Close

    • Adding the N63TU twin turbo V8 to the 2014 F15 X5 xDrive50i makes for a 5300 pound 12 second SUV

      Many people have likely forgotten this but BMW did make high performance SUV's long before the X5M ever went on the market. Back with the first generation E53 X5 over a decade ago BMW produced the X5 4.8is model which was the highest performance X5 in all the land. With 355 horsepower and 360 lb-ft of torque from the 4.8 liter naturally aspirated N63 V8 it hustled the 5090 pound X5 to 60 in 6 seconds flat and through the 1/4 mile in 14.5 second at 96 miles per hour.


      How much have things changed in the decade since? The xDrive50i is not even the highest performance X5 available although until the new X5M hits it is the highest performance X5 available for the new F15 generation. It is roughly the equivalent in the model range of the X5 4.8is of a decade ago since an M model did not exist back then. In 2014 what this means is a 445 horsepower and 480 lb-ft twin turbo 4.4 liter N63TU twin turbo V8 powered 5306 pound monster that hustles to 60 in 4.3 seconds and through the 1/4 mile in 12.8 @ 109.

      To put it another way, quicker and faster than every M3 produced prior to the last generation E92 M3. You could line up next to an E39 M5 at a stoplight and pull away while sipping a latte. That is how fast BMW's SUV's have become but notice that they have not gotten any lighter. This generation was supposed to improve in that area by a couple hundred pounds (according to BMW who somehow keeps overstating their weight loss) but when weighed it turns out it actually isn't any lighter.

      Everyone will no doubt state this is very impressive acceleration and it is but there is one thing that old X5 4.8is did better than this new car. It went through the slalom quicker and pulled .83g on the skidpad to the 2014's .81g. It also stopped 5 feet shorter from 70 miles per hour.

      Hey, as long as this one is faster that is progress right?


      Source: Car and Driver
      This article was originally published in forum thread: Adding the N63TU twin turbo V8 to the 2014 F15 X5 xDrive50i makes for a 5300 pound 12 second SUV started by Sticky View original post
      Comments 28 Comments
      1. G0TB00ST?'s Avatar
        G0TB00ST? -
        Well it seems bmw can still do one thing right... But I would still rather had an 07/08 tahoe lifted and sitting on 35in Mickey Thompson Baja mtz's
      1. rdeterman's Avatar
        rdeterman -
        88k MSRP is crazy money. That thing will be worth half that in only a few years.
      1. Sticky's Avatar
        Sticky -
        Click here to enlarge Originally Posted by rdeterman Click here to enlarge
        88k MSRP is crazy money. That thing will be worth half that in only a few years.
        You're right. Buying an X5M or Cayenne Turbo brand new is burning money.
      1. leveraged sellout's Avatar
        leveraged sellout -
        ....sorry I'm still scraping my jaw up off the floor....


        4.3 to 60? 12.8 in the quarter at almost 110 mph? This thing would hang with an E60 M5, just about. This is madness. I'm re-reading these numbers to make sure I'm not misunderstanding. This is obscene. As far as I'm concerned, this is progress...the new X5 is crazy nice. The X5M should be certifiably insane. 88k maybe is a bit much, but it's a very nice car and its cheaper than a Cayenne (although won't handle like one). Pretty sure we can call BS on those power figures too...no way something that heavy gets moved that quickly by only 445 hp and 480 lb ft.
      1. Sticky's Avatar
        Sticky -
        Click here to enlarge Originally Posted by leveraged sellout Click here to enlarge
        This thing would hang with an E60 M5, just about.
        Well to a hundred or so.

        Click here to enlarge Originally Posted by leveraged sellout Click here to enlarge
        As far as I'm concerned, this is progress..
        Heavier, worse braking, worse handling, worse steering feel, but faster? I mean are BMW's dragsters now?

        Click here to enlarge Originally Posted by leveraged sellout Click here to enlarge
        The X5M should be certifiably insane
        I'm guessing it will get the S63TU as well then but will it have the dual clutch or automatic? A 5300+ pound all wheel drive dual clutch is going to put some serious stress on that drivetrain. That would make it the heaviest all wheel drive dual clutch car in existence I think. Audi didn't do it for the RS6/RS7 so I'm wondering if BMW will also go auto.
      1. spool twice's Avatar
        spool twice -
        the tires arent performance tires like on the 4.6/4.8is, nor are they as wide, so I don't expect handling/braking # to be the same. I wonder why 5/6 series with the same engine have such a hard time producing similar trap speeds as this X5? I always felt the 5/6 was slow considering whp/weight.
      1. Sticky's Avatar
        Sticky -
        Click here to enlarge Originally Posted by spool twice Click here to enlarge
        the tires arent performance tires like on the 4.6/4.8is, nor are they as wide, so I don't expect handling/braking # to be the same. I wonder why 5/6 series with the same engine have such a hard time producing similar trap speeds as this X5? I always felt the 5/6 was slow considering whp/weight.
        Haven't rubber compounds advanced a bit?
      1. leveraged sellout's Avatar
        leveraged sellout -
        Click here to enlarge Originally Posted by Sticky Click here to enlarge
        Well to a hundred or so.

        Heavier, worse braking, worse handling, worse steering feel, but faster? I mean are BMW's dragsters now?

        I'm guessing it will get the S63TU as well then but will it have the dual clutch or automatic? A 5300+ pound all wheel drive dual clutch is going to put some serious stress on that drivetrain. That would make it the heaviest all wheel drive dual clutch car in existence I think. Audi didn't do it for the RS6/RS7 so I'm wondering if BMW will also go auto.
        Yeah basically. That quarter mile time isn't too far off, although trap speed is.

        I think probably in an M version (or potentially an is version) you might see improvements in that regard. After all, the 4.6/4.8is models had chassis tweaks that the regular V8 models didn't have.

        Yeah I can't imagine that it they could make it work...but who knows. Maybe they're hard at work on that already. They need to make it work with AWD anyway for the near future...
      1. rdeterman's Avatar
        rdeterman -
        Click here to enlarge Originally Posted by rdeterman Click here to enlarge
        88k MSRP is crazy money. That thing will be worth half that in only a few years.
        Neg rep for that? Really?!?
      1. Sticky's Avatar
        Sticky -
        Click here to enlarge Originally Posted by rdeterman Click here to enlarge
        Neg rep for that? Really?!?
        Here's a positive. You guys let one thumbs down really get to you.
      1. Roadkill12r's Avatar
        Roadkill12r -
        Did this have the M sport package with the adaptive suspension?
      1. Sticky's Avatar
        Sticky -
        Click here to enlarge Originally Posted by Roadkill12r Click here to enlarge
        Did this have the M sport package with the adaptive suspension?
        I believe so.
      1. spool twice's Avatar
        spool twice -
        It doesn't have sport package (the body trim isn't a Sport anyways), it doesn't have the M-sport body kit, so it doesn't have the stagg wheel/tire set. The one C&D tested is an X-line model with dynamix damper control. The tires are 255/50/19's F/R all season Goodyear LS, and yes ladies and gentlemen....the same brand/model line as the Buick Century's of the early 2000's...

        Seriously BMW?!?!??!!? The same tires as a WHAT?? Wowza's, at least they redeem themselves with the M-sport line.

        4.8is has 275/40/20 F, 315/35/20 R Bridgestone Duelers (Similar brand / size to the current X5M)
      1. Group.america's Avatar
        Group.america -
        5300 trillion lbs and 0 to 100 mph in sub 10.7

        sick
      1. BlackJetE90OC's Avatar
        BlackJetE90OC -
        Sales of the new X5 are down 20%+ and that is compared to the last year sales of the outgoing model (E70).
      1. alextremo's Avatar
        alextremo -
        Same trap speed and 3 tenths quicker in the 1/4 mile than the 1,000lb lighter pre-lci 550i. Something doesn't seem right...

        Specifications

        VEHICLE TYPE: front-engine, rear-wheel-drive, 5-passenger, 4-door sedan

        PRICE AS TESTED: automatic, $75,100/manual, $69,575 (base price: $60,575)

        ENGINE TYPE: twin-turbocharged and intercooled DOHC 32-valve V-8, aluminum block and heads, direct fuel injection

        Displacement: 268 cu in, 4395 cc
        Power: 400 bhp @ 5500 rpm
        Torque: 450 lb-ft @ 1750 rpm

        TRANSMISSIONS: 8-speed automatic with manumatic shifting, 6-speed manual

        DIMENSIONS:
        Wheelbase: 116.9 in
        Length: 193.1 in
        Width: 73.2 in Height: 57.6 in
        Curb weight: 4417 lb (auto); 4358 lb (manual)

        C/D TEST RESULTS (auto):
        Zero to 60 mph: 4.8 sec
        Zero to 100 mph: 11.0 sec
        Zero to 130 mph: 19.0 sec
        Street start, 5-60 mph: 5.3 sec
        Standing -mile: 13.1 sec @ 109 mph
        Top speed (governor limited): 155 mph
        Braking, 70-0 mph: 170 ft
        Roadholding, 300-ft-dia skidpad: 0.86 g

        C/D TEST RESULTS (manual):
        Zero to 60 mph: 5.1 sec
        Zero to 100 mph: 11.3 sec
        Zero to 130 mph: 19.4 sec
        Street start, 5-60 mph: 5.3 sec
        Standing -mile: 13.1 sec @ 109 mph
        Top speed (governor limited): 155 mph
        Braking, 70-0 mph: 171 ft
        Roadholding, 300-ft-dia skidpad: 0.88 g

        FUEL ECONOMY:
        EPA city/highway driving: 17/25 mpg (auto), 15/22 (manual)
        C/D observed: 18 mpg (auto), 17 mpg (manual)
      1. Sticky's Avatar
        Sticky -
        Click here to enlarge Originally Posted by BlackJetE90OC Click here to enlarge
        Sales of the new X5 are down 20%+ and that is compared to the last year sales of the outgoing model (E70).
        I wonder why. E70 just a better buy as dealers clear them out?
      1. Sticky's Avatar
        Sticky -
        Click here to enlarge Originally Posted by alextremo Click here to enlarge
        Same trap speed and 3 tenths quicker in the 1/4 mile than the 1,000lb lighter pre-lci 550i. Something doesn't seem right...

        Specifications

        VEHICLE TYPE: front-engine, rear-wheel-drive, 5-passenger, 4-door sedan

        PRICE AS TESTED: automatic, $75,100/manual, $69,575 (base price: $60,575)

        ENGINE TYPE: twin-turbocharged and intercooled DOHC 32-valve V-8, aluminum block and heads, direct fuel injection

        Displacement: 268 cu in, 4395 cc
        Power: 400 bhp @ 5500 rpm
        Torque: 450 lb-ft @ 1750 rpm

        TRANSMISSIONS: 8-speed automatic with manumatic shifting, 6-speed manual

        DIMENSIONS:
        Wheelbase: 116.9 in
        Length: 193.1 in
        Width: 73.2 in Height: 57.6 in
        Curb weight: 4417 lb (auto); 4358 lb (manual)

        C/D TEST RESULTS (auto):
        Zero to 60 mph: 4.8 sec
        Zero to 100 mph: 11.0 sec
        Zero to 130 mph: 19.0 sec
        Street start, 5-60 mph: 5.3 sec
        Standing -mile: 13.1 sec @ 109 mph
        Top speed (governor limited): 155 mph
        Braking, 70-0 mph: 170 ft
        Roadholding, 300-ft-dia skidpad: 0.86 g

        C/D TEST RESULTS (manual):
        Zero to 60 mph: 5.1 sec
        Zero to 100 mph: 11.3 sec
        Zero to 130 mph: 19.4 sec
        Street start, 5-60 mph: 5.3 sec
        Standing -mile: 13.1 sec @ 109 mph
        Top speed (governor limited): 155 mph
        Braking, 70-0 mph: 171 ft
        Roadholding, 300-ft-dia skidpad: 0.88 g

        FUEL ECONOMY:
        EPA city/highway driving: 17/25 mpg (auto), 15/22 (manual)
        C/D observed: 18 mpg (auto), 17 mpg (manual)
        You raise a really good point. I don't get it with that weight and the same motor it should be running 115+
      1. alextremo's Avatar
        alextremo -
        Click here to enlarge Originally Posted by Sticky Click here to enlarge
        You raise a really good point. I don't get it with that weight and the same motor it should be running 115+
        To be fair, the pre-lci didn't have the N63TU so it was down 45HP and 30lb-ft but that doesn't seem like enough to make up for the weight difference of the X5.
      1. Sticky's Avatar
        Sticky -
        Click here to enlarge Originally Posted by alextremo Click here to enlarge
        To be fair, the pre-lci didn't have the N63TU so it was down 45HP and 30lb-ft but that doesn't seem like enough to make up for the weight difference of the X5.
        Exactly.

        Are the 550's being dialed back? I don't know.

        The N63TU isn't even that big of an advantage: http://www.bimmerboost.com/content.p...ynojet-results