2001 X5

Which engine?

I hear X5s are very hard on their suspension bushings / ball joints and they don't last long.

in article Xns9BE049F847A50cehollomongmailcom@216.168.3.70, Carl Hollomon at snipped-for-privacy@youdont.com wrote on 4/1/09 4:16 AM:

2000 was the beta version .. your selection is a bit more improved.

get new tires, new brakes, and new O2 sensor out the door... so that the

120K maintenace stuff is not so expensive.

otherwise you got all the new technology in it that gives all the gas savings and stuff ...

The current contender for my affection, and currency, is a 2003 X5 3.0 with 60k US miles. Looks like a better model than the '01. It's had two owners, both in Florida, so no "real" winter driving.

John Burns wrote in news: snipped-for-privacy@unixnerd.demon.co.uk:

Thanks, Alan. I've found a 2003 model with the 3.0 engine which I'll be checking out shortly. Any other caveats with the '03? Other contenders are the MDX and maybe a Sequoia. This will be the family car; two adults, two boys aged 14 and 8.

Carl

"Alan B. Mac Farlane" wrote in news:C5FA325D.4C87% snipped-for-privacy@sonic.net:

I liked my MDX, but I like both of by X5's better due to their performance and trailering capabilities. The MDX has more rear seat room that you should really consider.

-dk

Having been steeped in the "minivan = family vehicle" mentality, I've always wished the X5 were a little bigger. But I love the marque, so we'll see...

D K wrote in news:uqudnUt9mtzzP0vUnZ2dnUVZ snipped-for-privacy@giganews.com:

It's been a few years since I test drove a Sequoia, but I remember that it had a column shift. This moved it down a couple of choices for me.

M

But no knocking knees problem...

DAS

To send an e-mail directly replace "spam" with "schmetterling"