123d Anyone running one?
Discussion
I want a small "hot hatch" type car. I was drawn to the Focus RS but it is quite big and a bit too lairy looking. I dont want another VW and keepcoming back to the 123d.
Anyone living with one day to day, do they feel zippy (i'll have the 250 map done) and any thoughts, positive or negative.
My budget is about £23k so can't stretch to a 135, and it doesnt appear that you can get a 135d which is a shame.
Anyone living with one day to day, do they feel zippy (i'll have the 250 map done) and any thoughts, positive or negative.
My budget is about £23k so can't stretch to a 135, and it doesnt appear that you can get a 135d which is a shame.
Simond S said:
Anyone living with one day to day, do they feel zippy (i'll have the 250 map done) and any thoughts, positive or negative.
Many people will kick up at my opinion, but then again I know many who agree - in that the 120d is a far better engine. Just like the X30d is more fun than the X35d. These are diesel engines, and however cleverly you tweak them with two stage turbos, they will always beat to the drum of diesel clatter. Yes, agreed, on paper the 123d whips the 120d's arse, but drive one after the other (anywhere but on a track) and the 120d will leave you with the bigger smile (even more so if you plan on re-mapping).
It's a hard thing to explain. I work for BMW so have often driver both back to back, and somehow the 120d just feels more purposeful and composed. It feels like a high performance, torquey diesel. Whereas the 123d just feels a bit wishy-washy. Neither here nor there. It is of course fast, GTI fast.. but for some reason it just doesn't feel it.
Hope these late-night words of wisdom get what I'm sure will be a very interesting debate rolling!
Simond S said:
I want a small "hot hatch" type car. I was drawn to the Focus RS but it is quite big and a bit too lairy looking. I dont want another VW and keepcoming back to the 123d.
Anyone living with one day to day, do they feel zippy (i'll have the 250 map done) and any thoughts, positive or negative.
My budget is about £23k so can't stretch to a 135, and it doesnt appear that you can get a 135d which is a shame.
I have a 123d as my daily driver at the moment and have done about 5k miles in it since buying in June. I went for an SE because I didn't want an over-firm ride but to be honest it still doesn't ride as well over most roads as my E46 M3 CS (it's on run flats so that probably doesn't help). I also find the seats in the SE a bit lacking in lateral support (feel like I'm going to fall out of the window if I go round a corner quickly!) so overall the package isn't great as far as comfort is concerned. The engine is pretty smooth for a 4-pot diesel and it goes fairly well; however, the power delivery is more linear than with a lot of turbos so it's a bit deceptive and is actually quicker than it feels. I've seen AOK's comments regarding the 120d and I can see one of those might feel faster; however, be under no illusions, it isn't! The handling and steering are pretty good so overall I'd say the 123's decent to drive.Anyone living with one day to day, do they feel zippy (i'll have the 250 map done) and any thoughts, positive or negative.
My budget is about £23k so can't stretch to a 135, and it doesnt appear that you can get a 135d which is a shame.
However, where a 120d may have a distinct advantage is in the economy stakes. I can't persuade my car to average more than about 45mpg and I've never managed 50mpg on a single tank. I think that's in part due to relatively short gearing (about 33mph/'000 in a manual) although if you'd fancy a 135i or a Focus RS I guess economy isn't your priority!
The one general comment I'd make on the 1-series is that I don't think the build quality is great. My car has more squeaks and rattles at 24k miles than my M3 has at 68k miles and the quality of the plastics inside isn't in the same league. It's perhaps unfair to compare an M3 to a 123d in that respect but I suspect a Golf would put the 1-series to shame in the build quality stakes as well.
If I was giving my car an overall rating I'd probably say 6 out of 10. Decent performance, refined engine (for a diesel), decent handling and steering are in the plus column; however, disappointing build quality, poor ride, mediocre seats and indifferent economy are in the minus column for me.
The 123d is far more linear than the 120d thanks to the twin-turbo setup. I've come to it from a Focus ST with 270bhp (so not much less than a standard RS) and I don't ever regret it or feel short-changed.
It's as quick as the ST from A-to-B (if not quicker) and returns 35mpg even when being driven like I stole it. The ST struggled to break 20mpg at the same pace.
A seriously good little car. If you're doing a lot of motorway work, the 120d has slightly longer gearing than the 123d which makes it better for that sort of thing. I haven't remapped mine but I know guys who have and it's absurdly quick for a 4-pot diesel.
On the move, you don't even really hear it's a diesel. There are reasons why the engine has won so many accolades, and why EVO loved it in the Alpina D3.
It's as quick as the ST from A-to-B (if not quicker) and returns 35mpg even when being driven like I stole it. The ST struggled to break 20mpg at the same pace.
A seriously good little car. If you're doing a lot of motorway work, the 120d has slightly longer gearing than the 123d which makes it better for that sort of thing. I haven't remapped mine but I know guys who have and it's absurdly quick for a 4-pot diesel.
On the move, you don't even really hear it's a diesel. There are reasons why the engine has won so many accolades, and why EVO loved it in the Alpina D3.
AOK said:
It is of course fast, GTI fast.. but for some reason it just doesn't feel it.
I'd be lead to believe this is because of the sequential turbo's. With a single turbo diesel you will get nothing nothing nothing then a huge surge of power (making it feel fast) whilst the 123d has very smooth power delivery.To help the OP, I bought mine on Saturday. I absolutly love it. With steady driving it does far better on fuel that I could have ever imagined. For example, Sunday night I picked up three friends from Wakefield. We had a drive to Leeds Bfd airport and back. We stopped at 3 petrol stations (not for fuel, passanger requests) and basically took it steady. I overtook 3 cars on the journey that were holding me up and went to/slightly above the speed limits. When we got back to Wakefield we were guessing the average consumption. The general consensus was between 40 and 45, I found it had averaged 55.4mpg (OBC reading). Nobody could believe it, we never went on a motorway and on the way there we went through Leeds inner ring road...
Despite what is said on babybmw.net I believe it can reasonably easily achieve the claimed figures, for some reason they tend to average around 45mpg on there.
I will be looking at remapping mine in a few months, I think 269hp has been achieved and 250hp seems the minimum. If this doesn't effect fuel consumption this makes a sub 6secs 0-60 car that can routinely achieve 50mpg+. It doesn't take much to make a decision.
Also with a mild remap. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xtz8xBspGGA
JNW1 said:
I can't persuade my car to average more than about 45mpg and I've never managed 50mpg on a single tank.
This is the general consensus on the babybmw.net forum and it is really starting to piss me off now. If you cannot average over 45mpg in this car you have no idea how to drive. The next time you're out, stick to this.When driving at a constant speed.
30mph=4th gear 1400rpm~
40mph=5th gear 1500rpm~
50mph=6th gear 1500rpm~
Don't accelerate over 2200 with usual driving. I actually tried yesterday to achieve under 45mpg, I drove quite aggressivly home from work and tried to maintain 90 on the motorway. I got home to find 45.5 average...
I've achieved 55mpg on a tank before. It was boring and slow. I spank the nuts off mine most of the time and average 35-40mpg. It's twice what I was getting in the Focus ST with the same driving style (and same pace).
It's nice to know it can do it if you want it to - I normally prefer to have a bit of fun in mine.
It's nice to know it can do it if you want it to - I normally prefer to have a bit of fun in mine.
Thanks for all the replies chaps.
Economy isnt a major player, but I dont want another silly mpg like the Aston!
My idea is that the car is used for shopping, running around in, maybe driving up the motorway to work a few times a month (300 mile round trip)etc..ive in my mind.
Run flats evoke a negative thoungt in my mind. Not sure why but I dont think I've heard any positive comments about them. I did start the day looking at the 120d after initial comments, but would prefer a 123d unless there is a 130d out there somewhere??
My main reason for the 1 series is that i think t he 3 is a big car nowadays, and I like the rwd mini sized cars that we had in my younger years. Mk11 escorts, chevettes, Cortini Mk3's are all remmbered fondly and I'm hoping a smallish rwd will still be fun to drive.
I have owned a 120d and a 123d and think I prefer the 120d, both were mapped and the 123d was quicker, but like above something was missing.
I wouldn't have another now but would own a 130i which is an absolute blast and almost a perfect car.
I was the same regarding mpg, 39average but struggled to get past 45mpg, I don't like sitting at 70mph though. In comparison we also had a 320d auto touring and that was far better mpg wise, could average 48mpg per tank and see 60mpg on a run. 123d has crap gearing.
I wouldn't have another now but would own a 130i which is an absolute blast and almost a perfect car.
I was the same regarding mpg, 39average but struggled to get past 45mpg, I don't like sitting at 70mph though. In comparison we also had a 320d auto touring and that was far better mpg wise, could average 48mpg per tank and see 60mpg on a run. 123d has crap gearing.
StottyZr said:
JNW1 said:
I can't persuade my car to average more than about 45mpg and I've never managed 50mpg on a single tank.
This is the general consensus on the babybmw.net forum and it is really starting to piss me off now. If you cannot average over 45mpg in this car you have no idea how to drive. The next time you're out, stick to this.When driving at a constant speed.
30mph=4th gear 1400rpm~
40mph=5th gear 1500rpm~
50mph=6th gear 1500rpm~
Don't accelerate over 2200 with usual driving.
I'd wager that you've never met JNW1 and I also very much doubt you've ever been driven by them either. That being the case, the patronising & rude comments like the ones you posted above are just riduculous. Have you considered the possibility that JNW1, like the "general concensus" 123d drivers on babybmw.net, actually uses his car's performance and doesn't treat every journey as an economy run.
Edited by Crackie on Tuesday 6th September 22:44
I've had a 123d coupe for two years and have no plans to change it. It's been a great car and perfect for my commute and daily driving.
I have had a remap to around 240bhp and 500Nm torque, and my real average mpg is around 41 though the OBC shows 42.8. I drive it to enjoy it and am not obsessive a out mpg.
Mine is an M sport with runflats, but don't have a problem with the ride. The M sport seats are great and mine is fully loaded with heated leather, idrive, usb, bluetooth, cruise, xenons etc which make it a really nice place to be.
I have had a remap to around 240bhp and 500Nm torque, and my real average mpg is around 41 though the OBC shows 42.8. I drive it to enjoy it and am not obsessive a out mpg.
Mine is an M sport with runflats, but don't have a problem with the ride. The M sport seats are great and mine is fully loaded with heated leather, idrive, usb, bluetooth, cruise, xenons etc which make it a really nice place to be.
StottyZr said:
This is the general consensus on the babybmw.net forum and it is really starting to piss me off now. If you cannot average over 45mpg in this car you have no idea how to drive. The next time you're out, stick to this.
When driving at a constant speed.
30mph=4th gear 1400rpm~
40mph=5th gear 1500rpm~
50mph=6th gear 1500rpm~
Don't accelerate over 2200 with usual driving. I actually tried yesterday to achieve under 45mpg, I drove quite aggressivly home from work and tried to maintain 90 on the motorway. I got home to find 45.5 average...
Despite my apparent inability to drive I regularly beat the combined figure in my M3 without ever seeking to maximise mpg; same driver, same road conditions but very different results relative to the published combined figures (plus 10% in the M3, minus 16% in the 123d). Actually, from the 123's point of view the comparison is even worse than that because I have been trying to improve the mpg figure in the 123d (by paying attention to the shift indicator and by driving a bit more slowly) so if I adopted the same style in the M3 I'm sure I'd probably beat the combined figure by more than 10%! When driving at a constant speed.
30mph=4th gear 1400rpm~
40mph=5th gear 1500rpm~
50mph=6th gear 1500rpm~
Don't accelerate over 2200 with usual driving. I actually tried yesterday to achieve under 45mpg, I drove quite aggressivly home from work and tried to maintain 90 on the motorway. I got home to find 45.5 average...
I'm afraid I don't see your drive from work "thrash" as convincing evidence that you can't get less than 45mpg out of a 123d; my figure is calculated from actual usage over almost 5k miles so I'd suggest it's far more representative than someone resetting the trip for 20 miles (or however far you live from work!). However, if getting to the published figure (by knowing how to drive?) involves driving like a granny and never exceeding 2200rpm I'm out!
Actually, I've just spotted from your initial post that your experience with a 123d doesn't even amount to a week so you're not really in a position to give an informed opinion are you? However, I see you live in Yorkshire and so do I so if you'd like me to come round and demonstrate how easy it is to get less than 45mpg out of your 123d with a bit of aggressive driving it would be a pleasure; I'll even pay for the fuel!
Edited by JNW1 on Tuesday 6th September 22:09
JNW1 I'm currently doing a full tank test to see what my average and I'm hoping to be proven wrong otherwise I'm going to pull my hair out.
An average over 500 miles should be somewhat more accurate. I don't drive for economy as such, but why somebody would sit at a constant speed in a lower gear than neccasary is beyond me. I make progress pretty damn quickly and don't tend to slow down for corners.
And likewise with the drive, if the car achieves 50mpg+ over the full tank I will pick you up and go for a drive. I make progress, change gear appropriatly and slow for red lights to get a rolling start etc but this isn't effort, its natural.
Apologies for the 'insulting' comments but my experiance differs from almost every other 123d driver seemingly :S hopefully this full tank run should set me straight!
An average over 500 miles should be somewhat more accurate. I don't drive for economy as such, but why somebody would sit at a constant speed in a lower gear than neccasary is beyond me. I make progress pretty damn quickly and don't tend to slow down for corners.
And likewise with the drive, if the car achieves 50mpg+ over the full tank I will pick you up and go for a drive. I make progress, change gear appropriatly and slow for red lights to get a rolling start etc but this isn't effort, its natural.
Apologies for the 'insulting' comments but my experiance differs from almost every other 123d driver seemingly :S hopefully this full tank run should set me straight!
StottyZr said:
JNW1 I'm currently doing a full tank test to see what my average and I'm hoping to be proven wrong otherwise I'm going to pull my hair out.
An average over 500 miles should be somewhat more accurate. I don't drive for economy as such, but why somebody would sit at a constant speed in a lower gear than neccasary is beyond me. I make progress pretty damn quickly and don't tend to slow down for corners.
And likewise with the drive, if the car achieves 50mpg+ over the full tank I will pick you up and go for a drive. I make progress, change gear appropriatly and slow for red lights to get a rolling start etc but this isn't effort, its natural.
Apologies for the 'insulting' comments but my experiance differs from almost every other 123d driver seemingly :S hopefully this full tank run should set me straight!
No offence taken!An average over 500 miles should be somewhat more accurate. I don't drive for economy as such, but why somebody would sit at a constant speed in a lower gear than neccasary is beyond me. I make progress pretty damn quickly and don't tend to slow down for corners.
And likewise with the drive, if the car achieves 50mpg+ over the full tank I will pick you up and go for a drive. I make progress, change gear appropriatly and slow for red lights to get a rolling start etc but this isn't effort, its natural.
Apologies for the 'insulting' comments but my experiance differs from almost every other 123d driver seemingly :S hopefully this full tank run should set me straight!
I do understand the point about short-shifting with a diesel and certainly when I first got the 123d I was perhaps holding on to the gears for a bit too long (probably a consequence of being used to driving the M3!). However, I have adapted my style when I drive the 123 but it doesn't seem to have made any real difference. Furthermore, a lot of my driving is A-roads and motorways where I'm in top gear most of the time anyway and even tickling it I can't get 50mpg out of a tank (think 48 point something is the best I've had). The trip computer tells me the car's doing a bit better than it actually is but even so that's only around 47mpg (the genuine figure measured over 5k miles is just over 45mpg).
Although I drive quickly when conditions allow I certainly don't think I'm a "rev and brake" merchant and generally I've always managed to beat the claimed combined mpg figures for the various cars I've had. Interestingly, the one other exception to that aside from the 123d was my E46 330cd which was always about 10% down on the claimed figure of 42mpg; perhaps I should just wake up, smell the coffee and accept I don't get on with diesels!
Anyway, will be interested how the mpg settles down in your car; if you can hit the combined number without driving like a granny everywhere I'll be the first to say well done!
JNW1 said:
However, where a 120d may have a distinct advantage is in the economy stakes. I can't persuade my car to average more than about 45mpg and I've never managed 50mpg on a single tank. I think that's in part due to relatively short gearing (about 33mph/'000 in a manual) although if you'd fancy a 135i or a Focus RS I guess economy isn't your priority!
I can regularly get 49.5 (OBC seems to like this figure) or 50.4 (and this one too!) on a tank. Though that is driving carefully and largely motorway miles.45 seems like the 'overall' average across most owners though. I've yet to change the air and fuel filter on mine, I know from other people I know with diesels they've made a difference (particularly the fuel filter) to the figures.
JNW1 said:
The one general comment I'd make on the 1-series is that I don't think the build quality is great. My car has more squeaks and rattles at 24k miles than my M3 has at 68k miles and the quality of the plastics inside isn't in the same league. It's perhaps unfair to compare an M3 to a 123d in that respect but I suspect a Golf would put the 1-series to shame in the build quality stakes as well.
Agreed, internal build quality is very poor. Full of poor fitments and subsequent squeaks and rattles. They're all fixable - but why should you have to at that price point?It's the one gripe I could level generically at the range which is surprising as it's the one you would least expect to worry about.
To answer OP - I've had one a few months now as a daily driver. I love it, despite it's foibles. It's not super quick but pacey enough (I'd love to see what a remap does to it but not convinced regarding longevity and regardless I'm still in the warranty period), power delivery is very linear as stated and it doesn't feel very diesel-esque when driving it (other than the shortened rev range).
I find the handling great (though I'm no Stig) and enjoy the overall feel of the drive. The economy for the power it can deliver is very impressive and eminently achievable. The feel of the switch gear in the cabin is also great. I got back into a new style mondeo for the first time since owning the 123d a couple of days ago and was shocked that the mondeo, which I'd previously driven and considered quite well made and luxurious, felt incredibly cheap and nasty in comparison to the BMW.
The only gripes I could level at it are the build quality (as above), could do with a tiny bit more space (I believe the new 1 series range addresses this in some way) and the potential looming issues of diesel ownership.
Other than that I'm struggling to see why I would ever want to change it.
Simond S said:
Run flats evoke a negative thoungt in my mind. Not sure why but I dont think I've heard any positive comments about them. I did start the day looking at the 120d after initial comments, but would prefer a 123d unless there is a 130d out there somewhere??
I have runflats on mine. I was a bit concerned over the tales of poor handling, awful ride quality and traction in the wet.But I've found the handling seems fine to me, ride quality is bumpy but I've drive much much worse and I have to put some effort in to break traction even in pouring rain. I do have no frame of non-runflat-on-the-car reference though so listening to people who have had both should probably be a good idea
The one thing I will say is that when it's time for new tyres I'll be ditching them - purely on price reasons alone.
Oh and no 3 litre diesel engines in the 1 series I'm afraid.
Simond S said:
My main reason for the 1 series is that i think t he 3 is a big car nowadays, and I like the rwd mini sized cars that we had in my younger years. Mk11 escorts, chevettes, Cortini Mk3's are all remmbered fondly and I'm hoping a smallish rwd will still be fun to drive.
I think the 1 series is roughly focus sized (not checked dimensions so could be proved very wrong) but I've found it surprisingly easy for zipping about in town and parking. The other car on the drive is a dinky little yaris and being honest, whilst driving he bmw doesn't feel much bigger. Even my OH is perfectly happy to scoot about in the 123d and reverse park everywhere without a second though. Edited by eztiger on Wednesday 7th September 13:43
Edited by eztiger on Wednesday 7th September 13:45
eztiger said:
Agreed, internal build quality is very poor. Full of poor fitments and subsequent squeaks and rattles. They're all fixable - but why should you have to at that price point?
The feel of the switch gear in the cabin is also great. I got back into a new style mondeo for the first time since owning the 123d a couple of days ago and was shocked that the mondeo, which I'd previously driven and considered quite well made and luxurious, felt incredibly cheap and nasty in comparison to the BMW.
Slightly confused by the above comments as they appear a bit contradictory! On the one hand you're saying the 123d's very poor in terms of build quality but on the other you're saying the latest Mondeo is cheap and nasty in comparison; not been in one but that means the Mondeo must be really awful then?!The feel of the switch gear in the cabin is also great. I got back into a new style mondeo for the first time since owning the 123d a couple of days ago and was shocked that the mondeo, which I'd previously driven and considered quite well made and luxurious, felt incredibly cheap and nasty in comparison to the BMW.
However, a friend of mine has the latest shape Astra and, while the drivetrain is not in the same league as the 123d, I'd have to say the interior fit and finish are notably better than my car. I'll be interested to have a look at the new 1-series as the interior is one area where it needs to be a serious improvement over the out-going model IMO; needs to be up with A3's and Golfs never mind Astras!
Gassing Station | BMW General | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff