BMW X1 - am I missing something?

[g3org3y]

I saw one one of these over the weekend in the street and admittedly struggled to identify what it was. Looked about the same size as a 3er touring, not particularly high off the ground, I'm sure the badge on the side stated it was an S-Drive (meaning RWD iirc). I only realised what it was after noticing the X1 badge on the back.

So what's the point of this? Does it offer any advantages over a 3 Series touring (apart from looking worse) especially if 4WD is not standard?

I'm already of the opinion that some of BMW's niche models are somewhat dubious but this is on par, if not worse than the X6.

Proper BMW fanboi here, but am slowly losing the faith.

*Goes off to check the new Z4 M Roadster/Coupe for reassurance*...oh wait

[kambites]

I guess the main advantage over the 3-series is ease of entry/exit if you're old?

I suspect that most X1/X3/X5/X6 buyers wouldn't even notice the lack of four wheel drive.

[toast boy]

You're missing nothing. The point of a sporting saloon manufacturer making non-offroad cars that look like they should be offroad cars is simply because people are image driven idiots and there is a good profit to be made from that particular demographic.

[300bhp/ton]

toast boy said:

You're missing nothing. The point of a sporting saloon manufacturer making non-offroad cars that look like they should be offroad cars is simply because people are image driven idiots and there is a good profit to be made from that particular demographic.

BMW haven't always made sporting saloons....

[toast boy]

300bhp/ton said:

BMW haven't always made sporting saloons....

Indeed they have not but would you not agree that their core strength and main product range over the past 30-40 years has been sporting saloons? Cheers for the rolleyes btw. You don't own an X1 do you

[The Wookie]

toast boy said:

You're missing nothing. The point of a sporting saloon manufacturer making non-offroad cars that look like they should be offroad cars is simply because people are image driven idiots and there is a good profit to be made from that particular demographic.

Or more succinctly, the point of it is that people buy them, the bigger question is why

[12gauge]

kambites said:

I guess the main advantage over the 3-series is ease of entry/exit if you're old?

Interesting point. Ive seen a couple of those 5 series GTs around here, all driven by geriatrics (maybe what the GT stands for!)

Not BMWs usual demographics.

[podwin]

I like it

[ewenm]

toast boy said:

300bhp/ton said:

BMW haven't always made sporting saloons....

Indeed they have not but would you not agree that their core strength and main product range over the past 30-40 years has been sporting saloons? Cheers for the rolleyes btw. You don't own an X1 do you

What percentage of 3-series and 5-series sold are "sporting", so M3s and M5s perhaps with the inclusion of 330/335 and 550? BMW might market themselves as manufacturers of "sporting saloons" but I reckon the vast majority of their actual sales will be their non-sporting models.

Anyway, good luck to them with their Xn cars. Not my bag, but obviously many people like them.

[Zod]

I have three problems with the X1:

it is ugly;

existence of S-Drive version;

it is very ugly.

[Major Fallout]

kambites said:

I guess the main advantage over the 3-series is ease of entry/exit if old.

I think that is exactly the point of them. A small car that is easy to get into.

[300bhp/ton]

toast boy said:

300bhp/ton said:

BMW haven't always made sporting saloons....

Indeed they have not but would you not agree that their core strength and main product range over the past 30-40 years has been sporting saloons?

I think that's quite debatable to be honest.

40 years ago BMW were nothing like they are today. Arguably bikes and non sporting salon cars have played a big part of the companies success. Except for the past 10 years or so where SUV's and the past 7 years compact cars (MINI) have also had a significant role.

toast boy said:

Cheers for the rolleyes btw. You don't own an X1 do you

Nope, but I'd have an X6.

[CraigVmax]

in my eyes its a truly disgusting looking car, all proportions/angles look wrong. I dont understand why anyone would buy one.

Edited by CraigVmax on Monday 6th December 11:39

Edited by CraigVmax on Monday 6th December 11:39

[Zod]

CraigVmax said:

in my eyes its a truly disgusting looking car, all proportions/angles look wrong. I dont understand why anyone would buy one.

Edited by CraigVmax on Monday 6th December 11:39

Edited by CraigVmax on Monday 6th December 11:39

It's the front. The front is horribly droopy.

[RobM77]

4 wheel drive is an option of course, making the X1 a good choice for those people that need off road ability, but can't stand big vehicles. I hate big and heavy things, so if I needed to go off road then I'd probably have one.

As for the two wheel drive version, some people like the other advantages the car brings, like sitting up high, a higher entry position and err.. that's it, but these people may not worry about the disadvantages such as the poorer ride, handling and fuel economy.

My Dad had one for a week (a four wheel drive one) and was considering buying one briefly actually. As stated above though, the ride and handling was nowhere near as good as the 1 or 3 series and the fuel economy worse, and for him those disadvantages far outweighed the advantages, especially for my Mum, who actualyl felt ill in it because of the poor ride.

[Gizmo!]

I have to say when I drove one of these I was expecting to hate it. Too high up, too ugly, not that spacious inside and a diesel of all things.

However, it was the somethingsomething23d and I have to say it went like a mad thing, I liked the (whatever it's called this week) umpteen-speed semi-auto gearboxthing, the seats were utterly fabulous, it was well built, and it hoofed happily down country lanes like it had no right to at all.

Yes, a 1-series with the same engine would be faster around a track but you know something? Driving an MX5 does help you appreciate a car that you don't have to fold yourself into (when the roof's up). I'm not old but I'm not very bendy and I just hopped in and was off. As a car to live with day in day out, I totally see the point and would be very happy with one.

[braddo]

ewenm said:

toast boy said:

300bhp/ton said:

BMW haven't always made sporting saloons....

Indeed they have not but would you not agree that their core strength and main product range over the past 30-40 years has been sporting saloons? Cheers for the rolleyes btw. You don't own an X1 do you

What percentage of 3-series and 5-series sold are "sporting", so M3s and M5s perhaps with the inclusion of 330/335 and 550? BMW might market themselves as manufacturers of "sporting saloons" but I reckon the vast majority of their actual sales will be their non-sporting models.

Anyway, good luck to them with their Xn cars. Not my bag, but obviously many people like them.

100% of BMW's saloons were considered sporting, because in comparison to their competitors they tended to be more fun (and better) to drive - this applied to a 318i (vs 190E or top spec Cavalier etc), any 5 series (vs W123/124 Mercs etc) and 7 series etc, and went back 40 years to the '02 cars.

It's not that they had to be BMW's sports models, it just that all BMWs tended to have more sportiness (even if it wasn't much) than direct competitors.

It's much less obvious these days with most cars handling far better than they used to, BMWs and Mercs being far cheaper in relative terms than they were (they are now ubiquitous), and BMW trying to have a car for every niche they can think of.

[dick_dastardly71]

3 series touring with an elevated driving position, a more practical boot (thanks to the movable rear seats), the option of 4wd and better ride quality.

I could never understand the point until driving a 4wd one recently, and it was pretty damn good. It was actually the best riding BMW I've driven in recent years.

[300bhp/ton]

braddo said:

ewenm said:

toast boy said:

300bhp/ton said:

BMW haven't always made sporting saloons....

Indeed they have not but would you not agree that their core strength and main product range over the past 30-40 years has been sporting saloons? Cheers for the rolleyes btw. You don't own an X1 do you

What percentage of 3-series and 5-series sold are "sporting", so M3s and M5s perhaps with the inclusion of 330/335 and 550? BMW might market themselves as manufacturers of "sporting saloons" but I reckon the vast majority of their actual sales will be their non-sporting models.

Anyway, good luck to them with their Xn cars. Not my bag, but obviously many people like them.

100% of BMW's saloons were considered sporting, because in comparison to their competitors they tended to be more fun (and better) to drive - this applied to a 318i (vs 190E or top spec Cavalier etc), any 5 series (vs W123/124 Mercs etc) and 7 series etc, and went back 40 years to the '02 cars.

It's not that they had to be BMW's sports models, it just that all BMWs tended to have more sportiness (even if it wasn't much) than direct competitors.

It's much less obvious these days with most cars handling far better than they used to, BMWs and Mercs being far cheaper in relative terms than they were (they are now ubiquitous), and BMW trying to have a car for every niche they can think of.

40 years ago this certainly wasn't true, nor 30 years ago. I admit late e30 and e36 it might be different, but my e36 318i certainly was not sporty in the least. Capable and competent yes, but sporty no.

[RobM77]

300bhp/ton said:

braddo said:

ewenm said:

toast boy said:

300bhp/ton said:

BMW haven't always made sporting saloons....

Indeed they have not but would you not agree that their core strength and main product range over the past 30-40 years has been sporting saloons? Cheers for the rolleyes btw. You don't own an X1 do you

What percentage of 3-series and 5-series sold are "sporting", so M3s and M5s perhaps with the inclusion of 330/335 and 550? BMW might market themselves as manufacturers of "sporting saloons" but I reckon the vast majority of their actual sales will be their non-sporting models.

Anyway, good luck to them with their Xn cars. Not my bag, but obviously many people like them.

100% of BMW's saloons were considered sporting, because in comparison to their competitors they tended to be more fun (and better) to drive - this applied to a 318i (vs 190E or top spec Cavalier etc), any 5 series (vs W123/124 Mercs etc) and 7 series etc, and went back 40 years to the '02 cars.

It's not that they had to be BMW's sports models, it just that all BMWs tended to have more sportiness (even if it wasn't much) than direct competitors.

It's much less obvious these days with most cars handling far better than they used to, BMWs and Mercs being far cheaper in relative terms than they were (they are now ubiquitous), and BMW trying to have a car for every niche they can think of.

40 years ago this certainly wasn't true, nor 30 years ago. I admit late e30 and e36 it might be different, but my e36 318i certainly was not sporty in the least. Capable and competent yes, but sporty no.

It depends what you define as sporting. You seem to be assuming it's the power output? Personally, I look at a car's layout and suspension setup, and in that respect an E36 318i is pretty much as sporting as an E36 328i, and the really big differences don't really come until you get to the M3. It's a relative term of course, and no 318i is the equal of a Boxster, but straight line pace is not the reason for that... (CofG, polar moment, geo, suspension setup etc etc). After all, an MX5 is more sporting than a 320i, despite being slower...