BMW 530i - What's the point?

Mr. Larson

I'll be replacing my car someday in the future for a 5 series (E60) - I've been admiring the 530d from afar but I was just wondering what the point of the 530i is?

The 530d is obviously more economical, faster from 0-100kph than it's petrol equivalent (5.10s as opposed to 6.50s) and has a marginally higher top speed also.

What would posess anyone to pick the 530i over the 530d? What am I missing (assuming I am missing lots, I don't profess to be a petrolhead). I can't wait to get one - really like the look of them - a jet black one with cream leather will do nicely when the time comes.

fletch

Jabberwocky wrote:

The 530d is obviously more economical, faster from 0-100kph than it's petrol equivalent (5.10s as opposed to 6.50s) and has a marginally higher top speed also.

Where are you getting those figures from? Just had a look at bmw.ie and they quote

• BMW 530i - 0-100kph - 6.5secs
• BMW 530d - 0-100kph - 6.8secs

Anan1

Refinement?

MarkN

Not sure I get people buying the same model with similar power in petrol either sometimes.

I'll have racked up 400 kms in a 3.0TDI Audi A5 by tomorrow and fook me it's a quick car.

C_Breeze

Dunno , some people may prefer higher petrol consumption and less torque :rolleyes:

You would be surprised though at the stigma diesel engines still have attached to them - loud, smokey, unrefined ... engines for tractors or for tight @sses ... thats what some people still believe , whenever i ask them why they had bught a petrol equivalent when it was avb in diesel.

Also worth noting that diesel units are normally more expensive to purchase ... and that some people actually just preffer the driving cahracteristics of petrol engines

Owen

Some people just prefer Petrol. James May for example is one, he wrote a very satirical article in Top Gear Magazine one issue on why people buy Diesels, and in it, he moaned about Diesel owners constantly justifying their purchase. A Diesel owner usually won't say "I drive a Golf TDi", instead saying "I drive a Golf Tdi, it's very economical, it's quick, and not that noisy", and his point was that really, the only reason people buy Diesel is to be cheap, and because they can't afford the petrol equivilant, or the running costs.

I'm not sure I agree with him, there are some wonderful diesels out there these days. If manufacturers could only improve on sound-deadening technology, diesels could probably take over the world!

quarryman

price?

Mr. Larson

fletch wrote:

Where are you getting those figures from? Just had a look at bmw.ie and they quote

• BMW 530i - 0-100kph - 6.5secs
• BMW 530d - 0-100kph - 6.8secs

Perhaps my source is wrong - I just took a quick glance at the stats on http://www.carfolio.com/ - still not much in it really is there. It wouldn't be enough to sway me towards the petrol version. Just my personal opinion and was interested in others.

Mr. Larson

C_Breeze wrote:

You would be surprised though at the stigma diesel engines still have attached to them - loud, smokey, unrefined ... engines for tractors or for tight @sses ... thats what some people still believe , whenever i ask them why they had bught a petrol equivalent when it was avb in diesel.

Fair enough, I could well believe that opinion still exists out there... but it sounds a bit juvenile/macho to me, not to mention ill informed. I would never have considered a diesel before but only because I was a bit ignorant about them and under the impression they were guaranteed to be more sluggish and noisy.

The more I understand and appreciate about cars the more I would move away from that notion, I'm driving a 2.0l turbo that drinks petrol on me and I don't mind that one bit (it's worth every cent I pump into it) so I'd like to think I don't fall into the tight @ss category.

unkel

quarryman wrote:

price?

Nope. New, there's only a couple of hundred euro between them. It doesn't make much sense buying one new here. Second hand the diesel is worth a lot more so it depreciates less. Tax and insurance are the same and the diesel will save you a considerable sum on fuel. Maybe ned78 will give us some insight, but at a quick guess I reckon BMW sell 10 530d for every one 530i in this country

And someone that doesn't need to care about money, won't buy a 530i but would pick an M5 instead

Second hand it is a very different story!

E92

Well the 530i has 272 bhp as opposed to the 231 bhp, so the 530i will be faster from 0-100 and if there wasn't a limiter, would be faster at the top end.

The diesel is economical sure,the 530d Auto does 42.1 mpg, but believe it or not, the petrol actually does 37.7 mpg with an Autobox. So the diesel isn't actually going to save a lot of money. The 530i produces 178 g/km of CO2(Auto), the 530d Auto produces 170 g/km so again a very small difference.

No matter what they do with diesel, it never seems to have the refinement of a petrol. Petrols sound nicer, for the same number of cylinders. In a diesel, usually they give it all at low revs and are out of steam at 4,000 rpm. A petrol is only getting into its stride at 4,000 rpm. Some people like to drive cars where you give them a bootful of revs. For that reason a petrol is often more exciting, because they need to be trashed to get some worthwhile performance. Diesels on the other hand give it their best at low revs, which means that when you press on, there is nothing extra to give. While a modern diesel is not even close to what you would call noisy, petrols still have the edge on this.

Some people just hate diesels, and no matter how much faster/smoother/quiter a diesel is, there is just simply no way in the earthly world that they will drive a paraffin stove. They are literally diesel phobic. The quote ned has about Captain Slow is what I'm on about.

Diesels weigh more, and all this extra weight is over the front wheels, so for those who are looking for that extra last bit in handling prowess, they lose out to petrols for that too.

There is the issue of coolness. It isn't really as cool to say you have a diesel(ever wondered why style conscious cars like Coupés and Cabrios are very rarely powered by a parraffin stove?) There is also the stigma of being a pinch penny; if you're spending the amount of money needed to get an E60 530, then fuel costs shouldn't be that important, if they were, why buy a big car?

For 90% of the people none of this matters, very few will take their cars to the limit of what they can do, and diesel is by far the better choice for all those people.

A lot of reasons I gave a just basically stigmas, and perceprtion, the truth is that in the real world a 530d will be a lot quicker than a 530i because its torque and not power that is responsible for overtaking, and diesels have a lot more in the torque department. If you took a 530i and a 530d for a race on a track, the petrol would win comfortably, but when overtaking, picking up speed etc in normal driving the diesel will be much faster.

The 530i manual does the sprint from 80-120 km/h in 4th in 6.6 seconds, the 530d does the same in 5.1 seconds, so that is a big difference, and explains in simple English why diesels are better for overtaking. Believe it or not, you have to go to a 550i to get the same response when overtaking.(it does the said sprint in 5.1 seconds, exactly the same as the 530d).

JHMEG

E92 wrote:

Well the 530i has 272 bhp as opposed to the 231 bhp, so the 530i will be faster from 0-100 and if there wasn't a limiter, would be faster at the top end.

The diesel is economical sure,the 530d Auto does 42.1 mpg, but believe it or not, the petrol actually does 37.7 mpg with an Autobox. So the diesel isn't actually going to save a lot of money. The 530i produces 178 g/km of CO2(Auto), the 530d Auto produces 170 g/km so again a very small difference.

Based on this I'd begin to wonder what the point of the 530D is (tho I always wondered anyway). If you want a driver's car you get the petrol.. if you want economy you get a diesel, but get a 2 litre.

E92 wrote:

The 530i manual does the sprint from 80-120 km/h in 4th in 6.6 seconds, the 530d does the same in 5.1 seconds, so that is a big difference, and explains in simple English why diesels are better for overtaking. Believe it or not, you have to go to a 550i to get the same response when overtaking.(it does the said sprint in 5.1 seconds, exactly the same as the 530d).

Common misunderstanding. The diesel is probably quicker in top gear than the petrol. But hey that's what gears are for: Drop a cog or two in the petrol and the diesel will get left behind, especially when the torque multiplier comes effect comes in with the higher revving petrol.

And then there's stuff like throttle response and better flexibility due to greater rev range etc that will again make the petrol a better drive.

E92

JHMEG wrote:

Common misunderstanding. The diesel is probably quicker in top gear than the petrol. But hey that's what gears are for: Drop a cog or two in the petrol and the diesel will get left behind, especially when the torque multiplier comes effect comes in with the higher revving petrol.

And then there's stuff like throttle response and better flexibility due to greater rev range etc that will again make the petrol a better drive.

There's no 2 ways about it, a car with 232 lb ft is never going to be more flexible than a car with 369 lb ft of torque, especially when the diesel gives it all at only 1750 rpm. The petrol gives its 232 lb ft at 2750 rpm, which in fairness is quite low for a petrol. But then there is the consideration that the Petrol goes to 7,000 rom, and the diesels goes to about 4,500rpm.

Would I be right in saying that the torque multiplyer thing says that 369 lb ft at 1750 rpm is the equivalent of 232 lb ft at 2740 rpm(approximately)? I still don't believe that a 530i would be more flexible than a 530d though if this is true. There is so much in terms of Physics to be considered though as to what makes an engine flexible, there is the weight, the gear ratios, the final drive ratios, the power, the torque, the revs these are delivered at etc the list is endless...

Anyway, there are advantages to both engines, I've detailed the advantages of petrol power already in this thread.

JHMEG

E92 wrote:

There's no 2 ways about it, a car with 232 lb ft is never going to be more flexible than a car with 369 lb ft of torque,

All things being equal. Which they're not. Far from it.

E92 wrote:

Would I be right in saying that the torque multiplyer thing says that 369 lb ft at 1750 rpm is the equivalent of 232 lb ft at 2740 rpm(approximately)?

Not without doing the maths, but it would be fair to say that at 7,000rpm the petrol would be probably be putting more torque on the road than the diesel at 4,500rpm.

As I've said, the diesel's advantage is economy, which is only slight. And for those that are too lazy to use the gearbox then it will be quicker in top gear and the petrol. Having said that a 3.0 petrol will not be at all short on torque.

Biro

E92 wrote:

There's no 2 ways about it, a car with 232 lb ft is never going to be more flexible than a car with 369 lb ft of torque, especially when the diesel gives it all at only 1750 rpm. The petrol gives its 232 lb ft at 2750 rpm, which in fairness is quite low for a petrol. But then there is the consideration that the Petrol goes to 7,000 rom, and the diesels goes to about 4,500rpm.

Would I be right in saying that the torque multiplyer thing says that 369 lb ft at 1750 rpm is the equivalent of 232 lb ft at 2740 rpm(approximately)? I still don't believe that a 530i would be more flexible than a 530d though if this is true. There is so much in terms of Physics to be considered though as to what makes an engine flexible, there is the weight, the gear ratios, the final drive ratios, the power, the torque, the revs these are delivered at etc the list is endless...

Anyway, there are advantages to both engines, I've detailed the advantages of petrol power already in this thread.

Granted, in the case of the 530i and 530d, the d would provide a more punchy mid-range without the effort. When it comes to smaller, lighter cars, like the 330cd and 330i, the petrol would be quicker in more respects due to the way a coupe is meant to be driven.
However, while you compare the times in 4th gear between the 550i and 530d, I can tell you that having driven the 530d, and an E39 540i (about 80 or more hp down on the new 550i) the 540 would demolish the 530d in any circumstance, due to the fact that you just bury the shoe in what'll more than likely be an auto anyway and the correct gear will come, and the V8 petrol will leave the diesel in it's wake. There is a big difference in power delivery, and it's all better.

craichoe

There is alot of inconsistencies in this thread.

Comparing RPM between two different engines to power output. I mean, you have so many different variables there.

I guess when peeps are driving cars, nearly all car engines on the road out there are pretty similar. On bikes, their all petrol (except for the one with the BMW Diesel engine)

Comparing a Diesel to a Petrol engine is like comparing 250CC Inline 4 engine to a v-Twin, or a 600CC 2 Stroke to a 1350CC Four stroke. Completely different characteristics, if you drive one like there other you'll think its absolute rubbish.

Similarly, if someone jumps into a Petrol car and drives it like it has a diesel engine, due to their driving style they tend change gears earlier (which is bad)

The same when people used to petrols drive a diesel, they take off and think that its rubbish because their trying to push the engine to higher rev's, which just isn't the way it works.

i.e. the only real different is that a Diesel has to be a steel lump because the compression in the engine is much higher and the rev's are much lower, lower rev's equal a more comfortable ride imho. That and a small bit of turbo lag, but thats the Dependant on the size of the turbo, and they even have sequential turbos now too.

Really, its a case of, if you started on one you probably won't like the other if you go for a test drive.

Personally i like both

maidhc

JHMEG wrote:

Not without doing the maths, but it would be fair to say that at 7,000rpm the petrol would be probably be putting more torque on the road than the diesel at 4,500rpm.

We will never agree on this I'm afraid, but a car with loads of torque at low rpm is far more usuable. I know with my two cars a) Focus Diesel, b) Tricked out Capri 2.0 with a fast road cam etc..., the Capper probably can move as swifty as the Focus (and rolling roads suggest it should have more power, but I doubt it), but doing things like overtaking is much more draining... but of course for my purposes more fun. The focus is far more effortless to drive and to overtake with though.

JHMEG wrote:

As I've said, the diesel's advantage is economy, which is only slight. And for those that are too lazy to use the gearbox then it will be quicker in top gear and the petrol. Having said that a 3.0 petrol will not be at all short on torque.

The economy difference should be pretty big tbh.

RobAMerc

While I admire the diesels and have a great respect for them I'd still prefer to have petrol over a diesel any day.

IMO a petrol feels more lively, free revving with usually has a much wider power band than a diesel meaning you don't need to stir the gear lever every two seconds in order to keep her lit while on a demanding piece of road.
I like the way I can use a petrol engines full rev range and get the extra sense of aural drama a six or big eight or raspy four might give while you give it the beans down your favorite strip.

Also a diesel engine weighs a lot more than a petrol engine and often means the weight balance of a car will be shifted forward meaning it tends to lumbar into bends, understeer more and the added weight tends to reduce feel through the steering wheel.

So if it was me and I was in the position to buy a 530 vs a 530d I think the petrol head in me would plump for the 530i.

The 530i is probably meant for non European markets more than anything, I imagine the average Yank might wonder what is a 530d never mind why bother.

MarkN

As a petrol head, I would challenge ANYONE on here to drive a big engined diesel car and tell me you are not impressed by the performance of it.

I'm not talking about a "1.9 T red I red D red T red I red my car is a rocket" type car.

Get yourself into a 3.0TDI VAG V6 car or a BMW 335D and come back and tell me it's slow.

CarLover

Modern diesel performance is magnificant...and they are a lot more refined than the tractor engines of old...

But at the end of the day petrol vs diesel is usually about refinement. No getting away from that "dukka dukka" noise from a diesel vs the roar/rumble of a flat six

MarkN

I agree but again, when your 3.0 TDI HAS a V6 roar and you can BARELY notice a diesel noise with it being non existant inside the car, it's closer again to the petrol.

E92

For a proper 6 cylinder roar, you need a Petrol BMW for that:D . But yeah I've heard that the V6 TDi in the Audi doesn't sound that dieselish at all.

maidhc

CarLover wrote:

But at the end of the day petrol vs diesel is usually about refinement. No getting away from that "dukka dukka" noise from a diesel vs the roar/runmble of a flat six

There is a satisfying growl from most diesels under acceleation. At cruising speed they are generally silent. On cold mornings they are a bit noisey... I'm sure it is a trade off most people can live with.

(and a BMW straight six sounds pathetic compared to a Dodge Charger... so where do you stop!)

craichoe

IMO most people that knock diesels have never owned one .... I don't know why but the boardsies seem to just disagree about everything

that lads on briskoda.net that have petrol and diesel vrs's dont seem to have the same argument and concede that both have their plus and minus points.

Both having a massive boot of course

jdf

I recently had cause to drive a 530d. It was a ragged one with 150,000 miles on the clock but by gum could it shift. It was way, way faster than my 525i.

Diesel v's petrol is kinda a like ale v's stout. Some people will use whichever suits their purpose at any given time and then others just swear by one or t'other.

Anan1

Fuel economy aside, can anyone tell me how diesel is better than petrol? And don't start on about torque, petrol turbos have that too.:)

siralfalot

Anan1 wrote:

Fuel economy aside, can anyone tell me how diesel is better than petrol? And don't start on about torque, petrol turbos have that too.:)

they're not, petrol wins every time, and I speak as the owner of a 210bhp Diesel car

maidhc

Anan1 wrote:

Fuel economy aside, can anyone tell me how diesel is better than petrol? And don't start on about torque, petrol turbos have that too.:)

Well if money didn't matter, we would all be flying private jets to work...

I don't think anyone will disagree but that a V8 Petrol is a thing of beauty... getting between 7-10mpg is however a fatal design flaw.

However that doesn't mean that a 530d is not a better car in many respects to a 530i, or that a Corolla 1.4 D4D is not superior to a 1.4VVTI!

richie_rvf

People that buy higher capacity petrol cars do so because they like the performance and will also use the gears to maximise this.

I have yet to see a 530d (unmodified) outperform a 530i (both in E39 form).

Anyone here see the episode of Top Gear where they tested the 535d? when it came to the track they put it up against it's petrol rival, the 545i, no competition.

Diesels are fantastic but I don't see the point other than economy.

I am open to the fact that diesels are getting better year on year but I am still not sold - and yes I have owned both petrol and diesel cars.

If I was a rep or had need to do very high mileage I would go for a diesel but for the pure enjoyment of driving I will stick with petrol cars - for now.

I recently had a guy in a 535d try to show me how good his diesel was - I don't think he will try it again

Some diesels do sound good, not as good as the petrol version IMO though but the really annoying thing for me is how quickly they run out of puff, I know you need to change gear at lower rpm but it's just that when it really gets going you have to suddenly change and wait all over again, when a petrol really gets going, it keeps going and going.

I think it will be some time before a petrol head will get the same thrill from a diesel - it may well happen in the future but for now I will stick with petrol.

Richie.

fletch

Anan1 wrote:

Fuel economy aside, can anyone tell me how diesel is better than petrol? And don't start on about torque, petrol turbos have that too.:)

I enjoy them for quiet motorway cruising, 75mph = 2,200rpm in my 1.9TDI . The equivalent capacity petrol engine would be over 3,000rpm.

mike65

Changing gear is for poor people.

Any big derv BMW should be an auto.

Mike.

maidhc

fletch wrote:

I enjoy them for quiet motorway cruising, 75mph = 2,200rpm in my 1.9TDI . The equivalent capacity petrol engine would be over 3,000rpm.

The best reason of all to buy a diesel would be reliability. The old non-common rail diesels were simply indestructible, and would start in spite of your best efforts... all you need is a bit of compression and a bit of fuel (any fuel) and you are away.

If ever we do have a day after tomorrow scenario, the old VW Golf and Merc 123/4 diesels will be selling for bigger money than the 545i does today!

Owen

fletch wrote:

I enjoy them for quiet motorway cruising, 75mph = 2,200rpm in my 1.9TDI . The equivalent capacity petrol engine would be over 3,000rpm.

How is a diesel quieter than a petrol? Diesel, even refined diesels are much more pronounced than a petrol engine, and even though the dB ratings would be close (JK confirmed this when testing the 535d on top gear), it's the lower pitch, and harsher noise of the diesel that makes it much more apparent, and grating than a petrol engine. A petrol engine runnng at 3krpm really isn't much more louder than a petrol engine running at 3krpm either.

richie_rvf

Diesel cars have much more sound proofing than petrol cars, they need it as the engines are noisier due to the higher compression ratio and the self igniting nature of the fuel.

My car sits at below 2500 at 75mph

Richie.

fletch

richie_rvf wrote:

Diesel cars have much more sound proofing than petrol cars, they need it as the engines are noisier due to the higher compression ratio and the self igniting nature of the fuel.

My car sits at below 2500 at 75mph

Richie.

You do drive a 5.0 V8 though

I just find mine very relaxed on the motorway, but yeh it sounds like a bag of spanners on startup

richie_rvf

fletch wrote:

but yeh it sounds like a bag of spanners on startup

So does mine

fletch

richie_rvf wrote:

So does mine

I doubt that very much

michaelanthony

mike65 wrote:

Changing gear is for poor people.

Any big derv BMW should be an auto.

Mike.

I did not want to say this cos people probably would take offence but it is true that manuals are for povs!!!

maidhc

michaelanthony wrote:

I did not want to say this cos people probably would take offence but it is true that manuals are for povs!!!

And for those who like the driving experience of a Volvo Bus!

kdevitt

mike65 wrote:

Changing gear is for poor people.

...and people under a certain age who still have the hips they were born with

Cyrus

im a 530i owner albeit an e39, never considered the 530d,

few factors, i do 8k miles per year max so mpg isnt a major issues, sounds from a 6cyl bmw petrol is wonderful, 530i is noticeably faster than a stock 530d, and i dont like diesel clatter and they ALL have it

unkel

Cyrus wrote:

i do 8k miles per year max so mpg isnt a major issues

Low mileage and a low second hand price mean it's probably cheaper to run a 530i second hand!

The 530i is only pointless when buying it new

michaelanthony

The sound out of it alone justifies it's existence.

Mr. Larson

Thanks for all the insightful posts... has been very interesting reading and has defintely changed my thinking on the two. Not only can I now clearly see the point of the 530i (on reflection it was probably ill informed to question it's raison d'être and probably offiensive to 530i owners) but I'd probably plumb for the 530i now over the 530d if anything....

but I've decided to go for a Skoda Octavia instead.;)

Owen

Jabberwocky wrote:

but I've decided to go for a Skoda Octavia instead.;)

In fairness, it does have a massive boot!

E92

MarkN wrote:

Get yourself into a 3.0TDI VAG V6 car or a BMW 335D and come back and tell me it's slow.

Indeed, in case anyone has forgotten, the 335d has the same power as the original E28 M5 and E36 M3 had. I've never heard anyone describe either of these cars as slow.

The new 123d has only 6 bhp less than the original E30 M3.

I would say to the OP drive both of them, and make up your mind on that.

By the way, the E60 530i before the 07 facelift had 231 bhp(04 and start of 05) or 258 bhp after that, the 530d had 218 bhp in 04and start of 05, and 233 bhp afterwards.

Before the E60 got its facelift, the 530i did around the 30-31 mpg mark, and the 530d did around 39 mpg, so the benefits of Petrol power ironically have only increased this year.

unkel

ned78 wrote:

In fairness, it does have a massive boot!

LOL

Yeah not even a BMW can beat that boot