The BMW X6 is priced comparably to the equivalent X5 models, although options differ a little. Standard equipment is reasonable, though there is an argument that a CD changer and satellite navigation should be standard. The options on our test car added the best part of £10,000, at which point the range has by some margin passed its sweet spot.
Running costs are respectable for a car of this size. It is predicted to depreciate in line with its competitors. Official emissions figures mean company buyers are only likely to contemplate the diesels.
But what it is not is frugal. The xDrive30d’s official combined consumption figure is 38.2mpg and the touring figure just over 40mpg, but we couldn’t get anywhere near BMW’s claims for the X6. We'd expect similar disparities to emerge across the range.
As you’d expect, the M version does the planet no favours with CO2 of 325g/km and claimed economy of 20.3mpg. The xDrive50i doesn’t do much better with an average of 22.6mpg. The 35i gets closer to a 30mpg claimed average at 28.0mpg. It’s no surprise, unless performance is your ultimate goal, that most buyers favour the pacey diesels.
Does the M50d offer the ideal compromise? It's real-world pace is on a par with the X6M, yet its combined fuel consumption is only fractionally worse than that of the xDrive30d’s 38.2mpg, at 36.7. Of course, this would be difficult to match with the performance on offer, but to add so much extra power for seemingly little cost appears remarkable.
That said, the X6 compares well with rivals such as the Range Rover Sport or Porsche Cayenne, none of which can match the BMW’s economy figures. The X6 also compares well when it comes to resale values; the 35d, as the most popular variant, should hold on to around half of its original price after three years.