RE: BMW 435d xDrive: PH Carpool
Discussion
cerb4.5lee said:
Most car magazines do say that the 640d is the pick of the range to be fair and I haven't driven the 640i but I do find it hard to believe that the 640d engine is smoother though.
I think an engine should have a feel good factor about it and I have never felt that with a diesel engine, yet a petrol engine to me gives more ultimate reward and satisfaction and obviously sounds better too, but its good that customers have the choice though for sure and most do go for the 'd'.
I think the feel good factor is right at the heart of the problem. Petrol cars like TVRs and such are about raw enjoyment of the petrol engine sound. You can't get any closer to a petrol engine enjoyment with a TVR short of having sex with an engine.I think an engine should have a feel good factor about it and I have never felt that with a diesel engine, yet a petrol engine to me gives more ultimate reward and satisfaction and obviously sounds better too, but its good that customers have the choice though for sure and most do go for the 'd'.
However over the last ten or so years a lot of petrol engined cars have become similar with shared engines, very similar performance and pretty much all look like and sound like rather benign white goods to me. Even powerful cars were totally docile at normal speeds. You can't use the extra power any more and when you do there isn't much fun as all you hear is a low sewing machine whine rather than anything spine tingling and deafening like a TVR.
So cars started to become all about the numbers and less about the feeling. BMW introduced a range of M5 each a few useless BHP more than the one before, and had to augment the noise using the radio!!! No M car is a challenge to drive. Any granny could drive an M5 now.
I think all true car enthusiasts lost interest at that point.
If its all about the numbers the diesel beats the petrol pretty much anywhere within the confines of the British roads on the criteria we are left with
julian64 said:
I think the feel good factor is right at the heart of the problem. Petrol cars like TVRs and such are about raw enjoyment of the petrol engine sound. You can't get any closer to a petrol engine enjoyment with a TVR short of having sex with an engine.
However over the last ten or so years a lot of petrol engined cars have become similar with shared engines, very similar performance and pretty much all look like and sound like rather benign white goods to me. Even powerful cars were totally docile at normal speeds. You can't use the extra power any more and when you do there isn't much fun as all you hear is a low sewing machine whine rather than anything spine tingling and deafening like a TVR.
So cars started to become all about the numbers and less about the feeling. BMW introduced a range of M5 each a few useless BHP more than the one before, and had to augment the noise using the radio!!! No M car is a challenge to drive. Any granny could drive an M5 now.
I think all true car enthusiasts lost interest at that point.
If its all about the numbers the diesel beats the petrol pretty much anywhere within the confines of the British roads on the criteria we are left with
I have yet to hear a TVR that sounded anywhere near as good as the owners claim it to be.However over the last ten or so years a lot of petrol engined cars have become similar with shared engines, very similar performance and pretty much all look like and sound like rather benign white goods to me. Even powerful cars were totally docile at normal speeds. You can't use the extra power any more and when you do there isn't much fun as all you hear is a low sewing machine whine rather than anything spine tingling and deafening like a TVR.
So cars started to become all about the numbers and less about the feeling. BMW introduced a range of M5 each a few useless BHP more than the one before, and had to augment the noise using the radio!!! No M car is a challenge to drive. Any granny could drive an M5 now.
I think all true car enthusiasts lost interest at that point.
If its all about the numbers the diesel beats the petrol pretty much anywhere within the confines of the British roads on the criteria we are left with
julian64 said:
cerb4.5lee said:
Most car magazines do say that the 640d is the pick of the range to be fair and I haven't driven the 640i but I do find it hard to believe that the 640d engine is smoother though.
I think an engine should have a feel good factor about it and I have never felt that with a diesel engine, yet a petrol engine to me gives more ultimate reward and satisfaction and obviously sounds better too, but its good that customers have the choice though for sure and most do go for the 'd'.
I think the feel good factor is right at the heart of the problem. Petrol cars like TVRs and such are about raw enjoyment of the petrol engine sound. You can't get any closer to a petrol engine enjoyment with a TVR short of having sex with an engine.I think an engine should have a feel good factor about it and I have never felt that with a diesel engine, yet a petrol engine to me gives more ultimate reward and satisfaction and obviously sounds better too, but its good that customers have the choice though for sure and most do go for the 'd'.
However over the last ten or so years a lot of petrol engined cars have become similar with shared engines, very similar performance and pretty much all look like and sound like rather benign white goods to me. Even powerful cars were totally docile at normal speeds. You can't use the extra power any more and when you do there isn't much fun as all you hear is a low sewing machine whine rather than anything spine tingling and deafening like a TVR.
So cars started to become all about the numbers and less about the feeling. BMW introduced a range of M5 each a few useless BHP more than the one before, and had to augment the noise using the radio!!! No M car is a challenge to drive. Any granny could drive an M5 now.
I think all true car enthusiasts lost interest at that point.
If its all about the numbers the diesel beats the petrol pretty much anywhere within the confines of the British roads on the criteria we are left with
julian64 said:
I think the feel good factor is right at the heart of the problem. Petrol cars like TVRs and such are about raw enjoyment of the petrol engine sound. You can't get any closer to a petrol engine enjoyment with a TVR short of having sex with an engine.
However over the last ten or so years a lot of petrol engined cars have become similar with shared engines, very similar performance and pretty much all look like and sound like rather benign white goods to me. Even powerful cars were totally docile at normal speeds. You can't use the extra power any more and when you do there isn't much fun as all you hear is a low sewing machine whine rather than anything spine tingling and deafening like a TVR.
So cars started to become all about the numbers and less about the feeling. BMW introduced a range of M5 each a few useless BHP more than the one before, and had to augment the noise using the radio!!! No M car is a challenge to drive. Any granny could drive an M5 now.
I think all true car enthusiasts lost interest at that point.
If its all about the numbers the diesel beats the petrol pretty much anywhere within the confines of the British roads on the criteria we are left with
Issue is that cars are evermore expensive to engineer and maintain ever tighter compliance whilst coping with increased competition. They therefore need sales volume. To have an M5 that you had to be a highly skilled driver with the dexterity of an olympic gymnast would appease a hand full of car nuts (most of whom couldn't buy one) but would preclude 10,000s of men, women and granny's that could. Engineering a car to be better than it's competitors whilst appealing to as many as possible is the name of the game these manufacturers have to play. They can then make the more extreme versions at a (huge) premium to appease those are enthusiasts and DO have deep packets.However over the last ten or so years a lot of petrol engined cars have become similar with shared engines, very similar performance and pretty much all look like and sound like rather benign white goods to me. Even powerful cars were totally docile at normal speeds. You can't use the extra power any more and when you do there isn't much fun as all you hear is a low sewing machine whine rather than anything spine tingling and deafening like a TVR.
So cars started to become all about the numbers and less about the feeling. BMW introduced a range of M5 each a few useless BHP more than the one before, and had to augment the noise using the radio!!! No M car is a challenge to drive. Any granny could drive an M5 now.
I think all true car enthusiasts lost interest at that point.
If its all about the numbers the diesel beats the petrol pretty much anywhere within the confines of the British roads on the criteria we are left with
C7 JFW said:
I have yet to hear a TVR that sounded anywhere near as good as the owners claim it to be.
I think you either get TVR`s or you don't, I am yet to hear a decent BMW engine and some would argue that the S54 in my Z4M is a decent sounding engine yet to me it was just tinny and wasp like in its noise, also had the S65 in the V8 M3 and that didn't sound anything like a V8 and was seriously muted(not to mention it hasn't any torque either).I would rather listen to the AJPV8 in a Cerbera or the Rover V8 in a Chim/Griff all day long than the muted and uninvolving M engines.
cerb4.5lee said:
Ares said:
ST270 said:
Good insight cheers!
Wonder if anyone can now compare the 435i with the 435d - they are similar priced but would the nice noise and rwd be worth the lower mpg!?
I did similar with e 640d Vs 640i. The 'd' has a clean sweep in everything but engine noise. Quicker, more relaxing, smoother, better power delivery, more frugal, better range. Aside from the 'i' sounding better, the 'd' betters it comfortably. Wonder if anyone can now compare the 435i with the 435d - they are similar priced but would the nice noise and rwd be worth the lower mpg!?
I think an engine should have a feel good factor about it and I have never felt that with a diesel engine, yet a petrol engine to me gives more ultimate reward and satisfaction and obviously sounds better too, but its good that customers have the choice though for sure and most do go for the 'd'.
cerb4.5lee said:
I think you either get TVR`s or you don't, I am yet to hear a decent BMW engine and some would argue that the S54 in my Z4M is a decent sounding engine yet to me it was just tinny and wasp like in its noise, also had the S65 in the V8 M3 and that didn't sound anything like a V8 and was seriously muted(not to mention it hasn't any torque either).
I would rather listen to the AJPV8 in a Cerbera or the Rover V8 in a Chim/Griff all day long than the muted and uninvolving M engines.
The Griff engine is a peach. I would rather listen to the AJPV8 in a Cerbera or the Rover V8 in a Chim/Griff all day long than the muted and uninvolving M engines.
BMW V8s are often not audibly up there with Audi and AMG. But that is the exhaust. The M5/M6 V8 sounds good, but underwhelming....but in the X6M it sounds like Thor's slightly more vocal and raucous elder brother.
long story short, some diesel are much better sounding than they used to be (muted). And most petrol engines today are no where near as good sound wise as they used to be (muted)
couple that with the fact that in every other criteria on a British road from 0-70 the equivalent diesel is faster and more frugal then it really is getting to be a no brainer.
I think its sad, but it its pretty undeniable for me.
couple that with the fact that in every other criteria on a British road from 0-70 the equivalent diesel is faster and more frugal then it really is getting to be a no brainer.
I think its sad, but it its pretty undeniable for me.
Ares said:
cerb4.5lee said:
Ares said:
ST270 said:
Good insight cheers!
Wonder if anyone can now compare the 435i with the 435d - they are similar priced but would the nice noise and rwd be worth the lower mpg!?
I did similar with e 640d Vs 640i. The 'd' has a clean sweep in everything but engine noise. Quicker, more relaxing, smoother, better power delivery, more frugal, better range. Aside from the 'i' sounding better, the 'd' betters it comfortably. Wonder if anyone can now compare the 435i with the 435d - they are similar priced but would the nice noise and rwd be worth the lower mpg!?
I think an engine should have a feel good factor about it and I have never felt that with a diesel engine, yet a petrol engine to me gives more ultimate reward and satisfaction and obviously sounds better too, but its good that customers have the choice though for sure and most do go for the 'd'.
I have seen the phrase "for a diesel", like this is some plucky underdog, its a top of the range diesel model that costs fifty grand with options 
Of course it shifts, it has 300 odd bhp and 4wd, diesels arent the poor relation, they have billions in development over the last twenty odd years, I think the mentality comes from old Sierra 2.3 DLs and Non turbo Pug 405 diesels and the misery they induced, then diesels got a turbo and were viable for those without access to red diesel and a wallet with a padlock, then we got addicted to 45 mpg and the government made concessions, but they are no longer the poor relation.
Of course it shifts, it has 300 odd bhp and 4wd, diesels arent the poor relation, they have billions in development over the last twenty odd years, I think the mentality comes from old Sierra 2.3 DLs and Non turbo Pug 405 diesels and the misery they induced, then diesels got a turbo and were viable for those without access to red diesel and a wallet with a padlock, then we got addicted to 45 mpg and the government made concessions, but they are no longer the poor relation.
J4CKO said:
I have seen the phrase "for a diesel", like this is some plucky underdog, its a top of the range diesel model that costs fifty grand with options
Of course it shifts, it has 300 odd bhp and 4wd, diesels arent the poor relation, they have billions in development over the last twenty odd years, I think the mentality comes from old Sierra 2.3 DLs and Non turbo Pug 405 diesels and the misery they induced, then diesels got a turbo and were viable for those without access to red diesel and a wallet with a padlock, then we got addicted to 45 mpg and the government made concessions, but they are no longer the poor relation.
Much to PH's chagrin, Diesels can now stand toe-to-toe with their equivalent petrol variants. Even the noise argument is weakening (but will never be eradicated).Of course it shifts, it has 300 odd bhp and 4wd, diesels arent the poor relation, they have billions in development over the last twenty odd years, I think the mentality comes from old Sierra 2.3 DLs and Non turbo Pug 405 diesels and the misery they induced, then diesels got a turbo and were viable for those without access to red diesel and a wallet with a padlock, then we got addicted to 45 mpg and the government made concessions, but they are no longer the poor relation.
It wouldn't really be an M5 if it wasn't as easy to drive as a 520d; that's half the point of the car. julian64 said:
long story short, some diesel are much better sounding than they used to be (muted). And most petrol engines today are no where near as good sound wise as they used to be (muted)
couple that with the fact that in every other criteria on a British road from 0-70 the equivalent diesel is faster and more frugal then it really is getting to be a no brainer.
I think its sad, but it its pretty undeniable for me.
I think this is a very valid point. Before I plumped for a 435i, I test drove a 430d and it was a lovely engine. In the end, as only do 10k miles pa, I couldn't quite persuade myself to switch to the dark side.couple that with the fact that in every other criteria on a British road from 0-70 the equivalent diesel is faster and more frugal then it really is getting to be a no brainer.
I think its sad, but it its pretty undeniable for me.
Having owned the 435i for nearly a year now, I can say, it is an absolutely lovely engine, smooth, refined, quick, and pretty economical (for a 3l petrol with 300hp...).
The downside for me is the combination of it being so quiet and the low down torque means there is very little sensory feedback about engine revs. I've realised that when driving an "old-fashioned" petrol engine, you put your foot down, and as the revs build, so does the power and the noise, so you get feedback about when and if you need to change gear. With the BMW , you don't really get this feedback, so occasionally, when driving it in manual, I find I'm in too low or high a gear.
I think like most things in modern cars, its just needs a bit of a different technique to the "thrash it until you hear the valves bounce, then change up" approach of my youth.
PHMatt said:
4.7 seconds to 62 and 49mpg "aveerage" sound very very optimistic to me.
That would make it quicker than a similarly weighted/powered R34 GTR
And that MPG average over 26k miles? It stops moving after about 200. Try resetting the computer more often.
Many thanks for your input.That would make it quicker than a similarly weighted/powered R34 GTR
And that MPG average over 26k miles? It stops moving after about 200. Try resetting the computer more often.
The mpg now stands at 50.0 over the 26.5k miles now under the 435d's belt, it has two mpg computers, one I keep as original, the other re sets itself every day, sometimes its better than 50mpg, sometimes worse ( the clue is in the title 'average' ) It has hit 71mpg and dipped to 40mpg at worst but we all need to remember the fuel computers always exaggerate, the 435d is around 3% optimistic, but it gives an idea of fuel used. If anyone thinks I'm being very optimistic, please come over and I'll take you for a very boring spin !
The 0-62 time is the factory figure not mine, although mine would be a tad quicker as it was remapped, don't forget the 435d has two more gears and much more torque. Of course a remapped R34 would be very much quicker.
A very rough and simple guide to how quick a car feels on the road is bhp + torque divided by weight.( yes, I know, many other factors will effect this )
ST270 said:
Good insight cheers!
Wonder if anyone can now compare the 435i with the 435d - they are similar priced but would the nice noise and rwd be worth the lower mpg!?
Thank you for your input.Wonder if anyone can now compare the 435i with the 435d - they are similar priced but would the nice noise and rwd be worth the lower mpg!?
I had a 435i on demo for a few days, it was lovely, smooth, fast, with relatively good economy and good torque, but, for me it was not as good as the 'd'. I don't pay for fuel but I hate to give the Chancellor more than needed, I also dislike stopping for fuel....a lot. The nearest rival was the D4 Alpina, especially in Dark metallic green with tan leather, I also prefer rwd ( just ) but I dislike the four exhausts and silly wheels. It would depreciate less too. On balance the 435d had it.
Gassing Station | General Gassing | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff