nav[aria-label="Primary Navigation"] { padding: 0; & ul { list-style: none; width: 100%; display: flex; flex-direction: row; justify-content: start; align-items: start; gap: 30px; padding: 0; & li { margin: 0; } & ul li { list-style: none; } } }

Child Item

* Motors chat - round 12 *

[Deleted User]

This thread is for motoring topics which you feel are not worthy of starting a new thread for, banter from a meet or general motoring related chit chat.

Keep it clean, be nice and helpful.

Motors charter applies.

Round 11 is HERE

Find more posts tagged with

Quick Links

Comments

GustavoFring

CIP4 wrote: »

180BHP and 380NM sounds like plenty of power for a mid sized diesel saloon. Was your blue one a 330d also ?

Yeah, 330d. It's much nicer even in day to day driving and the economy difference is fairly minimal. Her 520d is doing less than the 330d.

Added benefit is the chain is less likely to be an issue on the 6 cylinder.

bazz26

I think if CIP4 finds the Golf interior quality somehow lacking over his previous A4 then I cannot see him liking the F30 interior.

Wailin

CIP4 wrote: »

Thanks for that I seen a few that are 180bhp and 380Nm so assuming that’s the last of the old N47 engine so would that be an issue then like did they ever fix the N47 engine flaws towards the end of life or were they all troublesome ?

The timing chain issue was 2008-2011. A revision was made to the engine in 2011 which reduced incidences but they still occured. Personally I've had two 5 series with the N47 and I never had one issue. Luck of the draw really.

The 320d is a fine car and 0-60 is 7.3 sec, not slow by any means. Moving to the 330d has it's negatives too. More nose heavy, it's a big lump if an engine, and economy suffers, but still far better than your GTi (around 38mpg or slightly better). It has that 6 cylinder smoothness though, very refined and tons of torque.

Drive the 320d and see how it feels for you. You could instantly love it or it could do nothing for you.

CIP4

colm_mcm wrote: »

So, like, I mean, are you, you know?

Ah no not really :pac:

As bad as I am I think changing it after 4 months would be excessive to say the least. Was just curious about the F30 engine set up.

selectamatic

If its for yourself get a 6 cylinder diesel. Cos that will be the very next thing you'll want if you go for the 4 cylinder now.

colm_mcm

So, like, I mean, are you, you know?

CIP4

Wailin wrote: »

2015. It's 190bhp and 400Nm.

Thanks for that I seen a few that are 180bhp and 380Nm so assuming that’s the last of the old N47 engine so would that be an issue then like did they ever fix the N47 engine flaws towards the end of life or were they all troublesome ?

Wailin

2015. It's 190bhp and 400Nm.

CIP4

Wailin wrote: »

That's the B47 engine cip, not N47. No timing chain issues with that particular engine and seems pretty reliable.

When did they change to that engine or did all F30s have it ?

Wailin

CIP4 wrote: »

I don’t have much knowledge on BMWs so quick question on them. The F30 320d from 2015 ish onwards what’s that like engine and car reliability wise ? As I remember all the E90 N47 horror stories. Does that engine still run a timing chain ?

That's the B47 engine cip, not N47. No timing chain issues with that particular engine and seems pretty reliable.

Big Nasty

335d X-Drive Sport Touring in Estoril Blue with tan leather

CIP4

GustavoFring wrote: »

Buy a 330/335 instead;)

180BHP and 380NM sounds like plenty of power for a mid sized diesel saloon. Was your blue one a 330d also ?

GustavoFring

CIP4 wrote: »

I don’t have much knowledge on BMWs so quick question on them. The F30 320d from 2015 ish onwards what’s that like engine and car reliability wise ? As I remember all the E90 N47 horror stories. Does that engine still run a timing chain ?

Buy a 330/335 instead;)

[Deleted User]

CIP4 wrote: »

....... Does that engine still run a timing chain ?

Yup.
Improved valve train design etc etc over the n47 you mention.

CIP4

I don’t have much knowledge on BMWs so quick question on them. The F30 320d from 2015 ish onwards what’s that like engine and car reliability wise ? As I remember all the E90 N47 horror stories. Does that engine still run a timing chain ?

[Deleted User]

Leonard Hofstadter wrote: »

............ I'm a maths and facts person so I need to quantify and in some sense measure everything, so any system where I can't go from one to the other in my head (even approximately) is a non-runner :pac:...........

In my recent 40mpg example I knew I'd travelled 480 miles. As I was filling the tank and passed 45.4 l I was like, that's 10 gallons, it clicked out 9 litres lately at approx the 12 gallon point so intuitively it was 40mpg.

joujoujou

Oddly enough, neither mpg nor km/l is fuel consumption per se. :P

Leonard Hofstadter

Exactly. If it was km/l I'm sure I would have changed, 1 km/l is exactly 2.82481 mpg, so dividing by 3 is a rough approximation in the same way 5 miles is about 8 km (1 mile is exactly 1.609344 kilometres), I'm a maths and facts person so I need to quantify and in some sense measure everything, so any system where I can't go from one to the other in my head (even approximately) is a non-runner :pac:.

Oddly enough some metric countries, such as Japan actually do use km/l for fuel consumption. I never understood how or why it was decided that we would do it differently in Europe, the whole point of metric was to make measurements standardised across the world, instead we now have two systems in both metric and imperial (a gallon here and the UK is 4.54609 litres, but that's 1.20095 times bigger than a US gallon) for fuel economy :pac::D.

Interslice

It's not so much a metric imperial thing. Km per litre I would get my head around alot sooner. I know how many litres are in the tank. I don't want to have to do maths to figure how far that gets. L per 100km is arseways to me.

Leonard Hofstadter

Can't do l/100 km either, even if I had a car with everything in kilometres (which I don't) I'd be converting back to mpg. I can do speeds and distances in kilometres, and in time we'll all be driving electric so for nostalgia's sake as much as anything else, I'm sticking with the old fashioned (but much easier to understand) way for fuel consumption :pac:!

Wibbs

Interslice wrote: »

Still fairly stuck on mpg for the fuel though.

Same here IS. I've some excuse at least. Old dog, new tricks kinda thing.

Interslice

My new renhall trafaro is in mph with a digital speedo so no little kmh to squint at. Made me realize I'm completely switch to km/hr. Must figure out how to change it. Still fairly stuck on mpg for the fuel though.

Wibbs

wotzgoingon wrote: »

Where are you based. With your gallons and miles.

Stop. Recently I got a bluetooth doodah that plugs into my ECU and transmits the data to an app. Set it all up, calibrated the GPs an the like, but then noticed it defaulted to litres and kilometres, so figured I'd leave it as is and force my brain into this century.

Though given I've been driving cars with only kms on the speedo since the late 90's it's only in the last few years I don't automatically convert to mph in my head, so this litres to the kilometre lark could take some time. The above is largely double dutch to me. :eek::D

[Deleted User]

wotzgoingon wrote: »

Where are you based. With your gallons and miles.

Well the distance was clocked up in England

I find mpg and l/100km both fairly intuitive but I do default to mpg generally.

Charles Babbage

wotzgoingon wrote: »

Where are you based. With your gallons and miles.

Last century?

wotzgoingon

Augeo wrote: »

Took 12 gallons to brim it after doing 480 miles..... Properly mixed driving.

All things considered, a good all rounder.

Where are you based. With your gallons and miles.

[Deleted User]

Augeo wrote: »

Currently spinning about in a Mercedes c200, 1.5-litre turbocharged petrol engine... 48-volt mild hybrid thing.
Under 200bhp .... A great drive. ......

My idea of a great all rounder 😍

Took 12 gallons to brim it after doing 480 miles..... Properly mixed driving.

All things considered, a good all rounder.

Leonard Hofstadter

N47s were introduced in cars built from September 2007 for E90s and E91s, so the last of the pre-LCIs will have this engine. Same goes for the NA petrols and other diesels, cars built from September 07 onwards got the Efficient Dynamics technology and the corresponding decrease in reliability (not to mention the loss of hydraulic power steering in some cases) that goes with it.

The upgrade to the four cylinder (and some six cylinder) diesel engines occurred in cars built from February 2010, they switched from using the N47 to the N47N engine, and this brought about the increase from 174 to 181 bhp for the 320d (the 316d and 318d saw no increase in power despite the engine upgrade), the 325d switched from the M57N2 engine to the N57 engine at this time, too (the 330d always used the N57 from the LCI onwards - or early 2009 in the case of the E92 and E93, while the 335d kept the M57N2 right until end of production of the E90/1/2/3).

vintagevrs

I had a 2007 that had the n47 but that was a coupe. I think but could be wrong a check when browsing ads is look at the exhaust pipe. The older 163 ones are turned down. The newer 177 ones are straight out the back.

selectamatic

Bmw e90 320d's

Pre Lci

The first of them were m47 powered and made 160bhp. Most of these would be 2005-2006 some early 2007 regs too.

Then from 2007 on they got the n47 174bhp engine. 2008 saw the Lci introduced.
The n47 was upgraded to 181bhp at some stage and they're was some eco model that made 160bhp too.

So if I understand this correctly pre lci cars still got the n47 engines for a little while.

Is this correct? Or did all pre lci cars still have the m47 even up as far as early 2008 ones.

Me head is melted looking for a replacement car atm.