E34 518, opinions?

Indeed. I'm of the same opinion, T.J. .. . But now I am now very afraid indeed. You have a fuel log?! I do feel slack now. I think I had a receipt, somewhere, once. Until the cat ate it. But a log?! Very impressive!

I'd a 518i for 33k, a 520i 12v briefly, and a 525i 24v for 30k. the 518i is a grand machine, & I wouldn't consider it underpowered at all compared to the 12v 520i. It's frugal enough, needs a bit of revving to get going, but it motors along very well. I know with 12points you won't be speeding, but it lugs away merrily to 115mph not a bother, and the 4cyl engine means it has great handling & fantastic turn-in over the 6cyl models. My fuel log for 23k of those miles is below:

518i Miles	Litres	MPG
448	48.91	41.58
322	52.18	28.02
454	52.86	38.99
311	49.07	28.77
336	52.18	29.23
412	56.86	32.90
459	63.42	32.86
424	60.97	31.57
450	62.66	32.60
504	62.17	36.80
512	69.96	33.23
455	66.00	31.30
508	65.44	35.24
535	62.16	39.07
509	66.89	34.55
483	69.56	31.52
1015	126.80	36.34
785	106.52	33.46
510	65.39	35.41
1115	162.25	31.20
503	79.89	28.58
461	60.00	34.88
412	66.00	28.34
215	35.00	27.89
493	63.18	35.43
662	88.00	34.15
414	64.37	29.20
441	60.00	33.37
391	61.76	28.74
384	62.50	27.89
409	58.22	31.89
857	126.00	30.88
499	69.00	32.83
457	67.13	30.91
723	94.50	34.73
971	131.00	33.65
909	126.72	32.57
393	56.46	31.60
780	101.00	35.06
435	65.00	30.38
499.1	65.50	34.59
450.6	65.00	31.47
438	62.99	31.57
308	42.50	32.90
525	64.00	37.24
23051.7	3193.97	32.77

sleeper wrote: err, auto's are worse on mpg!?!

Not according to BMW.

Average fuel consumption in the Sept 1990 brochure states:-

518 - 34.9 mpg (not available with auto)

520 - 28.8 mpg (auto 29.1)

525 - 29.7 mpg (auto 29.7)

535 - 24.8 mpg (auto 25.0)

My '92 manual 520 (pre vanos M50) got around 22 mpg in stop/start commuting & a best of 34 mpg on a long motorway run.

My '93 E30 316 Touring manages 28 mpg with 33 mpg motorway. Low gearing makes it surprisingly nippy but noisey & thirsty with it.

I would say if you are going for 6 cylinders make it a 525 else stick with the 518.

Sorry, you are correct, it looked like I was talking thru my a***!

I should have said (As I was thinking but not typing) Autos with Cruise Control used will usually beat the manual equiv. because the minor changes in RPM caused by driver fidgets or speed variations will ruin the constant that is achieved by a CC.

Without CC, the manual will beat the auto because of the loss of torque and fewer gears in an auto. Obviously, round town CC can't be used so the autos are very poor mpg there. Not doubting your figures at-all - it's just a surprise to me that from my mid to high 20's on average, to your 20 is a staggering drop - up there in the 25% area.  I personally don't like autos, but these figures are the final justification on steering away from them.

Hmm, 20mpg from a 520 auto is very poor.  I was getting 29 on longer runs, and 23 round town from my manual 1989 520SE.  I even got 36mpg on a long 65-70mph drive from Preston to the top of Scotland.  On the basis that an auto is a few mpg better than it's manual equiv., your 20mpg implies that something was wrong - maybe?

Hi all, thanks for the replies.  Another fact I didn't declare is that, much as I would like a 2.5 litre or even bigger, the insurance would be prohibitive......I'm on 12 points, not through boy-racer driving, but for 3 times 30 something in 30 zones plus a 48 in a 40 (Magis Court accepted plea of hardship and thus gave me a fine and 3 points (Making 12) with conditions........but that's another story!)  My insurance shot up even though by default I am now the most careful driver on the road! (They didn't buy that argument)

Last summer, because my beloved 520 failed MoT on emmisions (Another long story that senior members of this forum will be familiar with), I was forced to find a car for �500 in 2 days.  I got an 1800 Ford Orion Ghia (Oh the shame, the shame!) so I want to stick with an 1800cc for insurance purps, but dearly miss my 5 series.  So, E34 518 versus E34 520....will I notice a difference????  Obviously, going back UP to any BMW from the Ford will be a great improvement!  I still get to drive my wifes E36, driving it is superb, it's just the carp interior trim (Falls to bits) and small boot that annoys me on that!

I have considered an E30 318, but they are getting on a bit now and most of the ones I see for sale have been lowered, de-chromed and IMO other abominations done to them, or have been clearly ragged to the red line on a daily basis (Opinion based on a talk/test drive with the selling owners).

Phew, that was a ramble.

 

 

 

 

TRACKPIG wrote: 95 miles on a tenner out of�a 2.5 m20? must of been a few years ago with cheaper petrol prices. �

sorry meant to say the 520 was m20 and the 525 was m50

95 miles on a tenner out of a 2.5 m20?

must of been a few years ago with cheaper petrol prices.

 

Hi Paul. I had an 525 E34, and now have a E34 518. My wife drove/drives both more than I do. I have E24 635csi and E38 740i. That being noted only in that when I say I get in the 518 and don't find it underpowered it surprises me - but it's true. Gearing is different, and engine sound naturally different. But it's terrific and economical; costs my wife �20 every two to three weeks to run it, compared to �15 a week we'd spend on the 525. It has an upgraded ECU; I don't know if that's the reason for its get-up-and-go entirely. But -- and I'd never have thought it I'd be saying it! -- it's a real gem and, based on your description above, perhaps well worth a shot.

I was told by an ex owner of an E28 518 that it was underpowered. I never had problems with the power in my old E30 320i (expect it will be similar engine), then again I didn't go for performance - more of a cruiser. The E34 I expect will weigh a few pounds more. Many say the 2.5 litre engine is better all round than the 2.0 litre (including economy) But then it got me from A to B and several thousand miles in between and only went wrong a few times.