Amazed by the ' (un)reliability ' comments about this SUV.

Originally Posted by roy528

This one is going around and around. I agree with you That's the horse we want. The great one. The 'chin in the neck ' one. That's why we pay up the big bucks. However - what use is this
great horse if it pulls up lame every few weeks. The point is- it should be that great horse and not pull up lame. Would you buy a very expensive horse from a breeder known for breeding very fast horses but who have a known high propensity for serious illness? These cars should do what they do
and be -at least- more reliable than they are- much more. Can you imagine buying an airplane with this mentality. It's faster than the rest and can pull 3 g's- only it breaks a lot.....
Again, when we want to- we can aways see the kings clothes. If the badge was taken off these cars and they were newly introduced, the car magazines would say" Great performance- terrible reliability-stay away until they get it right. Germany is known for great engineering. They could certainly get this done. However BMW just had it's biggest year ever. So, if they can sell them faster than they can make them like they are- Why spend more money to build them? I get it - Many on this board just love these cars so much that they are willing to put up with this to drive them . They love these cars reliability warts and all. The way these cars drive is not the issue. They are wonderful -fabulous. What this whole diatribe addresses is that they break a lot and shouldn't at this price point. To say that BMW can't get this done is ridiculous. They just won't. They don't have to.

Couple points which you have indicated:

A) BMW can get this done, I agree. However why? If your selling (for 2011 from wiki) ~3X times the amount of vehicles from your nearest competitor (aka porsche who has better reliability) why mess with a winning, profitable formula. Their a business after all.

B) BMW owners really care about the vehicle as a whole unit, and anyone who drives one, if they like capable on-road vehicles love it. The parts that fail, usually draw LOADS of attention on these forums. However the people with these issues;

a)never resolve the issue, and simply just wait to turn it in for another or leave for another brand.
b) Lemon the vehicle, and BMW either gets them replacement or take the $$ and run.
c) Simply keep repairing the vehicle until the issue gets fixed, or they reach their individual repair budget limit, and live with the issue or sell it off to someone else.

^ What i just described in the above the people with the issues above are not limited to BMW, I see similar accounts of reliability issues every forum I go to. Toyota, Lexus, BMW, Audi, Mercedes, Nissan, Infiniti, Acura. However the severity of each individual situation seems to be reliant on one crucial point:

The vehicles who tend to report the most problems tend to be the ones who design their vehicles for a single brand, and don't share their technologies with the other in house brands.

Keeping with that statement, If reliability is to be improved on BMWs (which I do care about), I suggest BMW should purchase or create a value brand (similar to Toyota&lexus, VW&Audi&porsche) then only can we the rise in reliability (with minimal costs to the end-consumer).

I however am good with the current BMW and its reliability. Yea it sometimes causes this= but most of the time it cause this

They just won't. They don't have to

There is just one rule in life and business,,,"You do what you have to " Everything else is negotiable ...With sales up what 28% and the X5 in the top 2 leaders...they just dont have to put in the work or money...its that simple.

I have always wentthe safe and reliable route...Tundras for me and Acuras for my wife..many years ago I had my eye on a 2002 Tii ( yea I am that old) and my logic talked me out of it....I test drove the X5...just loved the feel...I ( and many others ) will take the chance..

I agree with the comments on this thread. I have owned three BMW's over the years. 2000 M Roadster(still own), 2007 X5 4.8(no longer own), and current 2010 X5 35D. My 2000 M Roadster is built like a tank and very reliable. 2007 X5 4.8 was very reliable (proven gas engine) and operated flawlessly for 60K miles until I bought the 2010 X5 D. When I bought the X5D I was planning to keep the car and drive it for a long time e.g. over 100k miles. However, this vehicle has more recalls than Bill Clinton and has been in for minor warranty work four times in 50k miles and three years. I am retired and use this vehicle to drive from Minnesota to Arizona and back once a year. My ultimate bummer would be to get stranded in New Mexico or the Texas panhandle with a vehicle that won't run. Anyway, I have owned a lot of vehicles over the years, including Mercedes, Lexus etc. This is he first high end vehicle that I do not totally trust in terms of reliability. My view is that my vehicles are transportation and as such I expect that if I take care of the necessary maintenance that they will be reliable and not leave me stranded. Next, I like some luxuries, safety and handling and am willing to put up with some additional maintenance costs to get it (e.g. more frequent brake pads etc). However, I am not willing to sacrifice dependability. The car should start and be reliable for long periods of time without warranty problems that can impede dependability, especially in a high-end vehicle at these price points. The problems with this vehicle are not because it is such a high performance vehicle, it is because it is poorly engineered on the margins. Handling, braking, body etc , well engineered. Engine and engine control system, fuel handling system are weak and problem prone.

BMW and my dealer have stood behind the fixes, however now that I have 50k miles I was pretty much forced to either get an extended warranty or sell the car. I usually do not purchase extended warranties and I have a tendency to keep my vehicles over 100k miles. Usually, by 50 miles I will have a sense as to wether the car is bug free and worth keeping as the bad stuff will usually become apparent in the first 30k to 40 miles and once fixed you are good to go.

So, in conclusion, in my humble opinion, this low sulfur diesel engine control system is very new and somewhat a work in-process for BMW. All the nitty failures of parts of the engine control system are indicative of this. And even though BMW has replaced the parts that have failed, I am not convinced the the same thing won't happen again and again due to the overall engineering of the system and components.

I plan to stick with my X5D to 100k miles now that I have purchased an extended warranty so we will see how it goes. If reliability continues to be a problem I will sell the X5D and move to another brand that I can be assured will get me there. There will be trade-offs in handling an performance, but with this vehicle it is more about the utility for me. I can toss my M Roadster around for kicks. BMW builds some great cars. However, I would give them a grade of D minus on the engineering of this diesel.

Originally Posted by MRoaadster2000

However, this vehicle has more recalls than Bill Clinton

My 2003 Honda Accord had more recall than Bill Clinton. In fact, I have to take it back for another recall this April after 10 years (they don't have the parts yet. ) BMW is the first car I had to take it to dealer with a check engine light. In fact, I don't know any body that had the same problem in the first month if ownership. Although, BMW is still one leg up from Chrysler. My 2001 Chrysler minivan could not start in the garage after a few months on the job. I hope this BMW x5 won't do that.

Sent from my LG-P999 using Bimmer App

Originally Posted by AutoUnion

Generally the pre-LCI X5s seem to be terrible in terms of issues. The LCI is pretty solid. 07-08 E70s were terrible

The opposite is the case. How many threads have we seen on lemon new X5's?

Originally Posted by NoI4plz

Couple points which you have indicated:

A) BMW can get this done, I agree. However why? If your selling (for 2011 from wiki) ~3X times the amount of vehicles from your nearest competitor (aka porsche who has better reliability) why mess with a winning, profitable formula. Their a business after all.

Porsche is nowhere close to being BMW's "nearest competitor". If you're only considering driving dynamics sure. The sales numbers show who the X5 truly competes with and it is MB and Lexus. I'm not sure where you got your numbers from but they aren't remotely close.

2012 US Sales numbers:

BMW-281,460
Mercedes-Benz-274,134
Lexus-247,166
Cadillac-149,782
Audi-139,310
Infiniti-119,877
Lincoln-82,150
Porsche-35,043

If you're talking strictly SUV's:

X5-44,445
ML-38,101
GX/LX-16,044
Cayenne-15,545
Q7-11,008

RX-95,381
MDX-50,854

(Numbers courtesy of Clublexus who track the sales numbers monthly)

B) BMW owners really care about the vehicle as a whole unit, and anyone who drives one, if they like capable on-road vehicles love it. The parts that fail, usually draw LOADS of attention on these forums. However the people with these issues;

a)never resolve the issue, and simply just wait to turn it in for another or leave for another brand.
b) Lemon the vehicle, and BMW either gets them replacement or take the $$ and run.
c) Simply keep repairing the vehicle until the issue gets fixed, or they reach their individual repair budget limit, and live with the issue or sell it off to someone else.

^ What i just described in the above the people with the issues above are not limited to BMW, I see similar accounts of reliability issues every forum I go to. Toyota, Lexus, BMW, Audi, Mercedes, Nissan, Infiniti, Acura. However the severity of each individual situation seems to be reliant on one crucial point:

The vehicles who tend to report the most problems tend to be the ones who design their vehicles for a single brand, and don't share their technologies with the other in house brands.

Keeping with that statement, If reliability is to be improved on BMWs (which I do care about), I suggest BMW should purchase or create a value brand (similar to Toyota&lexus, VW&Audi&porsche) then only can we the rise in reliability (with minimal costs to the end-consumer).

I however am good with the current BMW and its reliability. Yea it sometimes causes this= but most of the time it cause this

Your premise about shared tech doesn't make any sense either. If it were accurate MB would be towards the bottom...with BMW and Audi/VW would be at or near the top. And for the record, BMW does have it's own sub-brand, it's called Mini....and it typically is at or near the very bottom of reliability reports.

BMW's reliablity is poor by all reporting agencies. No excuse for it and further proof how truly great the BMW marketing machine is.

Yes we all know that BMW quality is ****. They can't even do a proper factory paint job.

Originally Posted by smyles

Ironically, almost all new threads about problems are from LCI owners...

And the problems are often major and devastating

I'm guessing BMW quality is actually getting even worse

Originally Posted by Cdnrockies

Porsche is nowhere close to being BMW's "nearest competitor". If you're only considering driving dynamics sure. The sales numbers show who the X5 truly competes with and it is MB and Lexus. I'm not sure where you got your numbers from but they aren't remotely close.

2012 US Sales numbers:

BMW-281,460
Mercedes-Benz-274,134
Lexus-247,166
Cadillac-149,782
Audi-139,310
Infiniti-119,877
Lincoln-82,150
Porsche-35,043

If you're talking strictly SUV's:

X5-44,445
ML-38,101
GX/LX-16,044
Cayenne-15,545
Q7-11,008

So I'm guessing I failed math and cannot divide. The BMW x5 selling out the porsche cay approx 3x times is incorrect. Now I'm also guessing I'm going to be crucified for comparing the Porsche to the x5 in the handling department (there probably isn't a couple long threads about this when I search the fest. Plus the op mentioning the porsche as a better built German car would also be imaginary and besides the point of a thread talking about solid build quality.

RX-95,381
MDX-50,854

Originally Posted by Cdnrockies

Your premise about shared tech doesn't make any sense either. If it were accurate MB would be towards the bottom...with BMW and Audi/VW would be at or near the top. And for the record, BMW does have it's own sub-brand, it's called Mini....and it typically is at or near the very bottom of reliability reports.

In some years the reliability of mb and BMW are at the bottom. I would also suggest not using the phrase "for the record", as a means of trying to transform something that's incorrect as correct. When I suggested that BMW should seek a BMW sub-brand similar to what Toyota and Lexus or VW and Audi I meant exactly the same. Mini, who sold 57.000 vehicles in the US doesn't equate to Toyota who sold 1,763,595. Again I'm bad at math so who knows


BMW's reliablity is poor by all reporting agencies. No excuse for it and further proof how truly great the BMW marketing machine is.

I love statistics:




http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-505145_1...ast-to-repair/
http://corp.carmd.com/2012-manufactu....htm?subId=218

They fluctuate from time to time and depending on model to model. For instance the 7 in your sig is the worst rated BMW in the consumer markets study. However as an overall brand, BMW ranks number 3 in the car md study.

Originally Posted by RockChips

Yes we all know that BMW quality is ****. They can't even do a proper factory paint job.

What's interesting is that when Lexus was dominating the luxury segment in the US year after year, they were #1 in IQS, VDS, resale, customer service, everything. Hell, Toyota/Lexus do FANTASTIC paint jobs. Go look at any pearl white Lexus. flawless.

So the excuse that more volume = less quality is a poor argument here. Even look at Toyota. Super high volume, they dominate CR and JDPower by being at the top with Lexus/Scion.

How is reliablity judged?

They rank Infiniti higher, but from personal experience, they suck. For example, the windows brake light on certain years of G35 fails for 90% of people. You would think they would have issued a recall, considering its a safety issue as well.

Also, the gas lid locking solenoid fails for everyone too. And god forbid you turn off the engine when the window is closing, because you will fooock up the entire window closing mechanism.


I would rather pick a manufacturer that, you know, actually resolves stuff with recalls.

Originally Posted by henrycyao

Although, BMW is still one leg up from Chrysler.
Sent from my LG-P999 using Bimmer App

Ow!!, that hurt - putting the BMW with ANY Chrysler product.

Originally Posted by roy528

What is the basis of this seeming 'consensus' that one has to accept a degree of unreliability if one wants to drive a bimmer?
P.S. I'm still loving my 528iX - quirks and all.

Perhaps the complexity of all the features in BMWs? Maybe they are "pushing the envelope" with new technologies? I don't know the reason, but I can give you my personal experience.

I am 61 years old and own a 2004 Z4 and a 2010 X5 diesel. Each of these vehicles has individually had more problems than all of the other cars I have owned in my life combined, e.g., my Z4 had to be flatbedded 100 miles to a BMW dealer due to a failed ignition coil. Then another one failed, but I was near home and could replace the coil myself. So now I travel with an OBD-II code reader and a spare ignition coil in the trunk. It also got a check engine light due to a cracked rubber accordion boot on the air intake which was letting air in post-MAF and making the engine run lean. Etc. Just yesterday I got a check engine light on my 2010 X5, so it's back to the dealer again (P01C1, P00EB, and P0001 codes).

I like both of my BMWs a lot, but must admit I get nervous when traveling in the Summer on vacation in places like Montana, where there is not a single BMW dealer in the entire state.

If you want something reliable, buy a Ford, not a BMW.

Originally Posted by Penguin

I like both of my BMWs a lot, but must admit I get nervous when traveling in the Summer on vacation in places like Montana, where there is not a single BMW dealer in the entire state.

If you want something reliable, buy a Ford, not a BMW.

I'm also 61 years old, and bought a 2013 X5M to keep primarily at our home in NW Montana. I'm driving it around SoCal for a couple hundred miles to sniff out infant mortality and outfitting it with proper winter tires before driving it North. I dread the day I call BMW assist to have the X5M flat-bedded 210+ miles across Idaho, and into WA to the nearest dealer (Spokane) when it breaks down.

I must be lucky;-).. 2009 X5 diesel, 35k miles with absolutely no issues..Cant say the same about some Mercedes and Audies i have owned..

Originally Posted by gjohnsen

I must be lucky;-).. 2009 X5 diesel, 35k miles with absolutely no issues..Cant say the same about some Mercedes and Audies i have owned..

That is for a good reason. X5 35D actually made CR recommend list for an SUV. That average rating sure help push it over the edge.

Still, 2009 is pre LCI and that is pretty good considering how many people on this forum blast pre-LCI reliability.

The 2013 variation seem interesting. Looks like 2012 is a good year. I wonder what happened? Did some manufacturing director/VP leave?

I've had ten BMW's over the years and even had a buy back and two M's. I've recently decided that my loaded out '11 X5D with 31,000 won't be with me after the 50,000 warranty is out. It's not that it's bad, but CEL's, recalls, etc just tick me off nowadays. I move back and forth between BMW and Lexus and I'll probably be going back. Heck, I don't even know my service rep for Lexus. The BMW rep and I are great friends and I almost want to consider him family by now.

Like I said, it's not bad and they give me a loaner each time. Service is great and I love the car. I may change my mind before the 20,000 wears out but for now, that's where I'm headed. Would I recommend a BMW? Of course!!! It's one of the best cars out there and a blast to drive. It's just that coming up towards retirement, I'm looking for less distractions in my life...

Originally Posted by patrnflyr

I've had ten BMW's over the years and even had a buy back and two M's. I've recently decided that my loaded out '11 X5D with 31,000 won't be with me after the 50,000 warranty is out. It's not that it's bad, but CEL's, recalls, etc just tick me off nowadays. I move back and forth between BMW and Lexus and I'll probably be going back. Heck, I don't even know my service rep for Lexus. The BMW rep and I are great friends and I almost want to consider him family by now.

Like I said, it's not bad and they give me a loaner each time. Service is great and I love the car. I may change my mind before the 20,000 wears out but for now, that's where I'm headed. Would I recommend a BMW? Of course!!! It's one of the best cars out there and a blast to drive. It's just that coming up towards retirement, I'm looking for less distractions in my life...

Lexus is going "H.A.M". If you dont know what HAM is, you`ll know when you step into any new LEXUS F-sport. I gotta commend them on this new turn around.

However As you said, Lexus is amazing in quality, hopefully this new direction they are taking wont affect their reputation...then only acura will be the sole reliable luxury moniker.

My wife drove one of the first IS-F's out there and loved it. Almost an M3 but then we had a granddaughter and we wanted a bigger chassis for her protection in case of an accident, hence the 7. I feel the LS is just too removed from the driving experience. I'll probably go with an LX or a new body Denali pickup when my X is used up.

Originally Posted by NoI4plz

However As you said, Lexus is amazing in quality, hopefully this new direction they are taking wont affect their reputation...then only acura will be the sole reliable luxury moniker.

Acura is not a luxury brand. You can try to spin it a billion different ways, but that's fact. No brand that bases all their cars off the Accord deserves to be called a luxury brand.

Originally Posted by AutoUnion

Acura is not a luxury brand. You can try to spin it a billion different ways, but that's fact. No brand that bases all their cars off the Accord deserves to be called a luxury brand.

^Nice Rant....?

However Acura is still luxury. It`s not a regular car maker with say 2 luxury barges (Hyundai). Its typical Japanese Luxury. They try to be as lean as possible in terms of development costs.

Yes I agree if you believe Acura has lost its way, and somewhat let the competition run far ahead. However they`re slowly realizing that to compete in a luxury market today, the brand has to constantly innovate, and not just feel comfortable with what they have. The technology today, that is the main driving force of innovation, gets stale real quick hence you see more substantial updates to vehicle equipment in a shorter period of time. In addition they need to have a great vehicle portfolio that appeals to the luxury buyer.

I`m banking Acura can really be a competitive driving force in the luxury circuit, once most of their vehicles are updated. So far, their only vehicle that seems to be is the RLX, and upcoming MDX. the rdx, tl or tsx (one got axed), ilx need to have a mid-cycle refresh to get the latest from Acura.

Originally Posted by NoI4plz

^Nice Rant....?

However Acura is still luxury. It`s not a regular car maker with say 2 luxury barges (Hyundai). Its typical Japanese Luxury. They try to be as lean as possible in terms of development costs.

Yes I agree if you believe Acura has lost its way, and somewhat let the competition run far ahead. However they`re slowly realizing that to compete in a luxury market today, the brand has to constantly innovate, and not just feel comfortable with what they have. The technology today, that is the main driving force of innovation, gets stale real quick hence you see more substantial updates to vehicle equipment in a shorter period of time. In addition they need to have a great vehicle portfolio that appeals to the luxury buyer.

I`m banking Acura can really be a competitive driving force in the luxury circuit, once most of their vehicles are updated. So far, their only vehicle that seems to be is the RLX, and upcoming MDX. the rdx, tl or tsx (one got axed), ilx need to have a mid-cycle refresh to get the latest from Acura.

I agree completely and I hope they pull up their socks. Honda is a company with an awesome history in Car and Motorcycle engine development and racing credentials. And they are reliable and reasonably priced. Why they don't use their know how, experience and innovative force in the Acura lineup is beyond me and the biggest shame in today's car industry. C'mon Honda let down your hair and rock. Give us some goodies.

Originally Posted by NoI4plz

However Acura is still luxury. It`s not a regular car maker with say 2 luxury barges (Hyundai). Its typical Japanese Luxury. They try to be as lean as possible in terms of development costs.

That is the worst excuse I have ever heard for Acura's platform sharing ever. Does Lexus base their entire lineup around the Camry platform? Nope. Lexus is true Japanese luxury.

Acura is merely an upscale Honda, not quite luxury. You can go sit in an Accord and then sit in a TL. No major differences in trim at all. Very similar feeling. Infiniti is treading the fine line because they at least make some competitive sports sedans with RWD, V8, etc.

However they`re slowly realizing that to compete in a luxury market today, the brand has to constantly innovate, and not just feel comfortable with what they have.

If they realized that one has to innovate, why would they come out with the pathetic ILX? They're rushing an emergency facelift (like the '13 Civic) because it was really that terrible. Nothing in their lineup stands out, except the hideous beak on the front of all of them.

I`m banking Acura can really be a competitive driving force in the luxury circuit, once most of their vehicles are updated. So far, their only vehicle that seems to be is the RLX, and upcoming MDX. the rdx, tl or tsx (one got axed), ilx need to have a mid-cycle refresh to get the latest from Acura.

Sorry, I don't believe it. I can see Lexus and the Germans, but that's it. To be a driving force, a company has to be on the cutting edge. JUST releasing engines with direct injection or 6 speed automatics shows you are about 5-6 years behind the curve. (Especially since Hyundai even has it).

They don't even understand their lineup at all. They take the fantastic last-gen RDX with SH-AWD and the turbo-4, dump both the engine and AWD and make it a upscale CRV. They take the last gen (beautiful BTW) TL and ruin it with the hideous styling. They bring out an entry level Civic-based ILX that gets poor fuel economy in every trim, compared to its competition.

They finally get around to brining out direct injection and LED headlights, but guess what? It doesn't debut on an Acura, Honda brings it out on the '13 Accord

They still use decade-old J and K series engines that haven't been noteworthy in years.

Everyone is eating their lunch. Any brand that basically uses one platform to base all their models shows that they aren't serious about the luxury market. All they care about is the bottom dollar. True Japanese luxury is Lexus. (ISF, LFA, new GS).

Originally Posted by AutoUnion

That is the worst excuse I have ever heard for Acura's platform sharing ever. Does Lexus base their entire lineup around the Camry platform? Nope. Lexus is true Japanese luxury.

I`m pretty sure any excuse that anyone comes up with ,about Acura will be met with the same response from you so I`d rather not waste my time trying. However What I can say however are two things:

1) Lexus, Infiniti, Acura all platform share the heck out of themselves. remember that a 370z is the same as the G series (quite a weird pairing), the toyota camry is the same as a lexus es, and a Acura TL is the same as an Honda Accord.
2) Lexus and Infiniti have all gone thru or going their individual brand revolution. Lexus with their F-sport, Infiniti with the IPL, and Acura is slowly beginning this step. Acura is slowly getting there.


Acura is merely an upscale Honda, not quite luxury. You can go sit in an Accord and then sit in a TL. No major differences in trim at all. Very similar feeling. Infiniti is treading the fine line because they at least make some competitive sports sedans with RWD, V8, etc.

Recently had a chance to sit in a buddies `12 Camry, and redesigned GS. The interior trimmings are similar (not saying identical), but you can see that both dash material came off the same mfg line and possibly the same designer and engineer. Japanese Luxury vehicles never really hit the spot when it comes to interior design. I think between the german brands, interior designs have been really great with BMW's E+F-platform, (X/5series and above only) and Mercedes new lineup of Crossovers (think ML+GL).



If they realized that one has to innovate, why would they come out with the pathetic ILX? They're rushing an emergency facelift (like the '13 Civic) because it was really that terrible. Nothing in their lineup stands out, except the hideous beak on the front of all of them.

The Beak is quite odd I agree.

Sorry, I don't believe it. I can see Lexus and the Germans, but that's it. To be a driving force, a company has to be on the cutting edge. JUST releasing engines with direct injection or 6 speed automatics shows you are about 5-6 years behind the curve. (Especially since Hyundai even has it).


I agree, but just a couple years ago, Lexus was synonymous with phrase boring beige luxury. Then out of nowhere comes the LFA and the F-line and WOW Lexus becomes on par with De Germans. We can only hope for the same with Acura, but only time will tell However counting Acura out would be a hasty

They don't even understand their lineup at all. They take the fantastic last-gen RDX with SH-AWD and the turbo-4, dump both the engine and AWD and make it a upscale CRV. They take the last gen (beautiful BTW) TL and ruin it with the hideous styling. They bring out an entry level Civic-based ILX that gets poor fuel economy in every trim, compared to its competition.

They finally get around to brining out direct injection and LED headlights, but guess what? It doesn't debut on an Acura, Honda brings it out on the '13 Accord

They still use decade-old J and K series engines that haven't been noteworthy in years.

Everyone is eating their lunch. Any brand that basically uses one platform to base all their models shows that they aren't serious about the luxury market. All they care about is the bottom dollar. True Japanese luxury is Lexus. (ISF, LFA, new GS).

Your last bit is true, funny, and a bit of a rant. We can all sit here, argue how Acura is confused, distasteful, and just plain stupid in their decisions however weren't we all like this in our adolescence, and I`m guessing everyone turned out fine in the end. If we are to judge a brand in it`s adolescence, a time when they`re trying to find their brand identity, which once found, will solidify there future, I think its just too hasty. That would be similar to writing off Apple during the late 90s. However right after 98 Apple found their way and now their #1 in the field. WHO KNOWS LOL

^See Bold