CarteaCompare CarsiX xDrive40 vs Expedition XLT 3.5L (380 HP) RWD

iX xDrive40 vs Expedition XLT 3.5L (380 HP) RWD Comparison

Car Information

Engine / Motor

200 km/h

240 km/h

/

6

/

3500 cc

/

GCC

Dimensions

5 Seater

8 Seater

4953 mm

5334 mm

1967 mm

2006 mm

1695 mm

1930 mm

3000 mm

3111 mm

500 L

530 L

/

5 Doors

/

250 m

Fuel Economy

/

11 Km/L

/

88 L

/

11 Km/L

Comfort

/

/

/

/

/

/

/

/

/

Smart Entry

/

Interior

/

/

/

/

Leather

/

Digital

/

Dual Zone

/

/

/

/

/

/

/

/

Electric

/

/

/

Standard

Safety

/

/

/

/

/

/

/

/

/

Infotainment

/

12

/

/

/

/

Android LCD

/

/

8

Chassis & Steering

All Wheel Drive

Rear Wheel Drive

Key Spec

TBD

/

326 BHP - 619 BHP

300 BHP - 440

TBD

10-Speed Selectshift Automatic & 10-Speed SelectshifteAutomatic & Automatic

Electric

Gasoline & Petrol

TBD

/

5 Seater

6 Seater - 8

/

3.5 L - 5.4 L

/

TBD

Exterior

/

/

/

/

/

/

/

LED

/

/

/

/

Engine

Electric

Gasoline

326 BHP

380 BHP

630 Nm

637 Nm

/

V

/

3.5 L

/

Twin Turbo

/

4

Technologies

/

/

/

/

Comparison of configuration highlights

  • iX xDrive40

    • 360 Degree camera
    • Parking sensor rear
    • Parking sensor front
    • Rear Camera
    • ABS
  • Expedition XLT 3.5L (380 HP) RWD

    • Electronic engine immobilizer
    • Power Tailgate
    • 360 Degree camera
    • Rear Defogger
    • Rear Power Outlet
    • Heated Side Mirrors
    • Parking sensor rear
    • Parking sensor front
    • Keyless Start
    • Heater
    • Rear Camera
    • Headlight On Reminder
    • Remote key types
    • Steering Adjustment
    • Anti-Theft Alarm System
    • Speed Sensing Auto Door Lock
    • Driver Seat Belt Warning
    • ABS
    • EBD/CBC
    • EBA/BA
    • Passive Pedestrian Protection
    • Child Lock
    • Speed Alert
    • Active braking

Review Comparison

Positive

  • No data found

Negative

  • No data found

Positive

  • Spacious interior space
  • Excellent towing ability
  • Comfort and ride quality

Negative

  • Fuel consumption is high
  • Large size may cause difficulty in maneuvering
  • The initial purchase price is high

Related comparisons

Editor's PickExpedition XLT 3.5L (380 HP) RWD

Expert / Editor Recommendation

Choose iX xDrive40 if you care more about power; choose Expedition XLT 3.5L (380 HP) RWD if you care more about price.

Popular Car Comparisons

BMW | iX xDrive40

VS

Porsche | Cayenne Coupe E-Hybrid

BMW | iX xDrive40

VS

Porsche | Porsche Cayenne 2023 S Platinum Edition

BMW | iX xDrive40

VS

Porsche | Porsche Cayenne 2024 S Platinum Edition

BMW | iX xDrive40

VS

Jaguar | Jaguar F Pace 2020 5.0L V8 SVR (550 PS)

BMW | iX xDrive40

VS

BMW | iX xDrive40

Q&A

  • According to fuel consumption data, iX xDrive40 has a fuel consumption of No data, while Expedition XLT 3.5L (380 HP) RWD has a fuel consumption of 9.09. Therefore, No data is more fuel-efficient.
  • In terms of interior space, iX xDrive40 has a wheelbase of 3000 mm, while Expedition XLT 3.5L (380 HP) RWD has a wheelbase of 3111 mm. Generally, the model with the longer wheelbase, Expedition XLT 3.5L (380 HP) RWD, offers more room.
  • Check drive type, ground clearance and torque together. iX xDrive40 uses All Wheel Drive, while Expedition XLT 3.5L (380 HP) RWD uses Rear Wheel Drive.