3 a loaner for and for which dealer?

I question your credibility here, and buddy I am good at that.
So, you went from an 01 325xi, 03 x5 4.4,03 bmw designed range rover, and various 7, 5 and 3 series to a 92 ES300????:confused: Ok:rolleyes: "the worst BMW you ever driven?? lol. So which car was the x3 a loaner for and for which dealer?

Why question his credibility? jhenty certainly knows what he has driven and owned over the years.....and he isn't questioning yours. Take him at his word. So he has gone from BMW's and SUV's to an ES...so what? I, myself, have owned a pretty good cross section of vehicles in my lifetime.....from economy cars to luxury cars to coupes to sports sedans to plastic-body Saturns to AWD Subarus.

Why question his credibility? jhenty certainly knows what he has driven and owned over the years.....and he isn't questioning yours. Take him at his word. So he has gone from BMW's and SUV's to an ES...so what? I, myself, have owned a pretty good cross section of vehicles in my lifetime.....from economy cars to luxury cars to coupes to sports sedans to plastic-body Saturns to AWD Subarus.Marshall...Sometimes you can't ignore the obvious. This guy seems to be following a trend by referring to the X3 as "the worst Bmw ever built". I can tell you, that i have never been a follower, but if that is his sentiment great:thumbup: Problem is, our buddy is a good story teller. Be a leader and not a follower I say to our buddy.. Have him post some pics of his "prior vehicles". Heck I had a Ferrari f430 and a Pagani but traded it in for a Gs400 & a Rav4 since i got tired of them. :D

A trend since its debut...

COUNTERPOINT

RON KIINO
I might have thought more of the X3 had I not driven it back-to-back with a Subaru Forester 2.5XT. Yes, the Bimmer is ritzier, offers more niceties, such as a power liftgate and hill-descent control, and handles and brakes in a league above, but it's more than two seconds slower to 60, a lot harsher in the ride department, and about 15 grand more on the bottom line. And as far as I can tell, it doesn't offer any real advantage in rear-seat space, cargo room, or all-weather traction. By itself, the X3 is an able performer, but next to the Forester, it simply seems like an inflated 3-series wagon, in both size and price.

PATRICK BEDARD
I've seen sillier cars. There was an angry, slotted Bizzarrini GT back in 1968 that scraped its belly on the ground like a skulking lizard. The AMC Gremlin, a subcompact created by chopping the useful space out of the compact Hornet, was pretty silly, too. But this BMW X3 is the 21st-century record holder. Especially with the sport-suspension option and six-speed box, BMW seems to have combined the worst features of sports cars and SUVs—the jarring ride, fast-wearing tires, and dinky cargo area of the former with the excessive weight and precious pricing of the latter. For $41,000 you get a sports car on stilts. Mondo silly.

LARRY WEBSTER
A BMW sport-ute had me skeptical from the start, but I grew to appreciate BMW's first effort, the X5. I once used an X5 to tow my race car—at a very comfortable and fast velocity—and once at the track exploited the car's flexibility by using it for a handful of not-too-slow demonstration laps around the course. I couldn't have done both in the 5-series wagon. But I don't think the X3 is any more useful than the 3-series wagon. Plus, the X3 gives up plenty of performance, and it's the worst-riding BMW I've ever driven. Sure, the X3 has a roomier interior, but from a driver's standpoint, it's not even a contest—I'd take the wagon version

http://www.caranddriver.com/roadtests/7592/bmw-x3-30i-page2.html

A trend since its debut...

COUNTERPOINT

RON KIINO
I might have thought more of the X3 had I not driven it back-to-back with a Subaru Forester 2.5XT. Yes, the Bimmer is ritzier, offers more niceties, such as a power liftgate and hill-descent control, and handles and brakes in a league above, but it's more than two seconds slower to 60, a lot harsher in the ride department, and about 15 grand more on the bottom line. And as far as I can tell, it doesn't offer any real advantage in rear-seat space, cargo room, or all-weather traction. By itself, the X3 is an able performer, but next to the Forester, it simply seems like an inflated 3-series wagon, in both size and price.

PATRICK BEDARD
I've seen sillier cars. There was an angry, slotted Bizzarrini GT back in 1968 that scraped its belly on the ground like a skulking lizard. The AMC Gremlin, a subcompact created by chopping the useful space out of the compact Hornet, was pretty silly, too. But this BMW X3 is the 21st-century record holder. Especially with the sport-suspension option and six-speed box, BMW seems to have combined the worst features of sports cars and SUVs—the jarring ride, fast-wearing tires, and dinky cargo area of the former with the excessive weight and precious pricing of the latter. For $41,000 you get a sports car on stilts. Mondo silly.

LARRY WEBSTER
A BMW sport-ute had me skeptical from the start, but I grew to appreciate BMW's first effort, the X5. I once used an X5 to tow my race car—at a very comfortable and fast velocity—and once at the track exploited the car's flexibility by using it for a handful of not-too-slow demonstration laps around the course. I couldn't have done both in the 5-series wagon. But I don't think the X3 is any more useful than the 3-series wagon. Plus, the X3 gives up plenty of performance, and it's the worst-riding BMW I've ever driven. Sure, the X3 has a roomier interior, but from a driver's standpoint, it's not even a contest—I'd take the wagon version

http://www.caranddriver.com/roadtests/7592/bmw-x3-30i-page2.html

What did Csabe have to say about the X3?:D I've been a reader of Car & Driver and used to watch Car & Driver television for years.. There will always be critics. Like I said earlier, you will have varying opinions from various sources. Just like you have movie critics, you have car critics. You have to be your own critic in the game of life and not follow others. As I mentioned in the beginning of this thread, I went out and test drove each vehicle mentioned except the Mazda C7. Magazines meant sqat to me. I have a Rav4 already and still tok a trip to my old Toyota dealer, Bayside Toyota, to test out the 06 Rav4L V6. Despite having 269 hp, it did not appeal to me. Porshe Cayanne V6 felt tipsy and did not cut it. The handeling of the comp I tested was not even in the same league as the X3 SAV. I wanted an all season sport vehicle that can cut up the corners with, haul stuff, and chill in..went out and got my self a Bimmer X3 :thumbup: Money well spent... Commence

The x3 rides like a truck, which it shouldnt. I don't even drive the es300 anymore, nor claimed to have owned all of those vehicles. I've driven each one on a daily basis, a few have been mine, a few family vehicles.

You want pictures for proof? hahaha, wow thats low. Heres one picture with both the 3 and x5. I dont think i need to go further and post them all.

Burdick BMW syracuse, NY.....loaner x3 for x5 service, specifically painting of black sport mufflers after chipping and air ride suspension service.

I'm not trying to make any personal attacks against you shocker like you did to me. You also drive a GTO? Most people hate that car too, I Love that car i dont need a reason. The x3 is your choice, if you like it good for you.

The x3 rides like a truck, which it shouldnt. I don't even drive the es300 anymore, nor claimed to have owned all of those vehicles. I've driven each one on a daily basis, a few have been mine, a few family vehicles.

You want pictures for proof? hahaha, wow thats low. Heres one picture with both the 3 and x5. I dont think i need to go further and post them all.

[B]The x3 is your choice, if you like it good for you.[B]Correct:thumbup: Why don't you come to a Neloc meet, and I will let you ride shotgun, then let you drive my x3 while I ride shotgun. Let me know if the 06 X3 does indeed "ride like a truck". Guess which handles & rides better of the two (X5, X3). I recall Car and driver televison/magazine referring to the X5 with the sport package as jarring and ball busting..Heck they had this to say in one article..But early comments from staffers who drove this brand-new vehicle elicited very un-BMW-like, one-word adjectives -- such as jerky, jumpy, and jiggly. It sounded as if we were naming the cast of the "Seven Dysfunctional Dwarves.More reviews here.http://www.caranddriver.com/carreviews/2005-bmw-x5/bmw_x5.html Very indicative of the X3 eh?? Those magazines I tell yeh.:p Once again, it is all subjective, and they mean squat imo. Dudes really need to drive vehicles instead of reading magazines and eating bon bons..:p Oh yes Jhendy, the X3 is similar in price to the X5 3.0.., more money than a z4 coupe/droptop, 335 coupe, 530I sport wagon. The beauty of your local BMW center is that you can test drive all these cars with no hesitation.:D Yeah, i could of rocked one of those other Bimmers but I was not in the market for any of them as i needed something more practical to commute in allseason (especially to Jersey where my girl lives), and for her to drive sometimes. The X3 I test drove seemed to win me over. Took it on the LIE which is right next to my dealer Bayside BMW , and was amazed at how quickly it gets up to speed.. Sport mode withe the famed 3.0 inline 6 just unleashes this vehicle, the brakes are incredible (157ft 70-0mph 2 feet shy of the mighty M5), cornering flat as hell. X5 3.0 is slowwwwwww. Guess it is the weight.. 4.8 on the otherhand wowww!!:thumbup: I'm a miser so was not willing to spend 60k on a vehicle.. Shelled out the doe on the x3, and I was out the front door... Hell yeah, I was ready to pull the trigger on the GTO, but I had to think.. This car will be sitting in my driveway during the winter just like my GS, 30k which will turn into 15 k in 2yrs do to depreciation, and my girl can't drive stick:uh: Like i posted in another thread, the GTO is going to be as cheap to obtain like a Trans-Am/Camaro.. I will let someone else take a hit, then I will get one for cheap:D Hey..Get the laundry out of moms x5 lol j/k;) :p love the pics..

Haha, no hard feelings about anything. Like I said its your preference. Most people here bash bmw period without ever driving many of them. Its my favorite brand. You did your homework and found what you preferred so props to you on that one. Many people just buy a car because others like it or just on looks. Although the x3 may not have been my choice it apparently suits you pretty well.

A trend since its debut...

COUNTERPOINT

RON KIINO
I might have thought more of the X3 had I not driven it back-to-back with a Subaru Forester 2.5XT. Yes, the Bimmer is ritzier, offers more niceties, such as a power liftgate and hill-descent control, and handles and brakes in a league above, but it's more than two seconds slower to 60, a lot harsher in the ride department, and about 15 grand more on the bottom line. And as far as I can tell, it doesn't offer any real advantage in rear-seat space, cargo room, or all-weather traction. By itself, the X3 is an able performer, but next to the Forester, it simply seems like an inflated 3-series wagon, in both size and price.

PATRICK BEDARD
I've seen sillier cars. There was an angry, slotted Bizzarrini GT back in 1968 that scraped its belly on the ground like a skulking lizard. The AMC Gremlin, a subcompact created by chopping the useful space out of the compact Hornet, was pretty silly, too. But this BMW X3 is the 21st-century record holder. Especially with the sport-suspension option and six-speed box, BMW seems to have combined the worst features of sports cars and SUVs—the jarring ride, fast-wearing tires, and dinky cargo area of the former with the excessive weight and precious pricing of the latter. For $41,000 you get a sports car on stilts. Mondo silly.

LARRY WEBSTER
A BMW sport-ute had me skeptical from the start, but I grew to appreciate BMW's first effort, the X5. I once used an X5 to tow my race car—at a very comfortable and fast velocity—and once at the track exploited the car's flexibility by using it for a handful of not-too-slow demonstration laps around the course. I couldn't have done both in the 5-series wagon. But I don't think the X3 is any more useful than the 3-series wagon. Plus, the X3 gives up plenty of performance, and it's the worst-riding BMW I've ever driven. Sure, the X3 has a roomier interior, but from a driver's standpoint, it's not even a contest—I'd take the wagon version

http://www.caranddriver.com/roadtests/7592/bmw-x3-30i-page2.html

That was the 04. Rumor has it the 06 has made decent strides in the rock hard handling department.

So the RAV4 is a sporty SUV?

RAV4 V6 limited is a pretty damn quick compact SUV

my friends are planning to buy a new car, looking into compact SUVs for a taller view of the road

they want me advice, i think ill highly recommend RAV4 V6 to them
great mileage (similar to 4 cylinder) yet still lots of power!
and the new RAV4 is much bigger than last one