Drag Racing 1/4 Mile times 0-60 Dyno Fast Cars Muscle Cars

Ford Mustang GT500 vs BMW x5M


 


More Videos...


Porsche 930 Turbo





CTS v vs X5M
Tuned X5M vs Pulley & Tune CTS V





Mustang shelby 2011 vs BMW M3
M3 Full system exuast , intake air and tune Shelby headers X-pipe pully intake air and tune





BMW X5 vs JEEP Grand Cherokee





BMW M3 takes on X5 M: Who Wins?
Have you been to the BMW Performance Driving School in South Carolina yet? If not please put it on your bucket list. Automotive Rhythms experienced two days at the school's adult playground with their M vehicles. We matched the 2011 M3 Coupe -- fitted with a 414 hp 4.0 liter V8 -- alongside the AWD X5 M with its 4.4 liter V8 and 555 twin turbocharged horses. Each vehicle was pushed to its respective limits proving why BMW is deserving of repping The Ultimate Driving Machine!





BMW M Garage قراج بي ام دبليو
قراج بي ام دبليو BMW M Garage





2015 BMW X5 vs. 2015 Range Rover Sport
Head-to-head: 2014 Range Rover Sport vs. 2014 BMW X5 Today’s luxury SUVs are essentially luxury sedans on stilts, withal all the prestige and performance you could want. But not all of these Lux-u-vees are created equal, so we compare two of the very best, the Land Rover Range Rover Sport and the BMW X5. Both are all-new and massively improved for 2014. But which one wins? LED lighting in the front and rear, a chunky fender vent, and a chiseled shape make the 2014 Range Rover Sport a delight to look at. When it comes to testing two premium luxury SUVs that can push their price-tags into six figures, one thing is certain: neither is going to stink up the place. That’s why comparing the all-new 2014 BMW X5 and just-as-new Land Rover Range Rover Sport is like deciding between crème brûlée and crème caramel…they’re both delicious (and highly caloric). But alas, they have very different characters. Style Statements If you can only drive one at a time, and if it was my money, I’d go with the Land Rover Range Rover Sport. Why? The 2014 BMW X5’s new exterior is dowdier than before, with slab sides and a blunter nose. We wouldn’t say the X5 is unattractive, but its design relies on things like nifty LED lights and various decorative ornaments on the fasciae and body-sides to dress up the styling. Like flat-front khakis and a pastel polo shirt; the X5 is country-club correct, if not terribly interesting. The Range Rover Sport has plenty of decoration on the exterior too. This includes sleek LED lighting at the front and rear, as well as a chunky fender vent. The chiseled shape is simply more distinctive than the BMW. Range Rover also offers countless customization opportunities, including an available contrast-color roof treatment. The clear fashion-statement winner here is definitely the Rover. The 2014 BMW X5 may not be the hottest looking thing, but it does the trick. Cabin Comfort Both of these vehicles have opulent cabins, with even more premium materials and features on the options lists. But the Bimmer bests the Range Rover Sport in two key areas: space (there’s more of it, with room for up to seven passengers) and the control interface. BMW has worked for years to perfect its hockey-puck-and-screen iDrive infotainment system, and now it works brilliantly. The Range Rover Sport can only seat five, and for infotainment, it uses a touch screen interface that can’t multitask terribly well and is annoyingly slow to respond to inputs. That said, the seats are wonderful (as they are in the Bimmer, to be fair), and Rover’s boxy interior design is quite regal and British in character. The 2014 BMW X5 may not be the hottest looking thing, but it does the trick. Cabin Comfort Both of these vehicles have opulent cabins, with even more premium materials and features on the options lists. But the Bimmer bests the Range Rover Sport in two key areas: space (there’s more of it, with room for up to seven passengers) and the control interface. BMW has worked for years to perfect its hockey-puck-and-screen iDrive infotainment system, and now it works brilliantly. The Range Rover Sport can only seat five, and for infotainment, it uses a touch screen interface that can’t multitask terribly well and is annoyingly slow to respond to inputs. That said, the seats are wonderful (as they are in the Bimmer, to be fair), and Rover’s boxy interior design is quite regal and British in character. By contrast, the X5’s cabin is modern and sleek – but its business-like sterility can also work against it. In terms of luxury and style, this contest is a draw. Deciding between these luxury sport utilities comes down to an emotional connection to the vehicle. After all, that’s something a person ought to have when plunking down $60K—$100K for a vehicle. Did we find ourselves more excited about hopping into the cool and functional X5, or the character-rich Range Rover Sport? In terms of overall character, the Range Rover Sport is the winner. 2015 Lexus NX vs. 2015 Audi Q5 http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MoIx3NqZ1zk 2014 Audi Q5 vs. 2014 Mercedes-Benz GLK 250 BlueTEC http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=c98GbcfHa1E 2015 Range Rover Sport vs. 2014 Jeep Grand Cherokee 2015 Land Rover Range Rover Evoque 2014 AUDİ Q5 vs. 2014 Land Rover Range Rover Evoque http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TvFuYpAWP2I 2014 Infiniti QX70 2014 Porsche Cayenne





E60 M5 vs X5M Race
BMW E60 M5 vs BMW X5M 2011 Bavarian Street Racing





2014 BMW X5 Interior - Awesome!!!
Subscribe https://www.youtube.com/user/myDriftFun?sub_confirmation=1 New 2014 BMW X5 interior review Music: The_Kyoto_Connection_-_09_-_Hachik­o_The_Faithtful_Dog





Drag Race X5M vs X6M
Test aceleración de modelos ///M en Drive Tour M Lleida.





Nissan GT-R(T-Killah) vs BMW X5M
Один из заездов открытия драг фестиваля в Орловском аэропорту 26 мая 2012г. канал на youtube: http://www.youtube.com/user/imax057 канал vkontakte: http://vk.com/sgt_channel





GT500 Super Snake vs. BMW M5
Closed Course. BMW M5 V10 600HP vs GT500 Super Snake V8 Supercharged 750HP





Ford Mustang GT500 vs Chrysler 300C vs Mercedes C63 AMG vs BMW M6
Следующий этап состоится 19 и 20 мая 2012. Заказ билетов по телефону +7 (495) 768-77-88 Next Event, May 19-20, 2012 Photos: http://www.dragtimes.info/en/gallery/events/50/ Facebook: http://www.facebook.com/pages/Dragtimes/173052629411578 Twitter: https://twitter.com/#!/dragtimes_info http://www.moscowunlim.ru/ http://www.dragtimes.info/forum/showthread.php?t=1776





Shelby GT 500 vs BMW M3
Shelby GT 500 vs BMW M3





BMW X5 M acceleration beschleunigung 0-265 km/h without m-power button





Which car is faster? Which Car is Faster?




Similar 1/4 mile timeslips to browse:

1969 Ford Mustang : 6.860 @ 204.000
Bill Sexton, Engine: 712ci Pontiac built by Sonny Leonard,


1969 Ford Mustang : 7.170 @ 177.000
CARL EPPLE, Engine: 572CI SVO 460, Tires: 33X10.5W MICKY THOMP


1969 Ford Mustang Mach 1: 7.670 @ 178.210
Phil Manquen - Walt Drakeford, Engine: 602 CI, Tires: 10.5


1987 Ford Mustang Turbo: 7.816 @ 180.800
Brad, Engine: 347CI, Turbos: Precision 98.5mm Tires: 28 x 10.5 MTs


1989 Ford Mustang lx: 7.850 @ 174.000
jorge fretts, Engine: 598, Tires: 33x10.5w


1995 Ford Mustang Cobra: 7.889 @ 197.360
Jim Mills, Engine: 427 Windsor, Turbos: Twin GT47-88 Tires: M/T 325/50/15 Radials


2007 Ford Mustang Super GT500 Twin Turbo: 7.890 @ 175.220
EV, Engine: Built 5.4L Aluminum Engine, Turbos: Twin 67mm Precision Turbos


1989 Ford Mustang LX Hatchback 10.5 tire: 8.000 @ 170.000
Marshall Hancock, Engine: 572 ci, Supercharger: n/a Turbos: n/a Tires: M/T


1986 Ford Mustang THE STAMPEEDE BANDIT: 8.013 @ 170.033
Larry Gotreaux, Engine: BBF-ELIMINATOR-460-605ci, by Tims Engines, Denham Springs,, Supercharger: N/A Turbos: N/A Tires: 27x15 GY & 33.5x17x15W-GY-D1


1993 Ford Mustang LX: 8.390 @ 167.870
Lee Howie, Engine: Bennett, Turbos: 1 Precision PT90 Tires: DOT


1987 Ford Mustang coupe: 8.400 @ 162.370
Todd, Engine: 385ci,


1989 Ford Mustang coupe: 8.420 @ 167.000
Ryan Ellington, Engine: sbc 434, Tires: mt 275/60/15 drag radial


1991 Ford Mustang GT: 8.520 @ 172.700
PRO LARRY, Engine: 351W, Supercharger: NA Turbos: NA Tires: NA


1990 Ford Mustang GT: 8.527 @ 172.300
PRO LARRY AND BRANDON G.T, Engine: 351W, Tires: 10.5 SLICK'S


1993 Ford Mustang Cobra 363 Nitrous: 8.541 @ 152.870
CJ Williams, Engine: 363,


2006 Ford Mustang GT: 8.579 @ 158.780
Paul Fercho, Engine: 572 CID big block ford, Supercharger: none Turbos: none Tires: M/T 29.5X10.5WX15 Slicks


1985 Ford Mustang lx: 8.600 @ 159.000
mike pritchard, Engine: 537ci, Tires: 30x13.50 et streets


2005 Ford Mustang GT 281 CI 80mm Turbo: 8.720 @ 155.000
Mark , Engine: 281 CI, Turbos: 80mm


1990 Ford Mustang LX Coupe: 8.780 @ 154.000
Clint Lynch, Engine: 418 windsor, Tires: 28x10.5


1991 Ford Mustang Turbo: 8.800 @ 161.000
Mike, Engine: 306CI, Turbos: Air Research 91mm Tires: 28X13.5X15 ET STREETS.


 


©2015 DragTimes - Disclaimer - Contact Us