[Balster]

Originally Posted by Beancounter_74;*****211

.... But it's not all about the mpg and engine
At the end of the day we all impose budgets on our purchases. If that wasn't the case we'd all be driving M5's.

For me, as much as I would have liked the 530d or 535d, I'd set a limit on what I was prepared to put down as a deposit, pay on a monthly basis and also, I didn't want a GFMV that was a monster bullet in case for whatever reason I decide to keep the car at the end of the term.

Having said all that, if you were purely comparing the 530d and 520d based on the data that's cropping up, your right the 530d isn't that much a different proposition.

Very true. It's all about how much you want to layout initially, and what value you want at the end - the middle bit is about the enjoyment and knowing that you have not broken the bank for a bit of metal.

[AP]

I'll chip and say that if you can afford the 530d you should go for that. It does cost more but it is the better car. I test drove a 520d before I got my 530d and it is certainly a step up. There is more than enough power for real world driving and if you want it to be economical, it can be.
only you can make the choice but as I think I've said elsewhere on forums, for the UK the 530d is probably the best compromise 5 series you can buy.

[Piers]

Originally Posted by AP

I'll chip and say that if you can afford the 530d you should go for that. It does cost more but it is the better car. I test drove a 520d before I got my 530d and it is certainly a step up. There is more than enough power for real world driving and if you want it to be economical, it can be.
only you can make the choice but as I think I've said elsewhere on forums, for the UK the 530d is probably the best compromise 5 series you can buy.

In theory yes, but another 8k new is not insignificant, hence why 90% of UK 5 series cars sold are 520d ( literally)

[xs2man]

Originally Posted by SCZ4;*****669

Lets be honest, driving a diesel is a compromise, we'd all rather be in a V8 (as an ex 550i owner). I'd therefore feel cheated losing 5-6mpg driving a 530d compared to my 525d (4cyl twin turbo). Ok, 4 cyl isn't great when cold in and around town, but once above 15mph it's still very refined and the car is quite a bit lighter than the 530d which is a bonus, doesn't feel as front heavy.

I also prefer the power delivery with the twin turbo setup, less turbo lag, so it has to be a 525d or 535d for me!

Not necessarily. My 335d was every bit as fast as my V8 S4. I'd rather be in the 335d.

And I don't feel cheated at all in my 6 cylinder 530d compared to a 525d. I am happily to pay the couple mpg less for the extra refinement and spec offered by the 530d over the 525d.

But then I do have a V8 Range Rover if I want a V8 roar, and a 1.9 TDI Passat if I want fuel economy. Right in the middle though, doing everything well, is the 530d, which gets driven the most.

[FRG]

I chose the 530d as I had a 3.0l diesel before this one and felt I'd miss the 6cyl if I'd gone for the 20d. As others have said, it is a compromise, I'd love a big engined, fast petrol car but I put £80 a week diesel in the 530 which is enough for me!

Mind you, if fuel costs were to half tomorrow I wouldn't save a penny, I'd simply buy that big engined, fast petrol car that was half as economical.

[gIzzE]

Quite frankly, I am amazed that so many buy new diesel cars, I just don't get it at all?

The 530i was about 4mpg behind the 530d, and Golfer on the tyresmoke forums went from an X6 40d to the F10 550i and saw better mpg.
He used to get 27/28mpg average and would see 35 on a run.
Not bad for 450bhp and 0-60 in 4.5 seconds.

Then you have the 535i, my neighbour has one and he is averaging 31mpg, which is 3mpg behind his 2009 535d, and on a run he is getting 38, which is only about 4mpg behind.
306bhp and 0-60 in 5.5 seconds.


The difference between these diesels and the petrols in cost is nothing for someone doing 20k miles a year, and for someone who does lots of sub 10 mile journeys the petrol might actually be the cheaper option.

I bet none of your took the 530d out against the 535i and then sat down and did the figures?
Not using the official figures, but the figures you get driving the two.

When you weigh up something like a new 530d will cost someone doing 15,000 miles a year around £900 a month for the depreciation, fuel, insurance, servicing, tyres, etc. etc. does it really matter if you save £8 a week on fuel?

Don't get me wrong, I think the diesels are great, and I buy them, but we have seriously got all caught up in this 'it has to be a diesel' mentality.
And many don't even remember how nice a big petrol is once you learn how to drive them again.

[xs2man]

I average "almost" 40 mpg in my 530d.
I average 47 MPG in my 1.9 TDI Passat
I averaged 48 MPG in my VW Polo 1.9D
I averaged 45 MPG in my A3 2.0 TDI

Compared to:

I averaged 23 MPG in my S4
I averaged 15 MPG in my Range Rover
I averaged 26 MPG in my Golf V6 4 Motion
I avergaed 29 MPG in my Golf 1.8T GTI

If I wasn't running my 530d at nearly 40 MPG, I would be driving something more likely to average something in the mid 20's. Probably 12 - 15 MPG less.

I do around 25,000 miles per year. So it breaks down like this...

Driving S4 instead of 530d = £50 per week more
Driving Golf GTI instead of 530d = £24 per week more
Driving Passat instead of 530d = £11 less.

So, to me it is the perfect balance. I pay £11 a week more to drive the 530d instead of the 1.9 TDI Passat. A reasonable extra cost for the privilege of all that extra equipment and power.

But I pay £50 per week less than I would in an S4, or £24 per week less than my Golf GTI. Both of which are NOT insignificant amounts. And while the S4 would be a wee bit faster (it wasn't next to my 335d), I'm not convinced the Golf would have come close. If I could average 31 mpg like your friend in the 535i, then yes, it would only be an extra £18 per week in fuel costs. However, that would also be £29 behind the Passat every week, which I now consider to be my baseline for comparison, for me, as it is my second car.

[HighlandPete]

Originally Posted by gIzzE

Quite frankly, I am amazed that so many buy new diesel cars, I just don't get it at all?

....

I bet none of your took the 530d out against the 535i and then sat down and did the figures?
Not using the official figures, but the figures you get driving the two.

....

Don't get me wrong, I think the diesels are great, and I buy them, but we have seriously got all caught up in this 'it has to be a diesel' mentality.
And many don't even remember how nice a big petrol is once you learn how to drive them again.

I come from a similar viewpoint, I'm certainly not against diesel in any way, have run them for years and still use diesels.

I did test a 530d and 535i 'back to back' (while driving a BMW 330d). It was the 535i that really appealed to the senses and was so refined compared to the 530d, which is a pretty good engine in a 5-series. Even the day to day performance was not left wanting, as the N55 turbo is no slouch at low to mid range. Power so easy to extract, closes the gap on the diesel torque advantage.

I did the math. At the time with a 8 - 10p cost difference in fuel cost, along with anticipated real world mpg it was looking at £8 per week fuel cost penalty in the petrol, for my typical driving mix. Even as a motorway car it would still be less than £25 per 1,000 miles.

In reality I'm on target in the 535i for long term consumption, recording a genuine 30+mpg. So yes £8 per week is pretty much the reality.

Buying a nearly new petrol made even more sense, the car was virtually the same new price, but an extra saving of around £8k at purchase, compared to a similar diesel. That is a lot of fuel, even if the residual several years down the line is still against the petrol. The 535i is off the new car purchase radar, for most new buyers, likely to be more sought after as BMW enthusiasts will be wanting them as they get into the used market, so anticipate not such a big value gap at trade in time. Even the trade seem to be indicating the 535i hardening up in value.

No regrets here, for buying petrol. No DPF concerns for local driving of a diesel, and a peach of an engine.

HighlandPete

[gIzzE]

Originally Posted by xs2man

I average "almost" 40 mpg in my 530d.
I average 47 MPG in my 1.9 TDI Passat
I averaged 48 MPG in my VW Polo 1.9D
I averaged 45 MPG in my A3 2.0 TDI

Compared to:

I averaged 23 MPG in my S4
I averaged 15 MPG in my Range Rover
I averaged 26 MPG in my Golf V6 4 Motion
I avergaed 29 MPG in my Golf 1.8T GTI

If I wasn't running my 530d at nearly 40 MPG, I would be driving something more likely to average something in the mid 20's. Probably 12 - 15 MPG less.

I do around 25,000 miles per year. So it breaks down like this...

Driving S4 instead of 530d = £50 per week more
Driving Golf GTI instead of 530d = £24 per week more
Driving Passat instead of 530d = £11 less.

So, to me it is the perfect balance. I pay £11 a week more to drive the 530d instead of the 1.9 TDI Passat. A reasonable extra cost for the privilege of all that extra equipment and power.

But I pay £50 per week less than I would in an S4, or £24 per week less than my Golf GTI. Both of which are NOT insignificant amounts. And while the S4 would be a wee bit faster (it wasn't next to my 335d), I'm not convinced the Golf would have come close. If I could average 31 mpg like your friend in the 535i, then yes, it would only be an extra £18 per week in fuel costs. However, that would also be £29 behind the Passat every week, which I now consider to be my baseline for comparison, for me, as it is my second car.

You need to compare like with like though. You can't compare a 12 year old 4.2 V8 with an archaic auto transmission and a manual that is geared only for 0-60 times with a new 6cyl petrol using a state of the art transmission.

I used to average 18mpg in my S4 avant, but averaged 27 in my 335i touring.
My 535d touring averaged 27mpg as a comparison.

I would guess most people are averaging around 37 in the 530d looking at the figures on fuelly etc.
So to average 32 on the 535i is 12% less, and with petrol being 8% cheaper the price gap is sod all.


That was sort of my point, people are thinking back to when the 1.8 petrol was going up against the 1.9tdi.
The petrol was 92bhp and the diesel was 110bhp, the petrol returned 25mpg and the diesel returned 55mpg.
Petrol was 79p litre and diesel was 81p litre.
It was an absolute no brainer to buy the diesel, it was quicker, more exciting and cost half the amount to run.

But things are changing.
I had an A3 with the 2.0tdi and the 1.4tfsi engine for two Sundays, doing the exact same 90 mile round trip they both returned 48mpg.
The 1.4Tfsi was so, so much nicer to drive, it was lighter, the cluthc was light, the gear changes sweeter, the engine revved better and the refinement was on another level.
The 1.4tfsi was also cheaper.
But still, 99 out of every 100 sold will be the diesel. Why?


IMHO the official consumption figures play a large part with this, gives a completely twisted views of things, many diesel owners never even get their car to temperature, and still look at the combined and extra urban figures.....you can't.


I do think we will see a revival of petrol soon, especially with problems with DPFs etc.
Just have to wait and see.

[xs2man]

Originally Posted by HighlandPete

I come from a similar viewpoint, I'm certainly not against diesel in any way, have run them for years and still use diesels.

I did test a 530d and 535i 'back to back' (while driving a BMW 330d). It was the 535i that really appealed to the senses and was so refined compared to the 530d, which is a pretty good engine in a 5-series. Even the day to day performance was not left wanting, as the N55 turbo is no slouch at low to mid range. Power so easy to extract, closes the gap on the diesel torque advantage.

I did the math. At the time with a 8 - 10p cost difference in fuel cost, along with anticipated real world mpg it was looking at £8 per week fuel cost penalty in the petrol, for my typical driving mix. Even as a motorway car it would still be less than £25 per 1,000 miles.

In reality I'm on target in the 535i for long term consumption, recording a genuine 30+mpg. So yes £8 per week is pretty much the reality.

Buying a nearly new petrol made even more sense, the car was virtually the same new price, but an extra saving of around £8k at purchase, compared to a similar diesel. That is a lot of fuel, even if the residual several years down the line is still against the petrol. The 535i is off the new car purchase radar, for most new buyers, likely to be more sought after as BMW enthusiasts will be wanting them as they get into the used market, so anticipate not such a big value gap at trade in time. Even the trade seem to be indicating the 535i hardening up in value.

No regrets here, for buying petrol. No DPF concerns for local driving of a diesel, and a peach of an engine.

HighlandPete

£8 per 1000 miles seems like nothing. And when I do my calculations, assuming a 38.6 MPG for the 530d (my actual fuel consumption average), compared to the 31 mpg mentioned above (which I think I wouldn't actually achieve), I get a £32 per 1000 miles fuel cost difference.

I do take you point however with the big purchase price difference on nearly new, compared to narrowing difference after several years. That will certainly offset most, if not all of that cost difference.

[xs2man]

Originally Posted by gIzzE

You need to compare like with like though. You can't compare a 12 year old 4.2 V8 with an archaic auto transmission and a manual that is geared only for 0-60 times with a new 6cyl petrol using a state of the art transmission.

I used to average 18mpg in my S4 avant, but averaged 27 in my 335i touring.
My 535d touring averaged 27mpg as a comparison.

I would guess most people are averaging around 37 in the 530d looking at the figures on fuelly etc.
So to average 32 on the 535i is 12% less, and with petrol being 8% cheaper the price gap is sod all.


That was sort of my point, people are thinking back to when the 1.8 petrol was going up against the 1.9tdi.
The petrol was 92bhp and the diesel was 110bhp, the petrol returned 25mpg and the diesel returned 55mpg.
Petrol was 79p litre and diesel was 81p litre.
It was an absolute no brainer to buy the diesel, it was quicker, more exciting and cost half the amount to run.

But things are changing.
I had an A3 with the 2.0tdi and the 1.4tfsi engine for two Sundays, doing the exact same 90 mile round trip they both returned 48mpg.
The 1.4Tfsi was so, so much nicer to drive, it was lighter, the cluthc was light, the gear changes sweeter, the engine revved better and the refinement was on another level.
The 1.4tfsi was also cheaper.
But still, 99 out of every 100 sold will be the diesel. Why?


IMHO the official consumption figures play a large part with this, gives a completely twisted views of things, many diesel owners never even get their car to temperature, and still look at the combined and extra urban figures.....you can't.


I do think we will see a revival of petrol soon, especially with problems with DPFs etc.
Just have to wait and see.

I was comparing cars I've owned in all fairness, so I see your point.

But I really do doubt I would see more than 30 mpg in a 535i. And based my calculations on the 31 mpg your friend said he sees. And the 38.6 I see in the 530d.

£32 per 1000 miles is too much for me, at the moment. The 530d sits right in the middle of the £32 per 1000 miles more in the 535i and the £29 per 1000 miles I'd save for my Passat (2003).

Looking at it that way, the 530d is bang in the middle, and as such, the perfect compromise between performance and economy. For me.

If I were doing 8000 miles a year, that would be different, of course. But at 25,000 not so much.

[gIzzE]

I do get where you are coming from, I just think people don't look at the whole picture when deciding.

They look at official figures, and use combined which in a diesel is a useless figure for 90% of diesel owners, and think "The diesel will cost me 40% less".
It doesn't.
It may be 10% less on fuel, and around 2-3% overall ownership costs.

Those that buy at a car at 1-3 years old nearly always pay more overall for owning a diesel.

Diesels loose more in the first 2-3 years, but by the time you get to 5 years old that figure comes bouncing back.

[gIzzE]

Originally Posted by gIzzE

I do get where you are coming from, I just think people don't look at the whole picture when deciding.

They look at official figures, and use combined which in a diesel is a useless figure for 90% of diesel owners, and think "The diesel will cost me 40% less".
It doesn't.
It may be 10% less on fuel, and around 2-3% overall ownership costs.

Those that buy at a car at 1-3 years old nearly always pay more overall for owning a diesel.

Diesels loose more in the first 2-3 years, but by the time you get to 5 years old that figure comes bouncing back.

Just to add, I am guilty of it myself.

[xs2man]

I agree with pretty much everything your saying there.

The combined official figure is useless now. Now the EU has standardised the testing procedure, it comes out with completely unrealistic numbers. And they don't actually equate, even slightly, in my experience, to real world numbers. A lesson hard learned with my A4 experiences.

Although I suspect the ACTUAL numbers are probably closer to 20% on fuel costs between equivalent petrols and diesels.

Yeah, the gap in purchase price does close after around 4-5 years, usually coming to within £1k or so by the time they are 6-7 years old.

[gIzzE]

My biggest gripe with it is, the lack of petrols available at 2-3 years old!

[HighlandPete]

Originally Posted by xs2man

£8 per 1000 miles seems like nothing. And when I do my calculations, assuming a 38.6 MPG for the 530d (my actual fuel consumption average), compared to the 31 mpg mentioned above (which I think I wouldn't actually achieve), I get a £32 per 1000 miles fuel cost difference.

I do take you point however with the big purchase price difference on nearly new, compared to narrowing difference after several years. That will certainly offset most, if not all of that cost difference.

You may have noted I amended my figures, (before you had responded) as I'd extracted the wrong one from my data. I'd meant £8 per week at my mileage, (now in the text) which in the 535i is based on ~8k miles per year. I still work out my 'real world' 1,000 miles penalty as under £25.

The figure of £8 per a 1,000 miles I originally quoted, was from some figures for consumption from cold starts, diesel vs. petrol. I'll quote them in full from my notes.

For my 5 mile mark, the mpg from cold is less than 10% more fuel for the petrol, even at 12 miles it only increases to about 13% more fuel. Takes around 30 miles before it is users over 15% more fuel than the diesel. Add the price differential for fuel, that's 10 pence a litre in favour of the petrol at the moment. Translate that to a theoretical 1,000 miles worth of 5 mile trips, would only save me £8 for fuel at current prices. Yes, no more than £8 for 1,000 miles.

It is when you start adding decent runs, the diesel engine will start returning the good mpg figures. That is where the petrol just can't gain the economy. My example, the diesel will use around 20% less fuel. On typical figures for a 1,000 miles at best consumption, than is still less than an extra £25 for fuelling the petrol.

And that is simply looking at fuel costs, of two cars, the petrol with a real world average of around 31mpg, the diesel with 37mpg.

Food for thought, particularly for those making short trips in a diesel.

HighlandPete

[gspannu]

Originally Posted by AP

I'll chip and say that if you can afford the 530d you should go for that. It does cost more but it is the better car. I test drove a 520d before I got my 530d and it is certainly a step up. There is more than enough power for real world driving and if you want it to be economical, it can be.
only you can make the choice but as I think I've said elsewhere on forums, for the UK the 530d is probably the best compromise 5 series you can buy.

Absolutely agree with AP.

I bought a 520D new; kept it for 9 months and then bought a new 535D.

I did drive everything before deciding on the 535D.

I test drove most of the petrols & diesels 520i, 525i, 525D,... and finally settled for getting a new 535D.

The torque of the 535D is absolutely in a different class ...and I can still squeeze 39 mpg. I have only driven 5000 miles, so its going to get better.

My 2p is that the 5 is quite a heavy car for a 2 litre engine... get the 530 or 535.

[gIzzE]

Yeah, the old mans 520d lasted 12 weeks, then he swapped for a 530d, albeit a GT, but the 520d just didn't excite him at all, and his view was "if I am spending all this money on a car it might as well be something I really look forward to getting in every day."

[Piers]

Haha, just read all of that in one hit.

Our three cars -

Wife has a Zafira for the family, had a diesel one but at 3k miles pa, when we changed it went to petrol.

My fun car is an Lotus Elise 111R - 30mpg, half that on track, and i could'nt care two hoots how much it is costing as I navigate my way through European tours with the roof off, or circling Spa Francochamps, pretty much overtaking anything we come into contact with, smiling every single second. Up and down through it' six speed box, second cam coming in at 6,200rpm as I head to an 8,200 redline.

Then there is my brand new LCI 520d - my everyday car, which I do not rag around most of the time. This is covering 100's of miles effortlessly weekly, fully automatic down to the lights, arriving at clients refreshed, listening to internet radio, talking on the phone, enjoying the ambience. Ironically it is this that I watch the diesel mpg in - if for no other reason than it is a constant challenge to do better mpg without driving like a snail, rather than the actual saving of money. That and when i look back at it, i love the look of mine, and this joy i share with the Lotus too.

I was tempted to sell the Lotus and buy a 535d with the increased budget, but in the end, they do different things. Most people have to compromise as running more than one car is a no no. I consider myself lucky, and as a result, have zero craving for a 530d/535d, not saying a would'nt buy one, just that I do not feel short changed with the 4 cylinder, and I like to drive quickly!

Fact is, in the UK, big petrols are for the more informed ( as above) the rest of the country will diesel it all day, even if they are paying more to purchase it....

[HighlandPete]

Originally Posted by gIzzE

Yeah, the old mans 520d lasted 12 weeks, then he swapped for a 530d, albeit a GT, but the 520d just didn't excite him at all, and his view was "if I am spending all this money on a car it might as well be something I really look forward to getting in every day."

Much my thinking, what would I really be saving in a 520d touring? I tried an F11 520d and could easily have waked away from BMW, but knowing the 5-series can be a completely different sensation, focused the mind.

My son runs an X3 3.0sd which he enjoys, (he'd previously run the 2.0d version) and is familiar with my BMW models over the years. When I took him out in the 535i his first comment, before we'd even got out to the main road, was that a "it is a real BMW, the diesels just don't come near". Once opened up he had no reservations I'd made the right choice.

The 520d makes a lot of sense for many users, I won't knock it on that ground, but as a BMW experience it is way down the pecking order, IMO.

I'd rather run a higher specced BMW which excites, from years 2 - 4, than a new more basic BMW, at virtually the same long term costs. For me the smiles are much wider.

HighlandPete

[kave]

Originally Posted by SCZ4;*****669

I also prefer the power delivery with the twin turbo setup, less turbo lag, so it has to be a 525d or 535d for me!

I am not sure which model you have, but neither the 520D or the 525D have twin turbos. The 535D has two turbos and the M550D have three.

All engines from 518D to 530D have something called Twin Power Turbo if that is what you are referring to?

[SCZ4]

Have a read here if you're not sure. It has two physical turbos, like the 535d, not the single turbo, twin vain you refer to and confused with.

http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/BMW_N47