Road Test: BMW X5

2007 BMW X5 4.8i Road Test

Engines: 3-litre six-cylinder petrol or diesel; V8 petrol

Transmission: Six-speed automatic

Performance: (3.0 diesel) 0 to 62mph in 8.3 seconds; 134mph; 32.5mpg official average

CO2: (3.0 diesel) 231g/km

Recently, The Economist asked: "Germany produces some of the fastest and most luxurious cars in the world, but is that yesterday's game?"

As it happens, it was a little nervous about answering its own question. And well it might be. Such is the ubiquity of German cars, not least on British roads, it would be a brave voice who called time on Mercedes-Benz, BMW and Audi. The thinking went like this; the Germans don't make enough of the smaller "cheap and cheerful" cars demanded by the fastest-growing markets (China, India and the rest). They've also neglected newer, greener technologies. So, on those grounds, they're on the road to gentle relative decline.

Then again, the Germans' technical excellence, strong marketing and formidable brands mean pricing power and suggest a happier, more profitable outcome, one that might even allow them to carry on manufacturing in Germany rather than exporting assembly lines, and jobs, eastwards.

BMW's new X5 SUV is a perfect example of the kind of product The Economist was talking about - the wrong car at the wrong time. Although it's produced not in Germany, but in Spartanburg, South Carolina, in the middle of its largest market, it's a fine illustration of the strengths and weaknesses of the German way of making cars.

First, the strengths. This new X5 brims with the sort of engineering and electronics that competitors from emerging markets will take years to catch up with, even though many of those features have been developed outside of BMW and/or their Bavaria fastness. (Did you know that there are dozens of software engineers in India passing code back and forth to Munich because there is a shortage of such talent in the fatherland?)

The new model has double-wishbone suspension at the front, which you don't have to understand, except to grasp that the car handles better. The shell has been stiffened, which also helps it to manoeuvre, and, as ever, BMW extracted more power from the engines while reducing fuel consumption and CO2 emissions. It's safer, too; a "head-up" display projected seemingly by magic into the middle distance of your view tells you your speed and, say, the sat-nav's instructions on your next move, so you don't have to look around the dash.

There's something called flex-ray technology in there, too, so the computers can work ever faster, akin to equipping it with broadband. The headlamps turn with the front wheels, the steering adjusts for speed (neither that novel, but nice to have), it will dim the lights to dip when it senses an oncoming vehicle, and the foglamps will turn themselves on if a low-level obstacle is "seen" in your way.

Those massive alloy rims (18-inch as standard, with bling options on 19-inch and 20-inch versions) are wrapped in run-flat tyres. And there's the usual stability control, six airbags and electronic dampers and anti-roll bars. In total, it's more than a match for anything coming out of India or China for the foreseeable future.

It all works well. Hustling the X5 along the slippery, winding roads of the Carolinas in the heaviest rain I've ever encountered proved the point. The part of the car that fared least well in these conditions was the wipers, which weren't quite up to the torrents of water that reduced visibility to nil for a few seconds. The roads in the Table Rock National Park aren't what they might be.

Particularly impressive - and I tested these beyond reasonable doubt - were the brakes, assisted by a "brake-drying" mechanism that periodically applied the pads to remove any film of water that might have built up. Although I suspect an equivalent BMW saloon or estate would perform dynamically better on such a test, I can see why some think that an X5 is the ideal safety capsule for their most precious of cargoes.

Thus, despite a bit of a backlash, it will retain its cachet on the school run. Slightly grumpily, BMW points out that "the X5 has historically been bought and used by males... 86 per cent of owners were male and aged 41 to 50 years old... only a third are used as school-run cars".

Maybe. The truth is that BMWs are a default choice for many people, for good and bad reasons. I think it a pity that names such as Jaguar, Saab, Alfa Romeo, Lexus, Citro?«n, Honda, maybe even Cadillac, never cross their minds. It just proves the point about the Germans' brand strengths.

So here we have a product that weighs a couple of tons, yet will steer and handle acceptably. It's a trick that was first pulled off by the Range Rover, in 1970, and in terms of off-road ability the Land Rover range still pretty much sees off the opposition, including the X5.

The problem, of course, is that there are just too many of these vehicles on the roads. They're rather too big and heavy and usually unnecessary when an estate car, a people carrier or some crossover of the two would do just as well.

Nor is the X5 fault-free; the third row of seats is suitable only for the tiniest toddlers, who probably won't be able to see much past the seats ahead of them. The big alloy wheels tend to "tramline" and the iDrive system is, as usual, frustrating.

But I'm not going to beat this BMW up for not being green. In terms of CO2 emissions - not the only aspect, I grant you, but a key one - it is slightly more environmentally friendly than you'd think. Why? Because it doesn't pollute that much. The 3.0-litre diesel version, which should be the bestselling of the family, spews out 231 grams of CO2 for every kilometre it travels. About twice as bad as a Fiat Panda, then.

Yet give them another 10 years and this figure will probably be under 200g. It might even happen quicker than that; the six-cylinder petrol-engined X5 is 17 per cent greener than its predecessor, at 260g/km. Again, no hero, and I'd still urge you to buy a Citro?«n C1 instead, but an unimaginably green outcome by historical standards. The car-makers are doing their bit, not to save the planet, precisely, but perhaps to kill it a little more slowly.

The 4.8-litre V8 is a bit naughty at 299g/km, but they sell very few of those in the UK. (It makes a very agreeable noise, by the way.) We, the consumers, are the ones who demand this type of vehicle. In due course, China will probably be one of their key markets. As long as the world's drivers want to buy 'em, they'll be keeping the Carolinians in Spartanburg busy, BMW bosses can sleep well, and the answer to The Economist's question will be "nein".

The rivals

Range Rover Sport from ??35,665

Just for a change, a British car beats the Germans for style and image. Can be very thirsty indeed. No seven-seat option.

Audi Q7 from ??37,285

Another behemoth. We prefer the Q7's interior, though, and its controls are a little easier to use. Comes as a six- or seven-seater

Mercedes-Benz ML-Class from ??35,370

Good off-road ability, and a big improvement on-road compared to its predecessor. Seven-seat option, smooth engines, made in the US.

Source: [url=http://motoring.independent.co.uk/road_tests/article2372368.ece]Independent[/url]