carsnob

My daughter has an '05 BMW X3 and I enjoy driving it, the nice handling and the airyness of the panoramic roof. I was thinking of switching her to a GLK since I'm a big MB fan. (I've an S 600).
Has anyone converted from an X3? If so, what do you think? Thanks!

KenNinBC

I haven't 'switched', but I test drove both the X3 and the GLK recently. I chose the GLK. The X3 beats the GLK on cornering ability hands down (rated 0.88 on skidpad vs. 0.77 for GLK), and the X3 has more cargo space. Fuel mileage for the GLK is not quite as good as I'd like to see.

GLK beats the X3 on just about every other metric on my list. Much better power/acceleration, better interior (X3 was far too 'plastic' looking for me, way nicer looking. Also, the current X3 model is on the way out, so dealer is offering very limited choices for colours, options, etc.

The whole comparison goes out the window if you're thinking about the new X3, probably available around December. I couldn't wait that long so I put down my order for the GLK.

Kn.

3Stars

If you are not in a rush, wait a few months and do a test drive both 2011 GLK and the new X3. For now I like GLK>X3.

benbow

I have test driven the 2010 GLK and I am patiently waiting to compare it to the new BMW X3. Even the first generation X3 beats the GLK in fuel efficiency and the new X3 will have additional efficiency enhancements to meet the 2012 CAFE standards. The new X3 will be assembled in South Carolina rather than the subcontractor factory in Europe that assembled (with issues) the first generation X3s.

The GLK will eventually get the 20-24% more efficient DI V6 engines that Mercedes has developed and announced. MB could also export the diesel 4 and six cylinder GLKs available in Europe and jump way ahead of BMW.

Duke_on

I own a GLK so I am bit biased but I didn't like anything about the current X3. Quality, feel, power, looks all goes to GLK.

Between X5 and ML... I would say X5.

boylston

I had two X3's and the new one will be even better.

One advantage of the new one (even old one) is that it hold more than the GLK. I ended up getting a C300 and Honda CRV.

dlinjuly2009

http://www.consumerreports.org/cro/c...y-findings.htm



European brands continue to improve. Mercedes-Benz has made great strides, with most models average, and the GLK did exceptionally well in its first year. Scores from rival BMW were more mixed. The 535i sedan and X3 SUV declined in reliability, and the 135i, debuting in this survey, scored below-average. Some BMW models had average or better reliability, but the 328i versions are the only ones that we've tested and can recommend.
Volkswagen and Audi are staging a nice recovery. The Volkswagen Rabbit (Golf for 2010), and its new CC got top scores. The VW Jetta's recommendation now extends to the diesel version, making it the only diesel we currently recommend. Both the Passat and Audi A3 have improved to average. The new VW Tiguan SUV was average. The Audi Q7 SUV continues to be much worse than average, while the VW Touareg, which had the worst new car prediction score in the survey, is 27 times more likely to have a problem than the best, the Honda Insight.
All of Volvo's sedans were average or better, but Volvo's XC90 SUV was below average. Porsche, which has been doing quite well in our survey of late, had one serious hiccup this year: The Boxster dropped to below average, which strikes it from our recommended list. But the Cayenne SUV improved to average.

NYCGLK

yea right...3 series is rated at 0.88, X3 is more like .78 about the same as GLK.

KenNinBC

Car and Driver says:

http://www.caranddriver.com/reviews/...erpoint_page_3

http://www.caranddriver.com/var/ezfl...00f9758223.pdf

Kn.

NYCGLK

Does it?

http://www.caranddriver.com/var/ezfl...3421557f1e.pdf

KenNinBC

Hmmm ... so they (C&D) record .88 in one test, then show .81 in another set of aggregate results. Still more than .78 (marginally). When I did my earlier research I saw .88 in two different reviews, so went with that.

Results can vary depending on track surface, weather conditions, tire selection (I'm reading that GLKs were shipped with many different tire sets), driver, etc. so I guess it's all inconclusive. I do think, based on my own test drives, that the X3 is just a bit more nimble in the corners.

Kn.

Birel186

X3 kills the GLK in handling, you don't need numbers; just drive one! However the X3 looks like ****! Ergonomics and interior are horrible. We ended up getting my mom a GLK, I wanted an MDX... she said it was too big. Would never consider the current X3. Financing for the Q5 was just retarded, why would anyone actually go through with Audi financing?
Not sure if the X3 comes with run flats, but thats a deal breaker here. After learning how ****ty, expensive, loud, etc... run flats are with my moms 328i never again, not for a sedan or SUV. I think the X5 now comes with run flats, sorry I'll take the ML.

Jkrn2003

Exactly the reason we never even considered the X3. My wife thought it was too ugly.

rmfnla

My wife just didn't like the X3.

When she saw the GLK she said, "Now that's more like it!"

It's really my car but you know what they say: No happy wife? No happy life!

EnigmaAW

all this discussion on handling???? it's an suv? i never considered handling when i bought mine. but i was driving an xterra at the time..not the best on road handling vehicle. do people really consider skidpad ratings a topic when car shopping? look at the new gx470 from lexus, it was put on the "do-not-buy list" because the can roll very easily, but people still buy em'. there are plenty here in houston.
anyways, the glk looks like a little suv, the x3 looks like a big hatchback, not a suv? to each his own..
the only thing i wish my benz had that bmw has, is covered scheduled maintenence and replacement of wear and tear items (bulbs, wipers, brake pads.etc)...bmw is better there because they cover all that..

MilesBFree

We liked the GLK much better than the current X3 in general.

At the limit, the X3 might handle better than the GLK, but I would doubt the skidpad numbers would be .88 to .77. I would more believe .78 or .81 for the X3. In almost any sort of normal driving I don't think the difference is really noticeable. I am not going to track this car, so it is not a differentiator.

We switched from an ML, and either the GLK or the X3 is much better in terms of handling. The ML is built on a truck chassis, and that shows. That was one of the factors in our decision to switch to the GLK. Not saying the ML is a bad car; just that I personally prefer car-type handling.

KenNinBC

Yep, in fact very important to me. I've almost always had cars that are decent in the cornering department - Shelby Daytona, Jetta GLI and 328iS in the past. This time round I needed to get more space as the gear I need to carry is a pretty tight fit in a midsized sedan.

Looking at the small SUV market was a big compromise ... my first thought was to go with a good wagon like the A4 Avant or the 328 Touring. Trouble with that is that the mfrs think that anyone looking at a wagon just wants a soft ride to the grocery store and back. At least in North America - there are some fantastic models in Europe that we can't get!

So yah, performance and handling were important. I knew I'd have to give up a bit compared to a solid sedan, but I looked very hard to make sure I didn't give up too much.

Kn.

Birel186

What's better than upgrading to a truck, that still handles like a sedan. X3 drives just like a 328i. You can push it so hard in the turns. GLK is sporty, you just don;t get the feedback in the steering wheel like a bmw.

MilesBFree

Us too.

But the thing that kept us from getting a wagon was the lack of space in the 2nd row. I wanted a car that would seat 4 normal adults in reasonable comfort. When we went and looked at all of the ones on the market, I adjusted the driver's seat to a good position for me, and lo and behold, the back of the seat was almost touching the rear seat in every car we looked at. So that nixed all the wagons.

The GLK probably doesn't handle as well as the wagons you mentioned, even in mushy American form

I would have gone for a wagon and a mild suspension upgrade and been happy except for the seating space issue.

While the Audi and Bimmer you mentioned would be great in a slightly lengthened version, this is exactly what the American car companies used to do very well. Chrysler had the right idea with the Hemi Magnum, but I got really turned off to them when almost everyone I saw going down the street was pimped out (and not in a good way).

GM should pony up some big bucks, get a superstar design chief (or un-retire Lutz), and build a Vette-powered Nomad wagon with a Vette-derived Magnetic Ride Control suspension. (I don't know if GM invented it, but I believe they had the first production system and hold a boatload of patents on it. This is the same sort of thing as seen in those Acura commercials they are running on TV now.)

KenNinBC

Agreed, and handling was important, but both those guys offer seriously underpowered engines. Both A4 and 3-series only offer the "good" engines in the sedan but don't carry them over into the wagons. And in Europe, the A4 can be bought with the 3.0TDI which is a brilliant engine for power and torque - plus it's pretty decent on fuel. Not available in NA because we don't like diesels ... or so Audi Canada tells me ...

grrr ...

Kn.

MilesBFree

I personally would have thought the North American market is there for the taking by a company that introduced a hot wagon, but the sales numbers seem to agree with Audi's stand.

Maybe he poor sales are because no one is offering a really great wagon. e.g.- Ford Flex is styled awkwardly and is missing driving excitement. It was a good idea, just poorly executed.

But the car companies' focus groups and market research as well as the media say we are asking for SUVs, so in any case that's what we get.

I looked at all the German wagons you mentioned, and saw the saw shortcomings you did. I also looked at the Jaguar X-type wagon a few years back, but it was a gussied-up Ford. At least a European Ford, but still a half-measure at best. And tiny.

No one wants to grow a set and release a great, non-half@$$ed wagon here.

carsnob

Now that the updated, new version of the X3 is coming, will the next GLK keep pace? That'll be a few years away as MB usually runs a 7 yr. cycle.

SL2003driver

Anyone own a late model GX470? How does it compare to the GLK350?

koojo

My father has an X3 and I like the ride & power of the GLK much better..although he has the 2.5i version.

chilledbenz

Just read a review of the all new redesigned X3. Guess its grown in size and is now considered a mid-sized suv. It's actually about the same size as the original X5. It looks quite well, except for those ugly Radio Shack looking speaker grills in the doors. I've owned a BMW 3 Series and it just never grew on me, the ride, the dealership, they all rubbed me the wrong way. But, to each their own as they say.

http://wheels.blogs.nytimes.com/2010...ps-up-in-size/

http://www.bmwusa.com/Standard/Conte...geGallery.aspx