530i M Sport or 530d Sport
01-03-2006, 10:41 AM
#31
Contributors
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: Essex, UK
Posts: 2,325
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by BangleBox_530d' post='218708' date='Jan 3 2006, 06:31 PM
I though I'd miss the higher revving of a petrol, but I can't say that I do.
I came from a manual, front wheel-drive, 2-litre turbo but I don't regret it! Far more relaxing and the power is there if you want to 'play'
01-03-2006, 10:47 AM
#32
Members
Thread Starter
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: United Kingdom
Posts: 88
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The biggest factor that swung it was the M Sport had the newer higher HP engine and the Diesel had the 218HP engine which good as it is there is a different more HP engine available. Although the M Sport I will be getting doesn't have DSC+ or Start/Stop button meaning its and early M Sport, though this is no great issue it has the newer 530 Petrol lump which I am pleased about
Did the Steering change from Sport to M Sport only the one I test drove today felt very different especially at low speed.
Did the Steering change from Sport to M Sport only the one I test drove today felt very different especially at low speed.
01-03-2006, 12:15 PM
#33
Senior Members
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: London
Posts: 313
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Given that forge succumbed to the smoothness of the petrol engine even before he got the the diesel, I am going to drive a 530d M sport on Saturday to finally settle the 530i vs 530d debate (well in my mind at least 
).
Going to my dealer to install some new shoes and he has a 530d with 172's on which I am going to try out. Not sure if its the new engine version though but I will check once I am there. Will report back my findings. I may be biased on the petrol but will concentrate on performance alone (ignoring engine sound and economy as we already know which car wins in these categories).
). Going to my dealer to install some new shoes and he has a 530d with 172's on which I am going to try out. Not sure if its the new engine version though but I will check once I am there. Will report back my findings. I may be biased on the petrol but will concentrate on performance alone (ignoring engine sound and economy as we already know which car wins in these categories).
01-03-2006, 12:18 PM
#34
Contributors
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: Essex, UK
Posts: 2,325
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by forge197' post='218739' date='Jan 3 2006, 07:47 PM
The biggest factor that swung it was the M Sport had the newer higher HP engine and the Diesel had the 218HP engine which good as it is there is a different more HP engine available. Although the M Sport I will be getting doesn't have DSC+ or Start/Stop button meaning its and early M Sport, though this is no great issue it has the newer 530 Petrol lump which I am pleased about
Did the Steering change from Sport to M Sport only the one I test drove today felt very different especially at low speed.
Did the Steering change from Sport to M Sport only the one I test drove today felt very different especially at low speed.
The DSC+ isn't much of a sacrifice... The engine is a peach I guess!I don't believe the steering changed per se, but perhaps it's the newer 'servotronic' steering. But as you mention low speeds are you sure it doesn't have active steering? AS shows up most at low speeds...
01-03-2006, 12:21 PM
#35
Members
Thread Starter
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: United Kingdom
Posts: 88
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
There is no debate they are both great cars sorry for not managing to get to the diesel 
The 530i M Sport was on 172's and I am sure the ride was better than my 135's just seemed more forgiving to our good old roads which it shouldn't be as there is even less rubber.
The 530i M Sport was on 172's and I am sure the ride was better than my 135's just seemed more forgiving to our good old roads which it shouldn't be as there is even less rubber.
01-03-2006, 12:24 PM
#36
Contributors
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: Essex, UK
Posts: 2,325
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
There is no debate they are both great cars sorry for not managing to get to the diesel
The 530i M Sport was on 172's and I am sure the ride was better than my 135's just seemed more forgiving to our good old roads which it shouldn't be as there is even less rubber.
The 530i M Sport was on 172's and I am sure the ride was better than my 135's just seemed more forgiving to our good old roads which it shouldn't be as there is even less rubber.
The 172's won't have runflat tyres on them - that might explain the difference!
(Don't start me on runflats... 
)
01-03-2006, 12:24 PM
#37
Members
Thread Starter
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: United Kingdom
Posts: 88
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
[/quote]
Congrats! The DSC+ isn't much of a sacrifice... The engine is a peach I guess!
I don't believe the steering changed per se, but perhaps it's the newer 'servotronic' steering. But as you mention low speeds are you sure it doesn't have active steering? AS shows up most at low speeds...
[/quote]
Don't think it had Active Steering as it wasn't mentioned on the spec sheet. Though it was so light at low speed and firmed up at higher speed.
Congrats!
The DSC+ isn't much of a sacrifice... The engine is a peach I guess!I don't believe the steering changed per se, but perhaps it's the newer 'servotronic' steering. But as you mention low speeds are you sure it doesn't have active steering? AS shows up most at low speeds...
[/quote]
Don't think it had Active Steering as it wasn't mentioned on the spec sheet. Though it was so light at low speed and firmed up at higher speed.
01-03-2006, 12:26 PM
#38
Contributors
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: Essex, UK
Posts: 2,325
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by forge197' post='218775' date='Jan 3 2006, 09:24 PM
Don't think it had Active Steering as it wasn't mentioned on the spec sheet. Though it was so light at low speed and firmed up at higher speed.
Active Steering actually varies the ratio dependent on speed - quite different...
My guess it that it's servotronic. (You can tell if it's AS by the lights displayed during ignition)
01-03-2006, 12:26 PM
#39
Members
Thread Starter
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: United Kingdom
Posts: 88
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The 172's won't have runflat tyres on them - that might explain the difference! (Don't start me on runflats... )
(Don't start me on runflats... )
Does that mean they will be cheaper to replace 
That be why it has a spare wheel then
01-03-2006, 12:29 PM
#40
Contributors
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: Essex, UK
Posts: 2,325
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by forge197' post='218779' date='Jan 3 2006, 09:26 PM
The 172's won't have runflat tyres on them - that might explain the difference! (Don't start me on runflats... )
(Don't start me on runflats... )
Does that mean they will be cheaper to replace That be why it has a spare wheel then
Non-runflats are cheaper, but 19" tyres aren't exactly a bargain 
The rears will be at least ?230 each! (Fronts at least ?200) I recommend the Michelin PS2's but they're about ?20 more...