|
|
|
|
 |
|
|
 |
|
|
| The introduction of the BMW X6 has
introduced a whole new niche. BMW tries to call it a Sports
Activity Coupe but it's really just an SUV with a sloping rear end
effectively combining the worst of two worlds. It has the
reduced cargo capacity of a coupe combined with the poorer
traits such as handling, maneuverability, and fuel mileage of an
SUV. So what's the point? One reason and one reason only,
vanity style. The X6 brings a new
look to the SUV world and admittedly, it looks good. It's had a
year to see how it would do and the people have spoken, they
like it. Sales have been good and Acura has noticed. Rather than
letting the X6 steal all the attention, they've created their
own atrocity fastback SUV, the ZDX. |
| 2010
Acura ZDX |
vs |
2010
BMW X6 |

The ZDX continues Acura's new styling direction of part
futuristic, part
Decepticon. The ZDX looks better than
other iterations of Acura's styling but the stance is a
little wide and a little low giving off a slight wagon
appearance. |
|

The X6 starts off with an X5 front end with a revised front
fascia. Its extremely aggressive with a tall stance and nicely
chiseled hood. The bumper design is styled well to match the
assertiveness of the rest of the vehicle. |
|
|
 |
|
 |
| Things start to take different
shape at this angle. The sloping rear is visible which makes
both vehicles look disproportioned. |
 |
|
 |
| Acura incorporated a few
differentiating features on the ZDX. Notice the ZDX's trick door
handles that are placed by the window instead on the door. It
tries to enhance the coupe-like design but nothing will ever
make an SUV look like a coupe. The ZDX's windows also suffer by
going for the coupe look with them being too short, especially
the rear sides. The BMW keeps the windows large (except for the
rear) for good proportions and driver visibility. |
|
|
 |
|
 |
| The ZDX includes a full panoramic
roof which tapers in slightly toward the rear. It creates a flat
rear quarter panel high above the wheels (best seen in the rear
view). Both rear's look tall but the ZDX offsets the look with a
tinted window. |
 |
|
 |
| The rear window is only limited to
a small slit in the X6 which greatly impairs driver visibility.
The ZDX integrates a dark tinted slit into its trunk similar to
how the
Honda Insight and Toyota Prius do to help visibility. The
ZDX's taillights have a nice form but aren't as polished as the
X6's. Also, the reflectors on the bottom look out of place and
unfinished at the bottom. They're integrated next to the exhaust
pipes which is unique but not as nice as the bold exhaust pipes
on the X6. |
|
|
 |
|
 |
| BMW's familiar interior design from
other models is also thrown into the X6. It looks more luxurious
than the ZDX with a nice combination of materials and colors.
The ZDX's center stack layout is a bit better though with a high
placed center screen and better button designs compared to the
1990s look of the X6. |
|
 |
|
|
 |
|
SPECIFICATIONS |
| Base |
|
PRICE: |
|
$45,495 |
|
ENGINE: |
|
3.7L V6 |
|
HORSEPOWER: |
|
300 hp |
|
TORQUE: |
|
270 lb-ft |
|
SIZE (L x W x H): |
|
192.4 x 78.5 x 62.8 in. |
|
WEIGHT: |
|
4,421 - 4,500 lb |
|
0-60 MPH: |
|
6.4 sec |
|
1/4 MILE: |
|
14.9 sec @ 95 mph |
|
TOP SPEED: |
|
127 mph |
|
TOWING: |
|
1,500 lbs |
|
FUEL (CITY/HWY): |
|
16 / 23 |
|
|
|
SPECIFICATIONS |
|
|
PRICE: |
|
$55,900 - $66,650 |
|
ENGINE: |
|
3.0L I6 Twin-Turbocharged -
4.4L V8 Twin-Turbocharged |
|
HORSEPOWER: |
|
300 - 400 hp |
|
TORQUE: |
|
300 - 450 lb-ft |
|
SIZE (L x W x H): |
|
192.1 x 78.1 x 66.5 in. |
|
WEIGHT: |
|
4,894 - 5,269 lbs |
|
0-60 MPH: |
|
5.1 - 5.9 sec |
|
1/4 MILE: |
|
13.8 sec @ 102 mph - 14.6 sec @
95 mph |
|
TOP SPEED: |
|
157 mph |
|
TOWING: |
|
6,000 lbs |
|
FUEL (CITY/HWY): |
|
13-15 / 18-21 mpg |
|
 |
 |
|
RECAP |
RECAP |
PROS
+Trick door handles
+Panoramic roof
+Rear tinted window helps visibility
CONS
-It's pointless
-Looks unfinished
-Exhaust pipes/reflectors |
PROS
+Muscular design
+Nicely integrated tail pipes
+Richer looking interior
Cons
-It's pointless
-Hugely impaired rear driver visibility |
|
 |
|
|
 |
|
|
 |
| NOTES |
So what's the point exactly? The regular X5 SUV manages
to get 14-15/19-21 mpg. Granted it's not as quick but does it
need to be?
The ZDX on the other hand, has less cargo space than a
Honda Fit
while only being able to tow as much as a
Honda CR-V.
This new segment recalls what happened when the Ford Explorer
was first introduced. Time magazine put the Explorer on their
"The 50 Worst Cars of All Time" list. They describe the SUV
phenomenon the best:
"In its very success, the Ford Explorer is responsible for
setting this country on the spiral of vehicular obesity that we
are still contending with today. People, particularly women
drivers, discovered that they liked sitting up high. Even though
more fuel-efficient minivans do the kid- and cargo-hauling
duties better, people came to prefer the outdoorsy, go-anywhere
image of SUVs. In other words, people became addicted to the
pose. And, as vehicles got bigger and heavier, buyers sought out
even bigger vehicles to make themselves feel safe. Helloooo
Hummer. All of that we can lay at the overachieving feet of the
Explorer." - Time
We (and especially Al Gore) can only hope this same trend
doesn't happen again.
|
 |
| RELATED COMPARISONS |
2011
BMW X5 vs 2010 BMW X5 (Quick Look)
|
 |
|
|
 |
|
|
 |
|
|