Unless there is some sort of center differential, I don't see how it could be full-time, i.e. used on non-slippery surfaces. Audi uses a torsen, Subaru uses a viscous coupling. Mercedes actually has an open differential and lets the traction control distribute power.
I guess we need to know more about BMW's new system. Anyone have a URL? Maybe they do what Mercedes does, i.e. open differential.
I'm really curious to drive one now. What I like about the Subie is that it doesn't feel like FWD. I bet the Bimmer has that same feel, the FX probably also.
XT can actually tow 2400 lbs with the MT.
I don't think I'd get the X3's sport package either, not on a family oriented utility vehicle.
Bear with me here, I'm not familiar with it but I'm reading from the BMW USA web site.
They say they use a multi-plate clutch, which is basically what Subaru uses on the auto tranny Forester XT, FWIW.
Question is, how do they get around the binding issue on grippy surfaces? They say in an understeer condition, more power goes to the rear. Oversteer sends more power to the front. It doesn't meantion the steady-state power split.
Here's what's interesting, they say on slippery surfaces the axles are locked together. When it's not slippery they aren't. So how does the multi-plate clutch disengage to allow the axles to spin at different speeds during, say, a U-turn?
I'm asking just out of interest. That's not explained on their web site, nor is the default power split.
More from the site, they say under the most challenging conditions, it delivers variable power to the individual wheels.
Again, that doesn't address non-challenging, steady-state conditions.
The videos show the AWD working only in curves and driving over water.
Bob's dealer could still be right.
Even though the Subaru XT MT is a mechanical system, I like that it is 50/50 default, so all wheels are getting power before you slip, in fact that might prevent slipping in the first place. I often don't notice it's icy, until I see people around me slip-sliding away.
And BTW, the auto Subie XT has a multi-plate clutch just like BMW, and it too is intelligent and pro-active. Default power is 80/20 but if you hit the gas, it'll shift power before you slip. It lacks BMW's traction control to manage both axles, but the rear axle is managed with a viscous LSD.
We don't want anyone who has driven both to mess up this perfectly theoretical discussion ;-). Besides, I might end up liking both cars a lot and then what would I do?!?!??!
I have sat in an X3 but I have not driven in one...maybe soon.
Even better. I have an Infinit dealer near me, may drop by. I feel bad, though, if I'm not honestly giving it consideration.
I wish Infiniti had squared off the back, like Renault does with some models. It looks quirky, but I'm function over form, any day.
As it stands, Murano is more practical for me, but it too has major blind spots. Hey, maybe that's why they offer those rear back up cameras. I don't really have a problems seeing what's behind my Forester.
the one thing i really like about leasing is having a new car every x years and having it underwarranty. note to missle dude, i bought my fxt thinking that it would be reliable enough and i would drive in until it died with 200,000+ miles on it.
yo subie land! I'm new to this board but some of the folks here I know from FX land and from a while back on the Outback VDC boards. I own an FX45 loaded to the gills & have never enjoyed a vehicle more but that is neither here nor there with regard to comparing an FX35 to an XT. I've also owned Subarus - I traded in a 2001 Outback VDC (the top of the line Subie at the time) for my FX & I liked the subie. It performed well off-road and on. The McIntosh stereo is probably the best factory installed unit out there. And it made an honest attempt at breaking into the lower end of the luxury SUV market in many ways. BUT comparing it to the FX is like comparing a tricycle to a mountain bike. I haven't driven the XT & I understand that it is fast but the comparison dies there IMO. Performance in other areas just isn't there like it is in many high-end crossovers (FX, Cayenne, X5, etc.) and not with the aesthetics that these vehicles offer. I just don't see how the XT could be construed to compete in that arena. Subie makes an awesome vehicle but it isn't even in the ballpark with the FX on too many levels to accept it (yet) as a luxury/performance suv. I know it must be fun for you guys to compare your vehicle on a loftier level but comon...get real.
It looks like you might have some make-up reading to do...most of those points have been discussed a few times already without any definitive edge given to the FX in any area except lux and prestige and - to some people - looks (I'd agree...I think the FX looks GREAT).
BTW, we weren't comparing the XT to a loaded FX45 which might be a little short on speed but offers one heck of a all-around package ;-).
You also miss the small point, that while you believe there is no definite edge in 0-60, there is a definite edge to the entire package, which it makes it worth my (our) whiles.
Not only is 0-60 substantially faster but the passing test is comically unbalanced:
XT 0-62mph: 6.7s FX45 0-62mph: 7.2s
XT 80-120kpm: 4.3s FX45 80-120kpm: 6.4s
It looks like they didn't aggressively launch either car in the 0-60 test. Results are for the manual XT. I don't think the AT is much slower for that particular 0-60 test because the 2nd gear in the MT doesn't reach 60mph but it exceeds 60mph in the AT (I just tested that :-) ).
FWIW, the braking test for both the FX and XT showed similar results. Of course, there is a LOT of room to upgrade the XT's feet.
Automatic only is an oversight, IMO, for the FX. They did the same with the G35 at first, but since have corrected that.
Still, the G35x is also auto only. They'll never learn!
Welcome back Pete, and yes I remember you from the early days in the VDC boards.
All I can say is that the H6 was all about smooth power delivery and quiet operation, not performance. They also never offered it with a manual tranny. 0-60 was only slightly quicker than the H4s with the manual, actually, but it sure is smooth.
The Subie turbos perform way, way better, a different league entirely. The WRX and XT also have shorter wheelbases and are more nimble and much lighter than the VDC ever was (that was my position back then, too).
VDC was and remains their technology leader, but it was never about performance, it was about moving upscale into (near) luxury territory.
So no, I don't think the VDC would be in this performance arena.
I think we're aware of the 5.3s attained by C&D but for the purposes of comparing cars I think that using results like the one linked above is a better indicator. Presumably both cars were launched similarly in a similar environment under similar conditions. Also be aware that the test was 0-100kph.
I agree that comparisons are only valid when all of the test parameters are as close to being the same as possible. Therefore Car & Driver's tests of the FX45 and the XT would be a valid comparison to use. I'm not sure that C&D got 6.1 for the FX45 but I believe it was somewhere in the 6 second range. I am going to look it up tonight.
The XT is a shell compared to the FX45. A loaded FX45 can attain a 0-60 of 6.x, weighs much more than an XT and might be comparable in luxury to the X5. The fact the Subaru weighs in a 3300 vs the FX35/FX45 4000 effects the towing and amenities. Add another 700 lbs to the Subie and watch it's zip go zap. You might say, that's what you like about it, others say it's too plebian and spartan.
That's true, so we have to ask what the intended mission is for these utes.
Given they're compact and sporty, I dunno, in that way the Forester XT is the purest of them. The extra weight is a pretty big compromise to have to make.
Look back to the BMW 2002, remember those? They were never about luxury. Sporty, compact, fun, light, quick, yes. Instant cult car.
When did window shades become important? Radar cruise control? To me, I'd say, wake up and drive.
I drove the X5 and the 530i wagon back to back and much preferred the 5 series, but the 3 wagon is just too small. At least the X3 offers more room, I'd have to drive one to judge, but reviews aren't encouraging.
I'm sure I'd prefer a G35 over an FX, too. Don't they make a wagon version for other markets? If that came here, I'd sure like to try a G35x wagon with a manual tranny.
Compared to a Legacy, Forester XT is actually lighter, more nimble, and (until the Legacy turbo arrives) much quicker. I should know, we own one of each. Forester adds a lot more fun and takes almost nothing away.
I don't think I could say the same about the X3 and FX vs. their wagon mates. They are heavier and less sporty.
Of course, when the Legacy GT (turbo) does arrive in 2005, I may just get that. We'll see.
SRX has a lot more room than any vehicle here, it's really not compact by any means.
But...yeah, I would consider one if the prices came down to earth. I like Caddy's new styling and 2 kids and a nanny make the seating arrangement desirable for me.
Pacifica is (now) priced right, but it's not sporty enough, neither acceleration nor handling is up to my standards.
Ask yourself, what if I had enough funding for every other aspect of my life, and really had plenty of spare cash for myself? I'd probably drive some nice vehicles too. At that point it's not really affecting more than 0.0001% of your net worth, i.e. it's not significant.
Cost no object, I dunno, I'd have a pretty darn nice fleet in my garage, too. An STi as my toy, a loaded Sienna XLE AWD minivan with a DVD theater for the family, and probably an Audi RS6 Avant for all around use, something like that. Plus a Boxster S or a Lotus Elise as my other toy, so the wife and I could alternate for commuting.
I doubt I'll ever be in that position, but perhaps people that have to balance their checking accounts aren't really in a position to understand what it's like to ignore prices completely, and get what you like most, period.
I'm sure you'd have a dream garage. Heck, it may involve importing a Forester STi as just one part of your fleet.
I'll cut them some slack and admit I'd probably be no different, buying my personal favorites with little regard to acquisition costs.
I'm open minded, but I have yet to sample a clutch-pedal-less transmission that totally satisfies me. This includes the SMG in the Toyota MR2, most unnatural feeling shifts I've ever experienced.
If shifts are rapid fire, obey the driver even when you hit redline, and yes, 5 ratios, then I'm game.
You mean you want the gearbox to hold the currently-selected ratio even as you overrev past the redline, rather than protecting the mill by upshifting? I'm not sure I'd call that an advantage.
Hit the rev limiter, bounce off it, but stay in that gear. I don't want a shift to occur mid corner. The rev limiter cuts off fuel and prevents over-revving.
Comments
I guess we need to know more about BMW's new system. Anyone have a URL? Maybe they do what Mercedes does, i.e. open differential.
I'm really curious to drive one now. What I like about the Subie is that it doesn't feel like FWD. I bet the Bimmer has that same feel, the FX probably also.
XT can actually tow 2400 lbs with the MT.
I don't think I'd get the X3's sport package either, not on a family oriented utility vehicle.
-juice
They say they use a multi-plate clutch, which is basically what Subaru uses on the auto tranny Forester XT, FWIW.
Question is, how do they get around the binding issue on grippy surfaces? They say in an understeer condition, more power goes to the rear. Oversteer sends more power to the front. It doesn't meantion the steady-state power split.
Here's what's interesting, they say on slippery surfaces the axles are locked together. When it's not slippery they aren't. So how does the multi-plate clutch disengage to allow the axles to spin at different speeds during, say, a U-turn?
I'm asking just out of interest. That's not explained on their web site, nor is the default power split.
More from the site, they say under the most challenging conditions, it delivers variable power to the individual wheels.
Again, that doesn't address non-challenging, steady-state conditions.
The videos show the AWD working only in curves and driving over water.
Bob's dealer could still be right.
Even though the Subaru XT MT is a mechanical system, I like that it is 50/50 default, so all wheels are getting power before you slip, in fact that might prevent slipping in the first place. I often don't notice it's icy, until I see people around me slip-sliding away.
And BTW, the auto Subie XT has a multi-plate clutch just like BMW, and it too is intelligent and pro-active. Default power is 80/20 but if you hit the gas, it'll shift power before you slip. It lacks BMW's traction control to manage both axles, but the rear axle is managed with a viscous LSD.
-juice
-juice
I have sat in an X3 but I have not driven in one...maybe soon.
overtime
How about someone who has driven all three?
I wish Infiniti had squared off the back, like Renault does with some models. It looks quirky, but I'm function over form, any day.
As it stands, Murano is more practical for me, but it too has major blind spots. Hey, maybe that's why they offer those rear back up cameras. I don't really have a problems seeing what's behind my Forester.
-juice
I would feel like I was cheating on my BMW.
Just give her a nice bath (hand wash) when you get back, so she's not jealous.
I test drive enough that my Forester must have about 100 accessories. :-)
-juice
Performance: only if you're willing to let the car shift gears for you. I guess I'm not. Sorry.
Zman
BTW, we weren't comparing the XT to a loaded FX45 which might be a little short on speed but offers one heck of a all-around package ;-).
overtime
Check this link that I posted before:
http://members.rogers.com/ajac/results.htm
Not only is 0-60 substantially faster but the passing test is comically unbalanced:
XT 0-62mph: 6.7s
FX45 0-62mph: 7.2s
XT 80-120kpm: 4.3s
FX45 80-120kpm: 6.4s
It looks like they didn't aggressively launch either car in the 0-60 test. Results are for the manual XT. I don't think the AT is much slower for that particular 0-60 test because the 2nd gear in the MT doesn't reach 60mph but it exceeds 60mph in the AT (I just tested that :-) ).
FWIW, the braking test for both the FX and XT showed similar results. Of course, there is a LOT of room to upgrade the XT's feet.
overtime
Still, the G35x is also auto only. They'll never learn!
Welcome back Pete, and yes I remember you from the early days in the VDC boards.
All I can say is that the H6 was all about smooth power delivery and quiet operation, not performance. They also never offered it with a manual tranny. 0-60 was only slightly quicker than the H4s with the manual, actually, but it sure is smooth.
The Subie turbos perform way, way better, a different league entirely. The WRX and XT also have shorter wheelbases and are more nimble and much lighter than the VDC ever was (that was my position back then, too).
VDC was and remains their technology leader, but it was never about performance, it was about moving upscale into (near) luxury territory.
So no, I don't think the VDC would be in this performance arena.
-juice
Didn't C&D test the FX45 0-60 in 6.1?
overtime
well, frickin' DUH!
srp out
Which is just about everything, because 99% of all cars on the road (including X3 and FX) can't keep up.
Given they're compact and sporty, I dunno, in that way the Forester XT is the purest of them. The extra weight is a pretty big compromise to have to make.
Look back to the BMW 2002, remember those? They were never about luxury. Sporty, compact, fun, light, quick, yes. Instant cult car.
When did window shades become important? Radar cruise control? To me, I'd say, wake up and drive.
I drove the X5 and the 530i wagon back to back and much preferred the 5 series, but the 3 wagon is just too small. At least the X3 offers more room, I'd have to drive one to judge, but reviews aren't encouraging.
I'm sure I'd prefer a G35 over an FX, too. Don't they make a wagon version for other markets? If that came here, I'd sure like to try a G35x wagon with a manual tranny.
Compared to a Legacy, Forester XT is actually lighter, more nimble, and (until the Legacy turbo arrives) much quicker. I should know, we own one of each. Forester adds a lot more fun and takes almost nothing away.
I don't think I could say the same about the X3 and FX vs. their wagon mates. They are heavier and less sporty.
Of course, when the Legacy GT (turbo) does arrive in 2005, I may just get that. We'll see.
-juice
Very, very expensive proposition.
note to missle dude, i bought my fxt thinking that it would be reliable enough and i would drive in until it died with 200,000+ miles on it.
See? You've been reading my material for only a few months, and already you're IQ is shooting up.
Yes, but it's built into the budget.
"note to missle dude, i bought my fxt thinking that it would be reliable enough and i would drive in until it died with 200,000+ miles on it."
Note to self, never own cars more than a few years and get rid of them at about 100k.
Does anyone here consider an SRX against any of the aformentioned cars in this thread?
The flip side is that some of the other posters' material is certain to cause brain damage!
james
But...yeah, I would consider one if the prices came down to earth. I like Caddy's new styling and 2 kids and a nanny make the seating arrangement desirable for me.
Pacifica is (now) priced right, but it's not sporty enough, neither acceleration nor handling is up to my standards.
-juice
Ask yourself, what if I had enough funding for every other aspect of my life, and really had plenty of spare cash for myself? I'd probably drive some nice vehicles too. At that point it's not really affecting more than 0.0001% of your net worth, i.e. it's not significant.
Cost no object, I dunno, I'd have a pretty darn nice fleet in my garage, too. An STi as my toy, a loaded Sienna XLE AWD minivan with a DVD theater for the family, and probably an Audi RS6 Avant for all around use, something like that. Plus a Boxster S or a Lotus Elise as my other toy, so the wife and I could alternate for commuting.
I doubt I'll ever be in that position, but perhaps people that have to balance their checking accounts aren't really in a position to understand what it's like to ignore prices completely, and get what you like most, period.
I'm sure you'd have a dream garage. Heck, it may involve importing a Forester STi as just one part of your fleet.
I'll cut them some slack and admit I'd probably be no different, buying my personal favorites with little regard to acquisition costs.
-juice
Sounds like my ultimate dream car is the same as yours: RS6. Only problem is (so far as I've seen) North Americans can't get the lovely Avant version.
Remember, I'm talking cost no object.
OK, I might settle for a S6 Avant. RS6 is automatic only any way. ;-)
-juice
So long as the automatic has 5 or more ratios, I'm willing to suffer.
while x <> -1
{
complain about fx and x3
x++
{
ok lame c code been along time
If shifts are rapid fire, obey the driver even when you hit redline, and yes, 5 ratios, then I'm game.
-juice
You mean you want the gearbox to hold the currently-selected ratio even as you overrev past the redline, rather than protecting the mill by upshifting? I'm not sure I'd call that an advantage.
-juice
That's one bit of info that I have no plans to personally verify :-)
-Frank P.
;-)
-juice