2016 bmw x1

[xtrailman]

I don't care about badges either, that's why I usually have Nissan and now have a Mazda, its power I want for towing.
In the UK the japs have lost the plot IMO they are only offering a weedy engine in the new Xtrail, the Mazda engine is the most powerful one in any jap car I can think of that I would want.

While the Germans are offering power and torque, remember I tow a 1565kg caravan, soon to be probably nearer 1700kg, the CX-5 would do the job, but I'm considering other options as I've lost confidence in the Mazda engine, warranty runs out July next year, so I want to change before than, and as normal I would like to improve on what I have.

 

[littlebear]

BMW makes some great vehicles, no doubt. They are of course a LUXURY HIGH-END manufacturer. Mazda does not compete with BMW. BMW competes with Audi, Mercedes, Lexus, etc.

With that being said. BMW vehicles can be hit or miss in long term reliability. New engine and trans designs, have introduced lengthy repair and service problems. Ask any BMW service department mechanic and they will tell you when the BMW is running well, it's a great machine but if they break (and they do, sometimes very often) they are double or even triple the repair price of vehicles like Toyota or Mazda. That is the fact of LUXURY HIGH-END automobiles. They cost more to buy and cost more to repair.

So overall I think it's unfair to compare a high-end luxury vehicle to a CX5. They are two different types of vehicles. It's like comparing a BMW 7 series to a Toyota Camry.

I've driven an X5 and they are great machines. I only got 20mpg highway but it's a beast (fast but heavy). Of course it costs around $70k and even the version I drove did not have the lane departure warning or auto braking that the loaded GT has. I for sure would not want to flip the repair bill when it's out of warranty. You can't even change the oil in these vehicles since they don't even have a dipstick and require going to the BMW dealership.

 

[littlebear]

The terms can get confusing, but AFS and ALH are not the same thing. AFS (headlights turn into corners) is for the US, as is High Beam Control (HBC) which switches between the dedicated high and low beam lamps. ALH, on the other hand, is the more advanced LED control system available outside the US that uses a bank of LEDs to simulate high and low-beam lamps, and provides greater control over the direction of the light.

AFS: http://www2.mazda.com/en/technology/safety/active_safety/afs.html
ALH: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8EZK_i4Zeoo

ALH is not permitted in the US due to (antiquated) government laws that essentially require separate dedicated high and low beam lamps.

So the American version is basically a revised (and legal) version of the ALH. The US version does the high/low beam auto controls and the headlights pivot on turns to light up the roadway but of course the tech is different in the ALH.

I think it would be a interesting to see which system provides better light control. I would lean towards the ALH having a slight advantage but the AFS/HBC is pretty advanced also and I bet does a great job of throwing light onto the road.

 

[MikeM.]

X3 is wider and longer than the Cx-5, I did consider one before buying the CX-5.

I do believe the X1 boot is now bigger, where it may fall short is the length for pushing my angling holdall through the centre hatch.
There is an option for a sliding rear seat, but I'm not sure if it can also increase the boot space, or just the rear passenger space, adjustment is good at 130cm.

The CX-5 is bigger in every respect vs. 2016 BMW x1. CX-5 is 4 inches longer, 3 inches taller and slightly wider (from Car and Driver):

2016 BMW X1
Wheelbase: 105.1 in
Length: 175.4 in
Width: 71.7 in Height: 62.5 in
Passenger volume: 98-101 cu ft
Cargo volume: 27 cu ft

2015 CX-5
Wheelbase: 106.3 in
Length: 179.3 in
Width: 72.4 in Height: 65.7 in
Passenger volume: 102 cu ft
Cargo volume: 34 cu ft


Amazingly Mazda engineers were able to keep the CX-5 over 100 lbs. lighter and it likely has less chassis flex during hard cornering. In a nutshell, that is why I think the CX-5 is the "better" vehicle.

 

[thedaddyb]

In my opinion, BMWs have really lost their luster over the last 5 or so years. The ultimate driving machine they are not. The current/older generation X1 is not really all that engaging to drive. I'm used to the 90's and early 200's BMWs that had that great blend of handling/power/and feel. The CX-5 in terms of driving enjoyment, beats the current X1. Maybe not on refinement and interior quality but I guess that depends on what you are looking for.

I'm not sure how the new X1 with a front wheel drive platform will preform (probably worse) It's gotten to the point that the only enjoyable BMWs are the M division. I do miss their old products. RWD, nice sounding inline 6 with decent power, and an exellent feeling shifter.

That's my opinion if you don't factor in cost/value. On that not, I wouldn't consider a BMW except maybe on a lease where you are out of the car before the real problems start.

 

[123373]

In my opinion, BMWs have really lost their luster over the last 5 or so years. The ultimate driving machine they are not. The current/older generation X1 is not really all that engaging to drive. I'm used to the 90's and early 200's BMWs that had that great blend of handling/power/and feel. The CX-5 in terms of driving enjoyment, beats the current X1. Maybe not on refinement and interior quality but I guess that depends on what you are looking for.

I'm not sure how the new X1 with a front wheel drive platform will preform (probably worse) It's gotten to the point that the only enjoyable BMWs are the M division. I do miss their old products. RWD, nice sounding inline 6 with decent power, and an exellent feeling shifter.

That's my opinion if you don't factor in cost/value. On that not, I wouldn't consider a BMW except maybe on a lease where you are out of the car before the real problems start.

To bad you feel that way because my CX5 has had more issues and cost more money in maintenance cost than my 100,000 mile BMW. I agree that BMW made a mistake with the 2012 F30 series trying to appeal to mainstream family sedan buyers by adding a cushy ride. That is why I hang on to my E90 as it has all the qualities you mentioned. Currently the real 3 is the 2 series as far as handling. The great thing is that the LCI F30 for 2016 is supposed to have been fixed so time will tell. My sons 2015 Mazda 3 handles great but that's wear Mazda ends as they are the most under powered cars made. Handling without power is a joke. Mazda needs to drop in a turbo and get into the 5 to 6 second 0-60 range, then they will be fun.

 

[Monterra]

Power without handling...even bigger joke☺

 

[Unobtanium]

What do you chaps think to the upcoming X1, it only about 4" shorter than the CX-5, with I believe a bigger boot now.

I'm attracted by the power units for towing, and also fancy an auto next.
X1 will have a 8 speed aisin box now and is FWD, its got an option of Xdrive which can send 100% torque to the rears if required.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/AWF8F35

I think it's a much better vehicle if you're okay with the much higher cost both initial and in ownership. I mean, with equal option's it's what, 75% again the price of a CX-5? That said, I'd probably buy a GLK350 instead, or maybe an X5M on the used market, since we are talking a $50K SUV here.

 

[Unobtanium]

To bad you feel that way because my CX5 has had more issues and cost more money in maintenance cost than my 100,000 mile BMW. I agree that BMW made a mistake with the 2012 F30 series trying to appeal to mainstream family sedan buyers by adding a cushy ride. That is why I hang on to my E90 as it has all the qualities you mentioned. Currently the real 3 is the 2 series as far as handling. The great thing is that the LCI F30 for 2016 is supposed to have been fixed so time will tell. My sons 2015 Mazda 3 handles great but that's wear Mazda ends as they are the most under powered cars made. Handling without power is a joke. Mazda needs to drop in a turbo and get into the 5 to 6 second 0-60 range, then they will be fun.

The Mazda is comparably gutless, but it's sufficient and cheap. That's kindof what a CUV is about...
As to the handling, I'd rather have handling than power, but that came with learning how to drive, as a teenager, I much preferred power to handling, I must admit!

 

[Unobtanium]

The CX-5 is bigger in every respect vs. 2016 BMW x1. CX-5 is 4 inches longer, 3 inches taller and slightly wider (from Car and Driver):

2016 BMW X1
Wheelbase: 105.1 in
Length: 175.4 in
Width: 71.7 in Height: 62.5 in
Passenger volume: 98-101 cu ft
Cargo volume: 27 cu ft

2015 CX-5
Wheelbase: 106.3 in
Length: 179.3 in
Width: 72.4 in Height: 65.7 in
Passenger volume: 102 cu ft
Cargo volume: 34 cu ft


Amazingly Mazda engineers were able to keep the CX-5 over 100 lbs. lighter and it likely has less chassis flex during hard cornering. In a nutshell, that is why I think the CX-5 is the "better" vehicle.

I have noticed that the CX-5 is VERY! rigid, but consider what that's worth, really. For example, my C6 Z06 corvette, when I went up driveways (you angle those as you know), would twist. I could feel it and sometimes slightly hear it. My 370Z, on the other hand, was like it was carved from a chunk of billet. No flex at ALL that I could register. I mean, I know it did, but it was beyond my perception.

Anyway, noone in their right mind would put the 370Z's chassis above the C6 Z06 in any performance or durability matrice (I've seen 370Z's literally cut in half in traffic accidents. As in, literally, two halves.)

That said, the average person may well get all fuzzy over how stiff the car felt. It's just perception, though, no bearing on reality/efficacy of the matter.

As to the weight, doesn't the X1 come with a turbo? There's your weight. Everything is beefier, and there are extra parts.

I will say though, I think the CX5 is much much much more sensible at CUV'ing. I still don't understand $$$$$ CUV's. CUV's are the comdoms of the automobile world. They are cheap and serve a higher purpose and then you throw it away and buy another one when you're finished with it. Some people take longer to finish than others, but in the end, they have no value and you dispose of the lease/sell or trade/ and move on. Not obsess over how amazing the CUV/condom was. Soulless and effective and cheap, you use them because you don't want to deal with the alternative (multiple vehicles, snow day immobility, etc.)

 

[yrwei52]

So the American version is basically a revised (and legal) version of the ALH. The US version does the high/low beam auto controls and the headlights pivot on turns to light up the roadway but of course the tech is different in the ALH.

I think it would be a interesting to see which system provides better light control. I would lean towards the ALH having a slight advantage but the AFS/HBC is pretty advanced also and I bet does a great job of throwing light onto the road.

Mazda's ALH is a totally new concept on headlight system which uses arrays of LEDs dynamically change the illumination coverage base on forward sensing camera. AFS is a very old technology been used since 70's in Europe. Just watch the video and you will see the difference.

 

[MikeM.]

Power without handling...even bigger joke☺

Very true. Nothing worse than having an excess of power with sub-standard handling.

 

[xtrailman]

The old X1 does have a poor reputation, and always had poor reviews.
It also only had a 2 star rating at most.

As a result large discounts where available.
In comparison the new X1 is a completely different car. And had been tested at 4 star.

So any comparison to the old version isn't applicable.

I actually also prefer FWD and would never buy another RWD again, having had 3.

I would also agree that that bloke Bangel or whatever he's called totally destroyed the BMW models looks.
Ugly in a word covers some of his creations.

In my opinion, BMWs have really lost their luster over the last 5 or so years. The ultimate driving machine they are not. The current/older generation X1 is not really all that engaging to drive. I'm used to the 90's and early 200's BMWs that had that great blend of handling/power/and feel. The CX-5 in terms of driving enjoyment, beats the current X1. Maybe not on refinement and interior quality but I guess that depends on what you are looking for.

I'm not sure how the new X1 with a front wheel drive platform will preform (probably worse) It's gotten to the point that the only enjoyable BMWs are the M division. I do miss their old products. RWD, nice sounding inline 6 with decent power, and an exellent feeling shifter.

That's my opinion if you don't factor in cost/value. On that not, I wouldn't consider a BMW except maybe on a lease where you are out of the car before the real problems start.

 

[xtrailman]

BMW makes some great vehicles, no doubt. They are of course a LUXURY HIGH-END manufacturer. Mazda does not compete with BMW. BMW competes with Audi, Mercedes, Lexus, etc.

With that being said. BMW vehicles can be hit or miss in long term reliability. New engine and trans designs, have introduced lengthy repair and service problems. Ask any BMW service department mechanic and they will tell you when the BMW is running well, it's a great machine but if they break (and they do, sometimes very often) they are double or even triple the repair price of vehicles like Toyota or Mazda. That is the fact of LUXURY HIGH-END automobiles. They cost more to buy and cost more to repair.

So overall I think it's unfair to compare a high-end luxury vehicle to a CX5. They are two different types of vehicles. It's like comparing a BMW 7 series to a Toyota Camry.

I've driven an X5 and they are great machines. I only got 20mpg highway but it's a beast (fast but heavy). Of course it costs around $70k and even the version I drove did not have the lane departure warning or auto braking that the loaded GT has. I for sure would not want to flip the repair bill when it's out of warranty. You can't even change the oil in these vehicles since they don't even have a dipstick and require going to the BMW dealership.

Again I would agree BMW will cost more if it breaks, and labour rates in the uk are around 140 an hour, compared to Mazda around 80.
But the warranty in the UK is the same as a Mazda. You should also know that the Mazda diesel new and old models has a poor reputation in the UK. Failures at low mileages have been reported.

In the UK Honda and Lexus top the reliability charts. The CRV is a ok car but not engaging to drive, and Lexus are a expensive Toyota.

 

[xtrailman]

To bad you feel that way because my CX5 has had more issues and cost more money in maintenance cost than my 100,000 mile BMW. I agree that BMW made a mistake with the 2012 F30 series trying to appeal to mainstream family sedan buyers by adding a cushy ride. That is why I hang on to my E90 as it has all the qualities you mentioned. Currently the real 3 is the 2 series as far as handling. The great thing is that the LCI F30 for 2016 is supposed to have been fixed so time will tell. My sons 2015 Mazda 3 handles great but that's wear Mazda ends as they are the most under powered cars made. Handling without power is a joke. Mazda needs to drop in a turbo and get into the 5 to 6 second 0-60 range, then they will be fun.

Yes my twin turbo is a fab engine for a diesel, its been described as one of the best diesels in the world, it pulls like a train.

Problem is the engines are building a reputation for early failures.

On the caravan forum I use of the seven owners of the CX-5 two have been flatbed to the garage, one has had extensive repairs, my own was of the road for a week awaiting a Vac brake pump replacement, and is the first car since the 80's I've had that has failed to start.

My sons also collecting a Mazda 3 next month, but he's having a petrol so should be reliable.

 

[edhchoe]

Handling, Price and MPG are the most important factors for me.
Without comparing price or mpg, I would think BMW would have better handling. Therefore, the X1 is better than CX5. But if the money and mpg are not an issue, why would I limit myself to X1 and cx5? I would buy a Miata for fun and buy X1 for daily driver.

 

[xtrailman]

Power without handling...even bigger joke☺

I haven't read anything about poor handling with the 2016 X1, do you have a link?

 

[xtrailman]

The CX-5 is bigger in every respect vs. 2016 BMW x1. CX-5 is 4 inches longer, 3 inches taller and slightly wider (from Car and Driver):

2016 BMW X1
Wheelbase: 105.1 in
Length: 175.4 in
Width: 71.7 in Height: 62.5 in
Passenger volume: 98-101 cu ft
Cargo volume: 27 cu ft

2015 CX-5
Wheelbase: 106.3 in
Length: 179.3 in
Width: 72.4 in Height: 65.7 in
Passenger volume: 102 cu ft
Cargo volume: 34 cu ft


Amazingly Mazda engineers were able to keep the CX-5 over 100 lbs. lighter and it likely has less chassis flex during hard cornering. In a nutshell, that is why I think the CX-5 is the "better" vehicle.

The boot capacity figures I have are different to yours, but the critical factor for me will be whether my fishing rod holdall fits in the car, as I've previously said.

Having recently had a Kia Sportage for a week while my CX-5 was being repaired, my fishing tackle fitted in the Sportage with out any problems, even though on paper the car is shorter than the CX-5.

The Sportage isn't a bad car either, but the engine is crude and the handling not quite up to CX-5 standards.

 

[xtrailman]

I have noticed that the CX-5 is VERY! rigid, but consider what that's worth, really. For example, my C6 Z06 corvette, when I went up driveways (you angle those as you know), would twist. I could feel it and sometimes slightly hear it. My 370Z, on the other hand, was like it was carved from a chunk of billet. No flex at ALL that I could register. I mean, I know it did, but it was beyond my perception.

Anyway, noone in their right mind would put the 370Z's chassis above the C6 Z06 in any performance or durability matrice (I've seen 370Z's literally cut in half in traffic accidents. As in, literally, two halves.)

That said, the average person may well get all fuzzy over how stiff the car felt. It's just perception, though, no bearing on reality/efficacy of the matter.

As to the weight, doesn't the X1 come with a turbo? There's your weight. Everything is beefier, and there are extra parts.

I will say though, I think the CX5 is much much much more sensible at CUV'ing. I still don't understand $$$$$ CUV's. CUV's are the comdoms of the automobile world. They are cheap and serve a higher purpose and then you throw it away and buy another one when you're finished with it. Some people take longer to finish than others, but in the end, they have no value and you dispose of the lease/sell or trade/ and move on. Not obsess over how amazing the CUV/condom was. Soulless and effective and cheap, you use them because you don't want to deal with the alternative (multiple vehicles, snow day immobility, etc.)

The Uk versions get twin turbos.

 

[xtrailman]

Handling, Price and MPG are the most important factors for me.
Without comparing price or mpg, I would think BMW would have better handling. Therefore, the X1 is better than CX5. But if the money and mpg are not an issue, why would I limit myself to X1 and cx5? I would buy a Miata for fun and buy X1 for daily driver.

Its too early to say yet what the real life costs will be over 3 years of ownership, i'm looking forward to the group tests although the X1 will probably be compared to the GLA and Q3 ? or that Lexus SUV.

Discounts are already on the new X1 so the price difference has already been reduced before they are even available.