Originally Posted by Tommy' post='323846' date='Aug 18 2006, 05:27 AM

Hey Tegel,

Was my description on the 520d performance a few months ago according to your experience now that you have yours a few months?

If you happen to pass through Belgium on your lengthly tour around europe, give me a PM and I gladly invite your for lunch or dinner or even just a refreshment drink if you want to keep on moving at high pace. I am close to an exit of the E313 between aachen germany and antwerp belgium.

Originally Posted by Krekski' post='324218' date='Aug 19 2006, 12:17 AM

He guys,

I have a 520d e60, but I think the performance isn't that special.

You guys seems to be very impressed about the power, even people with 350z are impressed.

1. Comparing with 525d: going in third from 50km/h seems much quicker or is it just the 6 cyl engine making it "sound" quicker
2. Last time was not a match for a e200cdi from 0 to 100 km/h
3. Test drove Renault Megane 1.9 d 115 pk, looks quicker than 520d
4. a frien of mine had an integra type R, he couldn't catch up with a 120d

I'm very confused. Is 520d powerfull? What is optimal rev for changing gear?

Originally Posted by tegel' post='324340' date='Aug 19 2006, 09:53 AM

Hi,
don't be confused. Obviously, the 520d isn't "very powerful". It has the smallest and weakest engine (bhp) of all 5-series.

BUT, it is surprisingly balanced and adequate. I used to drive a 525i e39 before the 520d and I miss the 1. Smoothness and 2. Throttle response.

Apart from that the 520d is better than I expected; good pull, low consumption, good noise level. Never feels too weak, whereas the 525i had to be revved to perform while overtaking for instance. You adapt to a different, more relaxed, driving syle in the 520d Step comparwed to a petrol manual. Good for me!

Will be interesting to see Autobahn performance within a couple of days.

/M

Originally Posted by gIzzE' post='318288' date='Aug 2 2006, 03:29 PM

Totally disagree, just about every forum you read where people go from driving the manual for 2 or 3 years to an auto they all report approx. 25% loss on the diesels.
Less so on the petrol models but definitley the case on the diesels.
I had a 320d manual for nearly 2 weeks, new engine compared to my run in auto and I was getting between 43 and 48mpg driving just the same as in my auto, in which I got between 29 and 35mpg. And this gets reported time and time again by users who switch, normally the posts start.....I just swapped to an auto and my mpg is really poor, why?

Also I love the way everyone compares MPG figures, nobody is the same, the only way you can tell if your car is not giving you the correct mpg is to borrow another one the same for a few days and see what you get from that.
A BMW diesel takes approx. 10 km to fully warm up, until it has it can be using up to 40% more fuel than it is when heated up, you can also use 50% more fuel with any sort of stop/start driving, so if you leave your house, go down the motorway for 4 miles then through town for 2 miles the car won't have warmed up properly and when it has you are in town driving, this is as bad as it gets for fuel economy.
Someone else who gets onto a nice back road and does a steady 80kmh for 20 minutes could have an MPG reading nearly 60% higher.

Also somone I know well who also had a 320d auto when I had mine, in fact he still has his, always says that he was surprised at my 32mpg when he got 39mpg. I said it was probably because I drive it harder than him, to which he always said 'nonsense' he drives just as fast. Then one day he took me to collect a new car and a journey that takes me no longer than 2 hours took us nearly 3h30mins, it was then I realised why he got 7mpg more than me!
We all drive differently so we are all going to have different fuel consumptions, and don't buy a BMW auto if you want economy!

Originally Posted by Nevermind' post='325341' date='Aug 22 2006, 06:33 PM

Back on topic:

I've had my 520d M-Sport for a few month now and just over 4k miles.

GOOD POINTS

V.Cheap as company car.
Comfort Seats are a cheap option and the best seats I've ever had in a car.
Excellent screen for PDC.
Good ride/handling balance with M-Sport. SE noiser and mushier, E61 too stiff at rear.
Large boot.
Plenty of toys.
Acceptable fuel economy.
Acceptable performance.
Good protection of rims in NCP car parks by Runflat tyres.
Large and comfortable back seat.
CD Slot "does" MP3.
Very refined.
Good dealer.

BAD POINTS

I-Drive integrates functionality but leaves those functions in the mid 1990s. And makes them slower.
No radio text.
I-Drive implimentation means that the gearlever is poorly positioned on manual cars.
Sat Nav is unspeakably poor. Pro Nav is slow to react and can't guide. I live in Nottingham and know my way round luckily, because if I had to find my way round with the Nav I would spend half the time going the wrong way up one-way streets and the rest of the time on the ring-road! I have DVD 02-06.
Looks. Eye of the beholder and all that but just don't like it. M-Sport better but still not comfortably proportioned.
Engine performance. This may improve when the turbo is replaced tomorrow!
Recalls. Shocks being replaced.

Overall it is a good handling, adequately performing large executive saloon. It could be an excellent car if the I-Drive were replaced with modern individual components.

Originally Posted by xBMWx' post='325681' date='Aug 23 2006, 01:28 PM

2) Looks. The fact you're part of a Forum suggests you have a "passion" for cars. Am I correct in thinking you ordered a car you don't like the look of?!

Originally Posted by Nevermind' post='325887' date='Aug 23 2006, 10:41 PM

In case anyone is interested I got my car back today complete with new turbo. What a difference, it was the Exhaust Gas Recirculation part of it that was malfunctioning giving industrial quantities of turbo lag at all speeds, but especially from 1600 to 2200 revs. All ok now.

Special thanks to Sycamore BMW in Peterborough, excellent service throughout, keep up the good work.