Test drove an 03 BMW 520i today

BraveDonut

Looking for some advise please....
I had a look at this today:
http://www.carzone.ie/used-cars/BMW/5-Series

---

/520-520/1136259/
( although this seems better:
http://www.carzone.ie/used-cars/BMW/5-Series

---

/520i-LEATHER/1203442/ )

I have some reservations for the following reasons....
- Moving up from a 1.6 engine, I am not sure about the increased expense on fuel, tax and insurance
- Never owned an automatic before
- not really sure about reliability and maintenance costs

I have always loved the look of the 5 series but can't say that I was really excited about the drive, but this may be because it was an automatic.
My other option is to buy something more economic, sensible......boring.

Any thoughts please?

Darragh29

BraveDonut wrote: »

Looking for some advise please....
I had a look at this today:
http://www.carzone.ie/used-cars/BMW/5-Series

---

/520-520/1136259/
( although this seems better:
http://www.carzone.ie/used-cars/BMW/5-Series

---

/520i-LEATHER/1203442/ )

I have some reservations for the following reasons....
- Moving up from a 1.6 engine, I am not sure about the increased expense on fuel, tax and insurance
- Never owned an automatic before
- not really sure about reliability and maintenance costs

I have always loved the look of the 5 series but can't say that I was really excited about the drive, but this may be because it was an automatic.
My other option is to buy something more economic, sensible......boring.

Any thoughts please?

I wouldn't let an automatic put you off. You'll defo pay more for servicing & maintenance, substantially more, expecially if you go to BMW main dealer. Fuel economy is also kind of out the window with a BMW. Having said that the two cars you've posted look like good value for money.

VH

big heavy cars like that with those smallish engines arent really going to excite - going to be more relaxed cruiser types

even manual wont really excite either and with that engine i'd stick with automatic

will be expensive to run tho - 2.2 L and autos are not great on the juice especially around town

not a lot of these around but would be my preference money no object
http://www.carzone.ie/used-cars/BMW/5-Series

---

/530-i/1155210/

Seth Brundle

Regarding the drive - where did you go and at what kinds of speed?

Many of the 520i's out there for 2003 seem to be basic spec models.
This one however looks nice - http://www.carzone.ie/used-cars/BMW/5-Series

---

/520-full/1151946/
I would aim to get as many toys as possible:
* digital climate control
* sunroof
* CD
etc.

Have you considered a 525i? Not that much extra to tax!

Stevie Dakota

TBH I think if you are concerned about economy and running costs you should look elsewhere. The 2.2 is a lovely cruiser, the auto suits it well, but even ignoring tax and insurance it is not cheap to run, especially if you are coming from a 1.6. It is heavy on fuel, and a five year old model would mean you are potentially very near to expensive maintenance to suspension, cooling system, aircon, etc. Even servicing at an independent can be costly.

If all that does not phase you then do you best to get a runout 2003/04 with minimum auto, leather and climate as stated already. If you get a good one they are a super car, a bad one could break your heart.

BraveDonut

Thanks all for the help

Bearcat

just buy the friggin thing and enjoy it.

E92

Bearcat wrote: »

just buy the friggin thing and enjoy it.

+1, feck the begrudgers, the E39 isn't just one of the best BMWs ever made, but one of the best cars ever made.

Make sure you buy one with full service history though, buy a good one and you'll have a car that is nothing short of outstanding in almost every area.

The only things wrong with them are the running costs, which will be a problem if you're not used to a premium brand, it is slightly cramped in the back and out the boot could be bigger and the fact the newest ones go up to 2003. If BMW still made it I'd buy it over the newer E60 5 series, it really is that good.

It does everything else brilliantly though; the 6 cylinder engine loves to be revved in addition to being silky smooth, and is my favourite bit of the 5 series experience.

The 2.2 should be a big improvement for performance on a 1.6. Like all petrol engines it does its best work when you rev it beyond 3000 rpm, and given how cultured and refined that engine, like all good 6 cylinder engines, sounds that should be no hardship at all, if anything BMW petrol engines love being taken by the scruff of the neck.

It has the same power as the older 523i, and I never heard anyone complain that the 523i is slow.

I'd go for a manual OP to get a more involving driving experience, a manual would be faster and more economical too, and as the 5 series is meant to be more of a sports saloon than a barge, a manual suits the character of the car better too.

Others suggested a 525i, bearing in mind that it is only €99 more to tax than a 520i, and the economy difference would be practically zero, if anything the bigger engine may be a bit more frugal as it has more power so it wouldn't need to be worked as hard, this is a suggestion well worth looking at too.

Alternatively the 530d has loads of power(more than either car mentioned above) and would be almost as economical as a 1.6-1.8 petrol family saloon in the real world, if you don't mind shelling out €1231 on road tax a year.

Darragh29

E92 wrote: »

+1, feck the begrudgers, the E39 isn't just one of the best BMWs ever made, but one of the best cars ever made.

If you live in Cuba...

E92 wrote: »

Make sure you buy one with full service history though, buy a good one and you'll have a car that is nothing short of outstanding in almost every area.

If it has an NCT, you won't need to worry about this...

E92 wrote: »

The only things wrong with them are the running costs, which will be a problem if you're not used to a premium brand, it is slightly cramped in the back and out the boot could be bigger and the fact the newest ones go up to 2003. If BMW still made it I'd buy it over the newer E60 5 series, it really is that good.

Running costs are just a rip off. No room in the back, reverse gear is a bitch to get on a manual gerbox, nothing overwhelming about this car, as you've said yourself in your OP.

E92 wrote: »

It does everything else brilliantly though; the 6 cylinder engine loves to be revved in addition to being silky smooth, and is my favourite bit of the 5 series experience.

All engines loves to be revved. 6 cylinders = more fuel consumption. Sounds lovely, but will cost you fuel. You can hear a 6 cylinder engine being revved on you tube without costing you an absolute fortune.

Victor_M

Jasus Darragh, sometimes you come across as a semi-knowledgeable petrol head, and other times you just rant like a few other Fan boys (or in your case anti-fan boys) on boards.

The E39 5 series was in it's day widely regarded as the best car in it's class by a long shot.

Granted the smaller engined ones (like any brand of car) aren't the liveliest, but this is Ireland, where the 1.4 is King.

You'd want to be a gob****e to buy a car with no service history at all and just an NCT, fine if it's a €500 banger, that actually irresponsible advice you are giving (although I doubt anyone is taking it too seriously)

Servicing costs are no worse than most other brands, in 10 years of driving BMW's I have never had any major component fail on any of my cars, service intervals are huge and only every second main dealer service is a big one (about 500 for the big one 300 for the smaller one every 18 months) the average driver should get about 18months between services (mileage at about 10K PA - 15K Service intervals)

Cramped in the back, maybe you are a bit portly, but for most people it's a very comfortable spacious place to be.

If you have a problem with finding reverse because it's in a different place to your car, don't blame you inability to adapt on the car, reverse gear is in a fairly intuitive position, better imo, than push down bottom right as some cars have.

As for your comments about 6 cylinder engines drinking fuel and it being cheaper to listen to them on youtube, are you one of these guys who know s the price of everything and the value of nothing? In case you haven't noticed you are posting on a motoring forum, some people on here actually enjoy cars and don't mind spending a bit more on their cars and don't want to drive around in 1.9L diesel white goods.

You're posts are all starting to read the same, anti BMW rant, anti BMW rant, anti BMW rant.

P.S are you still laughing every time one drives by you?

Darragh29 wrote: »

If you live in Cuba...


If it has an NCT, you won't need to worry about this...



Running costs are just a rip off. No room in the back, reverse gear is a bitch to get on a manual gerbox, nothing overwhelming about this car, as you've said yourself in your OP.



All engines loves to be revved. 6 cylinders = more fuel consumption. Sounds lovely, but will cost you fuel. You can hear a 6 cylinder engine being revved on you tube without costing you an absolute fortune.

xbox36016

go for a 530dse thay are going for around 18,000 now

Boots2006

OP, ranting and all that aside, we've an E39 530d and an astra 1.4:

mpg around town is similar on both, on a run the 530d will do about 10 mpg more than the astra.
Insurance 300 astra vs 500 for the 530d.
Tax is a killer tho - 1231 for the 530d vs 320 for the astra.

We never liked autos before this one - but it really suits the car, and you don't have the issue of running out of revs during an overtaking manouvre. It might be a different story in a petrol-engined one where you're more revs to play with, but I'd go for the auto again. Did you try the kickdown button underneath the accelerator pedal?


We've had no bother whatsoever since we got it last year. Maintenance costs are a bit higher than the astra alright.

E92 wrote: »

+1, feck the begrudgers, the E39 isn't just one of the best BMWs ever made, but one of the best cars ever made.

Make sure you buy one with full service history though, buy a good one and you'll have a car that is nothing short of outstanding in almost every area.

+1 on this, but remember its a big car, so don't look at it as a sports car. If you found it unexciting to drive, try a bigger engined one, and throw it into a few corners on a dry day. It took a while to figure out the difference between the FWD and RWD - you can get the power down way sooner when coming out of a corner than you're probably used to.

We're looking at selling the 530d, as its a bigger car than we need at the moment, but prices have really nosedived in the past year (ones you were looking at were probably 10k more 12 months ago!). Serious bargains to be had. Currently looking at hanging onto it instead of the astra as its a way better car than the current prices suggest.

Darragh29

Victor_M wrote: »

Jasus Darragh, sometimes you come across as a semi-knowledgeable petrol head, and other times you just rant like a few other Fan boys (or in your case anti-fan boys) on boards.

The E39 5 series was in it's day widely regarded as the best car in it's class by a long shot.

Granted the smaller engined ones (like any brand of car) aren't the liveliest, but this is Ireland, where the 1.4 is King.

You'd want to be a gob****e to buy a car with no service history at all and just an NCT, fine if it's a €500 banger, that actually irresponsible advice you are giving (although I doubt anyone is taking it too seriously)

Servicing costs are no worse than most other brands, in 10 years of driving BMW's I have never had any major component fail on any of my cars, service intervals are huge and only every second main dealer service is a big one (about 500 for the big one 300 for the smaller one every 18 months) the average driver should get about 18months between services (mileage at about 10K PA - 15K Service intervals)

Cramped in the back, maybe you are a bit portly, but for most people it's a very comfortable spacious place to be.

If you have a problem with finding reverse because it's in a different place to your car, don't blame you inability to adapt on the car, reverse gear is in a fairly intuitive position, better imo, than push down bottom right as some cars have.

As for your comments about 6 cylinder engines drinking fuel and it being cheaper to listen to them on youtube, are you one of these guys who know s the price of everything and the value of nothing? In case you haven't noticed you are posting on a motoring forum, some people on here actually enjoy cars and don't mind spending a bit more on their cars and don't want to drive around in 1.9L diesel white goods.

You're posts are all starting to read the same, anti BMW rant, anti BMW rant, anti BMW rant.

P.S are you still laughing every time one drives by you?

Well some of what your posting isn't accurate... There is some scary BMW service cost data on this forum, we all know the story with 150 Euro plus labour rates and nobody will ever convince me that there is value for money in that. This is what you're getting into if you are buying a BMW. I've said it before here that BMW drivers get completely hung up on service history and who proivided the service history, etc. The kind of problems that BMW's are well known for, ball joint/front wishbone problems just to name one, an NCT cert will clear the car for this before a service history will.

I've tried opening my mind a little to BMW recently as I've been accused here lately of being anti-BMW which I accept I am. If the OP wants to get a BMW, if she is happy with higher servicing costs and higher fuel costs, then by all means either one of the two cars he/she has posted up here are well worth buying....

mick.fr

520i is reasonable to run and maintain. Use a indy for maintenance, will save you some cash.
A bigger engine would be more costly for sure.
Auto is really nice too if you are more into cruising than speeding.

My bimmer is auto too but still it responds very quickly when I need it. A manual would be a little bit faster ok, but that does not matter on normal road conditions.

E39 is very confortable too compared to a E46. You have got more room.

I you want something more sporty, you can get a nice coupe E46 for the same budget.

From those 2 E39, I would go for the black one personally, looks better and seems to be in better condition (Leather).

Just my 2 cents

E92

Darragh29 wrote: »

If you live in Cuba...

No if you don't have a chip on your shoulder against BMW(which you do based on the amount of posts you devote to criticising BMW)like you do.

Darragh29 wrote: »

Running costs are just a rip off. No room in the back, reverse gear is a bitch to get on a manual gerbox, nothing overwhelming about this car, as you've said yourself in your OP.

It is not the biggest car in the back but for the vast majority of people it suffices. You'd want to be very tall to say it is cramped, certainly that car can accommodate 6 footers without any problem. And yes I accept that the boot isn't the biggest but it has more than enough space for most.

As for reverse, if it is difficult to select then I'd suggest the car be looked at; the gearbox on those cars is very precise normally and doesn't baulk when changing gears.

Darragh aren't you the very person who bemoans the fact that people come on here looking for a cheaper solution to main dealer pricing for BMW, and then you say the running costs are a rip off?

Yes they are more expensive to run than say a Toyota but you'll find that they compare well to some rival premium marques, as any JD Power survey will testify.

Darragh29 wrote: »

All engines loves to be revved. 6 cylinders = more fuel consumption. Sounds lovely, but will cost you fuel. You can hear a 6 cylinder engine being revved on you tube without costing you an absolute fortune.

I wouldn't agree with you on that.

Diesels certainly don't like being extended by and large. Some 4 cylinder petrol engines don't particularly like it either before I get criticised for going on an anti diesel rant.

OTOH Toyota diesels have no difficulty in being revved, and their VVT-i engines don't really mind either.

Similarly BMW 6 cylinder engines rev up high with the absolute minimum of fuss, if anything they like being pushed, and make a great noise while they're at it.

Yes you can listen on YouTube, but that's like saying you can learn to drive by watching drivers drive on YouTube.

There is no comparison between watching YouTube vids and experiencing the joys of 6 cylinder power on the road.

It's not just noise either(though that is a large part of their appeal for any self respecting car enthusiast) though. The refinement and smoothness of the smoothest engine this side of a V12 is also very important, especially in an "executive car", and that is an advantage from the moment you turn the key.

You are absolutely right, a straight 6 is heavier on juice than a 4 pot, but as somebody who owns a straight 6, and before that owned a 4 pot and having driven several 4 pots from various manufacturers; I'd more than happily pay the running costs of a straight 6 every time.

Objectively a modern 4 cylinder diesel will deliver the performance of a smaller 6 pot and have superior economy thrown in, but the driving experience is distinctly second rate so that would be completely missing the point.

I don't want diesel unrefinement, noise, clatter and narrow power band in my driving experience. I don't want 4 cylinder petrol coarseness and harsh sounds at high revs for that matter either. 4 cylinder petrols lack any charisma and joie de vivre, 6 cylinder engines have it in spades.

I wouldn't say they're particularly heavy on juice mind; the older ones do about 27-30 mpg, which isn't bad when you consider that a 2.0 4 pot of that vintage only does around 33-35 mpg anyway. Of course by today's standards it is poor because BMW 6 pot petrols do upwards of 35 mpg minimum and in the 3 series do up to 40 mpg on average. But that's just technological progress for you. 4 pot petrols these days do upwards of 40 mpg, even as 2.0s, so engines are just simply getting better in that way.

If I had the money, or lived in the US, I'd pay for the running costs of a V8 over a straight 6 too:o. V8s blow straight 6s into the weeds noise wise. I absolutely adore the burble of a crossplane V8 and nothing beats one of those low revving crossplane American V8s. Nobody does a good V8 noise like the Americans do.

Given the way oil prices etc are going, it looks like I'll have to settle for a straight 6 though:o:(.

Darragh29

The reason I don't like BMW's is because the people I know who are buying them, are buying them as a status symbol. I'm not saying this is the case with everybody, but it is the case with a lot of people. I don't need a car to define who I am, so naturally I find buying any car as a status symbol, a bit strange.

Lately however I've been trying to put this to the side and look at the car and not the person buying it. I found that BMW drivers with the odd exception to be the most difficult to deal with when servicing cars, this is probably the source of my hang up with them. The only time I ever had a problem getting paid for work like engine diagnostics, was when there was a BMW involved. I'm talking about small invoices like 40, 60 Euro here and people who always seemed to be driving a BMW thinking I should just do it for free.

I've never driven a manual 3 series that I haven't found getting reverse gear to be completely annoying. This is just something that annoys me, I've heard other people commenting the same, some people might not notice or care.

Servicing costs, grand if you are using an indy but a lot of BMW drivers have it in their heads that this is not an option with a BMW, I'm not going into the pros and cons of this particular argument, but the OP needs to decide if this is an option for him/her, because if they are dealing with a main dealer, they will pay through the nose for servcing and maintenance.

BostonB

Darragh29 wrote: »

The reason I don't like BMW's is because the people I know who are buying them, are buying them as a status symbol. ...

You're in the wrong trade if that annoys you.

E92

Darragh29 wrote: »

The reason I don't like BMW's is because the people I know who are buying them, are buying them as a status symbol. I'm not saying this is the case with everybody, but it is the case with a lot of people. I don't need a car to define who I am, so naturally I find buying any car as a status symbol, a bit strange.

Ah ha.

I find buying a car as a status symbol to be equally strange, though I will admit that there is a certain satisfaction in owning one in that it drives people up the walls for whatever reason.

There is no doubt that some people buy BMWs because of the badge. The Irish special 316i with a pint sized 1.6 and only 115 bhp is the perfect symbol of that. I think any self respecting BMW fan, or indeed any car enthusiast bemoans such cars. I know I do.

But people buy Audi A3s in droves, and that's a VW Golf in a fancier frock, but for some reason that's ok and owning a BMW is not.

Did you ever think though that people might just buy BMWs because they think that BMW makes very good cars?

Darragh29 wrote: »

Servicing costs, grand if you are using an indy but a lot of BMW drivers have it in their heads that this is not an option with a BMW, I'm not going into the pros and cons of this particular argument, but the OP needs to decide if this is an option for him/her, because if they are dealing with a main dealer, they will pay through the nose for servicing and maintenance.

It seems to depend on where you go.

Judging by what I hear on this forum that Dublin dealers charge a fortune, but country dealers are far more reasonable. Yes the parts are dear, but the service inclusive option is very good value, there is a reason why so many new BMW buyers go for it.

I think a good BMW specialist or otherwise competent garage, is the way to go.

It is financial suicide not bringing your car to a main dealer for the first few years any way. It is hard enough now trying to sell any used car without making your car even less desirable. After that it doesn't really matter, so why bother unless the main dealer is good and is reasonably priced?

It is a premium car, so it is going to be more expensive to run than your average car, and yes you do need to look after them(though all cars should receive the proper maintenance), but any premium marque is dearer, not just BMW.

Darragh29

E92 wrote: »

Ah ha.

I find buying a car as a status symbol to be equally strange, though I will admit that there is a certain satisfaction in owning one in that it drives people up the walls for whatever reason.

There is no doubt that some people buy BMWs because of the badge. The Irish special 316i with a pint sized 1.6 and only 115 bhp is the perfect symbol of that. I think any self respecting BMW fan, or indeed any car enthusiast bemoans such cars. I know I do.

But people buy Audi A3s in droves, and that's a VW Golf in a fancier frock, but for some reason that's ok and owning a BMW is not.

Did you ever think though that people might just buy BMWs because they think that BMW makes very good cars?

I don't accept that the majority of people out there who have a very recently love of BMW are buying BMW because all of a sudden they are convinced that BMW make good cars as you suggest...

bazz26

Ah lads can we put the handbags down and get back to the topic at hand.

OP, both cars are pretty well speced, unless you really do fancy an auto I would opt for the lower mileage manual 520i.

Elessar

I own a manual 2.2L 6 pot BMW. At best I am getting 23MPG with urban driving (lots of start-stops, little motorway) and I would imagine an auto would be worse. If you really want an auto, see if the budget will eventually allow an auto 520D or 320D.

That said the engine is sweet and quite nifty once you get her above 3000rpm

Regards servicing, yes it's expensive but make sure you go with a specialist BMW indy (I recommend AC cars). Even then it's more than your average toyota.

Best to get as many test drives in as you can.