BMW 5-Series Sedans

riez · February 2004

designman... To me, M5 might be comparable to Avro/HS Vulcan, Dassualt Mirage IV-P, B-58 Hustler, FB-111, XB-70 Valkyrie, or B-1B. I love older strategic bombers! (I've had the please of being inside the Vulcan, FB-111, and B-1B, at one time or the other. Was fortunate to spend a day at a B-1B base in 1990. Spent some time inside this magnificent plane but didn't get to fly in her.)

riez · February 2004

E39 525i manual used 3.15:1 final drive.
E39 525i auto used 3.46:1.
E39 530i manual used 2.93:1.
E39 530i auto used 3.46:1.

Interestingly, the individual gear ratios for the 525ia and 530ia are identical: 3.42, 2.22, 1.60, 1.00, and 0.75. And so are the 3.46 final drives. So the gearing doesn't help one over the other. It just helps explain why the 525ia is so slow to accelerate (8.2 seconds) and why the 530ia is so much quicker (7.0 seconds).

The individual gear ratios for the 525i5 and 530i5 are different:

525i manual: 4.23, 2.52, 1.66, 1.22, and 1.00.
530i manual: 4.21, 2.49, 1.66, 1.24, and 1.00.

EPA estimates:

525i5= 20/29
525ia= 19/27
530i5= 21/30
530ia= 18/26

bmwmrc · February 2004

Again, Riez, the value is what people perceive it to be. Not your perception regarding the value or not the value of a particular brand or model. But I will concur that if I paid near full sticker for mine, then you're right. At $45K I would have done a lot better getting the manual 530 (maybe) pretty stripped down or another brand. But I bought mine fully loaded for $37K plus tax. That's approximately 18% off the sticker. I'm a VERY happy camper.

designman · February 2004

EPA estimates vs. actual mileage is interesting. After playing with the on-board computer I have found my 03 530a ranging from about to 12-30mpg. In addition, I have one of the consumption gauges set since I bought the car 9k miles ago... reads 20.1... with about 50-50 (rough guess) city/highway driving. On one 300 mile pure-highway trip averaging between 75-90 mph, I got 27 mpg... this was beyond my expectation. Going a mile uphill from a stop I have seen it register between 6 and 12 going two miles pure downhill it registers over 50.

For you flyboys...
Im also an aerobatics buff. One of my finest memories is seeing WWII ace Bob Hoover in the early 80s flying the Rockwell Shrike Commander DEADSTICK (engines off) through a loop, eight-point roll, 180-degree turn, touching down first on one wheel, then the other... and taxiing to a stop in front of raving mad crowd. I surely hope you have had the pleasure of seeing this. In the ilk of world-class ice skating (and some of the things I have done with the Boxster) I found this to be elegantly spectacular. For those who are unfamiliar with the Shrike Commander... it is a high-wing, twin turbo prop BUSINESS AIRCRAFT!

;-)

riez · February 2004

designman... Actual mileage is actual miles driven divided by actual number of gallons of fuel used (which is based on what you pumped into the car). Is that how you are getting your actual numbers? Or are you using the computer's estimate? Every time I fuel up I reset the trip odometer. I compare miles travelled to gallons pumped.

designman · February 2004

I do it as you mention with the Subaru and Boxster since they don't have OBCs. Haven't bothered with the BMW although I have been meaning to do it to see how it compares to the computer.

530ir1150r · February 2004

2002 530i 5 speed SP, 26.2 MPG since new from OBC, 23k miles.

designman · February 2004

I would think 26.2 mpg is exceptional. I'm curious what the details of your driving situation are. Care to elaborate? Thanks.

riez · February 2004

I routinely achieved 26 actual mpg driving my '98 540i6 on the highway, cruising for hours at 74 mph. Thankfully the 6-speed manual has an overdrive 6th gear, unlike the non-overdrive 5th gear in the 525i & 530i 5-speed manuals.

designman · February 2004

I would think 26.2 mpg AVERAGE OVER 23k miles is exceptional. Has to be 90% to 95% highway miles in a temperate climate, longer-than-average road trips with a light foot. Just starting the engine knocks it down considerably.

shipo · February 2004

My lifetime mileage on my 2002 530i 5-Speed with SP is 25.3. Said miles have been primarily in NYC and Boston area rush hour traffic, however, the first 2,000 were in Europe "Flying" along at 100 or so for the first 1,200 miles and then up to the limiter for the last 800 (or as close to the limiter as traffic and road conditions would allow). I don't remember the exact mileage, but at 100, my car was able to return something like 22 mpg. Not too shabby for a car that wasn't even broken in yet.

The best mileage I have ever gotten was on an early morning trip from the Boston area into NYC, and if I remember correctly, it was something like 31.5, driven at speeds almost exclusively north of 75 (with a few squirts to 90+).

The only thing that dissappoints me (a little) is that even though my 530i has a better EPA rating than my former 1999 328i 5-Speed had, I have never even come close to the 35+ mpg that I used to get on the 328i on a long highway trip.

Best Regards,
Shipo

designman · February 2004

"My lifetime mileage on my 2002 530i 5-Speed with SP is 25.3. Said miles have been primarily in NYC and Boston area rush hour traffic..."

Quite a disparity comparing my 20.1 mpg especially considering the rush-hour scenario. I'm figuring at most a 2 mpg difference between auto and manual. Anyway, with every car I have ever owned, my mileage has always been on the low end when compared to others. Must be the driving habits. The Boxster is getting 16-19 and I'm just at the end of break-in. I'm curious to see what I can squeeze out of it if I can stand to lope along on a full tank in 6th gear. Aside from my trolling of the Steptronic, I really do like the stairmaster and rowing machine that come with some of these cars.

;-)

ny540i6 · February 2004

My "commute" is the opposite of yours - NYC most of the time (morning rush hour, with the mileage hitting 12-15 mpg) to speed runs to Boston (avg speed for trip 73 or so, runs of 90+), which turn in 23-25 mpg. Best is if I head down to Maryland, set the cruise at 79, and use the cruise to accelerate for passing. I can see 26+ on those trips. One thing - can anyone tell me how to retain the consumption for the life of the car? I averaged 16.6 mpg for the first 15K I had the car, took it in for the first service and (I believe) they disconnected the battery, which reset both consumption counters to zero. Now I am averaging 18.2 for the last 8K, but wish I had a way to not lose the data at service two. Any ideas on this?

530ir1150r · February 2004

OBC average speed from day 1 is over 50 MPH. I live in Central Kentucky between Lexington and Frankfort, warm compared to New England. I drive the car to work 1 day a week (70% interstate at 85 MPH), to church about every other Sunday (8 miles at 45 MPH avg.), to Cincinnati every other weekend (I-75 at 85 MPH), to Nashville 7-8 times a year (Bluegrass Parkway and I-65, also at 85 MPH when possible) and maybe 1 or 2 small trips a week. Car is always garaged and never driven in more than a blowing snow.

530ir1150r · February 2004

When it gets above 50 degrees, the r1150r is the commuter vehicle of choice, back roads through the horse farms.

530ir1150r · February 2004

Out of a desire to be accurate, objective and curiousity, I checked the OBC last night. 26.7 MPG at 50.5 MPH over 23370.8 miles.

nkwazi2 · February 2004

I bought a 2003 525i last year.
did not opt for the hands free phone installtion at the time of purchase.
Called BMW dealer in Fremont, CA today and they said it can be installed at a cost of $1695 (approx.).
Is there any other way to get it added on without going thru BMW? Cheaper any other way?
Thanks in advance for your help.

nkwazi2 · February 2004

I purchased a 525i 2003 last year.

I did not get the 530i b/c of the increase in cost. Comes pretty close to a E320 with all the options. then I would have opted for a E320.

The acceleration on the 525iA is slow but for our family, its a perfect car.
We have a 6 month old baby and this car is her primary mode of transport. The car does not jump like other powerful cars and so there are no sudden jerks to our baby in the car seat and also stops me from smoking someone on the road. The car is heavy and the weight to power ratio in automatic is perfect for this purpose. Also, it is built like a tank and feels very safe.

Bottom line, I saw what BMW has done to the 2004 BMWs and decide to get my dream car before the model change. 2004 are ugly!

Also when I am alone in the car, I can get faster acceleration by putting the car in manual mode.

I get around 29 mpg on highway and around 23 in city. I have 8K miles on the car.

jb_shin · February 2004

Your car is pre-wired for Bluetooth. Purchase the kit from anyone of the dealers and install them. They go from as low as $550 to $700, depending on the dealer, I think. The install is said to be quite simple, but may take a recode by dealer to activate it. Then all you need is a bluetooth phone.

srfast · February 2004

2003 530i and it works quite well. The BT kit eliminates the need to have any phone or phone cradle hardwired in the car. If you are interested in a fully integrated, handsfree phone solution for your 2003 BMW, check out the BT kit. The only "drawback" is that you will need to find a wireless service provider that offers GSM service that meets your needs.

BMW BT Info: http://www.circlebmw.com/parts/blue/blue.htm

Hope this helps....JL

diver110 · February 2004

I have a 540i now and am very happy with it. I probably should leave well enough alone, but I am some what tempted by the M series. I spend a lot of time in traffic and so a manual is too much of a pain. In the 3 series the M class has an optional SMG transmission (clutchless, can be driven auto or manual). Anyone know anything about it and how reliable it is? How reliable is the M class? Are they a pain to own? Many thanks.

riez · February 2004

There are a ton of differences between the E39 M5 (4 door sedan) and E46 M3s (2-door).

The automotive press has had a ton of articles for many years about SMG. Besides the detailed discussions in purely BMW publications like Roundel (BMW CCA) and Bimmer, most major publications have had technical discussions, road tests, or comparison tests of SMG or SMG-equipped cars (e.g., C&D, MT, R&T, Automobile, AW, etc.).

Roundel and Bimmer have had some discussions about SMG-related reliability and performance concerns. Still a bit early for any long-term observations and BMW keeps updating and changing the system to improve it.

I've seen numerous publications discuss the full "Auto" mode as being highly inferior to regular automatic transmission. Jerky shifting. If you really want smooth AT performance, then get the slushbox.

Have you considered an '03 E39 540i automatic with Sport Pkg? You really should.

fjk57702 · February 2004

The EPA numbers used to be based on the emissions testing and the MPG rating was based on the fuel used (computed from the measured emissions) and the weight of the car. This is why some effort is/was made to move the cars into a lower weight category if possible.

I am not sure how the BMW average MPG is computed, but on my car (not a BMW) the average seems to be some weighted average between recent fuel consumpution and longer term fuel consumption. I can reset the computed average at will.

I get better mileage in the summer than in the winter in local driving. Head winds will reduce mileage while a tail wind will increase it. I used to live about 6 miles from work and it was all stop and go driving which resulted in 18-20 MPG in winter. Now I live 10 miles from the city and the driving is mostly highway and I get 22-24 in winter with 25-26 in summer. I haven't taken this car on a long trip yet so I don't know how good MPG is on a long trip. I have a 4.6 liter V8.

sdg380 · February 2004

I've driven an M3 with SMG, which was plenty quick and fun for a little while shifting with the paddles. But for me that novelty wore off about as quickly as using a Steptronic (in a 3-series coupe), and with the SMG in "auto" mode, it was simply nowhere as smooth as a slushbox. From a stand still, there was no comparison, it just wasn't that smooth.

Maybe the SMG is great in an F-1 car, but for now I'll stick with my regular stick shift, with a clutch to modulate power delivery, if I want to shift myself. I would consider an automatic if I seriously consider a 545 (now with a 6-speed auto)--and I think Riez's suggestion of a 540iA is a good one.

As far as an M series being a "pain", I'd only offer that M-series models are supposed to offer uncompromised performance, which typically is achieved by compromising ride comfort. I think for every day driving, a Sport Package is compromising enough. I think you might find an M a little too harsh for day in and day out---but hey, maybe not. And I guess I'm ignoring any maintenance related issues, I think if you buy a relatively high performance car, you can't expect it to only require the low level of maintenance of a Toyota.

nkwazi2 · February 2004

Srfast,
Thanks for the information. Did you install the kit yourself or did a dealer install it for you?

Anybody out there inthe SF bay area who has installed this kit? Which dealer did you use and how much did it cost?

savora · February 2004

Is it worth the upgrade?

sdg380 · February 2004

In my opinion, there are better ways to spend the money (xenon, heated seats come to mind). I've always thought the standard 10-speaker system sounds just great, but then again, some people spend $1,000's on a car stereo. If that floats your boat, no problem, but this is money you'll never see again at trade time. At least features like wood trim, which can't do too much to improve driving (ha!), are likely to enhance resale value to some extent.

To see if I know what I'm talking about, you might check in the "used cars" section, and see what premium sound adds to resale value.

ny540i6 · February 2004

I happen to be one of those people that look at great stereo. I also have premium sound in my '03. This one is a coin toss for me - You can get significantly better aftermarket audio, but I wanted dashboard integrity, steering wheel controls, and not to mess with the upgraded computer. If audio is not important, then go with the base. If it is, I recommend the premium, but I would also look at doing a speaker upgrade, and possibly adding a bolt-in sub. I am not worried about this as a resale issue, since I just enjoy great sound.

sdg380 · February 2004

You mention steering wheel controls, a good feature I agree, but did you get something on the wheel besides preset selection and volume control that come with the standard system?

bmwmrc · February 2004

Yes, one can get nice acceleration in the manual mode, but just try the sport mode. I don't think my 2003 525i is slow at all. Now, granted, I primarily use the car with no one else, so the weight ratio is not skewed.

As I mentioned previously, I test drove both cars. And even though I thought the acceleration on the 530i was a tad bit better, it was NOT worth the cost.

BTW, I have about 7,700 miles on mine now.

srfast · February 2004

by the BMW service department and if they can do it, anyone with reasonable mechanical skills can do it since there are no special tools required. I did a custom install because I have a European spec E39 center console armrest and the US BT kit requires the OEM armrest. I was not re-installing the OEM armrest just for the BT kit, so I had to relocate some of the BT components.

The installation documentation is very detailed and the install can be done in less than two (2) hours. If you have the dealer install the kit, they will charge you full MSRP for the kit and two hours of labor. Estimated total: $750+.

If you don't want to do the install yourself, purchase the kit at the lowest price you can find and have a local auto stereo shop install it for you. Their labor rate is nowhere close to what BMW is asking.

The final step of the install requires that the car be programmed for the BT module, but my system works perfectly without the programming. Your car might/might not need the programming.

One final note. Most BMW service departments have no clue of what BT is or how to install it. Not many have done it, so the bottom line is that they will be doing the same as you: reading the instructions. From what I've heard, their success rate has not been good and they have no real way to troubleshoot the problems. They usually say "it's your phone," but it is usually an incorrect install. At least I know I did it correctly.

Hope this helps...JL

diver110 · February 2004

Thanks to riez and sdg380 for the feedback. When I asked if the M class cars were a "pain" to own, what I meant was are they reliable cars without needing a crazy amount of maintenance. SDG380 makes the good point that I can't expect it to be like a Toyata, and I wouldn't, but I don't want it in the shop every few weeks either. Any additional feedback? It is probably time to break down and subscribe to Bimmer.

ny540i6 · February 2004

No, the stereo controls on the steering wheel are petty basic. I believe they are the same as the base system offers.

designman · February 2004

Riez said... I've seen numerous publications discuss the full "Auto" mode as being highly inferior to regular automatic transmission. Jerky shifting. If you really want smooth AT performance, then get the slushbox.

I agree with this 200%.

I drove an 03 M3 with SMG two months ago. To say the shifting is jerky is an understatement. It feels as if you are being hit in the rear by another car on every shift whether it is in auto or manual mode. However, I have heard that the newer version on the 2004 is improved, so look into it.

diver110, I dont know what your reason is in going from 540 to M3. My guess is that you want more of a sports car. IMO the M3 is a compromise. 3-series are taint cars... taint sedan, taint sports car, plus I find the M3 ride to be much too hard for the sedan needs, not to mention the compromise with back-seating space. Dinner for four with an M3 doesn't cut it in my life.

If you have the urge for a sports car and spend a lot of time in traffic, Id buy a much cheaper car for the mundane driving, and have a low, two-seat, butt-kickin sports car for weekends. But if owning one automatic sedan is the only option, your leave-well-enough-alone 540 is impossible to beat, especially with sport package.

BTW, if I had $58k to spend and had to have only one car, Id get a used E39 M5 over a new M3 or 545. The M5 ride is not as harsh as the M3 and the pleasure of driving that on weekends would more than make up for the hassle of wrangling with bumper-to-bumper traffic with a manual transmission.

diver110, your handle suggests you are a sportsman... go with the two-car option or get the M5! TRAFFIC SHMAFFIC!!!

;-)

jb_shin · February 2004

I agree with the post above. Originally the M series were conceived as a showcase for the BMW Motorsport division to bring their race cars to the street for those who wanted more "sport". I personally think they have been somewhat watered down over the years and the BMW marketing/sales has more say in the direction of these machines.

People complain about oil consumption, clunking noise from the transmission, high maintenance, etc. I think the main reason for these complain is that people bought it without realizing what "M" really stands for. As much as they may have been "watered down", these are still highly capable cars with race origins. MB AMG and Audi S might be better tailored for those people, luxury car that is a bit different and makes "statement".

Having said all that, M5 is more about luxury than sport, and I think the ride is comfortable as stated above. I had a chance to test drive it over a weekend, and loved it. It certainly will not be as quiet as the other 5-series cars, and a bit firmer, but still acceptable.

One interesting thing about the M3 CSL (personally think it is a bit overrated) is that in order to have the speed governor removed, the owner needs to have a racing license.

diver110 · February 2004

Thanks to designman and jb_shin for their feedback. In fact, designman, I have opted for the two car model. I have a Volvo 850 with 118,000 miles that is still going strong that I use and the 540i wagon. The wagon handles fine and has lots of pep, but I find I don't need two wagons (I got a great deal on the BMW), and would like something a bit sportier. I am hearing a lot of negatives about the M3, so maybe a used M5 is the way to go, and as you suggest use it for weekends and trips. This is especially true if the SMG is as bad as it sounds. Of course, I should test drive the options, but I wanted to get a better feel for things. This board and its generous members is a great site on which to get educated.

jb_shin · February 2004

One weak spot seems to be the clutch. While many reportedly have no problem, quite a few have also reported premature clutch failure.

Having said that, I am torn between keeping the 530i and finding a 1998-2000 911, or going for an 2003 M5. Decisions, decisions........

manybmws · February 2004

Spend $500 on a Autobahn powered subwoofer and pocket $700 or also buy Sirius sat radio.

ny540i6 · February 2004

That's kinda the area I would suggest - upgrading the speakers, and adding a sub. Trunk space has become important in my old age, so I would look at one of the self contained removeable units. I went for the premium sound as a step up from the base - better amps, more speaker locations, DSP etc. I do agree that adding a sub would be a huge improvement, especially at low volumes - I find the standard and premium both weak on the low end.

diver110 · February 2004

I used to own a 911, though it was a while ago. Assuming the basics have not changed, you might be happier with the BMW, I am. 911's are even more expensive to maintain than a BMW, always take a specialist, and even for them are a pain to work on. Also, they are noisy and it gets old. That said, you can drive them in the snow as long as it is not too deep. When I lived in Colorado I took mine sking. I got weary of the hassles of owning it, and actually dropped out of sport cars for a decade or so. The BMW 540i is my reentry, and once again I am hooked (as you can tell from my posts).

kyfdx · February 2004

Get the 911.. I miss mine every day, even though it was a pain.. It was my dream car. Then, stuff happened.. You know, marriage, baby.

regards,
kyfdx

designman · February 2004

M5 and 911. Were talkin about the ultimate two-car garage here.

I am torn between keeping the 530i and finding a 1998-2000 911, or going for an 2003 M5. Decisions, decisions........

Sounds like decision 1 is whether to spend the money. If its a go, decision 2 is whether you want a sedan or true sports car. I hope you make the right decision for yourself, because if you do youll be in heaven either way.

In the 911 category I would caution you to stay away from the 99. It is the first of the new water-cooled 996 platform and enthusiasts report certain issues. 95-98 is the air-cooled 993 platform and is the most desired. All varieties of 98s are probably the most sought after cars on the planet and it is reflected in their price. When I was searching they were coming into dealers off leases and disappearing the same day. You will never see them on a lot and are tough to find even if you do a national search.

That said there are a many other great 911 possibilities. The $65k - $75k that 03 M5s command will get you a lot of Porsche. And by the way, I wouldnt worry about premature clutch failure in the M5 if you decide to go that route. Just absorb it as the cost of doing thrills, but of course, only if you can afford it. Both of these cars are not for the faint of heart or pocket book as I am sure you are aware. You can count on 911 maintenance to be costlier though.

From the follow-up posts of diver110 it seems like the sedan format fits his scheme of things and the M5 could be right for him. Either way, make sure your sedan vs sports car decision is right for YOU. You dont want to be spending this kind of money only to be lusting for the car you DIDNT get.

Good luck!

ptrekker · February 2004

Sounds OK to me. Not audiophile sound, but more than adequate.

The thing really seems to shine when you tap on classic rock. Quadraphenia, etc. But throw in some Metallica or Jay Z and the thing sounds like it's falling apart.

jb_shin · February 2004

To make the matters worse, Elise is now available in the US! I thought I'd never say this, but I actually find some of the American cars quite attractive, Corvette, Solstice to name a few. Granted, these are still not as refined as BMW or Porsche, but for the money it is hard to beat Z06.

diver110 · February 2004

Continuing with my prior thread, the more I think about it, the more I think I would not be happy with a car the size of the M3. As designman pointed out, it is not a sports car and also not a sedan. I need a car that works for trips, so an M5 makes more sense, and I will have to learn to get used to a stick again. I have another car I can use for commuting.

Does anyone have a sense of how much more maintenance is involved in a M5 versus a 540i? How often do the clutches go on average?

riez · February 2004

Check out the March 2004 issue of C&D. Their report on the Cadillac CTS-V ends with:

"Yet the CTS-V and the M5 are directly comparable in everything BUT but price. Given even money, our test crew favored the M5. Then we asked ourselves the key question: Is the M5 almost $23,000 better than the Cadillac? We got a resounding NO to that one." (emphasis in the original)

Their as-tested price for the CTS-V was a mere $51,195. Noted they compared the CTS-V to the M3 in the article and in their performance chart comparisons.

kdshapiro · February 2004

"Is the M5 almost $23,000 better than the Cadillac? We got a resounding NO to that one."

Hold on a second. We all ask ourselves that question daily. Some questions along that line:

1. Is a $40K 3 series, $30K better than an Elantra?
2. Is an M3 coupe $30K better than a G35.
3. Is a G35 coupe $24K better than an Elantra?
4. Is a G35 coupe $20K better than a stripper Mazda 6?

I would say the answer to all of these is no. However, just like there is some reason one would want an M5 over a CTS-V, there are some reasons one would want an M3, 3series, G35 over a stripper Mazda 6 and Elantra. Yet is the same $21K. So if we would spend the $21K, why wouldn't CD. Seems they are a bit two-faced.

riez · February 2004

kdshapiro... Don't shoot the messenger. I just pointed out an interesting article that has a lot of discussion about both the M3 and M5. You'll have to read the article and look over the data. Unlike the differences, say, between a G35 and an Elantra, the performance differences were not very significant. Just compare their lap time results.

kdshapiro · February 2004

"Don't shoot the messenger"

I'm not shooting the messenger, I'm questioning the stupidity of a magazine promoting that line of thought. When I want to find the value side of the equation I turn to CR. When I want to find out how two cars compare, I go to the mags, give it to me straight without this value stuff laden in. It's almost as if they were afraid to say, the big engine in the CTS-V, so what?

Is item B = item A (times/or plus) some factor. Is a steak at the Palm 3000% or $200 better than a steak at Outback? Hey they're both beef.

When you put it like that, no it really isn't. However, there are people who can afford them. Leave the value side out. Heck, an EVO for $30K is about as close as you come to an M5. Why even go for $50K. See the trap here? I don't have an additional $40K for leather, therefore I might as well get the speed for $30K. After all the cars are equivalent in every way.

designman · February 2004

I don't see where CR has a monopoly on critiquing value.

BMW 5-Series Sedans

Comments

Helpful Tools

Most popular vehicles