clived

Same spec how much does a 545i cost, verses a remapped 535d. I think you'll find the one that has "more money" is still the 545i ;-)

Interesting very very close 1/8 mile times for the 545i compared to my stock 535d in the 1/8 mile thread by the way. Here in the UK there is nearly ?5.5K difference. Is it ok then if I spend ?5.5K tuning my 535d and then we can have a fair comparison? ;-)

I do understand what you're saying Iceman, but I'd like to see us able to do both comaprisons - stock 535d vs 545i - just to make sure that the 545i is clearly faster in all situations as you claim (not just the same, but faster...) and then compare a remapped 535d against a 545i, and see if the ?4.7K cheaper car might be as quick / quicker by any metric / in the "real" world. As I've said many times on this thread now, I don't want to argue about it either as we (well, I ;-) ) don't know the answers, but I would like to find out.

Maybe Iceman we should both just get M5s and be done :-)

clived

Juat done some quick research - Iceman, you suggest looking at BMW's figures:

50-75mph, BMW says 5.8s for a 545i and 5.4s for a 530d, and I think we're all in agreement that a 535d is quicker than a 530d, correct? Autocar had a 535d do 50-70 in 3.2s in January and 0-60mph in 5.8 seconds, which compares favourably to BMW's figure of 5.9 for an auto 545i (or indeed 5.8 for a manual ;-) ).

So if BMW say that a 530d is quicker in gear than a 545i, why are we so unwilling to accept that a 535d might be quicker in-gear also?

And if a 535d can be tested as being quicker 0-60 than the equivalent 545i, why would we still not think that the performance of these cars is at least close enough to not allow the possibility in our minds that, in some situations, the 535d might be as quick as a 545i?

Interestingly, in that same test, at the same place, Autocar were slower in the 1/4 mile than I managed by over 0.2s

Clive

Merv the Derv

Can't argue with that!

swajames

Interesting stuff, and some good finds from Clived, but a few observations.

1. Clived, I think you might be mixing up published versus actual results for the 0 to 60. Your Autocar number for the 535d 0-60 is compared to the BMW published 545 0 to 60. In the interests of consistency we need to go apples to apples, in which case the numbers are 6.5 and 5.8 (535 first) for BMW published specs, or 5.8 for the 535 (using your Autocar number) but as low as 5.2 for the 545 based on the June 2005 edition of Road and Track which compared the 545 against the M45 and GS430 (but the 545 has posted many 5.3 to 5.5 times in other US magazines). I really think it's best to use "real world" times as much as possible and have no doubt that the 535 will be a lot quicker than it's official 6.5 and the Autocar test confirms that, though this is equally true for the 545 which is posting times in the very low fives.

2. Re the 5.8s from 50 to 75 for the 545. I haven't seen and can't find a BMW official spec for 50 to 75 on BMWUSA's site. So, my unofficial test on the way to the office this morning confirmed that the 545 will run from 50 to 75 way quicker than that. As a 545 driver on a daily basis, and with 50 to 75 being a key part of any Bay Area commute, I think that the 5.8 number is way off. I'll try and find some real world numbers if I can but the seat of my pants has been a relatively reliable indicator and I think it's quite a bit quicker than 5.8 seconds for the 50 to 75 in a 545. I would fully expect the 535 to post a solid time on this stat as well.

3. Just a general observation on the importance of torque, an area where there can be no doubt that the 535 has great characteristics. It is important to remember that HP and torque are interlinked and that the 545 revs for another couple of thousand RPM beyond the 535. What we lose on torque, we gain on acceleration and HP at the higher RPM that the 535 can't match. That's the primary reason why despite all the torque the 535 posseses, it is slower than than the 545 on 0 to 60 and through the quartermile.

4. A final observation on the importance of torque. The 535d with 560 nm has greater available torque than the E60 M5 which has 520 nm available. If torque was the be all and end all the 535d would beat or match the M5 too. The M5 gets its peformance from its RPM/HP, and that's the same with the 545. Can't match the 535d for torque but the 535 can't rev nearly as high or create HP (which the 545 maxes at the higher RPMs).

5. Can't we all just enjoy the cars rather than all of us trying to prove whatever we want to prove with random stats and our prestigious engineering degrees from the Univeristy of Google

GPS

bravo swajames

clived

Tell me, please, how many times I've said words to the effect in this thread that despite all the published numbers, I don't know if it is true, as Iceman contests, that there is no segment or metric by which the 535d could be shown to be even as fast (let alone faster) than a 545i and would therefore very much like to carry out some real world, side be side testing. Unfortunately, no 545i owners have stepped forward. I've never said that I think a 535d is outright quicker than a 545i.

I note with interest that you chose not to mention my comparison of BMW's published figures (apples for apples) for 50-75mph times which show a 530d as being quicker in this segment than a 545i, and therefore there being the possibility that the 535d would be quicker still. Remember, my whole discussion here is really about Iceman's statement that there is no situation in which a 535d could be "quicker" than a 545i, not which would get from 0-155 first

I also note that no-one has commented on my response to Iceman's suggestion that it is not fair to compare a chipped 535d to a stock 545i because, erm, the 535d is still thousands of ? cheaper than the 545i or something

Please, I just want us all to have fun and enjoy our great cars. Meeting up to do this test would be fun

Clive

maylander739

I'd take the 535d anyday over the 545i, not only is it faster round a track, you don't have to stop every 200 miles to get more fuel.

swajames

Tell me, please, how many times I've said words to the effect in this thread that despite all the published numbers, I don't know if it is true, as Iceman contests, that there is no segment or metric by which the 535d could be shown to be even as fast (let alone faster) than a 545i and would therefore very much like to carry out some real world, side be side testing. Unfortunately, no 545i owners have stepped forward. I've never said that I think a 535d is outright quicker than a 545i.

I note with interest that you chose not to mention my comparison of BMW's published figures (apples for apples) for 50-75mph times which show a 530d as being quicker in this segment than a 545i, and therefore there being the possibility that the 535d would be quicker still. Remember, my whole discussion here is really about Iceman's statement that there is no situation in which a 535d could be "quicker" than a 545i, not which would get from 0-155 first

I also note that no-one has commented on my response to Iceman's suggestion that it is not fair to compare a chipped 535d to a stock 545i because, erm, the 535d is still thousands of ? cheaper than the 545i or something

Please, I just want us all to have fun and enjoy our great cars. Meeting up to do this test would be fun

Clive
[/quote]


to be fair Clive I did mention the 50 to 75 stats, and said that I could not find a published US stat for that from BMW USA before saying that when I punched it this morning from 50 I got to 75 way faster than the 5.8 second number you found. Part of the issue of course is that BMW don't yet sell the 535 over in the US so I guess that not too many US owners have tried the 535, if and when they do I will definitely want to take it for a spin. I will agree though that the diesel torque (I have driven diesels) does make a car feel faster, even if in the grand scheme of things the stats show otherwise. Which I think shows that irrespective of whether you have a 535 or a 545 (or for that matter any E60) you have a very fine automobile.

maylander739

I still don't get why people are comparing the 535d to tow trucks. Its hardly the same is it! I know torque isn't everything, but the 535d has got a lot of bhp, and the torque just makes it even better.

clived

Yep, fair point - I should have given you the source. These are the figures from www.bmw.co.uk in the technical data section for the cars. They are the in-gear (4th) 50-75mph numbers. Both cars may be able to get a better time in a different gear - this is the gear BMW chooses to highlight performance / flexibility I guess.

Clive