BMW 5 Series Diesel

Currently running around in a brand new (well only 5000 mile) 5 Series 177bhp diesel.

Those who know me also know I don't like diesels and think they are over rated.

Having never driven a really modern diesel, I couldn't give a fair comparison with my favoured petrol engined motors.

So here goes.......

The BMW 5 series diesel is probably the quietest diesel I have heard. Only once you less than about a 100 feet away can you hear the rattle of the turbo'd paraffin stove that is called an engine by farmers and tight wads

On the road the car is very quiet and you can't hear the clatter of your pots and pans rattling on your stove unless you drive with the window down....which I do...'cos I'm cool

It has been said that turbo diesels have a power band that is upside down, go like stink from low revs and suddenly hit a brick wall at about 4500rpm. 5000rpm if you are lucky.
I have to say this car isn't like that. It does redline at 5000rpm and has warning dots on the fun monitor from 4500rpm at which point, you can feel the power start to drop off anyway.

I also drive a 120 2litre petrol with 170bhp. Both cars have 6 speed boxes and as a direct comparison, the 120 is faster. It really feels quicker on the road too.

As you know, horsepower turns heads and torque turns wheels. The 5 series has more of both compared to the 120, yet the 120 will pull from 70mph in 6th much much quicker than the diesel.
Why is this ?? I don't know. All I can say is the 120 will pull like stink from about 2000rpm all the way to 7000rpm and feels very powerful, 0-62 in 7.5 seconds apparently.
The diesel lump will also pull from 2000rpm, but only to the aforementioned 4500rpm which means it's power band is very narrow and basically isn't as flexible as the petrol.

On the upside, the electric leather seats, all the toys (which the 120 also has) and the feeling that you are King while the Mondeo diesels get out of the way as your Angel Eye lights bare down them in nice. This car is huge. I found this out when I put my Crown Jewels in the boot and it took me 20 minutes to walk back to the drivers door. Also I'm returning over 60mpg which is brilliant from such a big car and it is still reasonably quick. It's just the feeling of the car and engine doesn't entice you to try and win the BTCC. The petrol 120 does, and it returns on average over 40mpg with a heavy right foot. BMWs have always been excellent on fuel. One reason I actually now like them, although I still love my Alfas

On the whole, on a long journey I would take the 5 series diesel as you just drift along in silence and don't feel the urge to turn into Lewis Hamilton. But for fun........

This is the first chance I've had to compare a proper diesel with a petrol engine. Both put out around the same number of horses, although the diesel obviously has more torque things, and both are 2 litres. To me, the petrol is by far the more usable engine of the two. Saying that, I'm using the 5 series to do my 100 mile a day commute to and from work. It's more relaxed and as I say, the fuel consumption, or lack of it, is nothing short of amazing.

But there lies the problem, on one hand, to me the diesel is great for the long daily commute where you are stuck in jams and your speed is down due to volume of traffic on the motorway as it suits the engine.

On the other hand, I now won't listen to anyone who tells me their remapped diesel is as fast, or faster and more fun than a similarly powered petrol. It's just not true. If I put the paraffin stove into the 120, the characteristics would still be the same. It would turn the car into a commuter, rather than the "Ultimate Driving Machine".

I'm sure if I was driving an M5 I'd love the car. Why ??

Because it is a fun provoking, pedal to the floor, get those revs up and scream "HERE I COME...GET OUT OF MY WAY !!!" petrol engine of course......

Thanks for the review, very informative

Only slight flaw is comparing the smallest BMW to the second biggest...

I had a 120D in 163BHP form and have to admit imho they are 1 of the best diesel engines you can buy. Great performance and could easily get 40+ mpg in everyday driving and if I wanted could get 48ish.

It only confirms what I thought, people buy Diesels because they are tight Arses, not because they drive better.

I have yet to drive a Diesel that compares to my Fiat to drive, and it does 30mpg in normal driving and 35mpg on a run, and on nice cheap (compared to diesel) Regular Unleaded, whilst pumping out 250 bhp.

Compared to petrols diesels are more expensive to buy, and usually more expensive to fix and to service.

Originally Posted by RicksAlfas

Only slight flaw is comparing the smallest BMW to the second biggest...

Yeah, that's why I put in the bit at the end saying what would happen to the 120 with the diesel engine.

The car it's in doesn't change the fact it is not as flexible as a petrol engine in my opinion. Nothing to do with speed or acceleration in the end. The diesel is just not, for me, as good as a petrol engine. The only up side I see is the fuel consumption. But then, I very much doubt many diesels in a car that size would be as frugal. BMW have done a great job on the fuel consumption side of things.

So it really means, if you want to buy a diesel for fuel consumption/money saving.....first spend £27 grand on a BMW

The 120 does the fuel consumption of most "other" diesels, and it gets some stick from me at the weekends

the review was really about the engines, not the cars. I think most will agree that despite the wonky looks, underneath, BMWs are good cars

I agree BMW's are great cars, they just look a bit odd and some might say they have a slight image problem. Thats hardly the cars fault though.

Yes, the engines are peaches. No doubt about that!

Aye, 177bhp in a 1600kg car. No wonder it felt uninspiring.

Just stick with loving your paraffin stove and I'll stick with loving petrol engines

If you read what I said, I didn't say it was a bad engine, I said it was different and has it's use. I also said I've chosen to use the 5 everyday because it is better for cruising. That engine in the 1 series would still be the same....unflexible.

The 1 series weighs 1300kg and has a less powerful engine and less torque, yet it is much much quicker through the gears as the engine is more flexible and the power band is larger and better.

Well the 120D (163BHP) I had was a very quick car, quicker than the Alfa 2.4 (on paper) and it delivered the goods economy wise. I would imagine that the 177BHP version in the 1 series will be very rapid.
I know people on this forum are against BMW, they do look sh*t but the engines are extremely well engineered delivering cracking performance, with low emissions and good economy.

With this goverment in power I think that Alfa could learn a thing or two and start producing engines that deliver the above.

Originally Posted by tony44

Well the 120D (163BHP) I had was a very quick car, quicker than the Alfa 2.4 (on paper) and it delivered the goods economy wise. I would imagine that the 177BHP version in the 1 series will be very rapid.
I know people on this forum are against BMW, they do look sh*t but the engines are extremely well engineered delivering cracking performance, with low emissions and good economy.

With this goverment in power I think that Alfa could learn a thing or two and start producing engines that deliver the above.

I agree, their engines are very good. The problem with the cars looks are that the top end models look quite nice, while the base models just look really awkward.

I agree, the 177bhp diesel in the 1 series would be quick, but the driving thrill wouldn't be the same. That's the impression I get from the engine. It's running out of puff while the 2litre petrol is still pulling strong. The Beemer petrol engine isn't like the Alfa lumps where you have to be above 4500rpm before the engine is on song. I'd say, the 170bhp 2litre petrol anyway, has a kinda diesel like low end grunt, but continues to deliver power all the way up to it's 7000rpm redline. That's why I think the petrol version is more usable and flexible.

Originally Posted by marlon

Just stick with loving your paraffin stove and I'll stick with loving petrol engines

If you read what I said, I didn't say it was a bad engine, I said it was different and has it's use. I also said I've chosen to use the 5 everyday because it is better for cruising. That engine in the 1 series would still be the same....unflexible.

OK then.

I think you might moderate your view quite a bit if you tried the same engine in the 1 series.

When reading your review I couldn't help but draw parallels with my own situation of having the 1.9JTDM in both the the GT and the 147.

In the 147 (a much lighter and differently geared car) the performance is transformed -it gains huge levels of character over the GT. Even with the P-Box fitted to the Gt (and what a difference that makes) the 147 still feels far livelier and sportier.

You're spot on with your conclusion about small diesels in big cars for long distance cruising - they are unmatched. If I was a rep I'd choose a 159 1.9JTDM as car of choice.

back to the BM's - very few people understand that the BMW diesel engine range is ridden with electro mechanical problems, all kept quiet by BMW's superb after care service standards. Their dealers are littered with bust turbos and failed engines....

One of our employees had a 120d and it was quick, but the ride was hard and fidgety. He liked the engine though and now has a 320d (last series).

The ride in our 120 is hard, but I think that is partly down to the run-flat tyres that BMW fit.

My comparison of the 2 engines is not really based on how fast the car can go, although I did make comparisons in that area. It was the engine characteristics, and I prefer the petrols characteristics.

And Will, yes the 520D is great on my daily commute. The diesel engine suits that cars setup for the long journey. Again, the 520D is not "slow", but it's not "fun" either imo.

As for the dealerships being littered with cars with broken engines......ever been into an Alfa dealership ??

Anyway, as I say, the diesel engine in the car I'm driving is excellent for cruising, and I'll argue that just as much as I'll argue that our 1 series wouldn't be as much fun with the same engine fitted to it.

Just working this out now, as a comparison:

1 series 2litre petrol (167bhp, Torque 210Nm 155lb-ft ) - weight 1300kg

= 104.4bhp/ton
= 161.5Nm/ton or 119.2lb-ft/ton

5 series 2litre diesel (174bhp, Torque 350Nm 258lb-ft ) - weight 1510kg

= 115.3bhp/ton
= 231.8Nm/ton or 170.9lb-ft/ton

Figures taken from Parkers.

On paper the 520D should pee all over the 120 petrol, but it doesn't and I put that down to the difference in flexibility of the engines

Originally Posted by marlon

Just working this out now, as a comparison:

......

On paper the 520D should pee all over the 120 petrol, but it doesn't and I put that down to the difference in flexibility of the engines

Here you go:

Http://www.bmwland.co.uk

Originally Posted by Pud237

Here you go:

Http://www.bmwland.co.uk

What!? There's a list of problems on there as long as an Alfa Owners repair log!!!!

www.BMWLand.co.uk - Where Power Meets Control - UK BMW Car chat site :: View Forum - 3 Series

The 120D is quick, great handling, great fun (rear wheel drive) BUT the ride is very poor. I had 16" alloys with run flats, and the ride in my Brera on 18" is superior.
I am still a member of he 1 series forum and there are loads of complaints about the ride, a few owners have changed to normal tyres and chucked a puncture can in the boot.
I got the 120D after my 147 TS and the BMW really is a drivers car, best car I ever owned for fun and quick cross country dashes, but it looks crap and there are loads on the road.

I never saw a BMW dealership full of broken engines.

I had the service and maintenance pack £500 for 5 years, pity Alfa couldn't do something like that, as Alfa's are still a rip-off when it comes to servicing.

Originally Posted by Fraser