Model Year | 2010 | 2015 | |
Model | Ford Edge | BMW X5 | |
Engine | |||
Transmission | |||
Drivetrain | |||
Body | 4dr SUV | 4dr SUV | |
Difference | |||
Wheelbase | 111.2 in | 115.5 in | -4.3 in |
Length | 185.7 in | 193.2 in | -7.5 in |
Width | 75.8 in | 76.3 in | -0.5 in |
Height | 67.2 in | 69.4 in | -2.2 in |
Curb Weight | 4073 lb. | 4680 lb. | -607 lb. |
Fuel Capacity | 19.0 gal. | 22.4 gal. | -3.4 gal. |
Headroom, Row 1 | 40.0 in | 40.5 in | -0.5 in |
Shoulder Room, Row 1 | 58.9 in | 60.5 in | -1.6 in |
Hip Room, Row 1 | 54.8 in | 0.0 in | 54.8 in |
Legroom, Row 1 | 40.7 in | 40.4 in | 0.3 in |
Headroom, Row 2 | 39.3 in | 38.8 in | 0.5 in |
Shoulder Room, Row 2 | 58.8 in | 58.3 in | 0.5 in |
Hip Room, Row 2 | 56.3 in | 0.0 in | 56.3 in |
Legroom, Row 2 | 39.6 in | 36.6 in | 3 in |
Total Legroom | 80.3 in (over 2 rows) | 77 in (over 2 rows) | 3.3 in |
Cargo Volume, Minimum | 32.1 ft3 | 22.9 ft3 | 9.2 ft3 |
Cargo Volume, Maximum | 69.6 ft3 | 66.0 ft3 | 3.6 ft3 |
2010 Ford Edge Seat Room and Comfort: Pros | ||
Year | Body/Powertrain | Comment |
2011 | 4dr SUV 285-horsepower 3.5L V6 6-speed automatic FWD |
No contest-Edge seats are very comfortable vs. tolerable seats in the Dodge. see full Ford Edge review |
2011 | 4dr SUV 285-horsepower 3.5L V6 6-speed shiftable automatic FWD |
The Edge rear seat legroom is great. There are few crossovers with such good rear seat comfort and legroom. I did not want the third row, the lack of third row helps with rear legroom. see full Ford Edge review |
2010 Ford Edge Seat Room and Comfort: Cons | ||
Year | Body/Powertrain | Comment |
2011 | 4dr SUV 305-horsepower 3.7L V6 6-speed shiftable automatic FWD |
seats are comfortable, just wanted to get cooled seats for the hotg summers see full Ford Edge review |
2010 | 4dr SUV 265-horsepower 3.5L V6 6-speed automatic FWD |
A little cramped see full Ford Edge review |
2010 | 4dr SUV 265-horsepower 3.5L V6 6-speed automatic FWD |
not much leg room see full Ford Edge review |
2015 BMW X5 Seat Room and Comfort: Pros | ||
Year | Comment | |
2014 | BMW's multicontour seats, a $1,300 option on six-cylinder X5s and standard with the V8, deliver a rarely matched combination of support in turns and comfort on long drives. In a reversal of traditional tendencies, the buckets in the Range Rover Sport feel firmer and less comfortable. Though you'll find a commanding view forward in either driver seat, the Range Rover Sport maintains an edge in this area. Unusually large windows are one thing that makes a Land Rover a Land Rover. see full BMW X5 review |
2015 BMW X5 Seat Room and Comfort: Cons | ||
Year | Comment | |
Audi and Mercedes both offer much longer SUVs. At least until BMW fields an X7, the X5 is available with an optional third-row seat. Especially considering the size and price of the X5, said third row is absurdly tight, thinly upholstered, and difficult to access. The door openings are small, and the entire second row seat pivots forward and upward off the floor in an only partially successful attempt to compensate. To provide even minimal legroom for those using it, the second row must slide forward a few inches, to the point that its occupants find their own legroom severely compromised. Both rows are too low to the floor for adult comfort. The third-row seat optional in the Range Rover Sport probably isn't much better, and deletes the spare tire (not available on the BMW regardless). This might explain why it wasn't on the tested vehicle. If you want a usable third row, Land Rover offers the less stylish, but also much less expensive and roomier LR4. Shift focus to the second-row seat, and I found that in the smaller X3 at least as comfortable, and easier to get into and out of thanks to the more compact vehicle's lower ride height. That in the Range Rover Sport, though also not the roomiest or the most comfortable, is better than the X5's. see full BMW X5 review |
None of our members have yet commented on the seat room and comfort of the 2015 BMW X5.