FORUMS
- 5
![]() |
|
![]() |
![]() |
2010 2011 BMW 5 Series Forum F10
First Review of 2012 528i With 4-cylinder N20 Turbo
|
![]() |
![]() |
|
|
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
| 09-23-2011, 12:56 PM | #1 | |||
|
Administrator
|
BIMMERPOST NEWSFirst Review of 2012 528i With 4-cylinder N20 Turbo The 2012 528i will introduce BMW's Twinpower Turbo 2.0L inline 4-cylinder Motor (N20) to the 5-series lineup. The N20 powered 528i is rated at 245 hp and 258 lb-ft. This new engine was also recently introduced in the 2012 Z4 sDrive28i and the first reviews of the N20 powered Z4 were positive. Now the first of the review for the N20 powered 528i is in, via Automobile. What do they think of it? Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Share this story OTHER STORIES YOU MIGHT LIKE |
|||
![]() |
|
| 09-23-2011, 01:39 PM | #4 | |
|
Colonel
![]() |
Quote:
__________________
2007 E90 AW 323i Step | Lowered 1.25"/1" | BMW Performance Exhaust | PBX | Debadged | Scangauge II | Style 162 18" & 161 17" wheels & rear 15mm spacers
|
|
|
|
|
| 09-23-2011, 01:46 PM | #5 |
|
Major
![]() Drives: f10 535d M & e70 X5 Xdrive35d Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: Amsterdam
Posts: 1,078
iTrader: (0)
|
I was thinking the same...
__________________
2004 e87 118d (ret.), 2006 e92 335d (ret.), 2007 e92 330d (ret.), 2007 e87 130i M-sport (ret.), 2009 e92 M3 (ret.)
2009 e70 X5 35d & 2010 f10 535d M-sport |
![]() |
|
| 09-23-2011, 02:17 PM | #6 |
|
Colonel
![]() |
Sorry I am not sold, a 50K luxury 5 series with a 4 banger, it may be a good engine but there is something inherently wrong with that. Keep it only in the 3 series and only offered the big turbod motors in the 5.
__________________
2jZ + RB26 + 4G63 + LS9 + N54 =
![]() |
![]() |
|
| 09-23-2011, 02:34 PM | #7 |
|
Second Lieutenant
![]() |
If you're not sold, then don't buy it! The 535i is also available if you want the "big turbod motors". Choice is not a bad thing, there are some who prefer fuel economy over the extra power and price. I would just wish that BMW would supply the North America market with all models that they make (e.g. 320d).
|
|
|
|
| 09-23-2011, 02:42 PM | #8 |
|
Captain
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
The 2.0 seems like a worthy successor to the NA I-6. I always wonder if there is too much stress on these small engines because of the weight. I would expect the weight of the 528 to be about 3800 lbs and for a little 4 banger to be pulling that weight seems well stressful.
|
|
|
|
| 09-23-2011, 02:49 PM | #9 | |
|
.
|
In the past this was the case, but now the transmissions are the magic in the mix.
Quote:
__________________
Joy
|
|
|
|
|
| 09-23-2011, 02:55 PM | #10 |
|
Private First Class
![]() |
Quote:
Final EPA numbers aren't in, but BMW says to expect a significant improvement over the 528i's already stunning fuel economy numbers. (The 528i sedan with the normally aspirated 3.0-liter six already achieves 32 mpg on EPA highway testing.) Expect that number to improve slightly with more of a gain on the 22-mpg EPA city number. I get 30-31 mpg on highway@70-75 mph on 2011 535i. What is the point of a 4 cylinder unless it gave 38 mpg? |
![]() |
|
| 09-23-2011, 03:07 PM | #11 | |
|
Colonel
![]() |
Quote:
__________________
2jZ + RB26 + 4G63 + LS9 + N54 =
![]() |
|
![]() |
|
| 09-23-2011, 03:08 PM | #12 | |
|
Colonel
![]() |
Quote:
__________________
2jZ + RB26 + 4G63 + LS9 + N54 =
![]() |
|
![]() |
|
| 09-23-2011, 03:21 PM | #13 | |
|
Captain
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
I don't like the 2.0T but I wouldn't criticize it unless I drive one
__________________
Quote:
|
|
|
|
|
| 09-23-2011, 03:27 PM | #14 |
|
stick to your guns
Drives: 2007 335i 2012 Audi Q5 2.0T Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: Fredericksburg, Va
Posts: 447
iTrader: (0)
|
i think the 4 banger is a good idea, especially for those of us that have 100+ mile commute every day. you still get a wonderful BMW luxury sedan without having to get a different car for MPGs. although i think i'd prefer the 535, the 4 cylinder is still a great choice
__________________
"Speed has never killed anyone...suddenly becoming stationary, thats what gets you."-Jeremy Clarkson
|
|
|
|
| 09-23-2011, 05:31 PM | #16 |
|
NEW
|
Lol. What a sad argument. Then take the old 6 cylinder with less hp and less mpg and keep your 6 cylinder sound (whichever sound it may be because I don't hear anything).
|
![]() |
|
| 09-23-2011, 06:39 PM | #17 |
|
Colonel
![]() |
No is saying the old six is great by any means but it is certainly more appropriate in such an expensive and large car. Hell, if it was my decision, for the US market I would have removed it as an engine option all together and keep the larger FI motors. I would instead offer a 535D for the fuel conscious...
__________________
2jZ + RB26 + 4G63 + LS9 + N54 =
![]() |
![]() |
|
| 09-23-2011, 06:42 PM | #18 |
|
Private First Class
![]() |
To give up the straight six for a 4 cyl that gets 36 mpg hwy is to much of a sacrifice for too little mpg gains. No 4 cyl for me, maybe on the 1 or 3 series but on the 5 series no thanks I pass.
|
|
|
|
| 09-23-2011, 08:49 PM | #20 |
|
Second Lieutenant
![]() |
I don't see why some of you are moaning about the demise of the straight six in favour of this new four cylinder turbo. The new engine is just as powerful as the old 3 litre and returns better fuel mileage. So, it doesn't sound as good as the six cylinder... big deal! Nothing that an after market exhaust won't solve it and besides, the engine is quiet and smooth; that's what really matters.
|
|
|
|
| 09-23-2011, 09:06 PM | #21 |
|
Private
![]() |
Unless it's a LOT quicker then the NA 6, it's a dumb move. Slight fuel economy is no reason to dump a 6 cyl engine that stands for something and been perfected for years (and does not have a turbo that could, say... BREAK one day or wear the engine sooner!). Again, the ONLY thing that would convince me is significant torque difference over the 6, which I doubt there is given the engine is so much smaller.
Now, for European markets this may be a good move. I remember our great dilemma one year when mom was buying a car (2000 Nissan Altima). We could not decide whether we could afford 1.8l engine over the 1.6l (that was the choice! 1.8 was considered a rocket!). Can you believe that!? We've ended up with the 1.6 as it was more affordable. Take that into perspective guys. I know both sides of the story (born in Europe, living in Canada), so I get why BMW did it... it just does not make enough sense for our continent, where 4-door sedans are often seen with V8's in them and that's in the very much affordable $30k area. We consider 6 cyl a bare minimum (like me in a small '99 E46!), over there 6 cyl is a pure waste and environment killer.
__________________
|
|
|
|
| 09-23-2011, 10:36 PM | #22 | |
|
SMSgt
|
Quote:
|
|
|
|
|
![]() |
| Bookmarks |
| Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
|
|