2010 Buick LaCrosse vs. 2012 BMW X5
To start off, 2012 BMW X5 is newer by 2 year(s). Which means there will be less support and parts availability for 2010 Buick LaCrosse. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 2010 Buick LaCrosse would be higher. At 3,000 cc (6 cylinders), 2012 BMW X5 is equipped with a bigger engine. In terms of performance, 2012 BMW X5 (300 HP @ 5800 RPM) has 118 more horse power than 2010 Buick LaCrosse. (182 HP @ 6700 RPM) In normal driving conditions, 2012 BMW X5 should accelerate faster than 2010 Buick LaCrosse.
Because 2012 BMW X5 is all wheel drive (AWD), it will have significant more traction and grip than 2010 Buick LaCrosse. In wet, icy, snow, or gravel driving conditions, 2012 BMW X5 will offer significantly more control. With that said, do keep in mind that many other factors such as speed and the wear on your tires can also have significant impact on traction and control. Let's talk about torque, 2012 BMW X5 (406 Nm @ 1300 RPM) has 173 more torque (in Nm) than 2010 Buick LaCrosse. (233 Nm @ 4900 RPM). This means 2012 BMW X5 will have an easier job in driving up hills or pulling heavy equipment than 2010 Buick LaCrosse.
Compare all specifications:
| 2010 Buick LaCrosse | 2012 BMW X5 | |
| Make | Buick | BMW |
| Model | LaCrosse | X5 |
| Year Released | 2010 | 2012 |
| Body Type | Sedan | SUV |
| Engine Position | Front | Front |
| Engine Size | 2400 cc | 3000 cc |
| Engine Cylinders | 4 cylinders | 6 cylinders |
| Engine Type | in-line | in-line |
| Valves per Cylinder | 4 valves | 4 valves |
| Horse Power | 182 HP | 300 HP |
| Engine RPM | 6700 RPM | 5800 RPM |
| Torque | 233 Nm | 406 Nm |
| Torque RPM | 4900 RPM | 1300 RPM |
| Fuel Type | Gasoline | Gasoline |
| Drive Type | Front | AWD |
| Transmission Type | Automatic | 8-speed shiftable automatic |
| Number of Seats | 5 seats | 5 seats |
| Number of Doors | 4 doors | 5 doors |
| Vehicle Length | 5001 mm | 4854 mm |
| Vehicle Width | 1857 mm | 1933 mm |
| Vehicle Height | 1504 mm | 1775 mm |
| Wheelbase Size | 2837 mm | 2933 mm |
| Fuel Consumption | 7.8 L/100km | 10.2 L/100km |
| Fuel Consumption City | 12.4 L/100km | 14.7 L/100km |
| Fuel Tank Capacity | 70 L | 85 L |
