Conclusion:
"The fact that BMW does not win this test is because of its body. But exactly those is independent and with each stop topic for discussion - the X6 finds fast fans. Who puts more value on practical use, can seize to the X5, which already left all competitors behind itself in the test. The winner of this comparison is balanced Mercedes ML 500. The Cayenne secures itself rank two and dominates due to its sensational brakes also the driving dynamics. Rank Rover sport is something for friends of the British way of life - and actually not to compare."

X6 do not win this comparison becuase the body (space, practicality). If it was X5 it would have won the comparison.
ML win becuase its better balanced.
Cayenne bst brakes and good driving dynamics. And the RR, they dissed the car

When a Mercedes-Benz wins these comparisons it's usually because it "does everything well". Seeing the SUVs it was pitted against, I can see that it was amongst some very sporty competition that probably handled better but weren't as comfy or "everyday practical" as the ML. Either way all good cars here.

Loving the RR, X6, Cayenne GTS and of course the ML.

I would not take any car in this test before the X6. The reason the ML wins this test is the exact same reason why it would end up last if I had performed the test.

BMW boys are bitching,ah same story in every test

BMW-bitching about the result is very rare. There is seldom reason to.

In this case it is obvious that me and the people conducting the test have different values. A SUV is per definition a truck. It is very hard to make anything of it but those who try the hardest to move away from the standard SUV stereotype are winners in my book. On the other hand, why bother? Build a proper car instead.

X6 doesn't really have competition, nothing is like it, the same way the Rclass never really competed with anything since it's on its own...

I guess putting the RR there is a bit unfair, the thing is built to go offroad, can nearly dive into the ponds which the ML or X5 or whatever will surely not be capable of doing... on the road, RR is just a show off of wealth imo..

Tarek, be careful what you talking about, dont through stones in glass house's.

U know pretty well what i mean,chill Andreas

Exactly I agree. This was (or should have been) a test about driving pleasure and performance not practicality, considering the versions of the Porsche, BMW and RR that were tested. If anything the ML63 AMG should have been entered. Anyway I knew what the criteria was when I saw the ML in first place.

M

The BMW X6 does have a direct compeditor, the new Infiniti FX35 and FX50. The BMW X6 actually came in second to the Infiniti FX35 in the excellent Motor Trend article. Here is what Motor Trend says about the Infiniti FX compared to the BMW X6.

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

"Still the Infiniti manages to impress. "Braking into the corner, the FX is a lot more neutral," says Reynolds, "It'll rotate quite a lot, too-possibly too much. You have to stabilize it before applying the power, like a rear-drive car." Conclusion? "The FX is more rotatable, more fun to drive, more playful for the average enthusiast."

On the street, Infiniti gains more ground. Says Kiino, "Both vehicles deliver a firm ride, but the FX's is much more supple. It rolls over undulations without upsetting passengers, whereas the X6 tends to toss people around."The BMW scores high marks for quick steering and a responsive engine. "The FX V-6 engine is more thrashy near redline than BMW's twin-turbo inline-six and can't match the low-end torque," says Kiino. "It doesn't feel quite as snappy off the line."

---->>> 2009 BMW X6 xDrive35i vs. 2009 Infiniti FX35 AWD - Results - Comparison - Motor Trend



I`d take the FX or ML500 over the X6 anyday. I just don`t like the X6 at all, no offence BMW fanners..