# 3 Series or 5?



## REMFAN (21 Aug 2007)

Hey all. A friend is interested in changing his car in Jan 2008. He's narrowed it down to a 318d or a 520d SE. Is it just a size difference between the two cars? The 520 is 10k more!. Any BMW owners got any views on which is the better car in terms of overall comfort,resale value, problems with either model? thanks


----------



## xt40 (21 Aug 2007)

both are pig ugly and overpriced - a non-bmw owners opinion


----------



## REMFAN (21 Aug 2007)

xt40 said:


> both are pig ugly and overpriced - a non-bmw owners opinion


 
Perfer the Merc personally but he wants a Beemer. Both are silly money.


----------



## Pique318 (21 Aug 2007)

I'd go for the 318. The 520d will be underpowered for a car of that size.

Tell him to save the 10 grand and he'll enjoy the 318d.


----------



## kkelliher (21 Aug 2007)

I have the 318 and its a smashing car, spend the 10k on leather interior and other upgrades. Can always get the 5 series next time


----------



## RS2K (21 Aug 2007)

Pique318 said:


> I'd go for the 318. The 520d will be underpowered for a car of that size.
> 
> Tell him to save the 10 grand and he'll enjoy the 318d.



318d is actually slower than the 520d. the latter car will be a lot more comfortable too.

Both are somewhat overpriced imho.


----------



## tallpaul (21 Aug 2007)

Advise him to try get the option that includes working indicators, its amazing the number of BMW's that don't seem to have this feature...


----------



## Caveat (21 Aug 2007)

tallpaul said:


> Advise him to try get the option that includes working indicators, its amazing the number of BMW's that don't seem to have this feature...


 
Must be because of the tinted windows - drivers are invisible so no need to indicate.


----------



## aircobra19 (21 Aug 2007)

I prefer the 5 series myself. Both only look good with the right wheels and body kit. Standard car with the wrong wheels doesn't look that great IMO. Try a website like Parkers.co.uk to get a decent review.


----------



## Gabriel (21 Aug 2007)

The new 3 series *saloon* is pig ugly. 5 is better. Wrong diesel though. 530D!


----------



## Frank (21 Aug 2007)

the 318 d uses a detuned 2.0 engine. you loose power and still get taxed for a 2.0. Better to compare a 320 d to the 520d

As mentioned above the 5 needs a bigger engine.

Have driven the 530d very smooth and comfy. Much better than the last one.


----------



## Firefly (21 Aug 2007)

320d coupe?


----------



## ang1170 (21 Aug 2007)

In general, 3-series hold their value better than 5-series, due to higher demand.


----------



## jhegarty (21 Aug 2007)

5-series unless the 10k is an issue to him.... .its real step up in all areas over the 3 series....  (from a 3 series owner)


----------



## SOM42 (21 Aug 2007)

Got to be the 5 series.  Much better car in every respect than the 318d.  Obviously money is not a huge issue with so be sure to spec it well.  Nice alloys and an auto box are musts when buying a 5 series.  Much better comfort and interior space in the 5 and resale will not be a problem with this model.


----------



## KalEl (21 Aug 2007)

xt40 said:


> both are pig ugly and overpriced - a non-bmw owners opinion


 
Hardly what one would expect from a BMW owner to be fair...

Would they go for a 320D Coupe? They're very nice


----------



## REMFAN (21 Aug 2007)

kkelliher said:


> I have the 318 and its a smashing car, spend the 10k on leather interior and other upgrades. Can always get the 5 series next time


 
I believe this is the idea,a well spec 318(air con,leather,nice alloys,wood dash) or the 5 series with leather. He's not loaded or anything(not that you have to be to drive one of those things,10 a penny), he does ok and of course he's no family to support so has decided to treat himself to a BMW.

Just wondered which is the better car overall. As stated the 5 series is 10k more and I can't justify it!.


----------



## REMFAN (21 Aug 2007)

KalEl said:


> Hardly what one would expect from a BMW owner to be fair...
> 
> Would they go for a 320D Coupe? They're very nice


 
They are!! But he perfers the saloon.


----------



## KalEl (21 Aug 2007)

REMFAN said:


> He's not loaded or anything...I can't justify it!.


 
Lol...is this one of these "I have a friend stories"?

You should buy the 320D


----------



## REMFAN (22 Aug 2007)

KalEl said:


> Lol...is this one of these "I have a friend stories"?
> 
> You should buy the 320D


 
Sadly it really is a friend. I bought an Avensis earlier in the year  (Great car, don't slag it!).


----------



## KalEl (22 Aug 2007)

REMFAN said:


> Sadly it really is a friend. I bought an Avensis earlier in the year (Great car, don't slag it!).


 
Has he considered a CLK 200 or is his heart set on a BMW?


----------



## REMFAN (22 Aug 2007)

KalEl said:


> Has he considered a CLK 200 or is his heart set on a BMW?


 
Heart set on a Beemer. CLK 200 is a smashing car but he won't be shoved near a Merc dealership! He just perfers the BMW. 

Avensis is also a non runner


----------



## KalEl (22 Aug 2007)

REMFAN said:


> Heart set on a Beemer. CLK 200 is a smashing car but he won't be shoved near a Merc dealership! He just perfers the BMW.
> 
> Avensis is also a non runner


 
Nothing wrong with an Avensis!
I love my CLK but now I've my heart set on a new TT...the old one was a hairdresser's car but the new one is pretty slick. Reckon waiting until 08 to get a 07 is the way to go...let someone else take the hit.
You should advise your mate to do the same. Brand new cars are a bit of a waste unless you're absolutely minted in my opinion.


----------



## Gabriel (22 Aug 2007)

Get your friend to read this thread.

Buying a brand new beamer is one thing...nice if you can do it and want to. Buying a brand new underpowered beamer is pure madness.

I still think the new 3 series saloon is dreadful looking - they gave it a paunch for some bizarre reason!!! I love the new coupe however.
5 series is the way to go...and for god's sake buy the 530D. It's also a very good looking car...a grower for sure.


----------



## tosullivan (22 Aug 2007)

REMFAN said:


> But he perfers the saloon.


then he should buy a Volvo if he thinks the Saloon is nicer than the Coupe.

If I had that kind of money I know I wouldn't be splashing out and treating myself to a BMW.

I think the 5 series with the 3.0 diesel engine is now badged as a 525d.  I know someone who just bought one with the automatic gearbox and they said its the best 5 series they have had....one their 3rd or 4th one now


----------



## chelseamagic (22 Aug 2007)

Having been reading this thread, I can't help but think that those commenting on the 520D SE being underpowered haven't actually driven one.

I was actually lucky enough to be in a position to buy one this in January and I can confirm the performance is excellent for a car of this size and price range.

0-60 in 8.6 secs (auto) is 0.5 sec better than the €5k dearer 523i and the 50-70 time is better than the 523i & 525i and just a shade short of the 530i.  For Irish road conditions, it has all the power you would ever need.

Of the cars in this class and size it is easily the best deal available (this is all relative, I know), particularly with the high level of spec you get with the 5 series BMW these days.

I still look forward to driving it every day


----------



## REMFAN (23 Aug 2007)

chelseamagic said:


> Having been reading this thread, I can't help but think that those commenting on the 520D SE being underpowered haven't actually driven one.
> 
> I was actually lucky enough to be in a position to buy one this in January and I can confirm the performance is excellent for a car of this size and price range.
> 
> ...


 
It does make sense buying the 2L diesel considering it will be on Irish roads and not some American highway!. Did you add any extras?


----------



## chelseamagic (23 Aug 2007)

Yes - my budget allowed me to get leather and automatic transmission.  Delighted with both.  

If your friends budget can extend that far, they would be almost essential on a car in this class particulary when coming to sell it on.  

However, I found it hard to justify adding much else for 2 reasons - the fact the spec is very high anyway and the amount BMW look for on a lot of the other fairly frivolous extras.

re your original post, I feel the 5 series is a far better buy than the 3 series.  A friend of mine had the same amount to spend as me at the time and he went for a specced up 325i instead.  Having driven his for a few weeks, and no doubt it is a fine car, I have never had the slightest regret about my own decision. 

Hope this helps your friend in coming to his decison.


----------



## Gabriel (23 Aug 2007)

chelseamagic said:


> Having been reading this thread, I can't help but think that those commenting on the 520D SE being underpowered haven't actually driven one.
> 
> I was actually lucky enough to be in a position to buy one this in January and I can confirm the performance is excellent for a car of this size and price range.
> 
> ...



I stand corrected 
I didn't realise the 2L diesel had that much poke. That's not bad...not as nice as the 530 obviously...but it'll do 

Your friends decision should be even easier now REMFAN.


----------



## REMFAN (23 Aug 2007)

chelseamagic said:


> Yes - my budget allowed me to get leather and automatic transmission. Delighted with both.
> 
> However, I found it hard to justify adding much else for 2 reasons - the fact the spec is very high anyway and the amount BMW look for on a lot of the other fairly frivolous extras.
> 
> Hope this helps your friend in coming to his decison.


 
I suppose the leather has to be a given. He showed me the BMW extras catalogue and you could spend the value of the car kitting it out!!.
 He has his trade in that is paid for, he'll throw a few k in himself and get a loan for the rest.


----------



## REMFAN (23 Aug 2007)

Your friends decision should be even easier now REMFAN.[/quote]

Some good food for thought. Either way he'll end up with a nice bus (that I will "borrow" from time to time ). Appreciate all the feedback.


----------



## chelseamagic (23 Aug 2007)

Agreed - the 530d would be nice alright but I would find it very difficult hard to justify paying out another €16k for marginally better performance in an otherwise identical car.

The VRT rates in this country can really impact on your decision making when it comes to cars with engines greater than 2.0L.


----------



## monkeyboy (23 Aug 2007)

chelseamagic said:


> Having been reading this thread, I can't help but think that those commenting on the 520D SE being underpowered haven't actually driven one.



I have to agree, currently I drive a 318ci and it does me, I drove 1.6s for 3 years before it and Im happy with the power. All though next car I would like to go bigger but even the 2l eats ( auto ) petrol and I dont think woth the amunt of city driving I do I could warrant the extra running costs for the extra kick on the w/e!!

I had a loaner of an 07 520 and I expected it to be sluggish given the size of the car, I was very surprised and would have no worries of performance stepping from a 318 to the 520...

Yes its nice to have a 6cyl and a 320 or 325 or 525 etc but as far as normal performance with reasonable running costs I think you would have to be the Stig to have an issue with these cars power...

Next car for me, having said all this, will be last model 5 series I think. For all the reasons that the 5 is preferred in previous posts, excellent value out there on an 03 5 series ( old model ) fully loaded etc...


----------



## Gabriel (23 Aug 2007)

re VRT - That's unlikely to change with the Greens now in government 

In fairness the 530D offers more than marginally better performance. 
8.6 (520D) vs 6.8 (530D) is a big old leap. For that I'd justify the extra wonga...but then I'm a closet petrol head


----------



## car (23 Aug 2007)

> All though next car I would like to go bigger but even the 2l eats ( auto ) petrol and I dont think woth the amunt of city driving I do I could warrant the extra running costs for the extra kick on the w/e!!


Ive been told the auto would use more then the manual but from my own experience my 520 petrol is roughly the same as my last car which was a 1.6 laguna.  I get 420-430 miles out of a tank nearly every time and had got the same out of the laguna,   averages around 28-30mpg or whatever that is in km so unless lagunas are bad as well I dont find the 520 heavy on juice. my 2 centimes.  
Would anyone know the litre capacity of the tanks so that comparison is like for like?


----------



## sinbadsailor (23 Aug 2007)

The 530d vs 520d has caught my eye....can anyone let us know what the performance difference is with regard to mid range punch?

Basically talking acceleration from say 40-60mph & 50-70mph, overtaking speed mainly. 0-60 seems a bit irrelevant for day to day driving.

The above would be my deciding factor in choosing one or the other


----------



## REMFAN (23 Aug 2007)

car said:


> Ive been told the auto would use more then the manual but from my own experience my 520 petrol is roughly the same as my last car which was a 1.6 laguna. I get 420-430 miles out of a tank nearly every time and had got the same out of the laguna, averages around 28-30mpg or whatever that is in km so unless lagunas are bad as well I dont find the 520 heavy on juice. my 2 centimes.
> Would anyone know the litre capacity of the tanks so that comparison is like for like?


 
You are getting in around 700km on a full tank, thats quite good. My mate wants a manual gear box.


----------



## RS2K (23 Aug 2007)

sinbadsailor said:


> The 530d vs 520d has caught my eye....can anyone let us know what the performance difference is with regard to mid range punch?
> 
> Basically talking acceleration from say 40-60mph & 50-70mph, overtaking speed mainly. 0-60 seems a bit irrelevant for day to day driving.
> 
> The above would be my deciding factor in choosing one or the other



Hard to quantify, but there is a big difference.


----------



## xt40 (23 Aug 2007)

ive a rover 75 auto with the 130bhp version of the same 2.0 bmw engine. its not the same car i know but it was positioned sizewise midway between the 3 and 5 back in the days. the engine really is excellant in terms of performance and economy, streets ahead of the 2litre petrol omega i used to have. loads of grunt for overtaking etc. 
btw auto is the only way to go.


----------



## sinbadsailor (23 Aug 2007)

RS2K said:


> Hard to quantify, but there is a big difference.



What I thought, as from what I've read it's the mid range that sets these diesel engines apart, just wondering if it was actually really noticeable in car, rather than on a journalists review etc.

For me personlly though, i'd say the price would force me to stay at the 2-litre I'm afraid


----------



## aircobra19 (23 Aug 2007)

sinbadsailor said:


> What I thought, as from what I've read it's the mid range that sets these diesel engines apart, just wondering if it was actually really noticeable in car, rather than on a journalists review etc....



I would second that its noticeable. You get more torque at lower rev's so basically you don't have to work as hard to stay within the power band.


----------



## SOM42 (26 Aug 2007)

REMFAN said:


> You are getting in around 700km on a full tank, thats quite good. My mate wants a manual gear box.


 
In that case he should definitely go for the 320d.  A 5 series manual will be near impossible to shift later.  Anyone considering buying a used 5 series will expect an auto.


----------



## tippytoe (27 Aug 2007)

Try topgear.com's buyers guide section. Afterall they are the guys who really love cars.


----------



## REMFAN (28 Aug 2007)

New Audi A4 out next year could be worth a viewing. He took the current model out today and it turned his head. Liked it myself, be a smashing car with decent alloys and leather.


----------



## upport (17 Nov 2007)

SOM42 said:


> In that case he should definitely go for the 320d. A 5 series manual will be near impossible to shift later. Anyone considering buying a used 5 series will expect an auto.


 
While hunting for a good deal on a new 3 or a 5 series recently I spoke to several BMW sales people in five garages,both in Dublin and in the country about,among other concerns,the merits of 'automatic' re the 520d.....the two Dublin garages advised auto and in the three country garages the general consensus was that it would not be a necessity on the 520d but a must on the 525d and 530d.A pal of mine has 07 520d manual from new with 20k miles on the clock now,he said he gets about 50 mpg.I stand corrected but i believe that an automatic would return about 38-40 mpg.(The latter info I gleaned from my chats with the various BMW sales people).

I test drove both 520d auto and manual,the automatic was a fab car to drive.The considerable difference in mpg ( i drive about 30k miles pa ) the additional €3000 cost and the fact that I seen 4 year old autos and manuals of similar milage for similar asking price on Carzone led me to believe that a manual would be a good buy.
I would probably keep the car for ten years and would therefore go for some other extras if desired.


----------



## purplealien (17 Nov 2007)

i have a 07 316 at the moment - i',,m changing it for the new 316 msport in january - beautiful car!!Would he consider a 316?


----------



## SOM42 (18 Nov 2007)

upport said:


> I test drove both 520d auto and manual,the automatic was a fab car to drive.The considerable difference in mpg ( i drive about 30k miles pa ) the additional €3000 cost and the fact that I seen 4 year old autos and manuals of similar milage for similar asking price on Carzone led me to believe that a manual would be a good buy.
> I would probably keep the car for ten years and would therefore go for some other extras if desired.


 
Couple of points,  I would question whether or not there is a huge difference in mpg in auto diesels. I could be very wrong here but I would be amazed if its the 10-12mpg you say it is..

Secondly just because cars on carzone have the same asking prices does not mean that they all sell at this price.  An auto 5 series diesel will always be more desirable than a similar manual and shift must faster.

Thirdly if you intend to keep the car for 10 years do you feel the extra comfort and convenience of the auto is justifies the extra expense of approx €300 per year?  If not the the manual is your best bet though personally I'd opt for the auto


----------



## sinbadsailor (19 Nov 2007)

The 316 wouldn't pull a tooth. The only reason you would buy a 316 is the need to have the BMW badge at all costs. It is not enough car to justify the premium price.

To be honest, if were going to buy a BMW, then if diesel it would have to be 320d or 520d at least, or petrol 520 or 318 at the very least. I would say that if those models were out of your price bracket then buy a used beemer or keep saving till next year.


----------



## Armada (19 Nov 2007)

Sinbadsailor..

Thats an interesting point... have you had a lot of experience driving the 316?


----------



## -Gal1 (19 Nov 2007)

See attached for details on MPG.  I have a 320d and am getting approx 52MPG and very happ with it.  [broken link removed]


----------



## sinbadsailor (19 Nov 2007)

Armada said:


> Sinbadsailor..
> 
> Thats an interesting point... have you had a lot of experience driving the 316?



To be honest no, but if the 2002 318 I tested and didn't get 2 years ago was anything to go by, I think my comments would stand up.

Unless there is someone who has had a 'lot of experience' driving a 316 and can show comparisons etc.

Entry level models for every car, especially the premium German brands tend to be overly expensive and underpowered. This is where my comments came from


----------



## alpina (6 Jan 2008)

Oh silly me...

Thought Sinbadsailor had actual first hand knowledge since he had gone to the effort of commenting on the 316. I now see that this is only his 'presumption'.

Interesting..


----------



## aircobra19 (6 Jan 2008)

sinbadsailor said:


> ...
> Entry level models for every car, especially the premium German brands tend to be overly expensive and underpowered. This is where my comments came from



How are  Entry level models for every car,  overly expensive? Are they not the cheapest model in their ranges?

I've driven a few 316/318 '04~06 and I thought they were a decent car. I didn't find them underpowered. Mind you I didn't do much overtaking or long journeys in them. Just around the city.


----------

