e t s n o m ls now it faces new riva t bu , ub cl 4 4x st fa the rbo has long bossed Tu e nn ye Ca s e’ ch rs Po price PHOTOGRAPHY stuart
AC71_56-63_X6M VS RIVALS.indd 56
1/24/10 1:08:16 PM
High-performance SUVs | Group Test
c n i ers who monsters whom t ou ds fin s er d n u t Sa over and Infiniti. Mat from BMW, Range R
February 2010 WWW.AUTOCARmAG.COm 57
AC71_56-63_X6M VS RIVALS.indd 57
1/24/10 1:09:18 PM
Group Test | High-performance SUVs
T
hat day was very much like the one playing out in front of us now – sodden, cold and sufficiently miserable to make you wish you’d migrated from the UK for the winter. Porsche had just opened its Silverstone Experience Centre. I was one of a few journos to get a circuit ride in its latest Cayenne Turbo S. And one year later, I can remember every stultifying second of it. The rain was coming down so hard that Noah himself would have stayed in his motorhome. Rivers were running down the Hangar Straight. And yet out we went, four Cayennes four up and line astern, making short work of the track day Ferraris that were struggling on regardless. The grip that the Cayenne Turbo had on such a slippery track – the way it accelerated, stopped and changed direction – seemed other-worldly. Here was a two-and-a-half-tonne lump with a higher-than-average centre of gravity that could carve through a deluged Maggots with greater composure than a touring car might have had. It seemed totally unaffected by the surface water and about as likely to understeer or aquaplane as it was to grow a mast and keel. Today we have the same weather, so will it be the same story? We’ve brought a Cayenne Turbo to rural Leicestershire to find out. And today, the four-car convoy won’t be such a comfortable one for the Porsche to be a part of. It will also contain the new 503bhp Range Rover Sport Supercharged as well as two new members of the fast SUV club: the 385bhp Infiniti FX50S and 547bhp BMW X6 M. I’m not sure of the correct collective noun for cars
eT corner wiTh w a d un ro p a ee w s ill w ‘ The X6 M dialled in. in The er Te rs ve f o o es re eg d abouT 40 a proper M car’ ke li es dl an h iT T, ui rc ci a weT, on like these, but whatever you want to call them, they represent two things: the stateof-the-art for those who want to go fast and look big about it; and anathema to just about everyone else. By the time this test is over, we’ll know which puts the biggest grin on a driver’s face, which will be the best to live with every day and which will just cause you shame and derision outside the school gates.
ZINGING IN THE RAIN
We’re at Bruntingthorpe airfield first, if only to find out if the Cayenne Turbo can put in such an impressive performance on a wet circuit in the hands of a mere mortal – me – as it did that day at Silverstone. So far, the omens haven’t been good. On the drive here I’ve been looking for signs of greatness from the Porsche, of the car that won such high praise from us several years ago. And between a cabin that looks dull, dated and cheap in places, and a driving experience that feels unexpectedly blunt and unresponsive, I haven’t found many. Fairly flat and uniform expanses of black leather and plastic greet you when you climb into this car. Like so many Porsche cabins, the Cayenne’s has little that inspires. Aluminium-coloured inlays and trims lift the ambience above the disappointing – just – but they do little to make it feel special.
Cayenne: good body control and plenty of grip
AC71_56-63_X6M VS RIVALS.indd 58
Just as you’d expect, there’s phenomenal performance available from this car once it gets into its stride, but on the road, in anything other than rock-hard-and-crashy Sport mode, it feels strangely remote and unresponsive. You can actually feel the torque converter automatic ’box and complicated four-wheel drive system sapping the engine’s performance at times, delaying responses to your right foot. It makes the Cayenne feel big, heavy and to be honest, like a bit of a relic. Arriving at the airfield, it’s time to find out just how much more this car has to give when driven that bit harder. And as the speed and effort rises, the Porsche gets into an impressive groove. The Bruntingthorpe circuit is a little smoother than a typical back-road, so the Cayenne is much happier in its Sport setting, with its chassis rates and anti-roll bars stiffened and its gearbox configured for speedy changes. Even flat out, it’s remarkable how little the body leans as you commit it to a corner, and how much speed it can carry in these wet conditions. As grip runs out, so it gradually understeers; it’s hard to argue
1/24/10 1:09:33 PM
Three new rivals keen to scalp the Cayenne Turbo
with the logic of that, given the damage this car could do to a three-bed villa when driven backwards through one at 130km/h. But you have to drive incredibly quickly to encounter that dynamic safety net. Most of the time it just turns, grips and goes harder than a lot of so-called performance cars weighing a full tonne less. The Porsche’s performance on track still seems remarkable after a few laps in the Range Rover Sport. In relative terms, the Sport feels quite slow and out of its depth on a circuit. Its handling is perfectly predictable and nicely resolved, but the car pitches and rolls much more than any of the other cars on test here. It simply lacks enough outright grip and composure to feel quick. It carries too much weight, too. The Infiniti FX50S is also bested by the Porsche, but by a much smaller margin. And it feels at home on the circuit. Quick and feelsome steering, taut damping and a balanced chassis give it an appreciably sporting character. Truth be told, it’d probably be quicker than the Cayenne if it weren’t giving up so much power to it. ◊
so which is quickest? Flat out against the clock With more than three kilometres of runway, we could hardly leave Bruntingthorpe before we’d run acceleration figures on our four hot 4x4s. Or before we’d drag-raced them side by side, for that matter. Using the same stretch of tarmac as for our 0-100-0 contests, we attached timing gear to the cars and measured them, one by one, over a standing kilometre. We did it in the rain, but such conditions shouldn’t make much difference to cars like this. Which, of course, is why some people buy them. The times these cars logged prove beyond doubt that, while it’s still incredibly quick for a car of 0-100km/h 0-160km/h Standing 400m Standing km
FX50S 5.96sec 14.83sec 14.5sec at 159.29km/h 26.6sec at 199.14km/h
its size, Porsche’s Cayenne Turbo doesn’t quite put the “sport” in “sports utility vehicle” as emphatically as BmW’s X6 m. The Porsche was more than a second slower to 160km/h than the big BmW, which, remarkably, would have been less than a second CAYENNE TURBO 4.93sec 12.00sec 13.5sec at 171.62km/h 24.5sec at 216.05km/h
behind a current m5 saloon at the same speed, according to our figures. Watching the big BmW disappear into the spray from behind the wheel of the Infiniti FX was unbelievable; four seconds is a long time at 210km/h. The X6 m has genuinely moved the goalposts.
BmW X6 m 4.48sec 10.72sec 12.9sec at 177.51km/h 23.5sec at 222.37km/h
RR SPORT 5.62sec 13.4sec 14.2sec at 164.91km/h 25.5sec at 210.88km/h
February 2010 WWW.AUTOCARmAG.COm 59
AC71_56-63_X6M VS RIVALS.indd 59
1/24/10 1:09:42 PM
Group Test | High-performance SUVs
Range Rover Sport gives its driver an elevated, commanding view of the road
Infiniti FX puts the emphasis on equipment and it all feels solidly constructed
Porsche Cayenne’s cabin has a plain and sombre air to it, despite the silver inserts
BmW X6 m offers an uncluttered-looking dash and good-quality materials
∆ And what about the BMW? It’s with some trepidation that I climb aboard the X6 M. After driving one on a bone dry circuit in the US several months ago, I was seriously disappointed. Back then, it seemed a misguided version of a car that has a questionable reason to exist in the first place, especially in the UK. But 8000km further east, on a wet circuit in the Midlands – and in a largely irrelevant way, admittedly – the BMW X6 M begins to make sense. After the other three, the X6 M might as well be an Audi R8. It’s so much quicker
HEAD FOR THE BACK-ROADS
and more responsive than anything else, twice as agile and sufficiently composed to be driven quicker through corners than the Porsche. It’s surprisingly lively and entertaining. Because of its sophisticated asymmetrical Dynamic Performance Control four-wheel drive system, it’ll sweep around a wet corner with about 40 degrees of oversteer dialled in, in a full-on, controllable powerslide. It may make unpleasant reading to connoisseurs of fast BMWs, but in the wet, on a circuit, there’s no doubt: the X6 M handles like a proper M car.
FX50S puts its driver in touch with the action
AC71_56-63_X6M VS RIVALS.indd 60
Okay, circuit fun over. Time to head to some real-world cross-country roads and get a better feel for how these four cars behave in conditions most owners might encounter. My first priority is to find out just how many of the BMW’s talents show themselves on the road. And the roads here are narrow, your view often limited by hedges and crests. They’re not the sort of roads you’d want to get carried away on, especially in cars as wide and heavy as these. Immediately, the BMW’s refinement impresses. Despite all that dynamic focus on the track, there’s little harshness in the car’s ride and like all modern M cars, you can detune its throttle response if you want to. The X6 M’s engine is as tractable at low revs as it is mighty at full cry. So, all in all, the car is a perfectly pleasant thing to stroke along at seven or eight-tenths, using as much performance as is strictly advisable on Her Majesty’s highway. Still, having come from the track, it feels tame on back roads. Unless you’re driving with the bit firmly between your teeth, somehow it’s a bit ordinary. Swapping from the BMW into the Cayenne makes the Porsche feel even more ordinary. In Normal and Comfort modes, the same delayed reactions to steering and throttle inputs present themselves as they did earlier in the day. And yet Sport mode seems to make the car’s British back-road performance worse. Stiffer chassis rates provide better body control and turn-in where the road is smooth enough, but ◊
1/24/10 1:09:52 PM
rides ‘ The infiniTi fX50s handles, n 370Z. and sTeers like a big nissa oad’ iT feels connecTed To The r
On everyday roads, the Range Rover Sport chassis feels finely honed
∆ where it’s not, the Cayenne’s chassis feels wooden, noisy and decidedly second-rate. By contrast, the Range Rover’s chassis feels superbly judged; it reeks of extensive spring and damper tuning. This car feels just firm enough to be hustled along with a bit of verve and its commanding driving position, incisive steering and newly refreshed cabin allow you to take a lot of pleasure in driving it. It’s also the most refined and comfortable car of the four. Which is why, at the end of our road route, it becomes obvious that the Cayenne and BMW have become also-rans. The Porsche feels too old, too heavy and too harsh at times to cut it. It’s overdue for replacement, and in this company it really feels like it. The BMW, on the other hand, seems too one-dimensional to be convincing. It’s capable of eyebrow-raising athleticism on track, but never really takes your breath away on the road. And that’s before we
touch on how much less usable it is than others in our convoy, with its confined rear seats, no fifth pew and relatively small boot. Occupying a diametrically opposed position in the market to the X6 M is the Range Rover Sport. It’s an overwhelmingly versatile and useful car made sporting, rather than an overwhelmingly useless car made even more sporting. It’s robust, it’s capacious, it’s refined, it’s versatile and it’s upmarket in its feel. It’s a fantastic conventional SUV, in other words. It also happens to be as fast to 100km/h as a naturally aspirated Jaguar XK. And yet it’s not our winner. That distinction goes to a car that quietly comes up on the rails to surprise you with its delicious 5.0-litre V8, gorgeous cabin, clever four-wheel steering system and unexpectedly sporting dynamic character: the Infiniti FX50S. This car handles, rides and steers like a big Nissan 370Z. It feels connected to the road and more like a sports car, more of the time, than any of the
62 WWW.AUTOCARmAG.COm February 2010
AC71_56-63_X6M VS RIVALS.indd 62
1/24/10 1:10:02 PM
High-performance SUVs | Group Test
Infiniti’s V8 is normally aspirated, but FX is the lightest
Turbo V8 gives the X6 m 230bhp per tonne, the best here
Sport’s 5.0 V8 is supercharged, but it must shift 2665kg
Cayenne Turbo’s 4.8 V8 generates a test-best 700Nm
PORSCHE CAYENNE TURBO From $102,350 5.1sec 275km/h 14.9L/100km 358g/km 2430kg
RANGE ROVER SPORT SUPERCHARGED From $107,600 6.2sec 225km/h (limited) 14.9L/100km 348g/km 2665kg
INFINITI FX50S
engine
Engine layout
V8, 4395cc, turbocharged, petrol Installation Front, longitudinal, four-wheel drive Power 547bhp at 6000rpm Torque 681Nm at 1500-5650rpm Power to weight 230bhp per tonne Specific output 124bhp per litre Compression ratio 9.3:1 Gearbox 6-spd automatic
V8, 4806cc, turbocharged, petrol Front, longitudinal, four-wheel drive 493bhp at 6000rpm 700Nm at 2250rpm 209bhp per tonne 103bhp per litre 10.5:1 6-spd automatic
V8, 5000cc, supercharged, petrol Front, longitudinal, four-wheel drive 503bhp at 6000-6500rpm 625Nm at 2500-5500rpm 189bhp per tonne 101bhp per litre 9.1:1 6-spd automatic
V8, 5026cc, normally aspirated, petrol Front, longitudinal, four-wheel drive 385bhp at 6500rpm 500Nm at 4400rpm 182bhp per tonne 77bhp per litre 10.9:1 7-spd automatic
dimensions
Length Width Height Wheelbase Fuel tank Real-world range Boot
4795mm 1928mm 1694mm 2855mm 100 litres 673 kilometres 540 litres
4783mm 2004mm 1784mm 2745mm 88 litres 592 kilometres 958 litres
4854mm 1928mm 1679mm 2890mm 90 litres 689 kilometres 410 litres
at each corner
lairy monsters, super sleeks
Front suspension Double wishbones, coil springs, anti-roll bar Rear suspension Integral four-link axle, coil springs, anti-roll bar Brakes 395mm ventilated discs (f), 385mm ventilated discs (r) Wheels 10Jx20in (f), 11Jx20in (r) Tyres 275/40 R20 (f), 315/35 R20 (r)
FX impresses; X6 and Cayenne less suited to back-roads
rest of the cars on test. It’s superbly turned out inside; the FX’s cabin is like sculpture, curving around the driver and wrapped in some very tactile materials. It’s fast – as fast as any car of this size really needs to be. And it costs – wait for it – $77,000 less than BMW’s hot X6, $43k less than Porsche’s Cayenne Turbo and more than $48k less than the Range Rover Sport. Does value for money matter to buyers of fast petrol SUVs? Maybe not. If it did, they’d drive diesels or so you would think. Still, to those for whom it does matter and who are brave enough to try one out, the Infiniti FX50S should represent too powerful a bargain to turn down. And to those for whom cashflow isn’t such a priority? Well, they should be content to buy the most sporting SUV on the market in the shape of this little-known Infiniti and be glad that it costs less than the opposition – not to mention attracts a bit less of the wrong kind of attention. L
Vitals
BmW X6 m Price 0-100km/h Top speed Economy CO2 emissions Kerb weight
From $136,120 4.7sec 250km/h (limited) 13.9L/100km 325g/km 2380kg
4877mm 1983mm 1690mm 2933mm 85 litres 612 kilometres 570 litres
Double wishbones, adjustable Double wishbones, air air springs, active anti-roll springs, anti-roll bar Multi-arm axle, adjustable Double wishbones, air air springs, active anti-roll springs, anti-roll bar 368mm ventilated discs (f), 360mm ventilated discs (f), 358mm ventilated discs (r) 330mm ventilated discs (r) 9Jx19in 9.5Jx20in 275/45 R19 275/40 ZR20
From $60,350 5.8sec 250km/h (limited) 13.1L/100km 307g/km 2120kg
Double wishbones, coil springs, CDC damping Multi-link, coil springs, CDC damping, rear-wheel steer 355mm ventilated discs (f), 350mm ventilated discs (r) 9.5Jx21in 265/45 R21
February 2010 WWW.AUTOCARmAG.COm 63
AC71_56-63_X6M VS RIVALS.indd 63
1/24/10 1:10:15 PM