<http://schema.org/articleBody>
"             2006 BMW X5 4.8is       List price     $70,100       Price as tested     $73,125       Curb weight     5090 lb       Engine, transmission     4.8 liter V-8; 6-sp automatic       Horsepower, bhp @ rpm     355 @ 6200       0\u201360 mph     6.1 sec       0\u20131320 ft (1/4 mile)     14.5 sec @ 95.6 mph       Top speed     153 mph       Braking, 60\u20130 mph     134 ft       Braking, 80\u20130 mph     227 ft       Brake swept area per ton     284 sq in.       Lateral accel (200-ft skidpad)     0.78g       Speed thru 700-ft slalom     63.7 mph       Our mileage, EPA city/highway     14.9, 16/21 mpg       Towing capacity     6000 lb       BMW X5 4.8is   Better than a BMW 325xi through the slalom Better than a BMW 330i to the quarter mile Will the soon-to-arrive all-new X5 be better, or just bigger?   Since it was still three months from the time of writing before we could get our hands on the larger, 7-seat, second-generation X5 (to hit the U.S. market in November), we decided to include the &amp;quot;old&amp;quot; X5 because we&amp;#039;ve never previously run performance numbers on the 4.8is version and because we know that the new X5 will have a similar output to the vehicle tested here.   The X5 4.8is, like the Jeep GC SRT8 and Infiniti FX45, is intended solely for on-road duties, and it wouldn&amp;#039;t be out of place on a racetrack, what with 275/40R-20 front tires and 315/35R-20 rears. The 4.8is adds 14.0-in. front rotors (compared with 13.1 for the 4.4i) and stiffer suspension settings. Its xDrive all-wheel drive is meant for enhancing traction on the road (especially wet ones) and is helpful when trying to put down the power from the 355-bhp 4.8-liter V-8, mated to one of our favorite 6-speed automatics \u2014 BMW&amp;#039;s Steptronic. Manual downshifts are performed by pushing the center console lever forward, upshifts by pulling rearward \u2014 which seems most natural to us, like a race car&amp;#039;s sequential setup.   The throbbing V-8 is at all times smooth and soulful, especially so under full throttle, yet it&amp;#039;s never obnoxious in volume. This X5 is simply a smooth, comfortable, no-fuss-no-muss vehicle to drive, BMW no doubt feeling antics such as the power-on oversteer of the Jeep and corner-entry oversteer of the FX45 to be beneath its status level. Instead, the front gives way first in a nice, safe manner, though a bit sooner than expected, what with those huge tires. This was borne out by its test-worst skidpad of 0.78g. Yet its precise, communicative steering and reasonable size make it a user-friendly device, shown by its test-best slalom speed of 63.7 mph. It&amp;#039;s easy to drive quickly on back roads \u2014and without a great penalty in ride comfort \u2014 due to excellent feedback to the driver as to what the chassis is up to.   The interior is simple and feels a bit dated, no doubt to be fixed with the new X5, but it is a comfortable place to spend time and exudes a sense of quality. Shaun felt interior space was lacking: &amp;quot;Like the Infiniti and the Jeep, the 4.8is just isn&amp;#039;t all that practical when it comes to passenger room.&amp;quot;   Still, we found lots to like about the BMW, and we never thought about its age while driving it. &amp;quot;It has great steering, superb brakes and good styling,&amp;quot; said Shaun. &amp;quot;And the best-looking wheel/tire combination of the group,&amp;quot; he added. Not bad for an &amp;quot;old timer.&amp;quot;   With Mercedes and Porsche stepping up with super-mean versions of their SUVs, it seems time for BMW to finally affix the &amp;quot;M&amp;quot; badge to an X5 as well, something the current X5 has never worn. Look for an M X5 in a year or so.   The SUV advantage   Why buy an SUV over a sedan or a wagon, both of which are lighter and use less fuel? Most people name reasons such as a higher seating position, all-wheel drive (though many cars have this option now), increased load capacity \u2014 due to higher rooflines, easy-to-load hatchback designs and larger overall dimensions \u2014 and better ground clearance. Also, SUVs are for some reason judged &amp;quot;cooler&amp;quot; than station wagons.   That being said, there&amp;#039;s no getting around the weight of these SUVs, which carry an extra 1000\u20132000 lb. over a comparable car. It didn&amp;#039;t go unnoticed on the brakes. The Jeep&amp;#039;s Brembos, with oversize 14.2-in. front rotors and 13.8-in. rears (giving a swept area per ton of 264 sq. in.), rank as possibly the best ever fitted to an SUV; yet they cannot come close to matching a car like the Audi RS 4, with a smaller swept area (585 sq. in. compared to 634 for the Jeep) but a greater swept area per ton \u2014 299 sq. in. This was proven to us very quickly as all of the SUVs suffered from brake fade throughout our aggressive test.   To SUV or not to SUV gets even more complicated when vehicles like the Jeep, for example, lose utility along the way to achieving better on-road manners. Maybe Infiniti has had it right the whole time. For if we agree that most people never take their SUVs off road, a crossover SUV like the FX45 provides exactly what people are looking for: It looks big and tough like an SUV, but performs as well, or better than, many sports sedans. "^^<http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema#string>
<http://www.roadandtrack.com/new-cars/car-comparison-tests/reviews/a20374/chariots-with-fire-2006-bmw-x5-48is/>