E60 Discussion Anything and everything to do with the E60 5 Series. All are welcome!

520D Loaner - My Opinion

Thread Tools
 
Search this Thread
 
Old 12-20-2006 | 08:39 AM
  #1  
KAF's Avatar
KAF
Thread Starter
Contributors
 
Joined: Dec 2005
Posts: 1,261
Likes: 0
From: Chippenham, Wiltshire UK
My Ride: F11 535i M-Sport,, Silver, Black Leather, LED Adaptive headlights
Model Year: 2015
Engine: N55
Default

Had a 520D Tourer today whilst my 530D was in for some work, (Door seals, Steering Column, load bay cover, oil change).

it was a M-sport set up, Silver Grey and looked a million $$.

But......... a sheep in wolfs clothing.

Don't get me wrong, for a 4 cylinder, 2.0 Diesel it was quiet, pretty smooth and reasonably brisk. But it is a very long way off the 6 cylinder 530D.
The manual gearbox was a little notchy as well.
Liked the anthracite headlining, but found the alucube trim a bit 'busy'.

The sports suspension set up however was miles ahead of the set up on my SE, much more precise in the corners............but, the damn thing had Goodyear runflats...............oh how I had forgotten just how crap these tyres are. It was like driving on wooden wheels again.

Pleased to get my car back this evening.

Now a 535D M Sports with non RFT tyres................Hmmm, where is that BMW website......
Old 12-20-2006 | 09:01 AM
  #2  
Ricracing's Avatar
Contributors
 
Joined: Jul 2005
Posts: 7,790
Likes: 0
From: Helsinki, Finland
My Ride: My ex-ride: EU '08 LCI 520dA. Space Grey, Sport Seats in Black Leather/Fabric Anthracite, Sport Steering Wheel, A/C with Extended Features, Hi-Fi Speakers, Cup Holders, Cruise with Braking function, Folding Rear Seats, Xenons, Park Distance Control.
Default

So, you mean that a facelifted 520dA non sport (with + 10 kW and Nm comp to the car you drove)
could be a nice and economical car?
Old 12-20-2006 | 09:15 AM
  #3  
KAF's Avatar
KAF
Thread Starter
Contributors
 
Joined: Dec 2005
Posts: 1,261
Likes: 0
From: Chippenham, Wiltshire UK
My Ride: F11 535i M-Sport,, Silver, Black Leather, LED Adaptive headlights
Model Year: 2015
Engine: N55
Default

Whilst it would not be my choice, I would want the Sports set-up and more power, it would still be a nice car.
Old 12-20-2006 | 02:22 PM
  #4  
steve_gus's Avatar
Senior Members
 
Joined: Nov 2006
Posts: 370
Likes: 0
From: northamptonshire, UK
Default

the engine is 2/3 the size, for the same weight of car........The M kit is approx ?3,000 of froth. Same performance as the SE - you pay for the looks. M kit doesnt make it faster.....

It still does 0-60 in 8.3 secs, which is pretty much at the top end of most cars on general sale in the uk (most rep wagon are around 10-11 secs, hatchbacks at 14 sec)

So, its almost 2 secs down on the 3 litres, still does 139 mph, and is about ?8,000 cheaper.

You get what you pay for and the 520d is a pretty good offering



The box is a bit notchy - massvely so on the new E90 demo car I tried!



cheers

steve
Old 12-20-2006 | 02:49 PM
  #5  
Nevermind's Avatar
Members
 
Joined: Feb 2006
Posts: 93
Likes: 0
From: Grantham. UK
My Ride: 2006 520d M-Sport / Silver Grey / Maple Wood / Black Dakota Leather / Heated Comfort Seats / Media Pack With Extended Voice Control / Space Saver Spare Wheel / Sun Protection Glass
Default

M-Sport kit adds better suspension, steering wheel, seats, wheels and tyres. These items are not froth.
Old 12-20-2006 | 03:09 PM
  #6  
steve_gus's Avatar
Senior Members
 
Joined: Nov 2006
Posts: 370
Likes: 0
From: northamptonshire, UK
Default

Originally Posted by Nevermind' post='369702' date='Dec 20 2006, 11:49 PM
M-Sport kit adds better suspension, steering wheel, seats, wheels and tyres. These items are not froth.
Does your car go any faster........ ? I think that was the point behind sheep in wolf clothing...

They were (froth) for ?3,200 of my money

paraphrased from the brochure:

18 inch wheels (nicer than std)
Alu on the dash (looks chav)
No chrome on windows (i like the chrome original)
Different door sill finishers (the SE has door finishers too)
Different (still cloth) upholstery
Anthracite headlining (i look at the roof a lot)
M sport body kit (ok, but not a deal maker for me)
15mm lowered suspension (i drive to work, i dont race)
Sports seats (the ones ive got are fine)
Steering wheel (not that different?)

I note from your spec that you have effectively added approx ?8,500 of options ( inc M pack) on a base range 520d SE. I would have bought a 530d SE for that (which KAF has) and still had approx ?1,500 left over. Diff people have diff perceptions of value




cheers

steve
Old 12-20-2006 | 03:40 PM
  #7  
steve_gus's Avatar
Senior Members
 
Joined: Nov 2006
Posts: 370
Likes: 0
From: northamptonshire, UK
Default

Originally Posted by Ricracing' post='369526' date='Dec 20 2006, 06:01 PM
So, you mean that a facelifted 520dA non sport (with + 10 kW and Nm comp to the car you drove)
could be a nice and economical car?
I can find little wrong with mine in 17 days of ownership.........
Im getting between 42 - 45 mpg from mine (UK gallons) after 1300 miles. I dont know what that is in litres/100km, but its pretty good

cheers

steve
Old 12-21-2006 | 12:01 AM
  #8  
Nevermind's Avatar
Members
 
Joined: Feb 2006
Posts: 93
Likes: 0
From: Grantham. UK
My Ride: 2006 520d M-Sport / Silver Grey / Maple Wood / Black Dakota Leather / Heated Comfort Seats / Media Pack With Extended Voice Control / Space Saver Spare Wheel / Sun Protection Glass
Default

In the context of this thread the, the M-Sport should be slower and less economical than an SE because it is both heavier and has greater rolling resistance from the tyres. On my, admittedly short, commute I have been averaging 24.7 mpg for the last two weeks!
Old 12-21-2006 | 12:31 AM
  #9  
steve_gus's Avatar
Senior Members
 
Joined: Nov 2006
Posts: 370
Likes: 0
From: northamptonshire, UK
Default

Mine has also been less economical over the last week than the first week I had it. Possibly its the cold, possibly its me accellerating a bit harder since its become more 'run in'

The SE weighs 1580 kilos - which for a car the size of the E60 is pretty good. However, compared with similar sized cars from 15 years ago (for example, the MK3 granada - the first one with ABS brakes) its massively heavy - the ford weighed less than 1300 with a V6 in it!

Even the current volkswagen polo weighs near 1200 kilos!

cheers

steve
Old 12-21-2006 | 12:36 AM
  #10  
Nevermind's Avatar
Members
 
Joined: Feb 2006
Posts: 93
Likes: 0
From: Grantham. UK
My Ride: 2006 520d M-Sport / Silver Grey / Maple Wood / Black Dakota Leather / Heated Comfort Seats / Media Pack With Extended Voice Control / Space Saver Spare Wheel / Sun Protection Glass
Default

Its only normal. The body shells are more rigid, There are Airbags and loads of gadgets, the air con system alone must account for 70 odd kg. It never ceases to amaze me that the next generation of each car comes out heavier, yet faster and more economical. The engineers of today are the Wizards of the middle-ages


Quick Reply: 520D Loaner - My Opinion



All times are GMT -8. The time now is 02:20 PM.