Imagine, for a moment, if performance cars were athletes.

A Lotus Elise, for example, would be AFL wizard Cyril Rioli, light with superb agility, while a Porsche 911 GT3 would be Usain Bolt, lithe and unbeatable on-track. An HSV GTS? Perhaps NBA phenom Lebron James, large and powerful but surprisingly athletic.

So where does this analogy leave the likes of the BMW X5 M and Mercedes-AMG GLE 63? Well, these hulking brutes are the automotive equivalent of Hafthór Júlíus Björnsson; the 206cm/190kg Icelandic giant who plays The Mountain in TV show Game of Thrones. This modern-day viking is one of the world’s strongest men, but if there was ever a World’s Strongest Car competition, the X5 M and GLE 63 would likely be facing off in the final.

BMW X5 M VS Mercedes-AMG GLE 63 S rear

Certainly their sprinting ability is world class. The new BMW X5 M musters 423kW/750Nm from its 4.4-litre twin-turbo V8, an increase of 15kW/70Nm over its predecessor, sent to all four wheels through an eight-speed ZF torque-converter automatic.

BMW claims this 2275kg monster can hit 100km/h in just 4.2sec – a claim it matches on the strip. Rudimentary launch control builds a few revs against the brakes, catapulting the Beemer off the line. There’s so much grunt that a short-shift to second doesn’t cost it any time and it hurtles over the quarter mile in a scarcely believable 12.38sec at 182.91km/h.

But the Mercedes is even faster, though given its 5.5-litre twin-turbo V8 now packs 430kW/760Nm in updated ‘S’ guise, perhaps that isn’t so surprising. It requires some cute timing to build boost quickly against the brakes without bogging down off the line, but get it right and the GLE fires to 100km/h in 4.18sec, dispatching 400m in 12.30sec at 183.77km/h.

Under full acceleration the nose rises like a speedboat, the most ferocious noise bellowing out of its AMG-branded quad tailpipes. The soundtrack is straight out of 1960s Detroit, with a crack like snapping timber on full-throttle upshifts – you could easily buy a GLE 63 for the noise alone. It’s not long for this world, the M157 engine, but years of development have made it smooth and supremely powerful – it’s the heart and soul of the car.

Mercedes-amg GLE63 S

There are hints of diesel and highly tuned four-cylinder, a dollop of in-line six and very occasionally something that approaches a traditional V8. The thunderclaps from the exhaust on upshifts are a nice touch, though.

The transmission is similarly confused. M Division engineers have done a remarkable job in making the X5’s eight-speed auto mimic the behaviour of the seven-speed dual-clutch ’box found in other M cars, but it’s debatable whether there’s been any benefit in doing so.

BMW X5 rear

It is, however, leagues ahead of the Mercedes ’box. The seven-speed wet-clutch MCT auto feels a generation behind, though the latest C63 shows what it’s capable of. It’s smoother from rest than the BMW’s, but low-speed stumbles aren’t what you expect from a $190K car, and it’s slow to respond to shift requests via the paddles, if it responds at all.

For day-to-day use it’s best left to its own devices in Sport mode, but Sport+ is well calibrated to more spirited driving, holding gears to redline under acceleration and downshifting super-aggressively under brakes.

Mercedes-amg-GLE63 S front driving

The electronics are quick to intervene if you overstep the threshold, but work within the parameters and the softness makes the GLE quite entertaining to drive. It takes little effort to rotate the car on the brakes in slower corners and you’re always busy behind the wheel making inputs or corrections to keep everything pointed in roughly the right direction.

Push too hard, though, and it’ll start to misbehave. The steering, while well-weighted and linear, refuses to change under load, the brakes soften, and despite a 40:60 front/rear torque split, the inside-front wheel spins up on corner exit before the ESP dramatically kills momentum.

BMW X5 M VS Mercedes-AMG GLE63 S side

It’s not helped by wearing Michelin Latitude Sports tyres, which while enormous (295/35 ZR21 all ’round) offer nothing like the grip of the X5 M’s Michelin Pilot Super Sports; the same tyres, incidentally, fitted to the M3 and Ferrari 488. Measuring 285/35 ZR21 up front and a whopping 325/30 ZR21 at the rear, the sticky Michelins give the BMW far higher lateral grip levels. To be fair, though, the rubber is merely making the most of a very talented chassis.

If you really want to know how good M Division’s engineers are, drive an X5 M. How they manage to make this 2275kg leviathan handle like an oversized hot hatch is remarkable, except no hot hatch feels this rear-driven, and only the likes of the Audi RS3 or Mercedes-AMG A45 could match the X5 M’s monstrous punch out of corners. The diff set-up is magic; nail the throttle early and it’ll briefly power oversteer, even in the dry, but more often than not power is quickly and efficiently shuffled to the wheel that needs it most.

Bmw x5 tyre spin

Few, however, will ever reach that limit. Most will be happy chasing down sportscars while the kids in the back giggle in delight (or scream in terror). The only real blot on the X5 M’s dynamic copybook is, sadly in typical BMW fashion these days, the steering. M Division has managed to CPR some life into the standard X5’s flatlining tiller, but none of the three steering settings feel right in terms of weighting, nor do any offer any real communication.

The BMW wins more points on a more prosaic level, though. It’s not a pretty car, with few visual cues as to its potency, but then there’s always the X6 M for those wanting to be noticed.

BMW X5 interior

Despite the shift in name from ML to GLE, Merc’s recent mid-size SUV update was more of a facelift than an overhaul and its interior lags behind the BMW and Audi competition.

Mercedes-amg GLE63 S interior

It’s probably clear by now that the Merc comes second in this comparison. Straight-line pace aside, the GLE 63 is neither as capable nor as rewarding to drive as the X5 M, its interior doesn’t feel as special, it’s more expensive (before options, anyway) and less fuel efficient, though the BMW won’t be winning any ‘green car’ awards any time soon, either. But that’s also not the whole story, as it turns out this is a comparison between a flawed car that’s very likeable and an incredibly competent one that isn’t.

BMW X5 M VS Mercedes-AMG GLE63 S still

Conversely, if you’re not driving like your hair’s on fire, the BMW is a little, well, dull. Admittedly, that is a highly subjective assessment – if the BMW’s understated looks and unusual engine note strike a chord then it’s a slam dunk, as it’s objectively the better car.

But we could equally understand why some will choose the AMG without hesitation. Think of it as the difference between the MVP and the fan favourite.

u00a0BMW X5 MMERCEDES-AMG GLE 63 S
Body4-door, 5-seat SUV4-door, 5-seat SUV
Driveall-wheelall-wheel
Engine4395cc V8, DOHC, 32v, twin-turbo5461cc V8, DOHC, 32v, twin-turbo
Bore/stroke89.0 x 88.3mm98.0 x 90.5mm
Compression10.0:110.0:1
Power423kW @ 6000rpm430kW @ 5500rpm
Torque750Nm @ 2200-5000rpm760Nm @ 1750-5250rpm
Power/weight186kW/tonne189kW/tonne
Transmission8-speed automatic7-speed automatic
Weight2275kg2270kg
Suspension(F)A-arms, coil springs, dampers, anti-roll barA-arms, air springs, dampers, torsion bar
Suspension(R)multi-links, air springs, dampers, anti-roll barmulti-links, air springs, dampers, torsion bar
L/W/H4880/1985/1717mm4852/1971/1762mm
Wheelbase2933mm2915mm
Tracks1666/1667mm (f/r)1648/1663mm (f/r)
Steeringelectrically-assisted rack-and-pinionelectro-mechanic rack-and-pinion
Brakes(F)395mm ventilated discs, 6-piston calipers390mm ventilated discs, 6-piston calipers
Brakes(R)385mm ventilated discs, single-piston calipers345mm ventilated discs, single-piston calipers
Wheels21.0 x 10.0-inch (f); 21 x 11.5-inch (r)21.0 x 10.0-inch (f/r)
Tyre Sizes285/35 R21 (f); 325/30 R21 (r)u00a0

295/35 ZR21 (f/r)u00a0

TyreMichelin Pilot Super Sports

Michelin Latitude Sports

Price as tested$195,100$193,900
ProsIncredible dynamics; lovely interior; valueAmazing engine; feel-good factor
ConsAnodyne engine; sub-par steeringInfotainment needs a refresh; thirst
Star Rating4/53.5/5