If you're not satisfied with the performance, have you checked the 535d out?

 

Nah - I wanted to buy 1-2 years old so that a big hit of depreciation had already been taken. No 535d's of that age yet.

I think I might be more satisfied with a 535d though.

 

I sold my 2003 M3 and bought a 530d.

The two can't really be compared, they're so different. In real usage situations (and between 40-100mph) I feel the 530d is a better car by a country mile.

 

Now that's the sort of answer that will make me feel better about being a grown up !



Cheers Shiny

 

The M3 is a great car, but the styling is starting to look sedate to me. I loved mine but found that, though I intended to do so, I never ended up at the track. And therefore I found that I was only occasionally able to really utilize its capabilities.

I really didn't mind the stiff ride, but was wife was clear that it didn't appeal to her. On a smooth highway the ride was terrific. And you really felt you were on rails - complete control at any speed.

I first drove the e60 as a loaner car. I had owned an e39 530 prior to my M3, and my first impression was that this car is really smooth and quiet. When the 550 came out I felt I could combine M3 type speed with much more torque, and get a smooth quiet ride that is comfortable. Until switching to non-runflats I was a little dissappointed with the steering feel, but no more.
And it is not as if you don't get a thrill from this car. When you hammer the accelerator at 60 you are at 100 in an instant. With the M3 you had to downshift and really rev the engine to get power. With the 550, and probably the 530, the power is everwhere.

And I am loving the electronics. In fact, I have a hard time driving my wife's Lexus because I keep putting the keys in my pocket. Sirius I love as it is introducing me to a lot of music that is new to me, and the sports channels are always there. And bluetooth, and nav., etc etc.
And I love now having silver.

 

Based on your 21 vs 29 mpg and petrol @ ?0.849 per litre vs diesel @ ?0.889 per litre, the extra cost for running the petrol would be ?444.69 over 10,000 miles. I think that's a small price to pay for the refinement of a petrol engine.

AND using the offical mpg figures from www.bmw.co.uk for a 530i (32.1) vs 530d (42.2), the difference is only ?244.89 over 10,000 miles.

 

Yeah, but theres no chance of achieving the official figs - at all. I am only managing about 33mpg in the 530d !

When I bought the car I was originally looking for a 530i with a manual gearbox. Anything bigger sounded a bit rich for my taste (530 being fast enough really).

Various dealers told me I was barking up the wrong tree with manual as:

1. There are not many around
2. If you do find one they are less easy to re-sell

Because the residuals are worse on the 530i I would have been able to buy a newer model for the same dosh, but the dealers also persuaded me that the 530d was the quicker car for everyday driving.

To quote one:

"with the 530i you will be in sport mode ALL the time to make it feel lively with the 530d you just won't need to bother. "

I think the 530d is pretty refined - very little engine noise especially once you pass about 40mph. So the decision was 530i (newer, but slower and more thirsty) or 530d (older, faster, better economy)

I think it would have cost me about ?1500 a year extra on fuel to run the petrol model, so in that respect I am happy with my choice (in comparison with all available e60's).

But in comparison with everything I could have reasonably bought the m3 still nags at me.

I saw a post earlier on another forum that cheered me up though - m3 owners complaining that they only get 4000miles out of their back tyres that would get boring quite quickly.

 

Yea man you really should have bought an M3 if you had the chance I know I would have

 

But your sig reveals that you didn't buy an m3 - you bought a 530 - why?

 

no question asked 530 is whole lot of bigger car compare to the 3 series, so its comfortable.