Add your comments
Please keep your comments relevant to this blog entry. Email addresses are never displayed, but they are required to confirm your comments.
When you enter your name and email address, you'll be sent a link to confirm your comment, and a password. To leave another comment, just use that password.
To create a live link, simply type the URL (including http://) or email address and we will make it a live link for you. You can put up to 3 URLs in your comments. Line breaks and paragraphs are automatically converted — no need to use <p> or <br> tags.
Please note that gratuitous links to your site are viewed as spam and may result in removed comments.










Reader Comments for
Subscribe to this threadVIDEO: Production version of the BMW X6
(Page 1 of 1)
Carlos @ Dec 17th 2007 10:47AM
I'm not interested much in the car, but that twin turbo V8 has my attention. I'd love to see that engine in the M3 instead of that torque less wonder they have in it currently
Zane @ Dec 17th 2007 11:05AM
While I'm sure the 4.4L V8 has enough torque to turn a tornado inside out, the engine probably revs to a measly 6 or 7000 rpm. What good is that in a M3?
Carlos @ Dec 17th 2007 11:08AM
Because not everyone likes their engines to rev into the stratosphere.
Zane @ Dec 17th 2007 11:22AM
Well, the naturally aspirated engine has always been the ///M's trademark feature. If you really want something that doesn't rev until your spine tingles, you should really look at a 328 or 335.
Carlos @ Dec 17th 2007 11:26AM
Well I want the chassis and suspension improvements of the M3 over the 335i.
Zane @ Dec 17th 2007 12:46PM
Suspension upgrades to the 335i will cost a hell lot less than the price difference between the E92 335 and M3.