Rival: 2026 BMW iX3 reviews are impressive... R2 has its work cut out

[DuoRivians]

May 6th, this Wednesday, will be when the iX3 pricing and configurator goes live. Deliveries start in late summer

Sponsored

 

[DuoRivian]

EPA range? Thanks to the 112kWh battery pack. Put that in the R2 and we have what "range"?

Yes but also increased price. And yes EPA.

 

[DuoRivian]

The R2 will be quicker but much shorter range and slower charging. The m version of the iX3 will likely close the gap on the performance for those who think sub 5 second crossovers are too slow. The i3M has already been confirmed as a quad motor for 2028. If they bring that same powertrain to the ix3 (why???) it will definitely offer plenty of performance. BMW should be very competent in snow and gravel roads but definitely not an off road vehicle.

“Much” is subjective, 1.2s is something but 4.8 is still pretty quick. The extra 70+ miles of range is something too. Off road is for a minority of drivers (just like R1). Good to have choices so you can pick and choose what is important to you.

 

[TexasBob]

“Much” is subjective, 1.2s is something but 4.8 is still pretty quick. The extra 70+ miles of range is something too. Off road is for a minority of drivers (just like R1). Good to have choices so you can pick and choose what is important to you.

I agree for my personal use case as I mentioned in another post, 4.8 is more than good enough. I have a Dual motor that does 4.5 seconds (notionally) and a tri that does 3.1. You can feel the difference but I would not pay for the upgrade. My model and real data suggests that highway range difference will be more like 100 miles not 70 and the charging time on a 550 mile road trip will cut 45 minutes out of the day. Those are all very significant to me and much more so the a performance bump.

For those old enough to remember... the "slow" BMW iX3 is actually quicker than this 1985 Ferrari Testarossa supercar. I figure that is probably good enough for a family crossover. ¯\_(ツ)_/¯

 

[MaskedRacerX]

The performance spec between the BMW and R2 will be wildly different at $60k. Not really comparable given the massive speed difference.

People in that market segment largely don't care about 0-60 times when they're all "very quick" (and mostly MUCH quicker than CE vehicles in the same segment).

... and I was about too say, that seems to be the obsession of a certain owner group before I took a peek at a certain profile

 

[macb00kemdanno]

EPA range? Thanks to the 112kWh battery pack. Put that in the R2 and we have what "range"?

The R2 doesn’t and won’t have a 112 kWh battery so that question is an exercise is futility.

 

[DuoRivians]

The R2 doesn’t and won’t have a 112 kWh battery so that question is an exercise is futility.

Also, on a per kWh basis, the iX3 50 is cheaper than the R2 performance/launch edition

 

[Apprunner]

People in that market segment largely don't care about 0-60 times when they're all "very quick" (and mostly MUCH quicker than CE vehicles in the same segment).

... and I was about too say, that seems to be the obsession of a certain owner group before I took a peek at a certain profile

I like speed. Nothing wrong with that and willing to pay for it

We currently have an EV6 that does 0-60 in 4.8s and it just feels sluggish to me. If I drive around standard mode in my Tesla, its about 3.7s to 60 and that still feels slow to me so I'm aiming for the tri-motor around 3s flat. I could always go BMW later but I really dislike that interface. The software to me is very important and Rivian looks really great from that perspective.

 

[mkg3]

For those old enough to remember... the "slow" BMW iX3 is actually quicker than this 1985 Ferrari Testarossa supercar. I figure that is probably good enough for a family crossover. ¯\_(ツ)_/¯

The original point is very valid. I'll take the extra range over second or two to 60mph. This is exactly what's wrong with using 0-60mph metric. There is a world of differences between Tesarossa or any exotic car and SUVs, EV or ICE. No one buys an exotic based on 0-60 time.

From my perspective, any vehicle needs to be fast enough for its use-case AND quick enough to safely maneuver in traffic.

 

[Jeremy3292]

This may be off topic, but I just realized the reason R1T/S was limited to ~200 kW DC charging speed was not due to thermals or BMS issues, but the fact that CCS1 is hard limited to 500 amps (x 400 volts = 200 kW). So the R2 should just inherently charge faster than R1T/S due to it being NACS now + likely "better" battery cells overall + smaller battery + ribbon vs plate cooling/heating = faster 10 to 80%.

 

[MaskedRacerX]

The original point is very valid. I'll take the extra range over second or two to 60mph. This is exactly what's wrong with using 0-60mph metric. There is a world of differences between Tesarossa or any exotic car and SUVs, EV or ICE. No one buys an exotic based on 0-60 time.

From my perspective, any vehicle needs to be fast enough for its use-case AND quick enough to safely maneuver in traffic.

100%

The whole 0-60 obsession has gotten a little silly, especially for folks like me who used to do some drag racing (mostly as a test-n-tune for performance analysis), or run track events where 0-60 is almost meaningless (even did a Texas mile).

Honestly, it used to be way more fun, you'd line up your built motor Z06 up against a Civic with a turbo and never know the outcome.

Now you can just plop down $50K for a used Model S, and press the right pedal at a stop light, and wow, yeah, you're probably quicker than 95% of the vehicles on the road. Here's a cookie ...

 

[Apprunner]

Choice is a beautiful thing. If you want the slower version, more power to you. To each his own.

 

[mkg3]

Choice is a beautiful thing. If you want the slower version, more power to you. To each his own.

It's not about wanting a slower version. Its about the tradeoffs between performance and range for any EV.

As you've noted on anther post, you find 0-60 times sluggish. Rather, I would argue that you've gotten used to the instant torque and acceleration and you want that wow factor back. I get it. At first, I was amazed just how quick my Model 3 is compared to other vehicles I've owned. Since then, R1S is even quicker at 7k lbs!!

Currently, I am considering a Taycan to replace my daily driver Model 3 and there are lots of choices (typical for any Porsche) in terms of range and performance. Options goes from less than 2 sec to as "slow" as under 5 sec to 60. Range estimates are from 250-ish miles to 340-ish miles depending on the performance and the wheel choice. For me, I want to largest range with good performance (and certain features) - which is leading me to 4S currently.

In short, I have different vehicle for different purposes and I don't need all of them to go fast or quick as possible.. Its all use-case depends.

 

[MaskedRacerX]

It's not about wanting a slower version. Its about the tradeoffs between performance and range for any EV.

Also, other things, that are part of the overall experience.

Our 4-time-owner service experience with BMW has been fantastic, we had our iX in service back around Xmas (just the annual check and a software update that had to be done at the dealer) and as always, terrific experience, no questions asked loaner (another iX) for "as long as we needed", etc. Not suggesting that Rivian is/isn't deficient on the service side, but certainly a concern.

And heck, we really dig on CarPlay, it's absent in the Rivian.

I've owned extremely fast vehicles for decades (including an M3P we returned 3 months early on a lease ), and I've learned that there's so much more - and especially in the context of EVs - than "0-60". The dual motor/performance "entry level" Volvo EX30 does 0-60 in ~3.5s, hahaha, the Volvo engineers said something to the effect of, "You really can't even make an EV slow ...".

 

[Apprunner]

It's not about wanting a slower version. Its about the tradeoffs between performance and range for any EV.

As you've noted on anther post, you find 0-60 times sluggish. Rather, I would argue that you've gotten used to the instant torque and acceleration and you want that wow factor back. I get it. At first, I was amazed just how quick my Model 3 is compared to other vehicles I've owned. Since then, R1S is even quicker at 7k lbs!!

Currently, I am considering a Taycan to replace my daily driver Model 3 and there are lots of choices (typical for any Porsche) in terms of range and performance. Options goes from less than 2 sec to as "slow" as under 5 sec to 60. Range estimates are from 250-ish miles to 340-ish miles depending on the performance and the wheel choice. For me, I want to largest range with good performance (and certain features) - which is leading me to 4S currently.

In short, I have different vehicle for different purposes and I don't need all of them to go fast or quick as possible.. Its all use-case depends.

I understand and am willing to trade off range for performance. For my use case, I want my daily to be very quick and in the rare case I do road trip it, I guess i will have to wait longer at charging stations. I love the M3P but as I get older, my back doesn't like it as much. I want something about as quick as my current ride and the tri/quad RS1 is just too big for my liking. R2 is kinda the perfect size for what i'm looking for and I'll target the tri-motor for sure.

Sponsored