245hp vs 258hp
Discussion
Fox- said:
If only people actually understood this, perhaps there would have been more used 535i for me to purchase 
I was about to buy a 535i sport touring from Sytner a couple of months back, I was going to pick it up on the Saturday after my ML was collected on the Friday, on the Wednesday of that week some numpty drove down the side of it causing all sorts of damage, this left me in a dilemma as I then had to wait to see what the insurance said, annoyingly they paid me out nearly 75% of what I was selling it for as a cash in lieu settlement, which was even better, but by the time I got that decision the 535i had gone. 
Roo3Stuart said:
To add to this discussion and in particular the longer journey point, my 535d has done 42 mpg over 45k miles from new but I only really use it for commuting so nearly all journeys are 50 miles and it does very little town work. On any decent drive it is hard to get below 40 but equally I've never been in the 50s. I think the economy is amazing for the grunt on offer and I would guess I'm saving plenty from the economy.
That mpg sounds entirely believable and I agree that in isolation it's impressive given the size of the car and the performance on offer. However, it's over 20% off the combined figure if it's a saloon (bit less if it's a Touring) and on those sort of commutes I wonder what a 535i would be doing? If a 535i saloon was missing it's combined figure by 10% (my experience with a 335i) it would be doing over 35mpg so yes the diesel's better but given the higher cost of derv the cost saving is probably less than £10/week on 20k miles/annum (so arguably not that significant). Having said that I'm sufficiently impressed with the engine in my 335d that I'd say the diesel would probably be the better choice in a 5 Series, especially if you tend to do longish runs; however, I'm just not convinced that the cost saving argument is as strong as the published figures would have you believe!smashy said:
My 120d I saw 21mpg once driving outer london postcodes for 20 miles ,traffic "normal" not sitting in stopped traffic
My 2005 120d auto would often be sat at 26.9 on the obc during the winter commute of 10 miles. The 335i sport touring would be about 2mpg behind that.
Then Fiona's 320d auto touring on a 57 plate would never drop below 39mpg and would often see around 60mpg on a run.
I think it is often luck of the draw with cars, I am sure the same model built a week later/earlier can give wildly different consumption figures.
JNW1 said:
Roo3Stuart said:
To add to this discussion and in particular the longer journey point, my 535d has done 42 mpg over 45k miles from new but I only really use it for commuting so nearly all journeys are 50 miles and it does very little town work. On any decent drive it is hard to get below 40 but equally I've never been in the 50s. I think the economy is amazing for the grunt on offer and I would guess I'm saving plenty from the economy.
That mpg sounds entirely believable and I agree that in isolation it's impressive given the size of the car and the performance on offer. However, it's over 20% off the combined figure if it's a saloon (bit less if it's a Touring) and on those sort of commutes I wonder what a 535i would be doing? If a 535i saloon was missing it's combined figure by 10% (my experience with a 335i) it would be doing over 35mpg so yes the diesel's better but given the higher cost of derv the cost saving is probably less than £10/week on 20k miles/annum (so arguably not that significant). Having said that I'm sufficiently impressed with the engine in my 335d that I'd say the diesel would probably be the better choice in a 5 Series, especially if you tend to do longish runs; however, I'm just not convinced that the cost saving argument is as strong as the published figures would have you believe!
I can well believe a 535i would do 35mpg but that is still 100 miles less per tank which means more regular trips to the petrol station and that would bother me a lot more than the £10. I also think you are right that the petrol wouldn't really offer anything over the diesel in a big lump like the 5 series is now.
Roo3Stuart said:
I also think you are right that the petrol wouldn't really offer anything over the diesel in a big lump like the 5 series is now.
It absolutely would - no diesel smell when you reverse with the window open, no idle clatter and no delay before the turbo wakes up when you nail it.To be fair these are about the only things I can think of to criticise the F10 diesel but none of them apply to the 535i thus the 535i is better
Fox- said:
Roo3Stuart said:
I also think you are right that the petrol wouldn't really offer anything over the diesel in a big lump like the 5 series is now.
It absolutely would - no diesel smell when you reverse with the window open, no idle clatter and no delay before the turbo wakes up when you nail it.To be fair these are about the only things I can think of to criticise the F10 diesel but none of them apply to the 535i thus the 535i is better
I am surprised at some of the mpg figures you guys are getting. My F11 530d will do 43mpg on long journeys (eg 85mph on motorway), but on my 10 mile commute on empty country roads is closer to 30mpg.
Average over 72,000 miles is dead on 35.
I push on but not that much.
Great car and if you are getting mid forties average then you are missing out on that box and engine at its best IMO.
Average over 72,000 miles is dead on 35.
I push on but not that much.
Great car and if you are getting mid forties average then you are missing out on that box and engine at its best IMO.
Fox- said:
It absolutely would - no diesel smell when you reverse with the window open, no idle clatter and no delay before the turbo wakes up when you nail i
To be fair these are about the only things I can think of to criticise the F10 diesel but none of them apply to the 535i thus the 535i is better
You are comparing a single turbo diesel to a twin turbo petrol and stating the criticism of the BMW diesel is he lag - step into play the 535d that is the direct competitor to the 535i which then reduces the 2 criticisms you have down to one. To be fair these are about the only things I can think of to criticise the F10 diesel but none of them apply to the 535i thus the 535i is better
The 535d v 535i performance should be very similar near identical bhp gives the game away there.
Clatter and smell that's certainly a minus for the diesel but the plus is fewer fuel stops which saves time a small amount of direct cash and keeps you warmer during the winter.
( I just love it when PH are protective over their specific P&J makes a nice difference to those who simply consider cars to be white goods for moving things A to B. ).
Oh Fox had a bit of fun in mine today over 30 ish miles cross country and lots of low gear fun -- mpg door to door ended up being 36 that was really pushing it ( making the most of the ice cold air more power but not damp so no ice conditions). I'm sure it would get less but frankly you'd be driving beyond the safe limit of the road and vastly over the speed limit.
Is that important? Its nice to have a fun car and frugal too in one - is it a compromise? Sure I'd love a 997 C2S and a tesla S + but I'd rather spend the money on the family instead. Plus its a superb place to be on a drive those comfort seats all the lot is so so good. Over 3k miles in now and I've filled up 5 times.... In the RS6 it would have been 12 times and let's say 15 mins a go so nearly 2 hours I've saved from being at a petrol station plus £650-700 extra in my sky rocket.
Welshbeef said:
Fox- said:
Roo3Stuart said:
I also think you are right that the petrol wouldn't really offer anything over the diesel in a big lump like the 5 series is now.
It absolutely would - no diesel smell when you reverse with the window open, no idle clatter and no delay before the turbo wakes up when you nail it.To be fair these are about the only things I can think of to criticise the F10 diesel but none of them apply to the 535i thus the 535i is better
Welshbeef said:
Wills2 said:
er.....you do!
Ok every forced turbo engine suffers lag of some sorts as such so does the 535i. Heck the 997 Turbo has turbo lag. Even the P1 does but they have torque filling which eliminates it.
A V8 M3 has no lag apart from the drive by wire
Roo3Stuart said:
You've caused me look up the combined figure - 53.3mpg!! I was once early for a meeting so chugged along the motorway at 60 and just nudged 50 until I left the motorway. Pretty sure 53 is impossible unless you dropped it from outer space.
I can well believe a 535i would do 35mpg but that is still 100 miles less per tank which means more regular trips to the petrol station and that would bother me a lot more than the £10. I also think you are right that the petrol wouldn't really offer anything over the diesel in a big lump like the 5 series is now.
A fair point on the range! On balance I think I'd lean towards a 535d over a 535i (especially for longer runs) but it would be marginal; either way you're sitting behind an excellent engine IMO. And I think you're dead right about the combined fuel consumption figures with diesels - the numbers are invariably cloud cuckoo land in normal driving and not even achievable on a run unless you drive like a granny! I can well believe a 535i would do 35mpg but that is still 100 miles less per tank which means more regular trips to the petrol station and that would bother me a lot more than the £10. I also think you are right that the petrol wouldn't really offer anything over the diesel in a big lump like the 5 series is now.
Fox- said:
Wills2 said:
So what exactly is your point?
That petrol > diesel 
M5 is different.
Is say its not a simple answer as it totally depends on its application and the specific requirement of the vehicle. If its a racing track beast high revs and aural pleasure are key ( though I really dislike the current F1 car noise)
Is it a comfortable family car - I'd say powerful diesel is a sensible option
Reality is there is not a clear winner
Thermal efficiency - diesel wins
Lowest fuel cost per mile - diesel wins
No coil packs/ignition system to go wrong - diesel wins
The fact that you can use a much higher % of the cars torque and power much more of the time - diesel wins
Sound - petrol wins
Reving out M3 style wins or RS6 etc / it does win v the 535d no question on proper WOT but then it has 150bhp less
The fact that an on powerful petrol starting it up I open the windows and enjoyed it every day - petrol wins (not once have I ever enjoyed the start up of a diesel/I don't mind it)
Smell - petrol wins
Frequency of fuel stops and wasted time - diesel wins
The thing is once the Tesla S technology comes into a 500 mile range option it will wipe out petrol and diesel instant 100% torque from 0 revs and tiny running cost and huge service schedule. Keep massive petrols for super sports cars for the fun instead of silent electric.
Its nice that everyone is different has different requirements and are able to rank things differently else we'd all be driving round in identical cars.
Welshbeef said:
Oh Fox had a bit of fun in mine today over 30 ish miles cross country and lots of low gear fun -- mpg door to door ended up being 36 that was really pushing it ( making the most of the ice cold air more power but not damp so no ice conditions). I'm sure it would get less but frankly you'd be driving beyond the safe limit of the road and vastly over the speed limit.
Mate what the hell are you talking about.At www.spritmonitor.de The long term average MPG of all 96 registered owners of 258bhp 530d models is 36 MPG.
Here are 7 people who are LIFETIME AVERAGING less than 30MPG.
http://www.spritmonitor.de/en/detail/649116.html
http://www.spritmonitor.de/en/detail/418899.html
http://www.spritmonitor.de/en/detail/546881.html
http://www.spritmonitor.de/en/detail/620545.html
http://www.spritmonitor.de/en/detail/619143.html
http://www.spritmonitor.de/en/detail/483448.html
http://www.spritmonitor.de/en/detail/609738.html
On many tankfuls they are managing only 24-25. Some less - I haven't looked.
Welshbeef said:
Steve Sucliffe (Autocar) seems to think his D3 360bhp does 43-46mpg but when thrashing it it will not go under 36mpg whereas the M3 would be 10-15mpg.
Its In his recent Autocar videos - given his exposure to these cars and the ability to use the power it adds a notable amount of weight to my statement.
Don't be so gullible about what a magazine says mate.Its In his recent Autocar videos - given his exposure to these cars and the ability to use the power it adds a notable amount of weight to my statement.
There's only one owner recording his D3 figures on spritmonitor but more will come. He (let's assume it's a 'he', since he is recording his fuel economy on the internet it's extremely likely to be a 'he') he is averaging 38. He got less than 30 on a handful of tanks.
http://www.spritmonitor.de/en/detail/614551.html
These are lovely, lovely BMWs but let's take realistic samples and not delude ourselves!
I can repeatedly do 100-110 MPG for a few miles in a 2.2 HDi 173bhp Citroen C5 Estate. It gets exceptionally boring.
Now can we get back to the technical differences of the engines and just generally enjoying the cars not being smug about numbers?!
Gassing Station | BMW General | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff