# Will new 525i have a 3.0 liter or not?



## PhilH (Jun 7, 2002)

OK, so this is the third time I've seen a "rumor" that the new 525i will have a 3.0 liter engine. Is it true and does anyone think the new 325i will follow suit and have a detuned 3.0 liter as well?

This time, it's from Autoweek, and in the print copy of the magazine, they specifically make reference to the fact that BMW acknowledges the unusual naming of the 525i since it has a 3.0 liter. Strangely, this sentence is missing from the online version of the story, which I quote below. 



> BMW to show new 5 Series AWD models, inline-six engines at Detroit show
> Posted Date: 12/21/04
> 
> BMW is coming to the Detroit show with an all-wheel-drive 5 Series model in tow. Making its world debut in Detroit, the U.S. market awd 5 Series will come in 525xi, 530xi and 530xi sport wagon versions. The vehicles will be equipped with BMW's xDrive system, which is standard equipment on the company's X3 and X5 utes.
> ...


http://www.autoweek.com/news.cms?newsId=101444


----------



## Alex Baumann (Dec 19, 2001)

Typo.

523i, 525i and their X variants are getting 2497ccm engines, while the 530i/x is getting a 2996ccm engine.


----------



## PhilH (Jun 7, 2002)

Just the guy I was hoping to hear from. 

I figured it was a typo the first couple times I saw it, but when I saw that they said BMW confirmed the unusual naming convention of having a 3 liter in a 525i, I figured maybe it was _me_ that was out of the loop. I'd dig up the sentence they included in their print story to that effect at home tonight, but sadly, I am without internet service at our new house until the cable guy decides to stop by.


----------



## Alex Baumann (Dec 19, 2001)

Alex --> :spank: <--- cable guy

Tell him to hurry up !


----------



## vexed (Dec 22, 2001)

PhilH said:


> I am without internet service at our new house until the cable guy decides to stop by.


If he looks like this run


----------



## Dr. Phil (Dec 19, 2001)

vexed said:


> If he looks like this run


 :rofl: :rofl:


----------



## Jeff_DML (Mar 13, 2002)

to beat a dead horse and autoweek deserves a :spank:

Edit: Bet the autoweek writer got confused with the 523 and 525 engines since they both share the same displacement, not 525 and 530

From the BMW ag press release










http://www.germancarfans.com/news.cfm/NewsID/2041221.002/bmw/1.html


----------



## Fifty_Cent (Sep 17, 2003)

Jeff_DML said:


> to beat a dead horse and autoweek deserves a :spank:
> 
> Edit: Bet the autoweek writer got confused with the 523 and 525 engines since they both share the same displacement, not 525 and 530
> 
> ...


This doesnt make sence....
There will not be a 522i fitted with the 2.2L engine? Hm
That means "Another de-tuned 523i" and yt another de-tuned 323i....

Whats the point???? Capacity is tha same as the 2.5L engine....
The engine is the same.....except maybe from an inlet manifold.


----------



## andy_thomas (Oct 7, 2002)

Fifty_Cent said:


> This doesnt make sence....
> There will not be a 522i fitted with the 2.2L engine? Hm
> That means "Another de-tuned 523i" and yt another de-tuned 323i....
> 
> Whats the point????


There will be a 523i... and, according to some sources, a 322i. The difference is torque. Whilst the incoming 3er is no heavier than the car it replaces, the 2.2 litre 520i (not 522i) has always suffered from lethargic performance, especially with an autobox. A detuned 2.5 is a better bet for this car than a hopped-up Valvetronic 2.2, which probably makes peak power somewhere well beyond 6,000 rpm, and whose peak torque figure (on the basis of the figures we have for the 2.5 and 3.0) is likely not to exceed that of the outgoing engine's.


----------



## Patrick (Dec 23, 2001)

andy_thomas said:


> Whilst the incoming 3er is no heavier than the car it replaces, the 2.2 litre 520i (not 522i) has always suffered from lethargic performance, especially with an autobox.


Thanks.

.


----------



## PhilH (Jun 7, 2002)

Given the continuing rumors and press releases ( http://www.bimmerfest.com/forums/showthread.php?t=61926&page=4 ) that the 525 will have a 3.0 liter, and after digging out the print copy of the Dec 27th Autoweek, here's the print version of the above article...



Autoweek said:


> _Let it snow_
> 
> All-wheel dirve for BMW's 5 series range will make its world debut at the Detroit show in January (how appropriate). In the United States, BMW will offer all-wheel drive on the 525xi, 530xi and 530xi sport wagon. The all-wheel drive system is a version of the electronically controlled xDrive setup that debuted a year ago on X3 and X5 sport/utility vehicles.
> 
> ...


----------



## PhilH (Jun 7, 2002)

I'm not looking at 525s. Uh uh. No way. Don't really like the exterior styling, don't like the interior, don't want iDrive, don't need the extra space, don't want the extra weight, don't want a de-tuned _or_ smaller engine.

Now, the E90? Yeah, I'll give that one a look when the time comes (whenever that is...).

Although the X5 3.0 loaner I had today wasn't really that bad. But I was still very happy to be back in my car at the end of the day.


----------



## PhilH (Jun 7, 2002)

The truly interesting part about this story for me is this question...



PhilH said:


> ...does anyone think the new 325i will follow suit and have a detuned 3.0 liter as well?


----------



## Fifty_Cent (Sep 17, 2003)

andy_thomas said:


> There will be a 523i... and, according to some sources, a 322i. The difference is torque. Whilst the incoming 3er is no heavier than the car it replaces, the 2.2 litre 520i (not 522i) has always suffered from lethargic performance, especially with an autobox. A detuned 2.5 is a better bet for this car than a hopped-up Valvetronic 2.2, which probably makes peak power somewhere well beyond 6,000 rpm, and whose peak torque figure (on the basis of the figures we have for the 2.5 and 3.0) is likely not to exceed that of the outgoing engine's.


I am not so sure what you are talking about....

THe 520i 2.2l has actually *better* performance than your 318i, even if yours is the valvetronic 2002 model.

Here sare the specs:in the parenthesis is the auto model
520i 0-62mph: 9.0sec(9.9) top speed: 143mph(140)
318i: 0-62mph: 9.3sec(10.2) top speed: 135mph(133)

So if you say that the 520is performance is lethargic, it stands the same for your model as well.
But that didnt stop BMW on -rebadging- the current 318i engine to a 320i on the new E90.

The answer to your question is *profit.*
BMW has been having low profit on the entry level 2.2l models, since these cars use the 6 cylinder engines, but they are priced competitively in order to compete with the other 2.0 and 2.2l competition. This is especially tue in countries where tax for high capacity engines is alot.

But, they have realised that developing a new 2.2l engine for these markets will not bring huge profits, (since the US and other big markets always preferred 2.5 or 3.0l engines) so they have dropped it.

So bad news for countries like these.

The rest of the world wont be affected if there is no 2.2l engine at all.


----------



## andy_thomas (Oct 7, 2002)

Patrick 520iAT said:


> Thanks.


Dammit - what's the smiley for the little one with the red face? 

I should have qualified that with "...lethargic performance *at low rpm*." At lease the 320s I have driven needed a good prod with the right foot to pick up its skirts. Even you have to admit the car only really flies with the big dial on the right shows '4' or higher .


----------



## andy_thomas (Oct 7, 2002)

Fifty_Cent said:


> THe 520i 2.2l has actually *better* performance than your 318i, even if yours is the valvetronic 2002 model.
> 
> Here sare the specs:in the parenthesis is the auto model
> 520i 0-62mph: 9.0sec(9.9) top speed: 143mph(140)
> ...


Well, we weren't discussing my car, but looking and bhp/ton and lb-ft/ton for a sec:

520i 2.2: 1570kg (EU); 108 bhp/ton; 99 lb-ft/ton
318i 2.0: 1395kg (EU); 103 bhp/ton; 106 lb-ft/ton

My comment about lethargy related only to low-rpm performance, which I should have qualified thus. The 2.0 Valvetronic, on the other hand, responds very well at low revs but becomes breathless at high rpm (1st-gen Valvetronic doesn't have any benefit above 6.000 rpm, where the 2.2 six is still charging along). I spent some time comparing the 320i and 318i; personally I didn't think the creamy exhaust note was worth the premium. If I had more money, I may well have thrown caution to the wind!

It doesn't surprise me that BMW would quote slightly better performance figures for the bigger, more expensive, six-cylinder car. (At very high speeds the weight of the car becomes proportionally less important, as drag takes over - I would expect the 170 bhp 520i to turn in a higher top speed.) In reality, I am willing to bet the two cars turn in pretty similar performance figures.


> But that didnt stop BMW on -rebadging- the current 318i engine to a 320i on the new E90.


At least "320i" is now accurate . And there is plenty of historical precedent, of course...


> The answer to your question is *profit.*


Agreed. The 320i has never sold that well in the biggest markets; same with the 520i.


----------



## Patrick (Dec 23, 2001)

andy_thomas said:


> Dammit - what's the smiley for the little one with the red face?
> 
> I should have qualified that with "...lethargic performance *at low rpm*." At lease the 320s I have driven needed a good prod with the right foot to pick up its skirts. Even you have to admit the car only really flies with the big dial on the right shows '4' or higher .


No worries. I know that my car sucks ... :rofl:

I have only ever driven my car fast, one or two times. It serves other purposes very well, and it is very nice to drive on the highway in the 120km/h to 160km/h range.

Anyway, it will be replaced within the next six months. :eeps:

.


----------



## andy_thomas (Oct 7, 2002)

Patrick 520iAT said:


> No worries. I know that my car sucks ... :rofl:
> 
> I have only ever driven my car fast, one or two times. It serves other purposes very well, and it is very nice to drive on the highway in the 120km/h to 160km/h range.
> 
> Anyway, it will be replaced within the next six months. :eeps:


...at which point your handle will become... Patrick 523iAT?


----------



## Patrick (Dec 23, 2001)

andy_thomas said:


> ...at which point your handle will become... Patrick 523iAT?


No. I am feeling something bigger in the future. With a manual transmission. :bigpimp:

.


----------



## Alex Baumann (Dec 19, 2001)

Patrick 520iAT said:


> No. I am feeling something bigger in the future. With a manual transmission. :bigpimp:
> 
> .


Patrick 540iMT ? :eeps:


----------



## Patrick (Dec 23, 2001)

Alex Baumann said:


> Patrick 540iMT ? :eeps:


Well, that would be perfect, and it's not like I haven't been looking for the last year and a half.

2002 540i/6 (sedan), 2001+ M5 ... or my wife's choice, a new 330dT with the 6-speed.

We will see. I guess that would mean that I might actually have to start driving again. 

.


----------

