Author |
Topic Search Topic Options
|
Old shape!
Really Senior Member I
Joined: 08-January-2004
Location: United Kingdom
Status: Offline
Points: 497
|
Topic: E34 518, opinions? Posted: 03-January-2006 at 09:32 |
All, I am thinking of buying a 518. E34 shape.
"Experts" tell me that the 520 was underpowered so the 518 is seriously underpowered. (I still have my 520 but it's SORN at the moment - I didn't think it was underpowerd at all). I do not want a racing machine, I just want a family car to drive at normal speeds.....not a Jeremy Clarkson style muscle car! Will I notice this lack of power...if it is indeed unerpowered?
Oh, I am considering the 518 as oppose to another 520 because of MPG.
|
Paul DH
1994 E38 "Proud owner of a "3/4 engined E37.9 that's almost a real car with real paint...WITH 6 WASHER JETS!"
1989 520i (E34) Gone
1988 320i Coupe (E30) Gone
1995 520 Estate (E34) (Wife)
1992 320i SE OBC (E36) (Wife) Gone
1988 320i Saloon (E30) (Wife) Gone
|
|
Sponsored Links
|
|
|
Rhys
Moderator Group
Coffee addict...
Joined: 02-February-2003
Location: from the Latin locātiō
Status: Offline
Points: 10053
|
Posted: 03-January-2006 at 10:06 |
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.
|
V reg Rustbucket Merc C220 Cdi estate J Reg Saab 900i 16v '63 Ford Anglia 105e deluxe R reg Honda PC50 moped..
No BMW as yet...
|
|
Old shape!
Really Senior Member I
Joined: 08-January-2004
Location: United Kingdom
Status: Offline
Points: 497
|
Posted: 03-January-2006 at 10:29 |
Hi Rhys, the old E30 2 litre had the 6 cyl. M20 Engine in it, as did the old E34. The 318's and 518's had a 4 cylinder lump in them and are reputed to be "Not as good" as the 6. The E34 was built for the 2.5 litre version of the M20 (And upgrades), the 2 litre engine was put in for us skinflints in Europe :-) The US didn't want the 2 litre hence the Bentley manual doesn't cover it.
I was wondering how the 1.7 tonne E34 coped with a 4 cylinder engine in it....for example, is the loss of power balanced by the much lighter engine?
|
Paul DH
1994 E38 "Proud owner of a "3/4 engined E37.9 that's almost a real car with real paint...WITH 6 WASHER JETS!"
1989 520i (E34) Gone
1988 320i Coupe (E30) Gone
1995 520 Estate (E34) (Wife)
1992 320i SE OBC (E36) (Wife) Gone
1988 320i Saloon (E30) (Wife) Gone
|
|
GraemeH
Senior Member I
Joined: 03-November-2005
Location: At the beach, North Wales
Status: Offline
Points: 125
|
Posted: 03-January-2006 at 10:36 |
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.
|
|
|
Eamo
Moderator Group
Joined: 13-May-2003
Location: Ireland
Status: Offline
Points: 3450
|
Posted: 03-January-2006 at 11:12 |
Hi Paul
I used to have an e34 520 and e34 525. The 520 was an absolute pig on juice compared to the 525.
In the 520 I used to get around 65 mile to a tenner compared with the 525 where I used to get around 95 mile to a tenner. I dont drive like an old man either!!
|
|
TRACKPIG
Really Senior Member II
Joined: 07-May-2005
Status: Offline
Points: 582
|
Posted: 03-January-2006 at 12:01 |
95 miles on a tenner out of a 2.5 m20?
must of been a few years ago with cheaper petrol prices.
|
REMEMBER- POWER IS NOTHING WITHOUT KELLY REMOULDS
E30 325 Sport - Gone but not forgotten
E36 M3 evo
Suzuki GSXR 750 Track Piece
|
|
paulfinucane
Really Senior Member I
Joined: 19-July-2005
Location: essex
Status: Offline
Points: 273
|
Posted: 03-January-2006 at 18:18 |
Hi Paul,
I have never owned a 518 but did have a 520 (89 M20).
Compared to the 525 (M50,s) I have owned there is absolutely no comparison so I would guess that a smaller 4 cylinder lump is going to be worse performance wise & I doubt if the 2cc difference will actually save you anything on fuel as the engine will have to work harder (IMO).
Good luck either way.
Paul
|
1990 e34 M5,Macau Blau Metallic,Extended Champagne Leather,Auto Climate,Hella clear corners,Rondell 058,SS exhaust,
|
|
Eamo
Moderator Group
Joined: 13-May-2003
Location: Ireland
Status: Offline
Points: 3450
|
Posted: 04-January-2006 at 05:25 |
TRACKPIG wrote:
95 miles on a tenner out ofa 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
|
|
sleeper
Really Senior Member II
Original and STILL best
Joined: 26-March-2004
Location: East Sussex/Kent border
Status: Offline
Points: 2098
|
Posted: 04-January-2006 at 05:30 |
maybe some use? - my 520i auto averaged 20mpg in its life with me, my 535i auto averaged 27mpg on the same routes and traffic conditions.
|
|
|
Old shape!
Really Senior Member I
Joined: 08-January-2004
Location: United Kingdom
Status: Offline
Points: 497
|
Posted: 04-January-2006 at 06:18 |
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.
|
Paul DH
1994 E38 "Proud owner of a "3/4 engined E37.9 that's almost a real car with real paint...WITH 6 WASHER JETS!"
1989 520i (E34) Gone
1988 320i Coupe (E30) Gone
1995 520 Estate (E34) (Wife)
1992 320i SE OBC (E36) (Wife) Gone
1988 320i Saloon (E30) (Wife) Gone
|
|
sleeper
Really Senior Member II
Original and STILL best
Joined: 26-March-2004
Location: East Sussex/Kent border
Status: Offline
Points: 2098
|
Posted: 04-January-2006 at 06:34 |
Having not driven an 518 I can't speak for it, but the 520 (12v) really was awful at anything less than motorway cruising 85mph+
Maybe a manual is better? Go 518!
|
|
|
Old shape!
Really Senior Member I
Joined: 08-January-2004
Location: United Kingdom
Status: Offline
Points: 497
|
Posted: 04-January-2006 at 06:46 |
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?
|
Paul DH
1994 E38 "Proud owner of a "3/4 engined E37.9 that's almost a real car with real paint...WITH 6 WASHER JETS!"
1989 520i (E34) Gone
1988 320i Coupe (E30) Gone
1995 520 Estate (E34) (Wife)
1992 320i SE OBC (E36) (Wife) Gone
1988 320i Saloon (E30) (Wife) Gone
|
|
sleeper
Really Senior Member II
Original and STILL best
Joined: 26-March-2004
Location: East Sussex/Kent border
Status: Offline
Points: 2098
|
Posted: 04-January-2006 at 07:07 |
err, auto's are worse on mpg!?!
I had the car checked out by both main dealer (lovetts) and an indy (at lydiard millicent, swindon, can't remember the name) and she got a full bill of health?
The thing that bugged me was that pulling away was bordering on dangerous, it was that slow!
|
|
|
Old shape!
Really Senior Member I
Joined: 08-January-2004
Location: United Kingdom
Status: Offline
Points: 497
|
Posted: 04-January-2006 at 07:46 |
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.
|
Paul DH
1994 E38 "Proud owner of a "3/4 engined E37.9 that's almost a real car with real paint...WITH 6 WASHER JETS!"
1989 520i (E34) Gone
1988 320i Coupe (E30) Gone
1995 520 Estate (E34) (Wife)
1992 320i SE OBC (E36) (Wife) Gone
1988 320i Saloon (E30) (Wife) Gone
|
|
sleeper
Really Senior Member II
Original and STILL best
Joined: 26-March-2004
Location: East Sussex/Kent border
Status: Offline
Points: 2098
|
Posted: 04-January-2006 at 07:54 |
true, but the 535i, auto as well, did 27 average! Best on a run from nottingham to london (limit + 25/30 mph) was 34mpg!!
|
|
|
AndyS
Really Senior Member II
The Last of the Few
Joined: 21-August-2003
Location: 55 � North
Status: Offline
Points: 1365
|
Posted: 04-January-2006 at 07:55 |
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.
|
AndyS Live each day as if it's your last - one day it will be.
|
|
sleeper
Really Senior Member II
Original and STILL best
Joined: 26-March-2004
Location: East Sussex/Kent border
Status: Offline
Points: 2098
|
Posted: 04-January-2006 at 08:03 |
True, and (old shape!) I know you aren't even looking at big sixes, but that was 1990. Also the E34 is so much slipperier (! hmm, not sure on that word!) than an E30...
anything you buy now will be subject to so many variables for MPG - engine cleanliness, non-oem parts fitted, bearing wear, tyre choices, etc. etc.
Back to the 518 then old chap!
|
|
|
T.J.
Bavarian-Board Contributor
Joined: 22-September-2003
Location: Cork, Ireland
Status: Offline
Points: 2332
|
Posted: 04-January-2006 at 08:40 |
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 |
|
Mazda 6 MPS
S1 Elise 135 Sport
Alfa Romeo 159 Sportwagon
Formerly E39 TDS, E36 M3, E36 328i, E34 525i, E34 518i
|
|
paulfinucane
Really Senior Member I
Joined: 19-July-2005
Location: essex
Status: Offline
Points: 273
|
Posted: 04-January-2006 at 08:46 |
thats what you call fastidious record keeping-must be an accountant methinks !
|
1990 e34 M5,Macau Blau Metallic,Extended Champagne Leather,Auto Climate,Hella clear corners,Rondell 058,SS exhaust,
|
|
GraemeH
Senior Member I
Joined: 03-November-2005
Location: At the beach, North Wales
Status: Offline
Points: 125
|
Posted: 04-January-2006 at 08:49 |
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!
|
|