Is it just me, or are these seriously impressive figures for a big 5 seat saloon exec car?
2.0 common rail turbodiesel
184 bhp
380 Nm torque
0-62 mph in 8.1 seconds
141 mph.
57.6 mpg combined economy
129 g/km CO2
I wonder how close it gets to the combined figure in real world driving?
Last edited by: DP on Thu 26 Aug 10 at 12:59
|
|
That BHP and torque is just about the same as my 330d was (10 years ago). Just shows how much things have moved on.
|
|
I was discussing this on the way back from the seaside with my dad yesterday. He was driving us in his C270CDI estate, which was showing a trip average of 49.0mpg. I remarked how good this was for a loaded 177bhp 2.7 litre automatic, and the conversation drifted around to the fact that many current cars can exceed these figures by 30%. It still amazes me that BMW, Audi et al can build cars with 5-star crash ratings, climate control, 140mph+ performance, Euro V emissions and still get them to do 60 miles a gallon. It really is quite an achievement when you think about it.
|
|
Yup I'm amazed as well. My 140ps 2l Octavia diesel can not better 50mpg on a round trip, under any circumstances.
|
Audi A5 2.0d 170ps. Does 55mpg easily on a m/way trip at a steady 80mph. My current total average since April is 48.4mpg (according to the trip computer).
|
80 mph ? tut tut. Who do we think we are sir ? Jenson Button ? Step out of the car sir if you don't mind......
:-)
|
Yes those figures are impressive. And the car itself is quite cheap on our company car scheme. I'd pay up about £70 a month for an A5 2.0 diesel Sportback and about £12 for the BMW.
More impressive is the 2.0d in the 3 series Efficient Dynamics model. It's only about 163bhp (about what the diesel was 12 months ago) but the emissions are something like 109g/Km.
|
"More impressive is the 2.0d in the 3 series Efficient Dynamics model. It's only about 163bhp (about what the diesel was 12 months ago) but the emissions are something like 109g/Km"
Several of my work colleagues are picking these from the list. I think they're actually getting money back for choosing them against alternatives.
|
I'm amazed too - particularly by the figures for recent BMWs.
If I was one of these greenies, I'd seriously be thinking about getting one - at least after they had taken a few years of depreciation.
|
Perhaps I should have put an 'ish' after the 80!
I like the new 5 series. But I'm very, very pleased with the A5 and I've convinced myself it will be the last time I spend big money on a car. So who knows what comes next, but as I pay for it myself, it's unlikely to be anything from a 'premium' brand.
(Chances of a 5 series M Sport in four years...odds depends if the missus is looking!!)
|
One thing is for certain, you wont get those mpg figures whilst getting those performance figures ;)
They are seriously good though. Does the 5 series have some "trick" set up which makes it very efficient? The new Alfa Giulietta has similarly impressive figures (60mpg combined from 170BHP), but has the "DNA" system, so basically, set it to normal to pass EU tests, then set to dynamic for more fun..
|
My company has a couple of 5 series for the more senior execs. In one of the old model 525d tourings we averaged 120kph and 7l/100km (~75mph and 40mpg). Bearing in mind I have a lead right foot, and the car was touching 250kph (@3500rpm) for much of the journey not bad. Its one of the few cars to comfortably do Hannover to Eupen and back in a day (800+km from memory)
Joe
|
>> Does the 5 series have some "trick" set up which makes it very efficient?
They are obviously set up to give the best possible results on the EU tests.
>> The new Alfa Giulietta has similarly impressive figures (60mpg combined from
>> 170BHP), but has the "DNA" system, so basically, set it to normal to pass EU
>> tests, then set to dynamic for more fun..
>>
MB have a similar thing with E & S settings on the auto box. The annoying thing on the latest model is, to comply with the EU test regs, the car has to always default to the E setting. On the older cars, which have C (or sometimes W) and S, they stayed on whichever setting you chose. I have C/S and even though I'm a gentle driver, C is just too dulled.
Last edited by: Bill Payer on Fri 27 Aug 10 at 12:06
|
|
Yes the Giulietta is the same in that it defaults to N every time you switch it on...
|
....only pulling your chain mlc ! It was fairly irresistible.
:-)
Edit - must make mental note to take it easy through the Midlands for a week or two......
Last edited by: Humph D'bout on Thu 26 Aug 10 at 14:30
|
|
Most people posting seem happy AND to be suggesting that their cars are getting somewhere to near to the claimed/quoted figures. Why are Prius owners less happy and apparently unable to to get within 15mpg of Toyota's figures?
|
Both my cars get more or less the combined mpg their manufacturers publish and to be clear this is measured by calculating from fuel receipts v mileage so is accurate. To be fair though I do a lot of long haul so they are getting the best chance of achieving that.
Of course I don't drive anything like as fast as mlc.......
:-)
|
Because people try to get a small engine upto silly speeds (not good for economy) whereas BMW's are designed to work at Autobahn speeds. My 1.6HDi C4 Picasso gets urban figures on average (mixed autobahn and town) providing I keep the speed down. Wind it up to 180kph (110mph @ 4000rpm) watch the fuel guage drop (13l/100km).
Round town, give me a prius (BMW economy sucks in town), driving across Europe, a big engined diesel.
Joe
|
|
I would imagine that is the case with smaller diesels because most only have 5 gears and the torque band is narrower compared to a larger diesel engine.
|
>> ....only pulling your chain mlc ! It was fairly irresistible.
>>
>> :-)
>>
>> Edit - must make mental note to take it easy through the Midlands for a
>> week or two......
>>
Humph..you don't have anything to worry about from me...........it's the rest of my shift you need to look out for! :)
|
|
Ah so your the one munching doughnuts the wombles are always moaning about.
|
Thats not very good for the diesel GWS. On a long run I can get 40mpg (brim to brim) from my more powerful 2.0 Fsi.
|
|
I think a 25% improvement v petrol for a similar sized diesel is the norm. Always found it to be the case for comparable generations of VWs.
|
>> BMW 5-Series E?? - New 520d - staggering figures
The new BMW 5 is F10 series. HJ has reviews of the F10 and 520dDE
www.honestjohn.co.uk/news/new-models/2010-07/first-drive-bmw-520d-saloon-and-touring
www.honestjohn.co.uk/carbycar/bmw/5-series-f10-2010
If you are tempted to buy a new 520d, this is what HJ had to say in July 2010
"Prices start at £28,045, which represents just a £20 increase on the old model despite extra equipment (like leather upholstery and Bluetooth), a lower tax band and added fuel-saving technology. But anyone placing an order now could face a long wai as BMW has advanced orders until November 2010."
|
Much to my own surprise, I'm looking at the new 5 and thinking I want one. Actually, I might have thought this about either of the last two models if I lived in an LHD country, but couldn't in the UK because I like to see where I'm going in the rain. But they've fixed that now, so all I need is £28,000. Hmm. Maybe in a year or two.
Perhaps I should price one up, then show Mrs Beest how much cheaper - and safer in the snow - a V70 would be. But I digress.
|
>>Is it just me>>
No, I agree 100%, look at the 330d power, torque, performance, economy combo, quite amazing really.
|
The fuel consumption figure quoted by the OP is about what my colleague gets with his very late model E60 520d estate with manual transmission. Best I've had from a tankfull with my 530d was around 47mpg, oddly enough having filled up with the latest snake oil Shell diesel, but my car is an automatic and I don't hang around.
In some ways I actually prefer my colleague's 520d. It seems quieter and feels more light footed than my 530d. Also the ride appears better even though both are shod with identical wheels and tyres.
|
>> In some ways I actually prefer my colleague's 520d. It seems quieter and feels more
>> light footed than my 530d.
>>
I can't speak for the 5 series, but I echo your views exactly on the 3 series.
I had a 330d for a while but I much prefer the 320d that I have now. Sure, it doesn't have the outright pace of the bigger engine, but it feels better balanced and nimble. The 330d seems a bit nose-heavy to me. (Though still a great engine in a pretty good car, it must be said!)
|
>> In some ways I actually prefer my colleague's 520d. It seems quieter and feels
>> more light footed than my 530d.
That's a remarkable accolade - you'd never hear a Mercedes owner say they preferred the Mercedes 4cyl engine over the 6!
|
>>Perhaps I should price one up, then show Mrs Beest how much cheaper - and safer in >>the snow - a V70 would be. But I digress
Interesting WDB. I have a 2008 520d Touring now with 62,000 on the clock from new and I bought this instead of a V70. We normally buy 1 year old cars so as to not suffer the initial depreciation but I worked out that it was cheaper for our company (who buys their cars outright and cash) to buy me a new BMW rather than a 1yr / 18month V70. The savings in fuel, tax, servicing costs, and residual values, etc worked out saving over £2,000 over 4 years.
I do however find the car utterly soul-less, whereas my previous S60 (D5 - the 163hp one) had so much more 'character'. The BM's ride is better but although I have the 177hp 2.0d engine in the BM the Volvo 163hp felt much more powerful. The BM needs a stir of the gearbox to get it going whereas the Volvo you just left in top from 40mph onwards and it leapt forward.
The BM has also been pretty poor reliability-wise with the whole rear self leveling suspension having been replaced, Bluetooth gave up for a while, rear wheel bearings gone on one side, etc. Great service from my dealer but frustrating nonetheless.
The new 520 Touring looks great but I wonder if it will tempt me once I finally kill this one off in a few years, or whether there will be something with a bit more 'something' that tempts me away............
By the way, I do a lot on mixed driving and tend to be a 'press-on' driver, but not too fast and certainly not reckless, and I average about 46.3mpg. Have seen 50.1 on a gentler run from Sussex to North Wales, but 47-48 is more normal.
Just come back from Bordeaux on the toll roads at a set 85mph the whole way at an average of 44mpg. Not too bad but now the dpf is regenerating and it is dipping for a while into the low 40's.
|
->Anorak on
For information the new 5 Series 2010-> is either a F10 for the saloon or a F11 for the touring estate.
->Anorak off!
|
|
That's C4P's fault and not the OP - I'll get it fixed.
|
BMW 5-Series E?? - New 520d - staggering figures - Tigger
