[kave]

The German automagazine Auto Motor und Sport have tested various F10 cars.

This is the 0-100km/h figures:

523i 8,4 sek
528i 7,0 sek
535i 6,1 sek
550i GT 5,7 sek
520d 8,3 sek (man)
525d 7,1 sek
530d 6,7 sek
535d 6,1 sek (GT)

This is 100-180km/h
523i 19,4 sek
528i 13,4 sek
535i 12,6 sek
550i GT 9,4 sek
520d 23,2 sek (man)
525d 18,2 sek
530d 14,8 sek
535d GT 13,1 sek


This is the consumption in Liters per 100km

523i 11,1 l
528i 11,4 l
535i 12,3 l
550i GT 15,8 l
520d 7,8 l (man)
525d 8,9 l
530d 9,3 l
535d GT 11,1 l

Interestingly the 528i is faster that the 530D 100-180km/h and almost as fast as the 535i.
The 535D takes a lot of fuel.

[EdM5]

Interesting.
The first 2000 kms, my f10 535d is doing 8,5 l. per 100 km, which is worse than expected. But the engine is new of course, so it will probably get better.
But 11,1 l. for the 535 GT? That is poor considering the frugality that BMW promises.

[raleedy]

The GT isn't an F10.

[HighlandPete]

Good information, but may not tell the whole story.

We don't know what options were fitted to each car, (weight penalties), what wheel/tyre sizes (performance and economy penalties), or the mileage covered by each car, (tight vs. free running engine).

So we possibly have a corrupted 'comparison' sample, both for fuel consumption and performance figures.

HighlandPete

[grimlock]

I always thought the acceleration difference between the 535i and 528i was larger from 0, and diminishes with speed, these test times even exaggerates the differences

[grimlock]

Originally Posted by HighlandPete

Good information, but may not tell the whole story.

We don't know what options were fitted to each car, (weight penalties), what wheel/tyre sizes (performance and economy penalties), or the mileage covered by each car, (tight vs. free running engine).

So we possibly have a corrupted 'comparison' sample, both for fuel consumption and performance figures.

HighlandPete

good point
does the article say what 'mode' it was conducted in?
notice the slower 0-100 times for the 523i and 528i .. if the test was conducted in 'normal' transmission mode this could account for the difference, iddling at lower RPM versus the 2000rpm in sport mode, takes the 523i and 528i engines longer to hit their torque peak at 2600rpm. I guess the factory stated performance figures are 'best possible' ones. So you really do have to get drive like a maniac.

Wow, the 550i on the GT is fast from 100-200kmh .. but its performance is less outstanding from 0-100. From 0, mass slows the GT and the 550i engine's added weight, but the increased displacement of the 550i really powers it from 100-200.

[sequal]

Interesting

[delvek]

Please dont confuse the 550i GT with the F10 550i, two totally different animals.

[rocco90]

Very Interesting. I'm curious about the small difference in the 100-180km/h between 523i and 535i:
528i 13,4 sec
535i 12,6 sec

It's less than a second. I thought that the turbo should give advantage in the high rpm?

[Bond5M5]

Originally Posted by rocco90

Very Interesting. I'm curious about the small difference in the 100-180km/h between 523i and 535i:
528i 13,4 sec
535i 12,6 sec

It's less than a second. I thought that the turbo should give advantage in the high rpm?

Acceleration 0-100km/h for that particular 528i was pretty bad, it should be around 6,5 sec and therefore difference 100-180km/h would be even smaller. Looks like 535i is not so much faster than 528i. Here's F10 528i in action on German autobahn:

[Bond5M5]

Here's more 528i power

[sequal]

Originally Posted by Bond5M5

Here's more 528i power

Awesomeee!!!

[delvek]

I dont care what the numbers say, get in a 528 and then a 535, two very different cars ON the autobahn.

[Bond5M5]

Originally Posted by delvek

I dont care what the numbers say, get in a 528 and then a 535, two very different cars ON the autobahn.

That's mostly just a feeling because of turbo. I remember test driving E60 2008 530d and 530i. 530d felt much more powerful while in the reality 530i was a quicker car. The F10 528i on this video on autobahn is going slightly uphill and auto transmission is not even in sport mode. Put RON 100 fuel in 528i and RON 95 in 535i and you'll have almost identical cars.

[HighlandPete]

Originally Posted by Bond5M5

Put RON 100 fuel in 528i and RON 95 in 535i and you'll have almost identical cars.

Isn't that missing the point, put RON 100 in the 535i and RON 95 in the 528i and we have changed it completely.

From my point of view, the figures are not the whole story, it's driveability which dictates which engine suits a user. The engines have totally different characteristics. It's a bit like the old E39 530i vs, 535i debates. The figures don't make the E39 535i worth while to many, but drive the V8 and you see why some owners would opt for it, even if the performance is not dissimilar. Same for an F10 535i vs. 528i and the different torque curves. Totally different 'mid range' feel to the motor. Plus an extra 48bhp does add to the top end.

Just one other consideration, the gearing, the ratios are different so acceleration times, particularly in the manual examples can be skewed if one car needs an extra gear change for the incremental time being quoted. Add add another 10 or 20 km/h and it could look different, as the other car may need another gear.

We can play with figures all day, to justify one or the other, but I know which I'd rather drive and it has 535i on the badge.

HighlandPete

[Bond5M5]

Originally Posted by HighlandPete

Isn't that missing the point, put RON 100 in the 535i and RON 95 in the 528i and we have changed it completely.

From my point of view, the figures are not the whole story, it's driveability which dictates which engine suits a user. The engines have totally different characteristics. It's a bit like the old E39 530i vs, 535i debates. The figures don't make the E39 535i worth while to many, but drive the V8 and you see why some owners would opt for it, even if the performance is not dissimilar. Same for an F10 535i vs. 528i and the different torque curves. Totally different 'mid range' feel to the motor. Plus an extra 48bhp does add to the top end.

Just one other consideration, the gearing, the ratios are different so acceleration times, particularly in the manual examples can be skewed if one car needs an extra gear change for the incremental time being quoted. Add add another 10 or 20 km/h and it could look different, as the other car may need another gear.

We can play with figures all day, to justify one or the other, but I know which I'd rather drive and it has 535i on the badge.

HighlandPete

Sure 535i is faster and more powerful but not that much, simple fuel change can make 528i and 535i pretty close. Some don't like turbos and instead find naturally aspirated 528i to be more fun to drive. Currently, 528i is the most powerful naturally aspirated engine for F10, it's good to know that performance wise it's comparable to 535i. Which cannot be said for 535i vs 550i.

[grimlock]

The 528i are and 535i are two different animals designed with different characteristics. The 528i is the weaker of the two, but it has a higher redline which translates into more flexibility and fun factor. The 535i has 1/3 more max torque, and the difference is even greater at low rpms, which is why the 535i feels a lot more powerful in normal city driving.

The 528i is a skinny distance runner and the 535i a well-built sprinter, with respective characteristics.

On another note, I was looking at data on old cars, did you know the M3 in the 90's was only a 3.0 liter? So basically you have an updated M3 engine from the 90's in your 528, but hauling around 20% more weight.
Or compare to the current 4.3l e90 M3, you have 3/4 of the torque and 3/5 of the HP, hauling 100kgs more (and less 1000rpm redline)
The point I am trying to make is that the 'weak', linear, high revving nature of the 3.0l NA, you can see where it came from, and how in one of its current homes in the f10 is kind of funny, due to the large size and mass, but the basic engine, though a little weak, retains its 'fun' character.

[delvek]

remeber the coke v. pepsi tests back in the 80's? Both are sodas, both are dark in color, both are carbonated and in many ways the ingregients are the same but they taste totally different.

If you had no idea which car was the 535 and which was the 528, only that they were the two cars you were driving, I have absolutely no doubt that you would quickly be able to identify which was which.

[sequal]

I think the 535 in my opinion should be alot faster then the 528i, but its really not.

[Bond5M5]

Originally Posted by grimlock

The 528i are and 535i are two different animals designed with different characteristics. The 528i is the weaker of the two, but it has a higher redline which translates into more flexibility and fun factor. The 535i has 1/3 more max torque, and the difference is even greater at low rpms, which is why the 535i feels a lot more powerful in normal city driving.

The 528i is a skinny distance runner and the 535i a well-built sprinter, with respective characteristics.

On another note, I was looking at data on old cars, did you know the M3 in the 90's was only a 3.0 liter? So basically you have an updated M3 engine from the 90's in your 528, but hauling around 20% more weight.
Or compare to the current 4.3l e90 M3, you have 3/4 of the torque and 3/5 of the HP, hauling 100kgs more (and less 1000rpm redline)
The point I am trying to make is that the 'weak', linear, high revving nature of the 3.0l NA, you can see where it came from, and how in one of its current homes in the f10 is kind of funny, due to the large size and mass, but the basic engine, though a little weak, retains its 'fun' character.

It appears that something is wrong with 535i, it has 18% more HP, 30% more torque, a turbo and yet it accelerates only 6% faster from 100-180km/h compared to 528i. Let's face it: the only F10 animal here is 550i and there's significant difference only between 523i vs 528i and 535i vs 550i.

[Bond5M5]

Originally Posted by delvek

remeber the coke v. pepsi tests back in the 80's? Both are sodas, both are dark in color, both are carbonated and in many ways the ingregients are the same but they taste totally different.

If you had no idea which car was the 535 and which was the 528, only that they were the two cars you were driving, I have absolutely no doubt that you would quickly be able to identify which was which.

Exactly, the main difference between 528i and 535i is how they deliver power. As I have said it before, some like turbos some don't. I like Pepsi more

[raleedy]

Well, the weight difference between the 528 and the 535 is the equivalent of a passenger, isn't it? That has to detract from the extra HP and torque. I'm sure the 535 is fun to drive. But for me the 528 (like my 328 E92) is more of an expression of BMW's heritage — a normally aspirated in-line 6. What's lamentable, maybe, is the absence of a MT option for US buyers of the 528. What's laudable, though, is the fabulous fuel efficiency of both cars.