bmw 320d - anyone know what these engines are like?

TradePro

spacey2012 wrote: »

Every now and again, even the best get it very very wrong, this engine was a disaster for BMW.
They are tempting because they are cheap for a BMW, but for a very good reason.
They screwed the engine too far trying to play catch up with VW and Audi.

http://www.autoexpress.co.uk/car-news/consumer-news/62383/german-cars-among-worst-engine-failures

gkerr4

interesting thread.

the 3-series tourer is a lovely car - all variants from E36 / E46 and the E91 - looks better than the saloon (IMO) and useful (if not massive) boot space.

Interesting comments on the MPG - i had an 2007 E91 330d tourer - the 3ltr 6-cyl engine which is a GREAT engine, so smooth and quiet - great performance too - but i could easily top 52mpg in it on a long run. In fact, over the 30,000 i did in it before i swapped it for a 530d at xmas, it averaged 44.8 mpg which is great really - this was an auto too and those figures are from receipts and mileage records for tax purposes.

Interestingly, my wifes X1 20d isn't as economical which i'd assumed was due to the worse aero properties of the 'quasi-SUV' design.

My new 530d has the 8-speed auto which is simply amazing! - higher MPG, lower emissions and quicker than a manual from BMW's figures. I've done 3,000 in it since xmas and it is averaging around 40mpg but my driving includes a lot more town traffic now - it still tops 52mpg on a long run.

gilbert_and_sullivan

Interesting stuff indeed.

Answering earlier mentions about fuel consumption, you can get 50mpg out of mid noughties 320d's, by having the compact.

Our family owned compact regularly returned 50 but when it reached around 110k and started to make ominous noises it was traded for an E46 coupe with the same engine, instantly lost 10 to 15mpg compared to the smaller car.

Haven't seen anyone mention of the stupid servcing intervals as being at least partly responsible for early turbo failure on these and other modern cars.

You don't hear of Toyota turbos falling apart at 45k miles whcih BMW's do regularly, 9k service intervals ensure clean oil and filters are the order of the day.

I don't quite get the it must be a German Diesel or nothing obsession of the present time, many of them are overrated with too much emphasis placed on specific power figures and manufacturers fuel figures which few people ever match.

Its all very well having these wonderful though unattainable fuel figures, but if the car is going to present its second or third owner with 4 or possibly 5 figures bills to keep it running then the alleged fuel savings soon pale into insignificance.

Apples2

gilbert_and_sullivan wrote: »

Haven't seen anyone mention of the stupid servcing intervals as being at least partly responsible for early turbo failure on these and other modern cars.

'Aint that the truth? 19k service interval for oil on an E60. :eek:
I speak with first hand experience of a replacmeent turbo on a 530D, not a pretty invoice to look at.

Same for Gearbox oil - Lifetime oil my backside!

Lots of people going back to Petrol engines, the lower economy is more than offset when compared to the size of the repair bill for modern diesels.

Let's not even mention Swirl Flaps or DPF's.

System

yeah, that's why I've stepped away from this one (it was local and quite cheap!) but didn't want to ever see that invoice!
I usually service my cars every year as a matter of course no matter what miles they have done - I've serviced my R53 twice and there's still 7k left on the dash till next service!

gilbert_and_sullivan

Apples2 wrote: »

'
Lots of people going back to Petrol engines, the lower economy is more than offset when compared to the size of the repair bill for modern diesels.

.

Yes and i'm one of them, petrol LPG converted is my now default choice, i see nothing on the horizon to change my mind, if anything Diesels will get even more complicated and fragile.

Agree wholheartedly about the idiotic sealed for life gearbox farce, what tripe.

gkerr4

lots of valid points above - expecially agree on the auto-gearbox oil - i needed it changed as a result of a leaky sensor - thankfully it was under warranty which i think you really need on these engines.

The extended service regime is due to make attractive running costs for fleets isn't it? - agree it 'must' shorten the service life of some items - it must do!

finally though - talk of LPG is fine, i've never driven an LPG car but imagine it is good and i can understand why people turn back to petrols - expecially in this colder weather when they warm up so quick.

but...

i have to say this current 'new' F10 530d that i have is simply amazing! - it's the 8-speed auto and that 3.0ltr 240bhp engine is just SOOOO good - smooth, quiet, powerful and so strong its amazing!
and on a 320 mile round trip today to solihul and back via liverpool it will have returned over 50mpg - even with the (fun) toll-booth GP on the M6 toll road - i don't know how they make an engine like it i really don't!

steve-L

motorguy wrote: »

An 03 one?

He must be doing very long steady runs. I've never seen or heard of one doing anywhere near that.

And neither does anyone on pistonheads...

http://www.pistonheads.com/gassing/topic.asp?h=0&f=72&t=872086&mid=101804&i=0&nmt=What+MPG+do+you+expect+to+get+from+a+BMW+320d+E46&mid=101804

I can eeek out 50mpg+ from the 330 driving as economically as possible on A roads and Motorways on my 'normal' 30 mile trip so long as I leave at 07:00 and come home at 19:00.

I can also get 35 MPG driving like the average pistonheads driver.

steve-L

motorguy wrote: »

Disaster for BMW or a disaster for the poor sods who bought one? (myself included)

It does bug me that granted these are 9 or 10 year old cars but the turbos are failing because of a design flaw, yet its the customer who has to fork out.

Not their best engine ....
However Turbo failing at say 125k is "equivalent" to engine screwed at 125k for a 1.4 petrol pulling a similar weight car.

Even my Honda 2.2 TDCI needed the Turbo stripped and cleaned at 175k.

motorguy

steve-L wrote: »

I can eeek out 50mpg+ from the 330 driving as economically as possible on A roads and Motorways on my 'normal' 30 mile trip so long as I leave at 07:00 and come home at 19:00.

I can also get 35 MPG driving like the average pistonheads driver.

All the more reason not to buy a 320d then!