• We’re currently investigating an issue related to the forum theme and styling that is impacting page layout and visual formatting. The problem has been identified, and we are actively working on a resolution. There is no impact to user data or functionality, this is strictly a front-end display issue. We’ll post an update once the fix has been deployed. Thanks for your patience while we get this sorted.

Did anyone else predict the X6 would become such a success?

M

mwmorph

Diamond Member
http://www.autocar.co.uk/News/NewsArticle/AllCars/256021/
Despite doubts about the sales potential at launch in 2008, the BMW X6 has proven a remarkable success. The latest figures provided by BMW reveal overall sales of 110,622 – some 43,322 of which were recorded in 2010, including 3082 X6Ms.
Click to expand...

I truly wonder, what I did wrong in a previous life that I would be condemned to live in a universe where 110k people thought the X6 was such a good idea they'd like to own one.
 
I would never have predicted that. It pretty much throws away everything that is useful about an SUV. You get a cramped interior with a small cargo area, but it's big and heavy. I guess it's all about the styling. They do look kinda cool, but I wouldn't want to sit in the back seat.
 
I've seen a few. Followed an M version for a little while on my commute yesterday. He was going 30mph on the freeway just like everyone else.

I'm not impressed at all.
 
I like it, not practical (only seats 4), but styling is refreshing and different than all the traditional SUVs/crossovers that rolls around America these days.

It may not be described as beautiful, but it has this "presence" when you see one in person, being wider and lower than the X5.

The people that can afford $70k SUV/CUVs, most of them don't care if it is practical or not.
 
Ironically if it was a CAR with the more aerodynamic and practical fastback roofline, people wouldn't buy it because "hatchbacks are bad".
 
BMW themselves said they introduced the X6 specifically for regions like South Florida and Southern California. In these places, cars truly are a status symbol and while the X5 is the more practical, functional option, people there will pay for the sexier symbol that fewer others have.

The other example of this? The Porsche Panamera. I saw many soccer moms and 50yo+ housewives rocking that thing.
 
I pretty much despise this car...but I did get to drive an X6M around a race track and I have to say it drives amazingly well and the engine was awesome. Really looking forward to the M5.
 
fbrdphreak said:
BMW themselves said they introduced the X6 specifically for regions like South Florida and Southern California. In these places, cars truly are a status symbol and while the X5 is the more practical, functional option, people there will pay for the sexier symbol that fewer others have.

The other example of this? The Porsche Panamera. I saw many soccer moms and 50yo+ housewives rocking that thing.
Click to expand...

I don't know about the Panamera. I don't like the design, but the car is remarkably practical. I do see it used as a family vehicle a lot down here in South Florida.
 
PricklyPete said:
I don't know about the Panamera. I don't like the design, but the car is remarkably practical. I do see it used as a family vehicle a lot down here in South Florida.
Click to expand...
Yes, it is indeed practical. But couldn't you get just as useful of a car (that is still nice) for 1/2-2/3 of the price? Point being: status symbol.
 
fbrdphreak said:
BMW themselves said they introduced the X6 specifically for regions like South Florida and Southern California. In these places, cars truly are a status symbol and while the X5 is the more practical, functional option, people there will pay for the sexier symbol that fewer others have.

The other example of this? The Porsche Panamera. I saw many soccer moms and 50yo+ housewives rocking that thing.
Click to expand...

That doesn't make sense. There are other vehicles with the BMW logo....


And what's wrong with the Panamera?
 
In places like SFL, the BMW logo isn't enough. 4/5 cars that you see down there are Porsche, Audi, BMW, VW, Mini, MB, etc. I can count on one hand the number of times I saw an "average" car like a Chevy Malibu.

Having a 3 or 5 series, Audi A3/A5, etc is common down there. To be a step above, you need the unique eye catcher. What's better than an X5? Let's make it look slicker, sportier, lose some practicality in the process, and charge more for it! BAM - instant seller.

And there's nothing wrong with the Panamera. My point was just that instead of seeing older performance enthusiasts driving them, most Panamera's I saw (which were many) were driven by middle aged housewives.

All in all, my point is that the auto market in places like SFL/SoCal is different than other places. There, a Panamera makes sense to them as a family hauler and the X6 is worth the money over an X5. I think the term "badge whore" was coined for those places!
 
GoatMonkey said:
I would never have predicted that. It pretty much throws away everything that is useful about an SUV.
Click to expand...
What means this word, useful?

Didn't vi edit start a thread asking about minivan (useful) vs Ford Flex (cool) and people said get the Flex? Lots of people have also said they would never buy a useful minivan because vans look gay (even though owning a van means you probably have kids which would imply that you are not gay).
Modern cars also have needlessly large wheels. Cars like the Ford Tempo and Toyota Corolla had 14 inch wheels at one time because smaller and lighter wheels have a lot less inertia/moment and it can have a significant effect on performance. Now they have 16 and 17 inch wheels and the tires on them are much wider. It fucks up 0-60 and 60-0 by a lot, but useful doesn't matter as long as it looks cool.

When they introduce a car that is not useful at all, it shouldn't shock anyone when it sells well :\
 
ShawnD1 said:
What means this word, useful?

Didn't vi edit start a thread asking about minivan (useful) vs Ford Flex (cool) and people said get the Flex? Lots of people have also said they would never buy a useful minivan because vans look gay (even though owning a van means you probably have kids which would imply that you are not gay).
Modern cars also have needlessly large wheels. Cars like the Ford Tempo and Toyota Corolla had 14 inch wheels at one time because smaller and lighter wheels have a lot less inertia/moment and it can have a significant effect on performance. Now they have 16 and 17 inch wheels and the tires on them are much wider. It fucks up 0-60 and 60-0 by a lot, but useful doesn't matter as long as it looks cool.

When they introduce a car that is not useful at all, it shouldn't shock anyone when it sells well :\
Click to expand...

Hehe... I guess that's all relative. I also said that it looks "kinda cool", that should be justified with "for an SUVish thing", also.

Now that you mention it though... I wouldn't mind having a sculpture of a Ferrari 250GTO to sit in my backyard.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

Back
Top