[sor]

We will probably need to wait for thorough reviews to describe how this works, but given the info we have as peak HP and torque, I worked out this table.

What got me thinking about this is just how much torque the M60 has in non-boost mode (I'm using this term for lack of an official one). While the HP is not far off from the xDrive50, it maintains a 185ft-lb torque advantage. This seems to point to the max power coming on much earlier.

[sor]

Re-reading this press release (and particularly the table at the bottom), it actually reads as though the 610 HP is called "Sport Boost" and is available in Sport Mode. The 811 ft-lb of torque is available during Launch Control.

It's not clear that these two peaks are the same - it's possible they are offering 811 ft-lb for launch but the "Sport Boost" feature is available whenever you floor it in sport mode. Notably it does *not* mark the max output as Launch Control, only "Sport Boost".

This would be very similar to the e-tron implementation where you get about 10 seconds of extra power when you initially floor it, which with a 3.x second 0-60 is more than enough to perform by maneuver you need to.

"With Sport Mode engaged to unleash 610 bhp and Launch Control activated to release all 811 lb-ft of instantaneous torque, the BMW iX M60 will hit 60 mph from a standstill in only 3.6 seconds"

"Max combined output / Sport Boost : 532hp/610hp"
"Max combined torque, Launch mode: 811lb-ft"

https://www.press.bmwgroup.com/usa/a...23-bmw-ix-m60-–-the-best-of-three-worlds:-i-x-and-m?language=en_US

[Paladin1]

Briefly considered the M60. You do get the above - but you're not going to track it. Or even significantly improve performance or usability over the 50 on city streets or the highway, unless you like sitting on a deserted stretch and continually launching it to feel that extra second of reduction from 0-60. It's not like the 50 won't put you in the passing zone before you need it. But you do get that extra second. Plus Parking Assistant Pro. Plus some "M" badges. Other than that, it appeared to me the 50 and the 60 are identical - identical interior, identical exterior. Down to the same Lumbar Delete on the passenger seat. What you lose compared to the 50 is:

- About $7k (in the US) for essentially the same options and configuration
- About 15% of the range - which is sort of the major point for an EV to many

And actually, the price difference (which is surprising considering the "M" premium for gasoline models) is not that significant to me - but the range most certainly is. It would be attractive to gain the extra features of PA Pro versus Plus (jumping off the line for a second of gain in an EV has zero meaning or utility for me) but cranking it down to an e-Tron level for range, mmmm, no. Just no.

[stealth.pilot]

Originally Posted by Paladin1

Briefly considered the M60. You do get the above - but you're not going to track it. Or even significantly improve performance or usability over the 50 on city streets or the highway, unless you like sitting on a deserted stretch and continually launching it to feel that extra second of reduction from 0-60. It's not like the 50 won't put you in the passing zone before you need it. But you do get that extra second. Plus Parking Assistant Pro. Plus some "M" badges. Other than that, it appeared to me the 50 and the 60 are identical - identical interior, identical exterior. Down to the same Lumbar Delete on the passenger seat. What you lose compared to the 50 is:

- About $7k (in the US) for essentially the same options and configuration
- About 15% of the range - which is sort of the major point for an EV to many

And actually, the price difference (which is surprising considering the "M" premium for gasoline models) is not that significant to me - but the range most certainly is. It would be attractive to gain the extra features of PA Pro versus Plus (jumping off the line for a second of gain in an EV has zero meaning or utility for me) but cranking it down to an e-Tron level for range, mmmm, no. Just no.

Agree completely. For me the price diff was about $10k. Not a lot. But it seemed the performance difference was not very big, while the range difference was meaningful. I think the range matters more, and also the 50 might have better ride quality which also matters in an SUV/family car.

I've stopped buying M/AMG models and now prefer to buy the highest non performance model, because those cars are better for day to day driving. For performance just buy a sports car for weekend use.

[sor]

Originally Posted by Paladin1

Briefly considered the M60. You do get the above - but you're not going to track it. Or even significantly improve performance or usability over the 50 on city streets or the highway, unless you like sitting on a deserted stretch and continually launching it to feel that extra second of reduction from 0-60. It's not like the 50 won't put you in the passing zone before you need it. But you do get that extra second. Plus Parking Assistant Plus. Plus some "M" badges. Other than that, it appeared to me the 50 and the 60 are identical - identical interior, identical exterior. Down to the same Lumbar Delete on the passenger seat. What you lose compared to the 50 is:

- About $7k (in the US) for essentially the same options and configuration
- About 15% of the range - which is sort of the major point for an EV to many

And actually, the price difference (which is surprising considering the "M" premium for gasoline models) is not that significant to me - but the range most certainly is. It would be attractive to gain the extra features of PA Pro versus Plus (jumping off the line for a second of gain in an EV has zero meaning or utility for me) but cranking it down to an e-Tron level for range, mmmm, no. Just no.

The thing is, I made a big mistake in trying an i4 M50 before the iX xDrive50. Comparatively the iX was just missing the low end response and immediacy. Reminiscent of a turbo lag where you really feel the power once the RPMs get going. Two totally different cars, I know, but I'm looking at the M60 to restore the power to weight ratio and fill in the lower end torque to match its weight.

It's not about tracking the car, it's about the day to day feel of the car being fun to drive. I didn't track the i4 during the demo but both my passenger and I were grinning - and I don't even drive like an asshole exceeding the speed limit or weaving in and out of cars.

I agree that the xDrive50 has a lot of power compared to my e-tron and is "plenty" for daily driving. It's a fantastic car and I understand the vast majority of forum members here are getting it, so my opinion might not be popular. Also I admit I'm being extremely picky here. I'm just hoping (probably baselessly) that I can get both the fun and the utility in the same package.

I'm still skeptical the range will be much different compared to an xDrive50 when driven and equipped identically. There can be significant differences in range based on options, the M60 has everything by default and the xDrive50 doesn't.

[Paladin1]

May you not be disappointed! . Essentially overclocking (what appear to be) the same motors though will likely extract a greater penalty than the estimates indicate - depending on use. And if you're not going to use the boost frequently, it begs the question of why. So real world could very possibly be worse than advertised, with the additional penalty when charging of topping off a substantially larger battery pack than competitors with similar range. Physics is a bitch. Time will tell though, and we probably won't know actual numbers until at least the end of the summer, if then.

[NomoTesla]

Doesn't the M60 come with wider tires? If so, that could be the reason for most of the range penalty. Tesla performance cars can often achieve the same range as non-performance models if you equip them with the same wheels and drive them within the non-performance power band (i.e., accelerate slowly).

I wonder if the iX M60 will be similar.

[slampert]

Originally Posted by Paladin1

What you lose compared to the 50 is:

- About $7k (in the US) for essentially the same options and configuration
- About 15% of the range - which is sort of the major point for an EV to many

Exactly ! I went thru the same debate when the M60 was announced, with similar conclusions. You could even argue that the M60 will enjoy better resale value. None of these factors tipped the scales for me.

My iX50 is scheduled for production in mid May. Switching to the M60 would have added at least another 6 months onto the wait time....

[slampert]

Originally Posted by sor

There can be significant differences in range based on options

You've suggested this idea in a couple of other posts. What options besides tire size are likely to have a significant impact on range ?

[NomoTesla]

Originally Posted by slampert

You've suggested this idea in a couple of other posts. What options besides tire size are likely to have a significant impact on range ?

Tire size has the greatest impact on range, all things being equal. But all things may not be qual. Performance variants can dump more power into the motor, which may require additional hardware (adds weight) and greater resistive losses to heat.

Motor Trend said the M60's motors are three phase synchronous AC w/ double inverters to handle the added power. Not sure if these are different motors than in the xDrive 50 or just have some artificial electronic limits removed.

[sor]

Originally Posted by slampert

You've suggested this idea in a couple of other posts. What options besides tire size are likely to have a significant impact on range ?

Anything that adds weight or uses energy. Think about the hardware and power involved in driving assistants, for example, that aren't present in a base model.

[NomoTesla]

I thought the iX M60 used a different motor than the rest. At least Motor Trend seems to think so:

https://www.motortrend.com/news/bmw-...ech-deep-dive/

[sor]

Originally Posted by NomoTesla

I thought the iX M60 used a different motor than the rest. At least Motor Trend seems to think so:

https://www.motortrend.com/news/bmw-...ech-deep-dive/

Yeah, the verdict is out on that one. It probably contributes some, if so.

I'm just thinking there are something like a dozen or more options that the M60 comes with by default that the base xDrive50 doesn't, and those have to represent some level of power use and weight that could also skew the range results if the xDrive50 added them. That's really only relevant though if someone is thinking they'll option up an xDrive50 instead of getting an M60 for range reasons.

[NomoTesla]

There's also this from BMW's iX M60 launch materials:

With Sport Mode engaged to unleash 610 bhp and Launch Control activated to release all 811 lb-ft of instantaneous torque, the BMW iX M60 will hit 60 mph from a standstill in only 3.6 seconds. The intense power delivery of its M-specific electric drive continues steadily into high load ranges, so acceleration remains almost constant up to the electronically-limited maximum speed of 155 mph when properly equipped.

The two motors of the BMW iX M60 operate on the principle of a current-energized synchronous machine. That is, instead of permanent magnets, the excitation of the rotor is triggered by the precisely metered supply of electrical energy. This design method makes it possible to completely dispense with the rare earth metals required for magnetic components when manufacturing the rotor.

The M-specific design of the current-energized synchronous machine principle enables the electric motor of the BMW iX M60 - especially in the case of the rear motor - to achieve an extremely high power density. The drive unit is six-phase operated and has a double inverter. This makes it possible to achieve a particularly significant increase in peak power, which is available up to high speeds and enables typical BMW M power delivery.

[sor]

Yeah, they also say the suspension is "M-specific", but everyone seems to think it's a tune. If it is different suspension hardware that could contribute to range differences as well.

with activated Launch Control and an M specific suspension set-up, it adds an outstanding performance experience to the world of locally emission-free mobility.

[NomoTesla]

Originally Posted by sor

Yeah, they also say the suspension is "M-specific", but everyone seems to think it's a tune. If it is different suspension hardware that could contribute to range differences as well.

I wonder if it might have a slightly lower stance.

[slampert]

Originally Posted by sor

That's really only relevant though if someone is thinking they'll option up an xDrive50 instead of getting an M60 for range reasons.

Well...That someone is me! Or at least partially me. I think range, and to a lesser extent delayed availability, were the top reasons I passed on the M60.

While I don't (yet) have a shred of empirical evidence to back up my thinking, I've been assuming that the difference in range (factoring out tire size) between a base model and loaded iX50 would be negligible. If that's true, then doesn't it follow that the 15% loss of range between a loaded iX50 and the M60 must be primarily attributable to the powertrain and related hardware and SW enhancements, and not the option packages...??

I think it will be interesting to see how these questions resolve once we gather more battery consumption / range tracking data....

[sor]

Originally Posted by slampert

Well...That someone is me! Or at least partially me. I think range, and to a lesser extent delayed availability, were the top reasons I passed on the M60.

While I don't (yet) have a shred of empirical evidence to back up my thinking, I've been assuming that the difference in range (factoring out tire size) between a base model and loaded iX50 would be negligible. If that's true, then doesn't it follow that the 15% loss of range between a loaded iX50 and the M60 must be primarily attributable to the powertrain and related hardware and SW enhancements, and not the option packages...??

I think it will be interesting to see how these questions resolve once we gather more battery consumption / range tracking data....

Yes, assuming that there is no change in range by adding options to the car (excluding wheels) then you're correct, the difference would probably all come from the powertrain. I think that's a big "if" though, considering what some of these options are. I have no evidence either

Things like 30 speakers and a 1kw boost to speaker amplifier, HUD hardware and powering it, whatever is required for rear wheel steering and air suspension, surround cameras, seat ventilation, radiant heating hardware, headlight upgrade, driving assistant sensors and hardware, and whatever else. These could all be negligible to real world range, I don't know. My sense is that they're responsible for at least some of the difference between the M60 and base xDrive50 range estimates.

I also don't think the M60 is officially rated yet. When it is we might at least see the wheel differences.