The 520d has 163hp and 340nm of torque and I think the engine in the e90 3 series is the same (euIV compliant, aluminium block, piezzo electric ignition etc..)

The coupe still has the previous generation engine with 150hp and 330nm (nice engine - start of the common rail technology and euIV compliance) and the old e46 saloon had just 136bhp (this was not so special - pre-common rail technology).

The landrover (which I have also driven and HATED with a passion) has only 111hp and 260nm.

Unless your friends 3 series is the e90 the 520d should feel a LOT better.

The landrover is just a VILE car (sorry I really hate it it is so uncomfortable and unrefined).

The 520d engine is 2/3rds of the size of the 530d's and has roughly, 2/3rds of the torque, so I don't think it's getting any 'better' torque levels because of the number of cylinders.

I've been told that the 3.0d sounds more refined because it has balance shafts, but that just confused me because I thought that they were not needed in a straight 6, which is inerently a well balanced engine.

Either way the 2.0d is a really great engine (even the less sophisticated version in my old 320cd).

The 6 cyclinder diesel is just a bit more refined, but this comes with a price in respect of fuel economy and company car tax and although it has better performance, you may not want or need it.

 

We also have a Freelander - the 1800 petrol engined version Your comments are spot on!

 

i have driven a 320d e90 manual car, and its an absolute wonder. Good consumption , good torque, and quite good at highway speeds. I would imagine the 520d to be much the same. feels quicker than a e220cdi i drove a while ago

Its just not as quick as the 260bhp (NOT 280, my bad) 530d im driving


i have only ever driven petrol cars before the 530d and the x5, so i cant comment on previous engines.