BMW X5 xDrive40e Gets Official EPA Ratings

OCT 21 2015 BY ERIC LOVEDAY 33

BMW X5 xDrive40e US Window Sticker (click to enlarge)

BMW X5 xDrive40e US Window Sticker (click to enlarge)

We’ve seen the window sticker already for the BMW X5 xDrive40e (worst name ever for a plug-in vehicle) that estimates the BMW’s all-electric range at 13 miles and MPGe at 59, but now we’ve got all the data on how those numbers were calculated.

Here’s a look at battery charge time, total range, PHEV composite MPG (city, highway,combined) and electric range (city, highway, combined).  City and highway ranges are both very similar -coming in at 13.2 miles and 13.95 miles respectively.

BMW X5 PHEV EPA Ratings

BMW X5 PHEV EPA Ratings

And below is a look at the MPG breakdown (city, highway, combined)

BMW X5 PHEV EPA Ratings

BMW X5 PHEV EPA Ratings

Editor’s Note:  There is currently a bit of confusion about range data – at least fractionally.  The online EPA website shows the X5 xDrive40 having 14 miles of range, which appears to be a rounding up of the number that we also find in the chart.  However, the EPA conclusion/status is listed as 13 miles, and the actual Monroney sticker (which is required by law), lists the BMW at 13 miles.

At this point we assume the online public data will ultimately be adjusted to 13 miles to reflect the internal conclusion and the sticker on the car.

Deliveries of the BMW X5 PHEV (much simpler name) are underway right now in the U.S. If you’d like to configure your own X5 plug-in, you can do so by first clicking here.

BMX X5 xDrive40e Specs

BMX X5 xDrive40e Specs

Categories: BMW

Tags:

Leave a Reply

33 Comments on "BMW X5 xDrive40e Gets Official EPA Ratings"

newest oldest most voted

If you look closely, the 13 miles range is labeled as “Electricity + Gasoline” and in smaller letters below that is a “All Electric Range = 0-12 miles”. Can we say “Greenwashing”?

Sorry, this seems like an overpriced guilt reduction device, no more.

Don’t they do that a lot on PHEV’s? The window sticker for my Energi says the same thing.

Apparently it only represents driving in auto mode rather than taking the time to change it to electric-only mode.

http://www.fueleconomy.gov/feg/Find.do?action=sbs&id=37068&id=36772

The EPA hasn’t updated the information in their online database; I assume the window sticker pictured in the article is more accurate.

Under the EPA nominal case conditions (45% city, 55% highway, 15k miles/year), the xDrive40e will use 400 gallons of gasoline per year and 3.05 MWh. The “smallest” X5, the xDrive35i, uses 750 gallons of gasoline per year.

Preliminary information suggests the xDrive40e will cost about the same as the xDrive35i after the federal tax credit. In many states, choosing the plugin xDrive40e will save a similar amount of CO2 and fuel as other similar choices.

– Volt (100 gallons, 3.6 MWh) vs Cruze (500 gallons)
– Fusion Energi (200 gallons, 2.7 MWh) vs Fusion 2.5 (600 gallons)

13 miles? PATHETIC. I thought this car was going to be a big hit for them. But 13 miles? C’mon. Put some effort into it

These short-electric-range PHEVs are the “European Compliance Cars”.

Rather this than a diesel

Why even bother with a plug? Just make it a strong hybrid at this point.

my thinking is that the objectives are oriented toward european regulatory mandates: 1) provide just enough range for driving in congestion zones (which means that there is a hold mode); and 2) to reduce the co2 rating for the car (because cars in europe are taxed according to the co2 rating – something that should be done in the U.S. but that would be decried as a case of importing “european socialism”).

european cars are not serious attempts at providing enough range for any kind of daily driving scenario as is the case with gm.

Well, especially since half of our congress probably believes climate change is a scam, so what incentive do they have to push measures like that?

All this talk of linking EV with CO2 is probably driving half the US away from EV. As a RWNJ (right wing nut job), EV is perfect. CO2 reduction doesn’t even enter into the picture.

First, we get more of our tax money back from the government via EV subsidy. No, this isn’t welfare if you’re getting back what you paid.

Second, we don’t pay for imported energy where 60% of oil for gas is imports while 0% of electricity comes from imports. We probably pay very small fraction of oil imports directly to black market ISIS, but small fraction of millions of barrel is still huge amount of money.

Third, I’m sure there’s beneficial link to guns I take to shooting range. Maybe lack of backfire reduces risk of false alerts?

I’m sure there are lot more benefits for right wingers, such as US leading the way in EV technology (thank you Tesla and GM!)

Totally agree. It’s a big mistake to make EVs synonymous with Climate change activism. If that’s your reason for buying one, great, but making the two inseparable only alienates a significant portion of the population. One can claim that climate change deniers or people who just don’t think it’s a top priority are idiots, but if you want those idiots to buy EVs to fend off climate change, then it is in your best interests to not promote the stereotype that EV owners are climate activist tree huggers. Truth is, an EVs effect on the climate is the most vague and difficult-to-quantify major advantage of EV ownership, if you ask me. Sure, you can figure out how many lbs of CO2 you’ve saved, but that’s meaningless to most people. Saving money on gas is something people can quantify, though. If I say they’ll save $50/month on gas, they say ‘Wow, really?’ If I say they’ll save 2000 lb of CO2 per year, they’d stare at me like I’m talking like the teacher from Charlie Brown. Additionally, most people would immediately understand the advantage of never going to a gas station again, or like the feeling of instant torque. However, climate/CO2… Read more »

Now that Exxon has been exposed researching global warming back in the ’80s and preparing to exploit it to thaw out the Arctic for even more drilling (which has indeed occurred), then lying about it all, will that make “alienated” deniers realize they’ve been played for suckers by billionaires since Day 1? I mean, what the Hell will it take?

The question is somewhat immaterial to my point: Many people, regardless of belief about climate change, don’t want to drive a car that’s synonymous with environmental activists. In California maybe that sales pitch works, but in a big chunk of the country, they aren’t going to like being stereotyped as a tree-hugger whether the activists are right or not.

to take the benzo s-class as an example, the s500 benzo is rated at about 210 g/km where the phev s500 is rated at 65 g/km. the differencein out of pocket terms? in the uk, you pay an annual tax of £290 for the s500 where you pay no tax for the phev s500. in addition, you would also pay a daily congestion charge of £11.50 to drive the s500 in central london where you pay no congestion charge with the phev s500. so while the aer of the benzo phev s-class may be meager, it can result in nearly £3,200/year is reduced taxes and congestion charges.

imagine the behavior modification that could be achieved in this country if we had a taxing structure in which people paid $5,000/year more to drive an ice versus driving a *ev (not to mention the savings of electricity vs gasoline). when viewed in those terms, it makes perfect sense for the federal government to give purchasers of legitimate *ev’s a $7,500 tax credit.

The only silver-lining I can see, is that whoever buys these low-range plug-ins will get bit by the EV bug, and will want more AER after driving them 2 weeks. This should influence their future purchasing decisions.

a benzo is a *smooth* driving automobile; tesla has nothing on mercedes-benz when it comes to building smooth driving automobiles. if i hit the numbers on the lottery tomorrow night, i’m getting a benzo s-class, then i’m getting a bentley continental gt speed:

http://www.bentleymotors.com/content/dam/bentley/Master/Models/Hero/Continental_GT_Speed/GT_Profile_Speed%201920%20x%20670.jpg/_jcr_content/renditions/original.image_file.1366.477.file/GT_Profile_Speed%201920%20x%20670.jpg

and then i’ll get a model x.

Nothing is smoother than linear (and instant) EV driving. Gassers, no matter how many gears, will never be able to compete.

No tax incentives on hybrids. Add a plug, and the cost could be less than a hybrid due to tax breaks and state rebates.

You’re thinking about America. We’re talking about the EU here. A lot of EU states offer smaller rebates for hybrids. This means a pre-incentive price parity PHEV is actually cheaper to buy than the regular counterpart.

A 9kWh battery filled with electricity from the grid will displace at least as much gasoline in this car as it would a smaller sedan. Even if that doesn’t translate to a very significant all electric range, it does show up in the overall fuel economy, and in terms of annual fuel consumption, going from 20mpg to 30mpg leads to much more savings than going from 40mpg to 60mpg.

Wait, it’s not April 1 yet is it?

think the classic no-nonsense naming convention would do it:
X5 2.0e
done
let the ‘performance’ speak for itself again..

It’s a good vehicle to buy used in 3 years.

Curb weight: 5220 lbs. I’m betting that its gross vehicle weight will also be more than 6000 lbs. Hey, does that qualify it for a $25K tax deduction for business use, liek the Model X?

If I were them, I’d install some (removable) lead weights in there so that people could claim the credit and then remove the weights for better performance.

Stupid law deserves silly response.

Turns out it does have a gross vehicle weight of 2980 kgs ( 6570 lbs). Lots of details here. Waiting to see a “Save $25,000 on a BMW x5Xdrive” article on insideevs and elsewhere.

http://www.topgear.com/car-reviews/bmw/x5x6/xdrive40e-se-5dr-auto/spec
Luggage Capacity (Seats Up) 500l
Gross Vehicle Weight 2,980kg
Wheelbase 2,933mm
Minimum Kerbweight 2,230kg
Max. Roof Load 100kg
Max. Towing Weight – Braked 2,700kg ( Got that Model X’ers? That’s 5952 lbs)
Max. Towing Weight – Unbraked 750kg
Max. Loading Weight 750kg

Outlander 25 miles…

I generally post in defense of PHEV’s with short range with some math to show how even a short range PHEV like the Outlander can save lots of gasoline. Sometimes as many gallons of gas as the median Leaf owner saves over the median number of miles that Leaf’s are driven each year.

But the math just doesn’t work for this vehicle.

It would really only save a significant amount of gas in driving patterns that would be very unusual in the US, like driving only around 5000 miles, without any road trips.

This is about at the level of the original Prius PHEV. And I predict about the same fate for it.

I drove it a few weeks ago and it has an Eco Pro Plus EV only mode, was pretty amazing.

But at the tested $77k, get the Model X : )

24 MPG / 59 MPGe / 13 AER
I would never buy this car. Across the board, these numbers are horrible.

Vehicles like this are a joke. How many people who actually buy one will feel any motivation at all to actually plug the blasted thing in after the first couple of weeks? I’d guess it’s a very tiny percentage, in stark contrast to the Volt owners, many of whom are downright fanatical about driving on electrons.

That’s 10 – AA batteries right…

No, 20 AA Batteries and when you order now you get 20 AA extra batteries!

The whole point is that in Europa not only the standard ICE consumption test is way to optimistic, if you add a plug suddenly your car seems so green that it sucks CO2 out of the air.

These kind of cars are made only to show a low CO2 production on paper. Since carmakers have to stay under a certain amount of CO2 FOR THE WHOLE RANGE of models, this is the way to do it. Even the numbers sold do not matter, just all the available models together.

These indeed are the European compliance cars.