UK Facelift specs and M5 Touring
#11
Senior Members
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: Cork, Ireland
Posts: 551
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
My Ride: 320d SE (E90) manual - Sapphire Black, Beige Leather Sports Seats, Burled Walnut, Heated Seats, Sunroof, Comfort Access, Hi-Fi sound, Bluetooth, Side-Window blinds, Through-Load, Luggage Net, PDC Front & Rear, Adaptive Xenons, Style 158 17", Chrome Grill & Window Trim, Blackline Tailights, Power folding/dimming side mirrors, Split Armrest, Dual Zone Climate, Cruise, LEDs on door handles, iPod nano, SE K750i
Originally Posted by 911SC' post='376940' date='Jan 11 2007, 06:56 PM
Great info- many thanks.
I have a 520d M-sport on order (Carbon Black with beige cream int) with est delivery on 1st March. I had an inkling about the "facelift" but this is much better than I had feared. It would appear that the 520d engine will not be upgraded to 177bhp and that the M-Sport kit is unchanged aside from the lights. Am I reading this correctly?
I have a 520d M-sport on order (Carbon Black with beige cream int) with est delivery on 1st March. I had an inkling about the "facelift" but this is much better than I had feared. It would appear that the 520d engine will not be upgraded to 177bhp and that the M-Sport kit is unchanged aside from the lights. Am I reading this correctly?
I don't mean rub salt but there is some bad news for you
- you won't get the new fancy revised interior (if by chance it appeals to you)
- you won't get the iDrive shortcut buttons so you will have to memorise iDrive gestures yourself
All stuff you can live with I am sure as the price of the 520d is going up by 2.8/2.6% so you got your car for a bit less.
But don't worry, if you are not upset now then maybe September will do the trick... the revised 520d will be out then with a more powerful engine, new automatic transmission, fancy cruise control which brakes going downhill etc.
#12
Contributors
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: Essex, UK
Posts: 2,325
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by Raighne' post='376943' date='Jan 11 2007, 07:11 PM
Yes, more or less. The 520d doesn't get the new automatic transmission anyway and it doesn't get advanced climate control as standard like the other configs.
I don't mean rub salt but there is some bad news for you
- you won't get the new fancy revised interior (if by chance it appeals to you)
- you won't get the iDrive shortcut buttons so you will have to memorise iDrive gestures yourself
All stuff you can live with I am sure as the price of the 520d is going up by 2.8/2.6% so you got your car for a bit less.
But don't worry, if you are not upset now then maybe September will do the trick... the revised 520d will be out then with a more powerful engine, new automatic transmission, fancy cruise control which brakes going downhill etc.
I don't mean rub salt but there is some bad news for you
- you won't get the new fancy revised interior (if by chance it appeals to you)
- you won't get the iDrive shortcut buttons so you will have to memorise iDrive gestures yourself
All stuff you can live with I am sure as the price of the 520d is going up by 2.8/2.6% so you got your car for a bit less.
But don't worry, if you are not upset now then maybe September will do the trick... the revised 520d will be out then with a more powerful engine, new automatic transmission, fancy cruise control which brakes going downhill etc.
Number plate surround trim
Grille, Headlights tweaked
Floor mats
ISOFIX (front)
However, 520d has changed the least so it's not too annoying...
#13
Members
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Glos, UK
Posts: 17
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
My Ride: BMW 535d M Sport
Thanks for this detailed information.
The fuel consumption on the 535d seems to have improved dramatically from 35.3mpg to 41.5mpg - an improvement of nearly 18%. Interestingly the 3 series saloon 335d only manages 37.7mpg with the same engine. Does anyone know how bmw have managed this, assuming the figures are correct? Is it down to the new auto gearbox in the 535?
Thanks
Roger
The fuel consumption on the 535d seems to have improved dramatically from 35.3mpg to 41.5mpg - an improvement of nearly 18%. Interestingly the 3 series saloon 335d only manages 37.7mpg with the same engine. Does anyone know how bmw have managed this, assuming the figures are correct? Is it down to the new auto gearbox in the 535?
Thanks
Roger
#14
Members
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: Oxfordshire UK
Posts: 221
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
My Ride: 535d m sport - 9 Weeks to go!!
Originally Posted by rxlee' post='377183' date='Jan 12 2007, 11:29 AM
Thanks for this detailed information.
The fuel consumption on the 535d seems to have improved dramatically from 35.3mpg to 41.5mpg - an improvement of nearly 18%. Interestingly the 3 series saloon 335d only manages 37.7mpg with the same engine. Does anyone know how bmw have managed this, assuming the figures are correct? Is it down to the new auto gearbox in the 535?
Thanks
Roger
The fuel consumption on the 535d seems to have improved dramatically from 35.3mpg to 41.5mpg - an improvement of nearly 18%. Interestingly the 3 series saloon 335d only manages 37.7mpg with the same engine. Does anyone know how bmw have managed this, assuming the figures are correct? Is it down to the new auto gearbox in the 535?
Thanks
Roger
#16
Senior Members
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: Cork, Ireland
Posts: 551
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
My Ride: 320d SE (E90) manual - Sapphire Black, Beige Leather Sports Seats, Burled Walnut, Heated Seats, Sunroof, Comfort Access, Hi-Fi sound, Bluetooth, Side-Window blinds, Through-Load, Luggage Net, PDC Front & Rear, Adaptive Xenons, Style 158 17", Chrome Grill & Window Trim, Blackline Tailights, Power folding/dimming side mirrors, Split Armrest, Dual Zone Climate, Cruise, LEDs on door handles, iPod nano, SE K750i
Originally Posted by rxlee' post='377183' date='Jan 12 2007, 11:29 AM
Thanks for this detailed information.
The fuel consumption on the 535d seems to have improved dramatically from 35.3mpg to 41.5mpg - an improvement of nearly 18%. Interestingly the 3 series saloon 335d only manages 37.7mpg with the same engine. Does anyone know how bmw have managed this, assuming the figures are correct? Is it down to the new auto gearbox in the 535?
The fuel consumption on the 535d seems to have improved dramatically from 35.3mpg to 41.5mpg - an improvement of nearly 18%. Interestingly the 3 series saloon 335d only manages 37.7mpg with the same engine. Does anyone know how bmw have managed this, assuming the figures are correct? Is it down to the new auto gearbox in the 535?
First of all... sorry to be a stickler but...
-Going through the sources of info (from BMW) there three different average consumption numbers (all UK mpg) given for the LCI 535d was 40.3, 40.5 and 41.5 (as you stated above)
- This means LCI 535d improvement it is somewhere between 14% and 17.5% depending on which number is correct.
- I see the following numbers (on the BMW UK website) ... E90 & E92 335d ... 37.7 mpg
- so if now compare the worst LCI number with the E92 number (i.e. 40.3 to 37.7) we see it is 6.9% improvement over the 3er
So let's think about how such a saving could be made with the 'same' engine in a slightly bigger and slightly heavier car
- brake energy regeneration is advertised as saving an average of 3% (that accounts for almost half of the improvement)
- the engine might look to be the same but we don't know what additional modifications they made to this M57 variant for the LCI. Although hp and torque look to be the same, they may have changed something to make it more economical
- long shot but the E60 is slightly more aerodymnamic with a drag coeffiecient of 0.28 (pre-LCI) compared to 0.30/0.29 for the E92/E90 respectively. I'm not sure what impact this could have on economy in the real world
- it's quite possible that the new transmission was further modified either mechanically or in software from the one in the 3 series (we don't know yet). The current theory is that they are the same...
Hope this helps in your analysis...
#17
Contributors
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: Essex, UK
Posts: 2,325
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by Raighne' post='377192' date='Jan 12 2007, 12:27 PM
First of all... sorry to be a stickler but...
-Going through the sources of info (from BMW) there three different average consumption numbers (all UK mpg) given for the LCI 535d was 40.3, 40.5 and 41.5 (as you stated above)
- This means LCI 535d improvement it is somewhere between 14% and 17.5% depending on which number is correct.
- I see the following numbers (on the BMW UK website) ... E90 & E92 335d ... 37.7 mpg
- so if now compare the worst LCI number with the E92 number (i.e. 40.3 to 37.7) we see it is 6.9% improvement over the 3er
So let's think about how such a saving could be made with the 'same' engine in a slightly bigger and slightly heavier car
- brake energy regeneration is advertised as saving an average of 3% (that accounts for almost half of the improvement)
- the engine might look to be the same but we don't know what additional modifications they made to this M57 variant for the LCI. Although hp and torque look to be the same, they may have changed something to make it more economical
- long shot but the E60 is slightly more aerodymnamic with a drag coeffiecient of 0.28 (pre-LCI) compared to 0.30/0.29 for the E92/E90 respectively. I'm not sure what impact this could have on economy in the real world
- it's quite possible that the new transmission was further modified either mechanically or in software from the one in the 3 series (we don't know yet). The current theory is that they are the same...
Hope this helps in your analysis...
-Going through the sources of info (from BMW) there three different average consumption numbers (all UK mpg) given for the LCI 535d was 40.3, 40.5 and 41.5 (as you stated above)
- This means LCI 535d improvement it is somewhere between 14% and 17.5% depending on which number is correct.
- I see the following numbers (on the BMW UK website) ... E90 & E92 335d ... 37.7 mpg
- so if now compare the worst LCI number with the E92 number (i.e. 40.3 to 37.7) we see it is 6.9% improvement over the 3er
So let's think about how such a saving could be made with the 'same' engine in a slightly bigger and slightly heavier car
- brake energy regeneration is advertised as saving an average of 3% (that accounts for almost half of the improvement)
- the engine might look to be the same but we don't know what additional modifications they made to this M57 variant for the LCI. Although hp and torque look to be the same, they may have changed something to make it more economical
- long shot but the E60 is slightly more aerodymnamic with a drag coeffiecient of 0.28 (pre-LCI) compared to 0.30/0.29 for the E92/E90 respectively. I'm not sure what impact this could have on economy in the real world
- it's quite possible that the new transmission was further modified either mechanically or in software from the one in the 3 series (we don't know yet). The current theory is that they are the same...
Hope this helps in your analysis...
Nice for the E60 to be 'in front' again... The E90 was being favoured!
#19
Contributors
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: L.A., California
Posts: 1,016
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like
on
1 Post
My Ride: 2013 535i (White with Oyster Interior. Premium Package, Navigation, Technology Pacakge, Park Distance Control, and Rear View Camera)
Originally Posted by skyetripper' post='376349' date='Jan 10 2007, 08:33 AM
I have been forwarded this by a friend who has a new 535d touring on order (for delivery post facelift). Nothing new, but out of interest, it confirms a UK release date for an M5 Touring. I feel sorry for the labradors of Britain!!!
#20
Contributors
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: Essex, UK
Posts: 2,325
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by TC.' post='377186' date='Jan 12 2007, 11:56 AM
Am I right in saying the block of the 535d will remain pig iron versus the 335d new alloy lump??? If so, that could explain the lack of a decent performance hike in that it still has the extra weight of the old lump