V12 Q7 results...

[kip]

Autobild Sportscars March X6 vs ML vs Cayenne, the old one tested 2/2008:

X6 4.4 / ML 63 fracelifted/Cayenne Turbo S/ Q7 V12 TDI /OLD ML63
0-100 km/h 5.3/5.4/ 4.5/ 5.4/5.1
0-200 km/h 20.8/18.8/16.4/20.8/17.8
1/4 mile 13.58/13.58/12.81/??/13.33

Just for comparison (From 2/2008 autobild):
SRT 8/Cayanne GTS/ Touareg R50
0-100 km/h 5.0/6.1/ 7.1
0-200 km/h 21.0/24.7/36.5
1/4 mile 13.32/14.16/15.12

Consumption l/100km, respectively
14.9/21.3/21.9/15.3/21.3
21.6/18.1/14.0

[chewym]

Looks like the Q7 V12 TDI got very good fuel economy and was not much slower. The Q7 is also quite a bit bigger than the other SUVs it was compared to which makes its figures more impressive.

[Leadfoot]

Thanks Kip,

We need to examine why the Q7 wasn't quicker than it was, at least I expected it to be quicker than that.

X6 50i : 2145kg + 408hp + 600Nm
ML63 : 2310kg : 520hp + 630Nm
Cayenne Turbo S : 2355kg + 550hp + 750Nm
Q7 v12TDi : 2635kg + 500hp + 1000Nm

Basing everything around the quickest (Cayenne Turbo S) as the reference and see by percentages how each thing effects the results.

Weight:
X6 50i = 91.1%
ML63 = 98.1%
Cayenne Turbo S = 100%
Q7 v12TDi = 111.9%

Power:
X6 50i = 74.2%
ML63 = 92.7%
Cayenne Turbo S = 100%
Q7 v12TDi = 90.9%

Torque:
X6 50i = 80%
ML63 = 84%
Cayenne Turbo S = 100%
Q7 v12TDi = 133.3%

Based on this breakdown I don't disagree with the winner or even the ML coming second but looking at the difference between the Q7 and X6 I honestly expected the Q7 to be well ahead and closer to the ML with the X6 a distance fourth. Either BMW is telling porkies about it's weight or output figures or the Q7 didn't perform as it should.

[Toto89]

In this comparison the Q7 was as fast as X6. Do you find it dissapointing in regard of being 500kg heavier?

[Leadfoot]

In this comparison the Q7 was as fast as X6. Do you find it dissapointing in regard of being 500kg heavier?

It weighed approx 20% more but has 20% more HP and 33% more torque, so yes I am a little disappointed with the times achieved in the Q7.

[chewym]

The Cayenne time looks to good to be true. In American magazines the (pre facelift) Cayenne Turbo S was not quicker than the ML 63. In fact it was slower than the Jeep SRT-8. Don't know what they could have done to make it so much quicker.

[JavierNuvolari]

It weighed approx 20% more but has 20% more HP and 33% more torque, so yes I am a little disappointed with the times achieved in the Q7.

Me too, with all the hype there about this V12 SUV....AND the price tag attached to it I have to say that I'm dissapointed as well.

[emve]

Me too, with all the hype there about this V12 SUV....AND the price tag attached to it I have to say that I'm dissapointed as well.

Yep, the X6 50i offers same acceleration and fuel consumption, yet sounds much better and costs a lot less.