Originally Posted by JBOO' post='263250' date='Mar 31 2006, 11:08 PM

18 pages? Wow, that's crazy!

I read through a few of the first few pages and there was so much bickering going on that I really just couldn't understand. I mean, I have a 535d, but I didn't choose it over a 545i. I chose it over the 530i that was priced much more similar. The fact that the the 535d can even be compared to the 545i that costs $10K more is an amazing achievement and only solidifies my choice. Were talking a fraction of a difference in times here that in the real world would probably be less. I wouldn't have a problem taking on a 545i since I would have nothing to lose. I would be expected to lose, hoever, what would happen if I didn't?

Originally Posted by grogan545' post='263234

Thanks, and two last things. What rollout did you use? What month was it?

Originally Posted by clived' post='263304' date='Apr 1 2006, 01:45 PM

1) Thanks :-) I do try and bring some objectivity.

2) Interestingly, you absolutely hit the nail on the head here. The original discussions, way back, were started because a member or two here claimed that there were no circumstances whatsoever - any start speed, any gear, any anything in fact, that any sort of 535d could beat any sort of 545i. I had, and still have, a suspicion that this is not correct - at low speeds and the correct revs, the 535d really *really* takes off - i.e. overtaking someone from say 30mph. The combination of 1/4 mile time and terminal speed back this up - i.e. a tenth or three slower to the 1/4 mile, but 5 or 6 mph slower at the trap - so somewhere the 535d is accelerating harder than the 545i (and obviously the same is also true in reverse) - from my experience of both cars however, I suspect that it's lower down that the 535d has it's advantage. All I personally was ever trying to establish was if this is the case - and therefore if there was after all, some situation where a 535d was quicker than a 545i I think it's clear that by whatever margin, a 545i is, over the long haul, quicker than a 535d. Of course, it is also somewhat more expensive both to purchase, run and in terms of time spent at the pumps (I wonder if you spent the difference on some more tuning - no idea what, but it's thousands of ??? or $$$ at your disposal, how much difference you could make? ). In the real world, a 545i would not get anywhere in any less time than a 535d, but, if you love petrol (as hopefully my choice of cars will show - I'm in no way a diesel bigot) you might have more fun doing it in the 545i. I think what annoys a lot of 535d owners is the outright dismissal of the the car in the past by 545i owners, mostly in the US, who have never even seen one, let alone driven it. The 535d is not like any other diesel car you've driven before, unless you've driven an Audi A8 4.0 / 4.2 TDi or a VW Toureg V10 TDi.

Originally Posted by sapkan' post='263321' date='Apr 1 2006, 04:36 AM

Hats down to the 535d. I hope you guys in the States get it sooner rather than later. Heavier of the two, quicker to 100 km/h, quite a bit quicker in-gear, quicker over the Hockenheim short course, quicker through the slalom and need I say A LOT more frugal and also cheaper. Lets not forget, however, that V8s have that great noise going for them. Now thats one thing that even with the help of the butterfly exhaust valve our favourite diesel cant match.

Originally Posted by sapkan' post='263321' date='Apr 1 2006, 07:36 AM

quicker to 100 km/h, quite a bit quicker in-gear, quicker over the Hockenheim short course, quicker through the slalom

Originally Posted by Znod' post='263355' date='Apr 1 2006, 07:08 PM

Do you have hard evidence on these claims? All the hard evidence I have seen contradicts your first two statements at least. Do you have any data that would add to the data below or the data in post #244 above. The km/p data show the 535d doing very well, in the German magazine tests, against the 545i up to 100 km/h. However, on average the 545i, appears to be faster even to this speed. The 545i also has the edge, on average, in passing (from eyeballing the data). The data in post #244 show the 545i to be far faster than the 535d. But, I'd like to see more data from European magazines to get a clearer picture.

All Steptronics:
..........................{...........535d........ ....}{......545i.......}
............................GM1.....GM2.....GM3... ..GM4.....GM3
0-40 km/h..............2.0.......2.0.......1.7......1.8... ....1.8
0-60 km/h..............3.5.......3.5.......3.1......3.1... ....3.2
0-80 km/h..............5.0.......4.9.......4.5......4.5... ....4.6
0-100 km/h.............7.1......6.8.......6.5......6.3..... ..6.6
0-120 km/h.............9.5......9.0.......9.0......8.4..... ..8.8
0-140 km/h...........12.4.....11.7.....11.5................ 11.3
0-160 km/h...........16.4....15.3......15.1................ 14.9

GM = German Magazine

Originally Posted by sapkan' post='263358' date='Apr 1 2006, 08:27 AM

The only direct comparison between the two that I have seen is the German magazine article published earlier on this thread. The test looks pretty thorough to me and they probably used something more accurate than a g-tech. I'd like to see more comparisons too. I made my choice when I drove a 645 before I bought my car. It didn't do it for me. Felt gutless compared to the diesel. Every time I wanted to get even a modest amount of acceleration I had to bury my foot into the carpet. My car feels much more alive and responsive than that its not even close.