| Home | Forums | Articles | FAQ | Register |
 | Xoutpost.com > BMW SAV Forums > X5 (E53) Forum |  Comparison of 3.0, 4.4, 4.6is and 4.8is | | | | User Name | Remember Me? | | Password | |
| Member List | Premier Membership | Today's Posts | New Posts | Search |
| Search Forums |
| Advanced Search |
| How To's |
| BMW X3 Tips & Tricks |
| BMW X5 Tips & Tricks |
| BMW X6 Tips & Tricks |
| Xoutpost server transfer and maintenance is occurring.... |
| Xoutpost is currently undergoing a planned server migration.... stay tuned for new developments.... sincerely, the management |
| LinkBack | Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#1  10-02-2005, 10:00 PM |
 | pepatrick  Member | Join Date: Mar 2005 Location: Cumming, GA Posts: 888  | |
Comparison of 3.0, 4.4, 4.6is and 4.8is Here is my review on the differences between the 4.6is and 4.4i. This reveiw will actually be based on several different vechicles. These include: 2001 X5 3.0i - my old X5 68700 miles 2001 X5 4.4i - my other old X5 34300 miles 2002 X5 4.6is - my current X5 44500 miles 2005 X5 4.4i - my neighbors X5 24000 miles 2005 X5 4.8is - his bosses X5 4300 miles First of all...lets compare the 3.0 and 01 4.4. Both vehicles were premium package non sport vehicles with the the same style 132 wheels on them. Both cars drive and handle nearly identicle with a slight edge going to the 3.0i. Obviously the 4.4i is quicker all through the power band due to the 4.4i motor and 60 hp difference. 2001 4.4i and 2002 4.6is - The 4.6is actually feels lighter than the 4.4i in slower driving conditions. I think this has something to do with a different power steering system in the 2002 and newer models. The 4.6is definately pulls through the power band like a freight train. It keeps going and going and going and does not run out of breath....EVER!!! Brakes are more sensative on the 4.6is and over all the 4.6is handles better...20" wheels with huge shoes on them and sport suspension has a lot to do with this. This truck will stop on a dime compared to the 4.4i. The larger rotors really look good in the 4.6is wheel wells...The older 4.4i felt good driving, but does not have the same pull as the 4.6is...But again...there is 340 hp vs 282 hp basically a 60 hp difference. 2002 4.6is and 2005 4.4i sport - The 2005 4.4i does better than you would think. To 60...I was between a half and full car length ahead...Above 60 the 4.6is walks away but again...not as much as you would think. The 05 4.4i handles about the same as it has the same sport package and 20 style 87s so no big surprise there. The 4.6is from 90 to 0 stopped about 2.5 car lengths shorter...thats pretty impressive...It got to 90 about 1.5 car lengths ahead. You guys with the 04 and 05 4.4i cars can rest assured that you have a beast of a car. I expected to walk all over it and although performance in the 4.6is was superior...it was nothing like comparing the 4.4i to the 3.0i. 2002 4.6is and 2005 4.8is Blown away by the results...These two are neck and neck until about 100 mph and strangely enough the 4.6is pulled ahead by a couple of feet. This probably had something do with the driver as I would have figured the 4.8 would pull ahead at higher speeds. Over all...they drive the same. The 4.6is feels like it has more torque off the line, but both really have the same get up and go. I could not tell any siginificant differences (and the other drivers all agreed) between the 4.8is and 4.6is. Both of these cars are beast on the highway...but the 4.4i is not far enough behind to warrant the 8 to 10 grand in price. These words are not mine, but from the guy that owned the 4.8is. We all agreed that the 4.8is was the better looking of the cars because it was a titanium silver car and the aerodynamics looked stunning in silver. He also ditched the new style wheels for the 87s which arguably are better looking wheels. The 4.6is was the best value as it was more than 20k less than the 05 4.4is and 30k less than the 4.8is and had better seats (comfort seats) and navigation... In conclusion...All of these cars perform better than they should considering how much they weigh. The 4.6is and 4.8is are great performers with nearly identical driving feel. The 4.8is may have felt a little better simply because it was 3 years newer and 40k less miles than my 4.6is. I miss my old 4.4i as it had adequate power and was in better condition than a 2001 should be, but as I get used to the 4.6is and its different driving feel, I am sure it will reach the top of my list. I really liked the 3.0i as it was the one that got me started on all of this. It was a great X5 that got really good gas mileage until I slapped the 132s on it. When all is said and done...I cant think of any vehicle I would rather drive than the X5. __________________ pepatrick 2002 X5 4.6is oO ( )( ) Oo o ===== o  |
| #2 10-02-2005, 10:09 PM |
 | AutoXer Member | Join Date: Mar 2005 Location: San Francisco Posts: 1,983 | |
| Great commentary. Appreciate the thoughts and comparisions. Always had wondered about the 4.6 vs. 4.8's. |
| #3 10-02-2005, 10:11 PM |
 | alpac  Premier Member | Join Date: Jul 2005 Location: Durham NC USA Posts: 3,075 | |
| Thanks for this detailed comparison between de different models of X5. Question for you, is the 4.6 better, same or worse than the 2001 4.4 as far as MPG is concerned? Your 4.6 has a 6 speeds versus 5 speeds for your ex 2001 4.4, right? Does that make a difference? |
| #4 10-02-2005, 10:11 PM |
 | vinuneuro Member | Join Date: Apr 2005 Location: MI/IL/IN Posts: 7,800 | |
Great review Phil. Thanks for sharing your thoughts as not many of us have had as much prolonged exposure to as many different X5s  . |
| #5 10-02-2005, 11:36 PM |
| pepatrick Member | Join Date: Mar 2005 Location: Cumming, GA Posts: 888 | |
The 4.6is is a 5 speed. The 6 speeds did not come out until 2004. Both the 4.4i and the 4.6is get about the same really poor mileage... Another thing we all compared was gas mileage. While the 4.8is and 05 4.4i claim they get better mileage...they all get pretty close to the same. My MPG button was not reset when I picked it up...we all compared..and mine was at 15.7 mpg and theres were about 16.0 and 16.1 mpg. Not enough difference to sneeze at. I took a 100 mile cruize this afternoon to my office and back and in no traffic nailed whopping 21.6 mpg during the entire trip at about 70 mph...I didnt think that was too bad. Quote: | Originally Posted by alpac Thanks for this detailed comparison between de different models of X5. Question for you, is the 4.6 better, same or worse than the 2001 4.4 as far as MPG is concerned? Your 4.6 has a 6 speeds versus 5 speeds for your ex 2001 4.4, right? Does that make a difference? | __________________ pepatrick 2002 X5 4.6is oO ( )( ) Oo o ===== o |
| #6 10-03-2005, 01:42 AM |
 | gonzjed Member | Join Date: Apr 2005 Location: North Bergen, NJ Posts: 31 | |
| nice comparison |
| #7 10-03-2005, 02:01 AM |
 | somewhereinla Member | Join Date: Apr 2005 Location: X5world Posts: 308 | |
| Nice review, thank you. __________________ 04 X5 4.4 |
| #8 10-03-2005, 03:43 AM |
 | cimbro Member | Join Date: May 2005 Location: ITALY Posts: 159 | |
I have tested the '01 4.4 and the '05 4.4. My first impression it that the older version (with less power) is more responsive. In the first seconds of full gas in the pedal, the old version is amazing! The new one starts after a high rpm and it doesn't like me. Ok, maybe after 30mph it is quicker but what I like is start from the stops and let behind everyone. I would like to test a 4.6 is because I suppose it's the best sensation x5 car (4.8 I think has the same problem of the new 4.4, the sensation in the first seconds). What do you think about it? The same day I tested the '05 4.4 I tested the 218HP diesel version. This seems going better in the small and full of curve mountain streets (more fun)! __________________  |
| #9 10-03-2005, 07:56 AM |
| pepatrick Member | Join Date: Mar 2005 Location: Cumming, GA Posts: 888 | |
| I have heard of people mentioning the hesiatation in the valvetronic. After driving both the 05 4.4 and 4.8, I think it is more of myth. I never noticed hesitation and even during 0 - 60 runs there was no real difference off the line between the 4.6 and 4.8. __________________ pepatrick 2002 X5 4.6is oO ( )( ) Oo o ===== o |
| #10 10-03-2005, 09:47 AM |
| cimbro Member | Join Date: May 2005 Location: ITALY Posts: 159 | |
Quote: | Originally Posted by pepatrick I have heard of people mentioning the hesiatation in the valvetronic. After driving both the 05 4.4 and 4.8, I think it is more of myth. I never noticed hesitation and even during 0 - 60 runs there was no real difference off the line between the 4.6 and 4.8. | Ok, but you say that the 4.6 and the 4.8 are very near during the acceleration, so I think that the 4.6 is more responsive having around 15 HP less. Don't you think this? __________________ |
| Bookmarks |
-
 Digg -
 del.icio.us -
 StumbleUpon -
 Google
|
« Previous Thread | Next Thread
» | Thread Tools |
 Show Printable Version |
| Display Modes |
 Linear Mode |
 Switch to Hybrid Mode |
 Switch to Threaded Mode |
 Posting Rules | | You may not post new threads You may not post replies You may not post attachments You may not edit your posts BB code is On Smilies are On [IMG] code is On HTML code is OffTrackbacks are On Pingbacks are On Refbacks are On Forum Rules | |
| -- OEM-3.53 -- Xoutpost | Contact Us - Xoutpost - Sponsors - Archive - Top |
All times are GMT -4. The time now is
11:49 AM. vBulletin, Copyright 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd. SEO by vBSEO 3.6.0 © 2017 Xoutpost.com. All rights reserved. Xoutpost.com is a private enthusiast site not associated with BMW AG. The BMW name, marks, M stripe logo, and Roundel logo as well as X3, X5 and X6 designations used in the pages of this Web Site are the property of BMW AG.This web site is not sponsored or affiliated in any way with BMW AG or any of its subsidiaries.
| LinkBack |
 LinkBack URL |
 About LinkBacks |
