BMW XM vs Mercedes-Benz X250

What's the difference?

It’s pretty obvious the XM is designed to impress people with big wallets and an appetite for a techy experience that’s also not without a few green credentials. The ability to motor around as a fully-electric vehicle for up to 80km or so is a big plus and the electric-ballroom interior vibe is hard to ignore, as well.

But from our perspective, the full-fat, twin-turbo V8, while offering startling performance, is perhaps a lost opportunity to follow some of BMW’s competitors into the engine-downsizing space. Then again, when you floor the throttle and 2700kg hurtles forward like a big dog on a short chain, you can see where BMW is coming from.

Perhaps the biggest letdown is the ride quality – or lack of it. While it’s understandable BMW wanted the most dynamic version of the XM it could manage, the end result plays against the vehicle’s otherwise long suit of hyper-luxury. Doubtless, BMW would argue that to soften the chassis would have been to introduce a chink into a no-compromise product. But, perhaps, sometimes a sensible compromise is the way forward.

The X was an opportunistic shot at a market segment new to Benz. With even apprentices able to afford to buy a well-specced Hilux, it's become harder to separate the foreman from the kids. I, like Mercedes, thought this would be the boss's car. Mercedes saw the gap and went for it, thinking it could grab sales from top end utes from VW, Toyota and Ford, while maybe saving a few folks from buying a RAM or an F150.

The problem is, the target market knows its utes. And in a rough-and-tumble workplace, the perception is that if you've spent up big on this Merc, you've actually just paid too much for a Nissan Navara. Still, like those flawed movies I enjoy, the X-Class is a fine thing - and I don't blame Mercedes for trying. It just costs too much, and yet isn't Mercedes enough to justify that price.