uncork1 Posted: 4/16/2013 1:17pm PDT Sorry, but this is a disappointing and inaccurate comparison. I had thought that the BMW Bias was decresing in automotive writing but apparently not at The Car Connection. In the second paragraph you say"one's a clear winner";at the end you say the X3 "noses ahead" yet the Meta Rating has them both at 8.4 and every catagory exactly the same rating. Then you descibe the "front drive" 2.0T Q5 when no such vehicle exists. All Audi Q5s are quattro all wheel drive, considered by many in the industry as being the best system on the market. Even a casual comparison shows that the new X3 has used the Audi Q5 as a template and copied the Q5 almost screw for screw; everything but the price and value; $2950 higher base price and NO leather or Sirius Jim Posted: 4/16/2013 10:57am PDT The Audi Q5 has been around with tweeks for over five years now and it still matches up well with the X3! That says something, although I'm not sure what. The BMW ultimately is much more expensive than a comparably equipped Q5. I shopped all of them, including Evoque, Volvo, Ford Edge, et al, and wound up with a '12 Q5 in December of 2011. I've owned all manner of SUV before starting with a Samurai, Isuzu Trooper, Grand Cherokee, Mercedes ML 430, MB G500 so I've had lots of experience/exposure to SUVs. What swayed me to Audi? It's right-sized for my needs, don't need 3rd row seating; VG mpg (24 in my use) with 4WD; quality is 1st rate; handles well; 0-60 is above average for 2.0T; & of course, the snazzy led lights!