From £112,5806

Does only the second-ever bespoke M car leave us excited about the future, or longing for the past?

There remain some at BMW who still rue the company’s decision not to follow up the M1 supercar of 1978 with a second-generation model. And perhaps then a third, fourth and fifth. They believe such a lineage would have stood the company in excellent stead, because – hey, look what Porsche achieved from a brand perspective with the timeless 911.

You can imagine how delighted these people were when mutterings on another M-bespoke creation – the very first since the M1 – began to circulate in the 2010s. It’s also not hard to imagine how disheartened they were when it became obvious that this car would in fact take the form of a large, hybridised SUV.

We would be lying if we said we didn’t share some of that disappointment, but the reality is that the performance SUV market is currently propping up some rather illustrious companies. In short, there appeared to be a business case for the hulking BMW XM.

Luxury performance SUVs are also often grudgingly good. Certain derivatives of the Porsche Cayenne and the Aston Martin DBX can reasonably be claimed to be ‘driver’s cars’. When you consider the magic that M can work on a full-size saloon, it was no stretch to imagine an M SUV being very capable indeed, and at a price the ultra-premium marques couldn’t match.

We’ve waited three years to get our hands on an XM in the UK, in order to subject one of these highly divisive vehicles to proper road test scrutiny. We’ll do it with an open mind, because while the exterior design has no shortage of critics, the lavish cabin is another matter, and BMW has also gone all out on this car from a hardware perspective. The likes of the old M5 CS and the current PHEV M5 demonstrate how well the company can disguise mass and fine-tune electronic chassis systems for true driver appeal. If the XM is able to hoick up its dirndl and dance on the table, it may win a few more fans.

Advertisement
Back to top

The headline-making model is the 4.4-litre V8 hybrid, which first appeared in 2023 and donated much of its powertrain to the first PHEV M5. Here, however, we test the entry-level XM 50e, which uses a 3.0-litre six-cylinder engine. It arrived in 2023 as a more emissions- and wallet-friendly model, and at £113,000 is priced in line with similarly punchy versions of the Cayenne and Range Rover Sport.

DESIGN & STYLING

7
BMW XM review 2025 002

It is difficult to know where to begin with the XM’s brutish exterior design, and it’s fair to say the market has also been unsure. In the six-figure price bracket, looks matter, and the simple fact is that the XM is the slowest-selling car BMW makes, now that i3 production has ended. We would only highlight the rising beltline, prodigiously broad tail and caricaturish silhouette, and move on to more mechanical matters.

On our scales, even the junior partner in the XM line-up weighed 2639kg. That makes it 93kg heavier than the V8-engined (BMW-sourced) Range Rover Sport SV, despite that car’s additional cylinders and off-road chassis hardware. The XM is also 39kg heavier than a LWB Bentley Bentayga. The mitigating factor is that the BMW carries a near-30kWh battery pack beneath the rear passenger compartment, though there’s no escaping the fact that it is a heavy machine given its driver-focused pretensions. At least the weight distribution is excellent. A 52% rear bias is about perfect, especially in a class when most cars are heavier towards nose than tail.

The car’s unmissable grilles are made even more glaring by unbroken illumination rings, recently seen on the M5. Three years on from launch the proportions of the XM’s snout still take some adjusting to – it’s huge in relation to the slimline headlights to either side

That kerb weight starts to make more sense when you consider the size of the XM. At 5110mm long and 2235mm wide, the XM’s footprint is considerably greater than that of a Cayenne or Range Rover Sport. In fact, the car is longer than a Range Rover proper, and so it would be a mistake to consider the XM anything other than a full-size SUV. The 3105mm wheelbase is identical to that of the seven-seat X7.

Underneath the bluff bonnet sits the first real surprise. BMW may bill the XM as an M car but the 50e uses not the twin-turbo S58 straight six from the M3 and co but the milder, single-turbo B58, today found in cars ranging from the Morgan Supersport to the Ineos Grenadier. Here it makes 308bhp at 5000-6500rpm – a figure that swells to 469bhp when you factor in the gearbox-integrated permanent magnet synchronous motor to which it is mated. Whether you go for the 644bhp V8 XM or the six-cylinder car, that gearbox is a ZF-sourced eight-speed automatic with identical ratios to that of the M5 but a longer final drive.

Downstream you will find one of the more significant differences between the two strains of XM. Only the V8 model is fitted with the torque-vectoring M Sport differential. The 50e does without, using only a multi-plate clutch that continuously alters the torque split front to rear, though it can use the brakes to simulate torque vectoring. 

Suspension is via double wishbones at the front with a five-link set-up at the back. Presumably in the interests of mechanical transparency, BMW has elected not to use air springs on the XM. Instead the car gets adaptive dampers and steel coil springs. Both derivatives also feature active anti-roll bars (on a dedicated 48V circuit) and rear-axle steering. Note that the steering ratio and contact patch is the same for both models.

Elsewhere, the XM has what BMW describes as a ‘second level’ of control arms that mean the dampers are almost completely isolated from lateral forces. The camber arms are also aerodynamically optimised (every little helps when you’re mitigating for a frontal area like that), and the rear springs are unusually long in terms of rebound travel, supposedly to improve traction and comfort.

The XM hails from BMW’s vast Spartanburg plant in the US, where it takes three workers to feed the car’s vast roofliner in through the windscreen aperture. Underpinning the car is the same CLAR architecture used for all of BMW’s longitudinally engined models, and for this application it’s pushed close to the limits of its adaptability.

INTERIOR

8
BMW XM review 2025 010

This is arguably the strongest card the XM plays, despite some caveats.

In 2025 it is obvious this cabin layout hails from a slightly older BMW playbook, but that is no bad thing. Our test car’s cool metal trim blended with matt carbonfibre and sumptuous leathers to excellent effect. There is a conspicuous lack of the transparent plastic found on the new M5, and the gearlever – a protuberance BMW now prefers to do without – feels fabulously expensive. Sturdy physical switchgear adorns the door cards, and the matching of the Alcantara-like roof and pillar trim to the dashboard is very neat indeed. In general the atmosphere of the place reminds us of Alpina’s historically opulent takes on the 7 Series.

Passengers will be lavishly cosseted, sure, but the car’s steeply rising beltline and tinted rear windows ensure the space captures something of a basement-bar vibe

For a full-size SUV, this is also an excellent driving environment, with broad adjustability and the M Multifunctional seats (which can tip forward and back from the shoulder point) that BMW only fits to its most senior performance cars.

It’s also good to find that the XM’s dashboard is tilted towards the driver, though no more than you would find in an X5 M. Atop it sits BMW’s squared-off merger of instrument binnacle and infotainment, though such is the scope of this cabin that the set-up doesn’t feel overbearingly large, as it does in other models. The XM feels like a car, not a tech-fest.

The software is the latest iDrive 8.5. The menus remain a little icon-heavy and there is certainly some style over substance in the home screen, but there’s no shortage of information and the wireless smartphone mirroring is crisp and responsive. The phone charging pad does get overly hot, however.

From the driver’s perspective, the XM experience is ergonomically correct and has a quality that justifies the price. This is, however, rather a louche environment by typical M standards, particularly with the baseball-glove leather of our test car, and things only get more unexpected in the rear.

It starts with the cushions, which are not especially ‘M’, even if they do make a real difference to comfort. Neither is the name given to this space: M Lounge. Your typical M5 owner is going to find much of this OTT, but there’s no question that the sculptural, wrap-around second row of the XM is a comfy place to be, and the measured knee room of 790mm is better than that of the Range Rover Sport (750mm), if 10mm shy of the Aston Martin DBX. The nightclub vibe continues with the roof. Despite appearance, this is not a cover that retracts to reveal glass. This contoured panel is the event itself, with side lighting that reflects the driving mode. Presumably if the edges glow a livid red, back-row passengers should expect an imminent multi-car overtake.

The boot floor is high on account of the fuel tank and the space needed for the V8 XM’s differential housing. However, it’s still spacious, with a useful squared-off aperture, and the second-row seats fold flat. One drawback is that there is no underfloor cubby for the charge cable. You get a posh duffel bag.

ENGINES & PERFORMANCE

6
BMW XM review 2025 021

This application of the B58 – never before seen action in an M car – is curious not least because BMW has tuned it to sound a bit like the full-bore, twin-turbo S58, though its naturally nasal tone is still recognisable. There is synthesised sound at play for sure, and the unit is oddly meek if you switch off the sport exhaust (on by default).

When we tested the V8 XM in the US, it was extremely quick but prone to driveline shunt during downshifts at lower speeds. We also didn’t like the fact that, if you were moving under electric power and provoked the engine into life by pressing the accelerator down far enough, the merging of the two sources wasn’t also especially smooth. It all felt a bit unfinished.

Turn off the stability control and you can access a 4WD Sand driving mode, which primes the xDrive system and the differential’s locking characteristics for dunes. It’s like Sabbia mode in the Urus.

The six-cylinder 50e suffers from the same driveline shunt, but is perhaps a little less grumpy in the way it initially blends combustion into electric propulsion. There are, by the way, three modes: Hybrid for a ‘smart’ blend, Electric for pure EV driving, and eControl to recharge the battery on the move. Beyond this you can select the usual Comfort, Sport and Sport Plus modes, plus two recuperation modes, albeit with no true coasting.

Our test car’s 5.0sec 0-60mph is middling for a car of this ilk. The track surface was damp but traction was still essentially flawless, so a sloppy getaway wasn’t a factor. That is, in fairness, just as quick as the V8-engined Porsche Cayenne S. However, it’s a good second slower than a Range Rover Sport SV. The BMW’s 5.4sec 30-70mph time in fourth highlights decent tractability, but most testers felt a bona fide M product looking as pugnacious as the XM does ought to have a little more urgency about it when you really put your foot down. The V8 version delivers this and then some; the 50e notably less so.

The delivery of drive unfolds neatly, at least. Put your foot down at, say, 1600rpm in third and torque from the electric motor instantly spikes before dropping off as the engine hits its stride. The electric motor then returns to its 7000rpm maximum as the engine surges towards its own 6500rpm peak. The delivery is linear, and roll-on response never anything less than gratifyingly sharp, even if upshifts are on the stately side for an M car.

And that’s the nub of the problem here. This is a versatile powertrain that, despite some shortcomings, is reasonably easy company and has decent drivability in EV mode. The problem is that it doesn’t feel very M. Prospective owners may wonder if the V8 in the similarly priced X7 M60i, which is more characterful and decadently smooth, is a better partner. It’s a sentiment sure to be reinforced once you have experienced the XM’s road manners, as we will now come to.

RIDE & HANDLING

5
BMW XM review 2025 024

The XM is rather a complicated car to assess in matters of ride and handling. Its fundamental cornering balance is strong, as shown by the fact that on track you can load up the outside suspension on a trailing brake and tease the rear axle out of line with an ease that should be beyond any 4WD super-SUV the wrong side of 2.6 tonnes. There is also integrity – a confident heft – in the well-sped steering, which is recognisably M. The same is mostly true for the body control when you have the dampers in their sportier settings. It is close but not cast-iron, and gives the XM raw agility through transitions that is beyond what its main rivals demonstrate, Cayenne excepted.

But something is off. The attempt to put genuine M5 dynamic DNA into a heavy car with a raised centre of gravity and considerable unsprung masses has gone awry.

You wonder how much air springs might have improved the recipe. Perhaps not as much as you’d think. The XM’s ride-related maladies aren’t about the long-wave gait; they feel a bit more fundamental.

You sense it most in the slight stiction and inconsistencies of the steering motion. It’s also discernible in the slightly non-linear way that roll is taken up. You’re never quite sure just how far, and how fast, the body is going to tilt. It’s a subtle quirk and not one that is hugely problematic on the road, but it all feeds into a sense of unease when it comes to driving the XM in committed fashion. Back off a touch and the cohesiveness returns to some extent, but the XM is never what you would call elegant.

In any case, backing off and simply letting the XM flow this way and that comes with its own frustrations. In the UK the car’s ride quality isn’t in any way satisfactory, even on the smaller, 22in rims. The seats may be superb and the isolation from road roar impressive (not so wind noise from the wing mirrors), but it’s all for nought when the suspension is this reactive. It is passably adept at motorway cruising but any imperfection in the road and the XM will seemingly magnify it. It is the same problem M-badged SUVs have shown in the past, notably the X3 M, and more than anything else undermines the case for the XM as a serious luxury performance SUV.

MPG & RUNNING COSTS

7
BMW XM review 2025 001

The XM 50e starts at £113k – some £41k less than the V8 version, so if you are buying the XM mostly for its presence and cabin ambience, there’s clearly good reason to consider the less bombastic car.

The standard equipment list is also fairly generous, extending to those magnificent seats, soft-close doors, velour floor mats and Comfort Pack, which includes the massage function and heated armrests. Owners looking to enhance the car’s extroversion will want to choose a colour from the vast array of ‘Individual Special’ paints, at a cost of £6055. Opting for 23in wheels will add another £3k.

In daily use don’t expect much in the way of economy if you’re regularly using the engine. Despite being the downsized option, it still manages only 25mpg or so at a cruise. On low-speed routes your economy will depend on how often you can charge the XM (maximum rate 11kW). We averaged 2.2mpkWh in EV mode for a real-world range of 57 miles (WLTP: 52 miles), which is towards the top of what luxury PHEV SUVs currently offer. The Range Rover P550e we tested earlier this year returned 44 miles and the new M5 only 35 miles.

VERDICT

6
BMW XM review 2025 029

In these tough commercial times, you can’t judge BMW too harshly for launching what it has billed as a proper M-devised SUV – not when Porsche, Aston Martin and even Lamborghini are all making hay in the segment.

What’s less excusable from an operation of this stature is the end result. Even putting the obtuse design aside, in the XM there is little of the dynamic verve that makes an M5 so effective. This is especially true of the 50e variant, which lacks the flagship derivative’s hulking V8 powertrain, as well as at least one important piece of chassis hardware.

Maybe air springs aren’t such a bad idea, M? An SUV should ride quite a bit better in this respect.

However, this car’s core failing is simple ride quality. The XM may work well on glass-smooth roads in Germany and the US, but in the UK it is genuinely challenging to live with. And that is a shame, in light of the car’s superb if quirky cabin, and strong EV-running credentials.

Richard Lane

Richard Lane
Title: Deputy road test editor

Richard is Autocar's deputy road test editor. He previously worked at Evo magazine. His role involves travelling far and wide to be among the first to drive new cars. That or heading up to Nuneaton, to fix telemetry gear to test cars at MIRA proving ground and see how faithfully they meet their makers' claims. 

He's also a feature-writer for the magazine, a columnist, and can be often found on Autocar's YouTube channel. 

Highlights at Autocar include a class win while driving a Bowler Defender in the British Cross Country Championship, riding shotgun with a flat-out Walter Röhrl, and setting the magazine's fastest road-test lap-time to date at the wheel of a Ferrari 296 GTB. Nursing a stricken Jeep up 2950ft to the top of a deserted Grossglockner Pass is also in the mix.