520d LCI - are they really that good on fuel

[abw530]

Finally decided to sell the old E39 - currently on 171k. With the price of fuel and the mileage I'm doing I've decided to go for a 4 cylinder for the 1st time Looking at 2007/8 520d Auto Touring SE. At this age you are straddling the pre and post LCI models.

Questions:

Pre-LCI has a combined consumption of 39.8 and Post LCI is 48.7 (and up to 60.1!). Are they really 10mpg better in real life
Do these models still suffer from swirl flap issues - surely by now BMW have done something about it
Any other differences between pre and post-LCI that justify the £1-2k price difference?

[Peter]

Remember the change over period still had the M47 engine and 163 bhp version, the 177 bhp N47 engine came later in the year. So the early LCI models still have the same sort of swirl flaps, the N47 changed the whole manifold and flap design, and operation.

The figure for the 163 bhp in the LCI is listed at 46.3 mpg in my brochure. The consumption is all over the place, depends a lot on how hard you drive. Can return good figures, but with stop start work, the touring is a pretty heavy car to get shifting, so many find it a bit lower than expected.

Peter

[abw530]

Ah Ha - that was what's confused me. I thought the 177 engine was LCI and the 163 was pre-LCI. The fuel consumption figures I'm referring to are for the 177 model where there is a marked improvement. It's the 177 engine that I'm leaning towards.......

[kleynie]

The 177bhp engine was only in the cars built after Sept 2007.

[Dan H]

I've just bought a 177bhp 520d last week, and have seen around 52mpg average on the fuel computer, compared to around 42-43mpg on my old 150bhp 6 speed E46 320d I had before, doing the same journey to work.

I'm impressed by the fuel consumption, as I wasn't really expecting it to be much different to my old E46, seeing as it's a bigger car.

[gtmoore]

My 520d 177 with the manual box is quick, amazingly frugal and often brings a smile to my face when driving it but I can't pretend it's the most refined engine in the world.

However, stick it on the motorway and you really can't tell it's diesel (that may be because of the roar from the run flats!), it's very responsive and it will easily do 50mpg all day long in my experience (last 8 months). I do 60 miles a day which is 10 miles town and 50 on the M25 which can be a bit stop start at times.

It's doing virtually twice what my old petrol E39 525 Auto was on the same run so I'm well happy - about 700 miles to the tank.

I've got to say though that if I'd had another four or five grand at the time I'd have gone for the 3 litre 525d if only to stop it sounding like a Transit at the traffic lights! Not sure if thats enough justification for the extra cost though.

Cheers

[Doer1]

I traded my old e46 touring 330d for a 520D its and lci canr but with the older engine. I'm getting mid 40's where the 330d was late about 39. I love the car to bits and driving with some care on the motorway you can see 800 miles when you fill the tank.

I love the new car it doesnt have the bite the old chipped 330d had (I had it chipped to 207bhp as it was the 184 engine) I would guess if I chipped the 520D it would feel the same.
the only thisng I cant get the hand of is pulling off, I either bog the car down or fly off.. the same with the wifes 325i.. these new models seem to have a different type of clutch??? the msport suspension is fantastic... esp on the 19" non run flats..

[BigPhilJohn]

I have a late June 2007 520d SE auto and it is not stop start technology, thank god because as an engineer of 40 odd years there can be nothing good done to an engine by stopping and starting it, anyway I am a bit of a geek when it comes to MPG, my previous 320d SE auto did 42 to the gallon fill up to fill up, not what the computer said as I have found that this is usually about 2-3% higher. On the 520d fill up to fill up with about 60% motorway driving I get 39.11 average, I said I was a geek about mileage and I have a spread sheet with all the purchased fuel V's mileage since I bought the car so the 39.11 is calculated and genuine. So I do not know how people with the same car get 45/50 mpg, they must drive at a constant 30mph urban and 50mph on motorways.

bigphiljohn

[Harry]

I spent a couple of days doing long runs in an '08 520d. For NVH, choppy ride and at times dangerously wayward steering, the least said the better. But it did come in at 52mpg. I thought the engine performance economy balance was strong.

[Doer1]

Is the auto slightly worse on the mpg?

I have a late June 2007 520d SE auto and it is not stop start technology, thank god because as an engineer of 40 odd years there can be nothing good done to an engine by stopping and starting it, anyway I am a bit of a geek when it comes to MPG, my previous 320d SE auto did 42 to the gallon fill up to fill up, not what the computer said as I have found that this is usually about 2-3% higher. On the 520d fill up to fill up with about 60% motorway driving I get 39.11 average, I said I was a geek about mileage and I have a spread sheet with all the purchased fuel V's mileage since I bought the car so the 39.11 is calculated and genuine. So I do not know how people with the same car get 45/50 mpg, they must drive at a constant 30mph urban and 50mph on motorways.

bigphiljohn

[xsweeneyx]

I've recently bought a saloon 520d '07 plate auto. LCI model but the older engine. I just returned last night from a 3000 mile round trip from UK to Italy an holiday with four people and cases and returned average consumption of 47mpg. That combined a fair bit of foreign motorway and about 600 miles of urban stuff, up and down steep hilly areas etc. Have been really pleased with the performance and economy of the engine during my short ownership so far.
Granted, it isn't the same as owning a big 3 litre diesel or petrol engine but it is not bad. Should be even better when I get round to re-mapping.

[gtmoore]

I have a late June 2007 520d SE auto and it is not stop start technology, thank god because as an engineer of 40 odd years there can be nothing good done to an engine by stopping and starting it, anyway I am a bit of a geek when it comes to MPG, my previous 320d SE auto did 42 to the gallon fill up to fill up, not what the computer said as I have found that this is usually about 2-3% higher. On the 520d fill up to fill up with about 60% motorway driving I get 39.11 average, I said I was a geek about mileage and I have a spread sheet with all the purchased fuel V's mileage since I bought the car so the 39.11 is calculated and genuine. So I do not know how people with the same car get 45/50 mpg, they must drive at a constant 30mph urban and 50mph on motorways.

bigphiljohn

I filled up on Tuesday (reset the fuel consumption) and to and from work plus a round trip to Leicester yesterday (total 377 miles) my fuel computer is showing 55.4 and tank is half full. I can't say how accurate that it but it can't be far out.

Admittedly a lot of my motorway journeys tend to be around 50 to 60 due to M25 traffic and the road works on the M1 keep you to 50 for what seems like for ever (thank goodness for cruise control) but I also sit in traffic quite a lot. For my driving it works out well.

Perhaps the manual does make a difference - and believe that June 2007 would be the 163 engine so perhaps there was quite a drop in consumption with the 177?

Cheers

[brownlow]

I bought a Nov 2007 520d LCI Auto. Engine is listed as N47 so assume the sales description of 177bhp is right!

I do a lot of stop start driving and get 39 - 41mpg (my assumption is that this is the weight of the car and auto gearbox but it is due a service so hopefully this will improve). My previous car was a 2007 Audi A4 Avant 2.0t FSI (220bhp petrol) and this returned 33 - 35mpg with similar driving. On a longer run and motorway it gets over 50mpg though which is great.

Fantastic car. Was nervous about reading posts on swirl flaps so great to see the comment above that the manifold has been changed for the N47 engine - thanks Peter.

Kevin

[neilt]

I've had a (new company owned) 520d 177 manual, and an am glad to be back in a (old, private, very high mileage) 320d 163 manual. The 520d was the biggest disapointment in recent times....

I got the 520d after 2.5 years in an E90 320d M sport Auto. the 5-series M Sport suspension felt a lot better in the 525d I had on a 3 day test drive, and I thought that going to a manual and the high output 177bhp engine it would be a nicer drive, especially after test driving a 320d with the same engine.

Over all it was a nice car, but the engine always seems hard work to get any performance out of it, it struggles 40mpg, and had a horrid vibration at idle that I have never experienced in a my colleagues 163bhp 520d. It went back to BMw and they found that the cat was twisted and was part of a small batch with a manufacturing defect, it helped a bit, but was never perfect. The steering was also alot less responsive than my 3-series.

After 18 months and 45k I gave it to a colleague and went back to private ownership (for finacial reasons), I had just bought my current 320d (it had 164k on the clock when I got it), and was able to drive them side by side for 2 weeks, there was no contest. the 320d pulled harder, handled better and felt more planted. My shoulder pains of 18 months also disappeared!

Its a real shame as I loved the size and space of the 5-series, and would love a 535d Touring, but i'm afraid I might once again be disapointed.

[TinyofCarlisle]

Ive got an E61 520d, 2008 LCI model. Ive only had it a few weeks but on a recent motorway (240 mile round trip) journey it returned 54 mpg sitting at 70-75. I was well impressed with that, my old car, a 1.6HDi Grand Picasso could just manage 42 on the same journey and that was driving like a nun to try an coax the best mpg out of it.