Print 47 comment(s) - last by Parhel.. on Nov 12 at 10:56 PM

2010 BMW ActiveHybrid X6  (Source: Motor Trend)

2010 BMW ActiveHybrid X6  (Source: Motor Trend)

2010 BMW ActiveHybrid X6  (Source: Motor Trend)

Under the hood of the 2010 BMW ActiveHybrid X6  (Source: Motor Trend)
Hybrid SUV will also offer competitive fuel economy for its class

A growing trend among luxury car makers like BMW, Ferrari, and Mercedes is to leverage hybrid platforms not only for better fuel economy, but also to bump up performance.  A prime example of this dual-goal philosophy is BMW's new 2010 BMW ActiveHybrid X6.  Soon to be released, this beastly hybrid will feature the sweet performance that BMW's customers demand, while gaining ground on fuel economy.

The vehicle starts with BMW's powerful, but fuel-hungry twin-turbocharged 4.4-liter V-8, which provides 400 hp and 575 lb-ft of torque.  They then load in hybrid electronics, a 2.4 kWh battery, and two electric motors, which crank out 91 and 86 hp (and 192, 206 lb-ft torque, respectively).  Altogether this yields a system power of 485 hp, with a peak torque of 575 lb-ft to drive the approximately 5,700 pound vehicle. 

Compared to the 2010 BMW X6 xDrive50i (15 mpg combined) and the BMW X6 xDriveM (14 mpg combined), the hybrid variant earns a loftier 18 mpg.  In performance, the hybrid manages to retain much of the performance of its gasoline-only rivals.  According to official estimates, it can accelerate from  0-100 km/h (0-62 mph) in 5.6 seconds, versus 5.4 seconds for the xDrive50i and 4.7 seconds for the xDriveM (though the hybrid may be even more competitive when released -- Motor Trend was able to accelerate 0-60 mph in 5.1 seconds).

The vehicle will be BMW's first to use the two-mode CVT transmission jointly developed with GM and-then DaimlerChrysler.  The system previously appeared in the Dodge Durango and Chrysler Aspen hybrids (no longer being produced) and will also be used in the upcoming Mercedes-Benz ML450 hybrid.  It also is used in GM's current line of hybrid trucks and SUVs.

Whereas GM and Chrysler's takes on the dual-mode system used three planetary gearsets for four total fixed gear ratios, the BMW hybrid uses 3 additional "virtual" ratios, to transform the transmission into a seven speed -- which gives it a more dynamic performance.  Shifting is manumatic, performed by steering-wheel-mounted paddles or the console shifter.

The vehicle can drive in all-electric mode for at least 1.6 miles and at speeds of up to 37 mph.  Automobile claims that it can go 2.5 miles in electric mode.  Four drive modes in total are available -- the aforementioned e-mode, the e-boost mode, used at higher speeds to boost the combustion engine, the power generation/recharge mode (which uses braking to regenerate the battery power, like most hybrids), and a drive mode which pushes the combustion and electric motors to their max.

The 2010 BMW ActiveHybrid X6 is packing a wealth of high tech features and performance, but comes with wallet-busting estimated price of $89,755 according to Car and Driver

Comments     Threshold

This article is over a month old, voting and posting comments is disabled

By iFX on 11/11/2009 9:30:56 AM , Rating: 1

How long is this car expected to last for $90k? If your average Honda Civic can be expected to run flawlessly for 10 years and another 10 with minor parts replacement at a base cost of around $14k then this thing should run for, what? 100 years without a hiccup?

Give me a break!

Also, it's ugly as sin.

RE: $90,000!?!
By Pneumothorax on 11/11/2009 9:38:37 AM , Rating: 2
So your average Civic has 485 hp, goes 0-60 in the fives, and will last 10 years (without an engine replacement)?
I agree with you though, it's ugly as hell

RE: $90,000!?!
By jonmcc33 on 11/11/2009 9:52:46 AM , Rating: 2
Not sure if it will last 10 years. I had a friend that owned a BMW and the automatic window stopped working. The BMW dealer wanted to charge her like $2000 to replace it. Sorry, a stupid window isn't worth $2000. She traded the BMW in for an Audi.

RE: $90,000!?!
By Parhel on 11/11/2009 10:20:16 AM , Rating: 4
The Audi won't be much cheaper to fix when something breaks. And, being an Audi, things are sure to break.

RE: $90,000!?!
By mdogs444 on 11/11/2009 10:25:45 AM , Rating: 3
My rear drivers window motor broke on my 03 A4, and cost almost $850 to fix. They wanted $2,000 to replace all my brake pads.

RE: $90,000!?!
By Parhel on 11/11/2009 10:55:10 AM , Rating: 2
Ouch!!! You could buy solid gold brake pads for $2,000.

RE: $90,000!?!
By mdogs444 on 11/11/2009 10:59:59 AM , Rating: 3
Granted it was a few years ago, and am assuming they wanted to replace the rotors with it. But the rotors aren't expensive nor are the pads.

I ended up buying new rotors and pads at autozone (ordered) for about $250, and did them myself. Funny thing was, the entire setup and fitting sizes were the EXACT same as my parents Mazda Tribute. Not sure if that means anything, just found it to be odd.

RE: $90,000!?!
By Spuke on 11/11/2009 7:46:16 PM , Rating: 2
Funny thing was, the entire setup and fitting sizes were the EXACT same as my parents Mazda Tribute.
There are a lot of cars that share bolt patterns and caliper mounting locations. Hell, the two cars might even share the same brake supplier.

RE: $90,000!?!
By iFX on 11/11/2009 10:28:25 AM , Rating: 1
So you would be ok with the car lasting 10 years because it has more horsepower and a fancier interior? Got it.

You did see the part where this was a hybrid which historically have been about efficiency and longevity.

RE: $90,000!?!
By mdogs444 on 11/11/2009 10:45:00 AM , Rating: 1
You do realize that in life, there is a reason we have different levels of consumer products that are made for the same purpose. Much of the quality of life and standard of living are based on income levels and product & energy pricing. The more money you make, the more you can afford to purchase better &/or more luxurious products.

No one needs a 4,000 sqft home...but are you going to tell them its stupid because it won't last longer than a 1,000 sqft apartment?

RE: $90,000!?!
By MrBlastman on 11/11/2009 11:34:04 AM , Rating: 2
I think we should have the freedom to purchase freely. If we make sufficient funds and earn the money through hard work, we should definately be able to enjoy the fruits of our efforts.

I'll stop short there though and say that your quality of life is not neccesarily equivalent to the level of luxury of the goods that you own. One of the most well off men that I know lives in a _very_ modest home and drives a rustbucket to work every day.

While fancy goods and objects are nice, they do not save nor help you at all when you face issues such as serious health problems, marriage problems, family problems, work problems (they can hurt you when you have work problems) or other obstacles you might face in life.

So really, these fancy possessions, while maybe enjoyable in the moment, are simply fleeting trinkets of micro-enjoyment you may receive periodically only to be replaced by the next--that is if you are obsessed by the ownership of these items in the first place.

BMW's, like Mercedes and Audi are all notorious for... falling apart. So, if you can afford to buy them, be prepared to fix them as well.

RE: $90,000!?!
By Spuke on 11/11/2009 7:59:50 PM , Rating: 3
Audi quality is actually pretty good according to JD Powers Dependability Study which is odd because VW is only one step above the bottom on that list. BMW's quality isn't as high as I think it should be (it's barely above the industry average). What surprised me was Mercedes quality. It's not really all that good (at least not where I'd expect it to be given the prices). It's below the industry average. You want a really reliable luxury car? See the following:

1. Buick
2. Jaguar
3. Lexus
4. Mercury
5. Lincoln
6. Cadillac
7. Audi

If you consider Porsche to be a luxury marque then it will slot between Caddy and Audi. It's closer to Caddy in quality than Audi.

My wife wants a SLK but I'm not sure I want to pay more in maintenance on a car that's not as trouble free as other luxury car makers.

RE: $90,000!?!
By MrBlastman on 11/12/2009 10:51:01 AM , Rating: 2
JD Powers is a crock of crap dude. They are the most corrupt reviewer of consumer products there is. I laugh when I read their reviews and scales that they judge vehicles on.

Wasn't it recently that a scandal came out showing that J.D. was taking money to boost ratings? I believe there was. Either way, they are the LAST place I would trust as far as ranking the quality and dependability of a vehicle.

Oh, and Jaguar... reliable? Have you ever owned one? My Father did for a year (and that was long enough), he had to have something silly replaced that on an average car would cost 50 bucks and a short amount of time. The cost that the dealer quoted him? 1200.00. Jaguars are historically Jag-turds, constantly falling apart, in need of maintenance or stuck in the shop. I'm hoping you are joking there.

My family has owned Licoln's and Caddy's for year, and generally they hold up pretty well, with the exception of the 1982 Cadillac SeVille--that thing was an electrical nightmare. Apparently it was one of the first highly electronic Caddies and at the time (we bought it new) it was constantly having malfunctions. That was the only one we had big problems with. Our 87 DeElegance Broham was a fine car, as is our 2001 DeVille. Also, the 90' Towncar drove nicely and our 95' Towncar is still running strong to this day.

Honestly, if you really want someone's take on an Auto's reliability, first hand accounts I have always found are the best from people who are not affiliated with any review agency.

RE: $90,000!?!
By Spuke on 11/12/2009 1:27:42 PM , Rating: 2
Wasn't it recently that a scandal came out showing that J.D. was taking money to boost ratings?
Can't find anything on Google about this so-called scandal so I'll chalk that one up to BS.

Oh, and Jaguar... reliable? Have you ever owned one?
I don't care about your anecdotal "evidence". And I don't care about whether or not you believe them. JD employs science, beliefs and opinions are not science. Unless you can come up with scientific evidence to the contrary, you're just full of sh!t.

RE: $90,000!?!
By MrBlastman on 11/12/2009 3:20:55 PM , Rating: 2
You're full of sh!t if you believe every word J.D. says. As far as I can tell you most probably are employed by them or work for them.

Regarding anecdotal "evidence," it is evidence nontheless, moreso it is hard facts from real-world experiences. Who are you going to believe more? A corporation that makes money off of reviewing products or an individual who paid their own money for a product and depending on their individual experience, passes on that knowledge to you, the consumer freely without any strings attached?

I'd buy what the individual says any day over a company. "Anecdotal," you tickle my tummy with your musing as such. My family owned one. You never answered my question Mr. Puke, and I'll ask it again--have YOU ever owned a Jaguar?

Care to answer my question? Or do you wish to just hide behind a verbal facade of shock and awe with your colorful words and dare not contemplate and reply to such a gauntlet?

Have you or have you not owned a Jaguar? That IS the question.

Real world results from real people are definitely something of substance. To refute that is to form complacency unto your mental masters, your ignus, rather than to listen to the true modus of knowledge within. Alas, you have made your choice and J.D. Power is your operandi supreme.

I chortle at the mere premise that science can not be conducted on a small, individual scale. Not only has my family owned Jaguars, but my uncle has owned several as well. Owned is the key word. He won't own any more as they've all been money pits.

But, J.D. Powers says they can not be so so perhaps this is all an anomaly and Mr. Power is right--I am an anecdotal anomaly.

Regardless of the rant, the question still stands. Have you ever owned one? And secondly, (as my eloquent passages above are full of crap), do you believe everything you read from a single source?

RE: $90,000!?!
By Spuke on 11/12/2009 4:23:34 PM , Rating: 2
Regardless of the rant, the question still stands. Have you ever owned one?
I guess you missed the I don't care part.

Regarding anecdotal "evidence," it is evidence nontheless, moreso it is hard facts from real-world experiences.
Anecdotal "evidence" is not evidence and is meaningless to me. I'll take science over an individuals word any day. Like I said, I don't care if you don't believe them, facts are facts. And JD Powers uses science to come up with facts.

RE: $90,000!?!
By MrBlastman on 11/12/2009 4:37:07 PM , Rating: 2
You "anecdotal" proof of them using facts is no more truthful than my accusation of them being paid off. Unless you work for them, I'll take science of statistical probability over your word any day. :)

This is a lot of fun, isn't it?

The fact you won't answer my question leads me to laugh in your general direction.

I guess you missed the I don't care part.

You cared enough to make a reply, a rather shy and scared one at that.

RE: $90,000!?!
By Spuke on 11/12/2009 4:57:26 PM , Rating: 2
You "anecdotal" proof of them using facts is no more truthful than my accusation of them being paid off.
The facts are available. Go get them yourself.

The fact you won't answer my question leads me to laugh in your general direction.
I hinted at it but since you didn't get it, I'll spell it out for you. I don't care to answer your question. It's anecdotal and meaningless as far as I'm concerned. This is the last time I'll repeat myself.

RE: $90,000!?!
By MrBlastman on 11/12/2009 5:04:27 PM , Rating: 2
You should run for office. The amount of sidestepping you perform should go well on your political resume.

Not caring to answer is denial in the strongest form. :P

I think at this point I can safely assume that you have nothing more to back your point up than one source, J.D. Powers, whom you also failed to deny that you work for. How is it working there?

RE: $90,000!?!
By Spuke on 11/12/2009 5:19:31 PM , Rating: 2
Not caring to answer is denial in the strongest form.
No sidestepping needed. I gave you the answer and you choose to ignore it. Fine. And I don't work for JD. You can let that one go.

I think at this point I can safely assume that you have nothing more to back your point up than one source, J.D. Powers, whom you also failed to deny that you work for. How is it working there?
Is there a requirement somewhere that I must use more than one source to back up what I said? I backed it up and that's all I needed to do. That said, I made my point and said all I needed to say.

RE: $90,000!?!
By MrBlastman on 11/12/2009 5:12:33 PM , Rating: 2
Since you amuse me so much today I thought I'd provide you a little more on "anecdotal" research:

on J.D. Power:

"The firm conducts surveys of customer satisfaction, product quality, and buyer behavior for industries ranging from cars to marketing and advertising firms." (*gasp* Wikipedia might be anecdotal)

on anecdotal:

"based on personal observation, case study reports, or random investigations rather than systematic scientific evaluation: anecdotal evidence."

So, with a little verbal interpolation, we come up with this on J.D. Power:

"The firm collects anecdotal evidence customer satisfaction, product quality, and buyer behavior for industries ranging from cars to marketing and advertising firms through surveys of personal experiences."

How does it feel to shoot yourself in the foot? Do you need a bandaid?

RE: $90,000!?!
By Parhel on 11/12/2009 10:30:21 PM , Rating: 2
You're fighting a losing battle here. Do we go with one guy on a forum whose family member owned a Jaguar and had problems . . . or the most respected publisher of warranty repair statistics and consumer satisfaction among automakers?

Sure, one person's experience with the brand isn't worthless. But they're are just too many variables. Your father could have gotten a lemon. He could be a bad driver, or the kind of guy who doesn't change the oil. It could very well have been a bad model for Jaguar, or a bad model year.

J.D. Power alone probably isn't enough to make a sound buying decision, but they're the single most valuable tool. I'd prefer to read both J.D. Powers and a professional review like Motor Trend or Car & Driver before buying. Then, as a distant third, I'd consider anecdotal information.

RE: $90,000!?!
By Parhel on 11/12/2009 10:56:25 PM , Rating: 2
One last thing, is that J.D. Powers publishes both initial quality and long term reliability results as well as results on the individual models.

Rather than take one figure as the end-all-be-all for the manufacturer, it's important to look at all the results.

Case in point, Audi looks good on the results above. But, if I remember correctly, they did extremely poorly the last few years before that, not so well in long-term reliability, and many individual models rated poorly as well.

If you ask me, after considering statistical, scientific, and anecdotal evidence, my conclusion is that Audi makes three things:

1) Overpriced unreliable not-quite-luxury cars (i.e. the A4, Q7, etc.)
2) Cars so expensive that anyone who would buy one gets a BMW instead (the A8 springs to mind. I've seen hundreds of 7-series BMWs and never seen an A8. I wonder why?)
3) The A6. It's their only car that's worth the price they ask, and my opinion is that it carried them on the overall results.

RE: $90,000!?!
By mdogs444 on 11/11/2009 9:42:11 AM , Rating: 3
I don't think the class of people looking to buy this BMW are even considering a Civic.

Get real.

RE: $90,000!?!
By iFX on 11/11/09, Rating: 0
RE: $90,000!?!
By mdogs444 on 11/11/2009 11:20:31 AM , Rating: 1
Then what good does your comparison do, if they have nothing in common outside of rolling on 4 tires? Not the same group of buyers, not the same class of car, not the same price range, not the same brand, size motor, interior...nothing.

Hey look, my to go coffee lid has 3 holes on the top of it...maybe I can compare it to a piece of college rules paper because it also has 3 holes on it!

RE: $90,000!?!
By Parhel on 11/11/2009 11:24:44 AM , Rating: 2
Why does your coffee cup lid have three holes? You just need two. One to sip the coffee from, and one to let air in the other side.

RE: $90,000!?!
By xti on 11/11/2009 12:39:17 PM , Rating: 2
the other one is to plug in your iPod, duh...

RE: $90,000!?!
By mdogs444 on 11/11/2009 12:53:07 PM , Rating: 2
You know, thats a good question Parhel! I didn't design it, but feel free to give Speedway on West Broad St in Columbus, OH a call and ask them...

RE: $90,000!?!
By polaris2k4 on 11/11/2009 10:01:01 AM , Rating: 4
I think this is a joke and a gimmick. An expensive hybrid that A)costs more B)is slower C)has more parts to maintain than it's equivalent counterparts for a possible ~20% gain in fuel efficiency?

If they were really interested in saving gas and money, they would have stuck a slightly smaller engine in there, tuned for efficiency, kept the CVT and would have probably got the same performance in terms of fuel and power; with a lower price tag. This is just uselessly marketing the hybrid sticker and nothing more. More dirty hybrids like these and its just going to give the term a bad name.

RE: $90,000!?!
By Boze on 11/11/2009 11:20:11 AM , Rating: 3
This vehicle is about making high-income and wealthy buyers feel better about their purchase. Nothing less, nothing more. People, especially well-to-do people, care about the environment so long as it doesn't inconvenience them personally, reduce their standard of living, or reduce their social standing.

Not that I'm opposed to people wearing environmentalism on their sleeve, people already do it with religion and a host of other 'causes'. After all, this is America, so if a doctor's wife, a rich laywer, a powerful executive want to drive around a 485 horsepower hybrid because it helps them sleep better at night instead of driving around a 485 horsepower non-hybrid, then I say more power to 'em. Whatever helps you through your day.

RE: $90,000!?!
By mdogs444 on 11/11/2009 11:23:16 AM , Rating: 2
I'm with you in saying that they should be able to do so, for whatever reason they want. I could really care less.

I get pissy when the people who wear it on their sleeve attempt to change my lifestyle to conform with theirs...often times by legislation because the masses are too "stupid" to listen...or so they believe.

RE: $90,000!?!
By Boze on 11/11/2009 11:29:44 AM , Rating: 2
You're not too bright are you? Anyone driving one of these likely won't be driving it three years from now, much less 10, and even if human lifespan would allow for it, they certainly wouldn't be driving it 100 years from now.

The people who are going to be driving this are the people who feel a vehicle that's three years old is far past its prime and needs to be replaced as soon they can spare a day from the golf course.

RE: $90,000!?!
By rippleyaliens on 11/11/2009 1:55:54 PM , Rating: 1
Same Argument could be about Computers.. a $500 computer does the exact same thing as a $5000 computer, for which it was designed for, EXCEPT the $5000 computer, with ssd - array, $1000 in video, 2-3 monitors, with bells and whistles, does the same thing as a $500 computer, except with
1. MORE performance
2. More bells and whistles
3. Definitely a difference..

Repair on parts on the $5000 computer, obviously cost more to fix/service than a $500 computer.. YET why do we buy them..
Easy, If certain people make the $$$, have the desire/need, or just plainly WANT IT.. that is why they are made..
Cars= same exact thing.. Technically for the money i could get a new $15,000 car every year for 6 years.. to equal the cost of one of these bmw's... YET if i am making $100,000 .. I think meh reward for all the studying/training/WORKING.. I think i could justify a car costing more than a normal every day, plumber joe vehicle..
Welcome to the real world economy..

RE: $90,000!?!
By Cubexco on 11/12/2009 9:02:28 AM , Rating: 2
Or what about wristwatches?
A cheap wristwatch costing a couple of dollars, shows the same time and as accurately, as a $4 million – Patek Philippe’s Platinum World Time...

RE: $90,000!?!
By Spuke on 11/12/2009 1:31:32 PM , Rating: 2
Same Argument could be about Computers.. a $500 computer does the exact same thing as a $5000 computer
Yeah but computers are socially acceptable, cars are not. Therefore cars as luxury items are evil and computers as luxury items are not.

Screw the hybrid!
By Brandon Hill on 11/11/2009 9:43:34 AM , Rating: 2
Screw the hybrid, they should have just stuck a 6-cylinder diesel in there.

RE: Screw the hybrid!
By HotFoot on 11/11/2009 10:02:13 AM , Rating: 3
For the price and market it's in, I'd rather see it with a 454. Put some wizardry like turning off half the cylinders for cruising if you want, but if I'm going to ride around in such an over-priced vehicle anyway, I'd rather it have a stupendous amount of torque at my command.

RE: Screw the hybrid!
By Hare on 11/11/2009 10:13:13 AM , Rating: 4
This article is about the hybrid version. Nothing is stopping you from getting the basic X6 with inline 6 cyl turbo diesel (235hp) or the twin turbo (286hp) or the V8 twin turbo diesel with 558hp...

This isn't about saving nature or feeling good about driving a hybrid. It's about luxury, power and getting the latest tech available for a luxury SUV Coupé (SAC actually).

RE: Screw the hybrid!
By Boze on 11/11/09, Rating: 0
RE: Screw the hybrid!
By Brandon Hill on 11/11/2009 12:35:20 PM , Rating: 2
Last time I checked, we don't get any of those diesels in the U.S. for the X6. Just the turbo 6 (gas) and two turbo 8's (gas).

So the only fuel-efficiency geared model we get is a $90,000 hybrid.

RE: Screw the hybrid!
By MaDS on 11/11/2009 2:23:28 PM , Rating: 2
or the V8 twin turbo diesel with 558hp

No such thing exists. The fastest gasoline X6 is the M and it delivers 555HP. Now that engine is a twin turbo.

The strongest diesel X6 is the 35d, and the strongest diesel BMW is the 740d with 306HP from a twin turbo 3.0L diesel.

But you're right in saying that this isn't about saving the nature.

RE: Screw the hybrid!
By Hare on 11/11/2009 2:47:42 PM , Rating: 2
Thanks for the correction. I need to practise my copy-paste technique.

Btw. I think the X6 looks fantastic. Practical? Definately not but there's something that I really like about that car.

By Evan B on 11/11/2009 2:58:45 PM , Rating: 3
Great! Now if only they did that to an attractive car.

By Pneumothorax on 11/11/2009 9:36:26 AM , Rating: 2
The X6 is a very poorly packaged vehicle, esp compared to the X5.
Then again, the X5 diesel (albeit slower) gets 19/26 or 22 combined MPG for being much cheaper than the X6 hybrid.

Big and fugly, imo
By The0ne on 11/11/2009 11:19:17 AM , Rating: 2
Saw one parking at Frys and both my co-worker and I had to laugh. This vehicle is big and design is definitely an acquire taste :P We couldn't decide whether it be a SUV, Truck or Car so we just continued to point and laugh.

Has good performance in reviews though...but still lmao.

By cfaalm on 11/11/09, Rating: -1
"When an individual makes a copy of a song for himself, I suppose we can say he stole a song." -- Sony BMG attorney Jennifer Pariser

Most Popular Articles5 Cases for iPhone 7 and 7 iPhone Plus
September 18, 2016, 10:08 AM
No More Turtlenecks - Try Snakables
September 19, 2016, 7:44 AM
ADHD Diagnosis and Treatment in Children: Problem or Paranoia?
September 19, 2016, 5:30 AM
Walmart may get "Robot Shopping Carts?"
September 17, 2016, 6:01 AM
Automaker Porsche may expand range of Panamera Coupe design.
September 18, 2016, 11:00 AM

Copyright 2016 DailyTech LLC. - RSS Feed | Advertise | About Us | Ethics | FAQ | Terms, Conditions & Privacy Information | Kristopher Kubicki