# Availability of BMW diesels in US this year!



## Pierre Louis (Oct 23, 2011)

BMWTurboDzl said:


> Typically high tq with low revs requires more frequent shifting within the speeds which the vehicle is typically driven. This is why i say it's like short shifting a gasser (Naturally aspriated).
> 
> Can't drive a 335d manual like you would a M3.


This is not how I typically drive a manual, especially since I drive for economy. Unless you typically rev to full redline, a diesel can go up to 4500-5000 RPM.

The gear ratios tend to be wider in diesels also, so with a typical gasser, its not unusual to go up or down by 2 gears.

I respect my machinery and don't push it 10/10'ths all the time anyway.

PL


----------



## 01Byte (Jun 22, 2003)

finnbmw said:


> *Mark, manual transmissions are not popular in the US and never will be, so unfortunately you are in the minority.* My first car was a MT, the rest have been automatic and I've never looked back. Whenever I go back overseas and have to drive a manual, I curse the unnecessary complexity of changing gear, i.e. pushing down the clutch and and changing gear. Especially in stop-and-go traffic.
> 
> The one car where I think a MT is warranted is in a sporty gasoline powered car, where you get the most out of the engine by keeping the revs high. In a diesel engine, where the oomph is achieved at low rpms, an automatic is ideal. IMO.


I'm 100% with Mark on this one. You are viewing the MT question as one of necessity. While we view it as nothing more than an option (that we get to choose if we wish). What's interesting is that while having options like upgraded sound or HUD are always available regardless of how many people actually order them, the MT option is some kind of voodoo topic. Every time it's always "you don't need it, get an auto". Well, guess what. You don't *need* a lot of options you get when you order a car. You get them because you *want* them.

To me (and guys like Mark), being able to choose the transmission type is just another selection of an option that we want.

It's a shame that BMW doesn't see this. Like him, I am slowly being pushed away from the brand because of my love of a manual transmission.


----------



## GB (Apr 3, 2002)

01Byte said:


> It's a shame that BMW doesn't see this. Like him, I am slowly being pushed away from the brand because of my love of a manual transmission.


Same here. I dumped my troublesome 335d (my first and last car with an auto) for the last of the naturally aspirated e91's wagons with MT. It doesn't looks like a MT will be an option in the future, so hoping it lasts me a while!

Graham


----------



## SteVTEC (Feb 16, 2005)

Blame the EPA and government red tape for making it extremely cost prohibitive to certify more than a few possible engine and transmission combos per car for sale here in the U.S. Compared to other manufacturers, BMW is already being _extremely generous_ with what they're offering. Shame there's so much red tape, otherwise a lot more options could be offered like diesels and MTs as offered in Europe. BMW has to pick and choose what they know they can sell enough of to justify the significant cost of certifying a powertrain/drivertrain/tranny combo for sale here.


----------



## SteVTEC (Feb 16, 2005)

Since it's going to be a "328d" here and not a 320d, I wonder if that means we'll be getting the higher spec version of the 2.0L turbodiesel then? The Euro 325d makes 218PS and 450 Nm (332 lb-ft) and hits 0-62 in 6.8s. I know BMW's numbers are all screwy these days but "28d" does imply similar level of performance to other "28" products which are currently at 240hp. :dunno:


----------



## d geek (Nov 26, 2008)

SteVTEC said:


> Since it's going to be a "328d" here and not a 320d, I wonder if that means we'll be getting the higher spec version of the 2.0L turbodiesel then? The Euro 325d makes 218PS and 450 Nm (332 lb-ft) and hits 0-62 in 6.8s. I know BMW's numbers are all screwy these days but "28d" does imply similar level of performance to other "28" products which are currently at 240hp. :dunno:


The 325d hasn't been in production for 5 yrs.

Info on the engine going into the N American F30d is going to be 180hp. That is the 320d


----------



## dhake2 (Nov 5, 2012)

I would love to have the MT as well. Assume for a moment that the 6MT could handle the torque, what issues would I have trying to put one in the 335d? 
1) Would it bolt in? (I think it would)
2) What electronic/computer issues would I encounter?


----------



## d geek (Nov 26, 2008)

^^^moderator please remove all irrelevant posts from this thread...


----------



## SteVTEC (Feb 16, 2005)

d geek said:


> The 325d hasn't been in production for 5 yrs.
> 
> Info on the engine going into the N American F30d is going to be 180hp. That is the 320d


http://www.bmw.co.uk/en/new-vehicles/3/saloon/2011/technical-data.html

180hp would be a bummer, but would probably get some pretty impressive fuel mileage!


----------



## d geek (Nov 26, 2008)

SteVTEC said:


> http://www.bmw.co.uk/en/new-vehicles/3/saloon/2011/technical-data.html
> 
> 180hp would be a bummer, but would probably get some pretty impressive fuel mileage!


Thanks. I hadn't seen the UK site. bmw.com doesn't show the 325d.

The 325d would indeed be an interesting option...


----------



## F32Fleet (Jul 14, 2010)

01Byte said:


> I'm 100% with Mark on this one. You are viewing the MT question as one of necessity. While we view it as nothing more than an option (that we get to choose if we wish). What's interesting is that while having options like upgraded sound or HUD are always available regardless of how many people actually order them, the MT option is some kind of voodoo topic. Every time it's always "you don't need it, get an auto". Well, guess what. You don't *need* a lot of options you get when you order a car. You get them because you *want* them.
> 
> To me (and guys like Mark), being able to choose the transmission type is just another selection of an option that we want.
> 
> It's a shame that BMW doesn't see this. Like him, I am slowly being pushed away from the brand because of my love of a manual transmission.


In the past people (myself included) would pick the MT for cost ($1200 for auto), reliability, better mpg , adding the fun factor somewhere in between. Today aside from the fun factor nothing else really holds true. So when someone is emphatic that a car is inadequate due to lack of MT I have diffulty understanding the logic.

Sent from my MB525 using Bimmer App


----------



## Pierre Louis (Oct 23, 2011)

I would still say maintenance is still a factor, especially if you keep the car a long time. Automatics like VW's DSG require expensive fluid changes while manual transmissions are apt to last quite a lot longer without an overhaul.

PL


----------



## 01Byte (Jun 22, 2003)

BMWTurboDzl said:


> In the past people (myself included) would pick the MT for cost ($1200 for auto), reliability, better mpg , adding the fun factor somewhere in between. Today aside from the fun factor nothing else really holds true. So when someone is emphatic that a car is inadequate due to lack of MT I have diffulty understanding the logic.
> 
> Sent from my MB525 using Bimmer App


To me, it's always been about the fun factor. I also don't think that any car is more or less adequate simply based on the transmission choice.

Question for you, when you see someone pay $2k for an upgraded sound system or $2k for comfort seats do you also have problems understanding why they felt they needed those options in order to enjoy the car? Or is your view only limited to the manual option?


----------



## 01Byte (Jun 22, 2003)

d geek said:


> ^^^moderator please remove all irrelevant posts from this thread...


:rofl::rofl::rofl:


----------



## SteVTEC (Feb 16, 2005)

BMWTurboDzl said:


> In the past people (myself included) would pick the MT for cost ($1200 for auto), reliability, better mpg , adding the fun factor somewhere in between. Today aside from the fun factor nothing else really holds true. So when someone is emphatic that a car is inadequate due to lack of MT I have diffulty understanding the logic.
> 
> Sent from my MB525 using Bimmer App


Yeah it used to be that if you had an automatic transmission, you were automatically taking like a FULL SECOND penalty in 0-60, along with poorer mileage, drivability, and reliability, not to mention you paid more for the privilege, and were really missing out on what a car and engine were capable of if you _didn't_ get a manual transmission. Those days are long gone now.


----------



## finnbmw (Jul 6, 2008)

I truly get the argument that we should have the option of being able to choose a manual transmission or auto. My point was that because the manual people are in distinct minority (and that will not change in my life time), BMW has decided, for whatever reason, that it is not a good business decision to bring more manual trans cars over to US. I am sure a lot of people would be interested to know what those reasons are...


----------



## Snipe656 (Oct 22, 2009)

finnbmw said:


> I truly get the argument that we should have the option of being able to choose a manual transmission or auto. My point was that because the manual people are in distinct minority (and that will not change in my life time), BMW has decided, for whatever reason, that it is not a good business decision to bring more manual trans cars over to US. I am sure a lot of people would be interested to know what those reasons are...


A lot of manufacturers and across many different types of vehicles are phasing out the manual transmissions. I used to always buy them not only because of the cost savings but also because the manual transmissions for me tend to out last the automatics by a long shot. Actually I can't recall ever having a manual transmission breaking, not even in the cars I raced.

I am not a huge fan of manuals in diesel vehicles due to the power bands but if I had a choice when buying then I'd get the MT over the AT assuming I did not have to pay more. I'd not do something so drastic though as buy a much lesser overall car simple to get an MT over getting an AT. When I got my truck I wanted to get an MT since they still did MT's in Ford Superduty trucks back then and the savings was many thousands of dollars but no one had one and they discounted things on the lot so much that it was cheaper to get an AT truck on the lot than order an MT truck.


----------



## Axel61 (Mar 10, 2011)

Frankly speaking i dont miss the MT Im getting use to the modern AUTO, with the 02 MCS then that was different story MT all the way with the 11 335d I can honest say HELL NOO I'll stay with the AUTO


----------



## GB (Apr 3, 2002)

BMWTurboDzl said:


> In the past people (myself included) would pick the MT for cost ($1200 for auto), reliability, better mpg , adding the fun factor somewhere in between. Today aside from the fun factor nothing else really holds true. So when someone is emphatic that a car is inadequate due to lack of MT I have diffulty understanding the logic.
> 
> Sent from my MB525 using Bimmer App


Yes, aside from the fun factor and not having to replace a $5k part every 100,000 miles (+/- 50,000mi), there's no real justification for a MT. If you're buying a car for convenience and utility, then an auto makes perfect sense. Otherwise....


----------



## kanar200 (Feb 15, 2011)

higher maintenance costs with automatic? what about dual mass flywheel which comes with MT and which does not live long with huge torque?


----------



## Mark K (Jun 5, 2010)

BMWTurboDzl said:


> So when someone is emphatic that a car is inadequate due to lack of MT I have diffulty understanding the logic.


Why does anybody want to marry fat women? Who cares, their problem. Let them have it, more skinny ones for you to chose from.

What's all of a sudden so wrong with having choices in this country? Why everything has to be logical and, even more important, sanctioned by majority? Not a nice society to live in if you stop and think about it. Those who want diesel are already screwed on choices, if you add MT to the mix, I still can buy only one brand - exactly as it was in 2006, 7 years ago. Fortunately, now you can at least chose between Golf, Jetta, Passat and Beetle. Soon to come CC as well.

This tells me that it IS possible to sell these cars at profit here, you just have to care about minorities.


----------



## fastm3 (Sep 1, 2006)

I'm a minority....and proud of it!


----------



## UncleJ (May 7, 2006)

The Tiguan 2wd still comes with a stick as well. VW for some reason has always pushed sticks far more than the other marques. Some would say it was because they really didn't have a decent auto box -- but now of course they do yet they still provide sticks in their bread and butter offerings. No stick in the T-egg however!:angel:


----------



## kanar200 (Feb 15, 2011)

Volks Wagen = People's Car

Nobody in Europe would consider VW as a luxury car. It was meant to be cheap, simple and reliable


----------



## EddieNYC (May 11, 2007)

Please be in my price range!!!


----------



## Axel61 (Mar 10, 2011)

UncleJ very true about VW most of the vehicles are MT come to think of it but remember they have lower TORQUE numbers than our BEAST!!


----------



## bimmerdiesel (Jul 9, 2010)

According to BMW, 3 Series GT is coming to USA this year. I hope they put 6cyl diesel in it. It would good combination of everything. It has more leg room than F30 and better trunk space too and in my opinion doesn't look bad at all.


----------



## bayoucity (Jun 11, 2010)

bimmerdiesel said:


> According to BMW, 3 Series GT is coming to USA this year. I hope they put 6cyl diesel in it. It would good combination of everything. It has more leg room than F30 and better trunk space too and in my opinion doesn't look bad at all.


Well said! :thumbup:

I'll have ditched 535d over 3 GT diesel if that happened.


----------



## Flyingman (Sep 13, 2009)

Good article about the new 2014 3 series GT.

http://autos.jdpower.com/content/new-car-preview/clGTWxs/2014-bmw-3-series-gran-turismo-preview.htm

Ne Diesel is mentioned.


----------



## bayoucity (Jun 11, 2010)

Flyingman said:


> Good article about the new 2014 3 series GT.
> 
> http://autos.jdpower.com/content/new-car-preview/clGTWxs/2014-bmw-3-series-gran-turismo-preview.htm
> 
> Ne Diesel is mentioned.


Nooo.... I'm going to have to stick with 535d. According to that link, it's seating for 4. I need seating for 5 & not 4. I hate how manufacturer always slap that center console on the rear bench. :thumbdwn:


----------



## Snipe656 (Oct 22, 2009)

bayoucity said:


> Nooo.... I'm going to have to stick with 535d. According to that link, it's seating for 4. I need seating for 5 & not 4. I hate how manufacturer always slap that center console on the rear bench. :thumbdwn:


I am right there with you about hating when manufacturers do this and not for any "technical" reasons. There are a few cars that I really like but they can only sit 4 people and I prefer to own something that in a bind can cram 5 into.


----------



## bimmerdiesel (Jul 9, 2010)

oops. Why cant they allow 5. Rear seats are reclining seats so probably thats why it is 4.


----------



## Axel61 (Mar 10, 2011)

That would SUCK if BMW does not bring it in DIESEL, Im begining to like the car for its space and not the looks. Curse BMWoA


----------



## bimmerdiesel (Jul 9, 2010)

bimmerdiesel said:


> oops. Why cant they allow 5. Rear seats are reclining seats so probably thats why it is 4.


It is 5 seater. seats 3 in back with more leg room (3:57)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=nChW4OSg9Yc


----------



## bayoucity (Jun 11, 2010)

bimmerdiesel said:


> It is 5 seater. seats 3 in back with more leg room (3:57)
> http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=nChW4OSg9Yc


You are right, it's a 5 seater (see photos below). I don't understand why that article keeps saying seating for 4 over and over. Are Americans really that fat & wide these days? :dunno:


----------



## BMW 3-SERIES (Jun 8, 2007)

Let's hope for a manual. How much more reliable and perfect can it get, diesel, RWD, and a manual.


----------



## floydarogers (Oct 11, 2010)

There have been quite a few posts on diesel models for 2014 - found a PDF from Jon at Santa Barbara. Look in post #1 for SOP-EOP-MY2014.pdf

Looks like the 4-cylinders are going to be called 328:

Sedan: 328d, 328xd
Wagon: 328xd

5-series has 535d and 535xd

http://www.bimmerfest.com/forums/showthread.php?t=674004


----------



## floydarogers (Oct 11, 2010)

And one more (same info... more official?)

http://www.bmwcca.org/node/5576


----------



## kanar200 (Feb 15, 2011)

they are saying it will be twin-turbo diesel I-6... interesting, maybe they will downgrade the Euro spec 535d?

"A 535d model will be the first U.S. model to make use of a new twin-turbo diesel I-6, expected to produce around 255 hp and 413 lb-ft."


----------



## Pierre Louis (Oct 23, 2011)

I don't see a problem with this new engine as to its specs especially if:

1. It is more reliable i.e. the fuel pump pressure, DEF circuit etc. are tweaked to improve longevity and durability
2. It gets much better fuel economy than the older twin turbo 335d motor
3. It has the improved 8 speed automatic that may or may not be able to handle all that extra power but otherwise has better technology

A 535d would be a welcome addition if its steering wasn't numb and you could get the traditional handling that BMW seems to be dialing out of its newest models, at least with a sport package.

PL


----------



## d geek (Nov 26, 2008)

kanar200 said:


> they are saying it will be twin-turbo diesel I-6... interesting, maybe they will downgrade the Euro spec 535d?
> 
> "A 535d model will be the first U.S. model to make use of a new twin-turbo diesel I-6, expected to produce around 255 hp and 413 lb-ft."


I saw this same speculation in Automobile magazine. I just find it hard to believe they would de-tune the "twin-turbo" 3L diesel (I believe it is actually two different sized turbos as were in the previous 335d engine- not twins) to get the same power they are getting out of the TwinPower turbo (single turbo) that they put in the Euro 530d. :dunno:


----------



## kanar200 (Feb 15, 2011)

well, i believe it will be a single turbo engine... but at the same time, they de-tuned M57 (bi-turbo) earlier and were offering adblue diesel only in single turbo diesel engine in Europe...


----------



## d geek (Nov 26, 2008)

kanar200 said:


> ... they de-tuned M57 (bi-turbo) earlier and were offering adblue diesel only in single turbo diesel engine in Europe...


When they de-tuned the 335d (265 hp) for US market the torque stayed the same as the Euro 335d which had 286 hp.

The Euro 535d now puts out 313 hp and 465 lb-ft. I can't see them cutting the torque down to 413.

The current 530d with adblue performance has no drop off in power ratings. That's most likely the engine that will show up in the US "535d". I'm not going to complain, but its just confusing...:tsk:


----------



## kanar200 (Feb 15, 2011)

regardless whether it would be single turbo or bi-turbo, I like it... if only they brought F11 to the US, I would say good bye to X5


----------



## m8o (Oct 18, 2009)

Thought it better to ask here in this thread than make another. Anyone clue when we might have solid details regarding what the 328d will actually be? Anyone in the know reading this that may have an idea of a date we'd have 100% non-speculative info.

I struggle to believe BMW would go the route of calling an unmodified 20d level engine a 28d, with sizable price increase but without performance increase; consider me skeptical and likely naive but I can't believe BMW would be so brazen to do so. The questions I wish to answer are will it fer'sher have urea injection or be a low-pressure diesel like VW chose to go? will it fer'sher have 1 or 2 turbos (which naively seems more logical to get the 25d engine -> 28d vs a 20d -> 28d), and what kind of power/torque and consumption can we expect?

I loved the previous-gen 335d but as I already had a RWD 4-door performance sedan that I didn't want to part with, making a move to the 335d wasn't in the cards for me; and I really wanted a wagon and AWD. And the possibility of me getting a diesel looks promising now. And if the US were to be getting to a "328d" with performance and consumption proportional between the 20d/25d/30d levels where you'd expect a 28d to lie, via say a de-tuned/lower pressure 330d engine to lessen the NOx levels, I'd be all over it. I'd be in-line to trade my JCW in in short order. 

But if the 328d is really to be basically a 320d which would mean I'd be paying for near (or even more than?) 330d prices for 320d levels of performance? Forget it; I'm out. I'd just like to know so I can either plan, or get on with my life.


----------



## d geek (Nov 26, 2008)

m8o said:


> Thought it better to ask here in this thread than make another. Anyone clue when we might have solid details regarding what the 328d will actually be? Anyone in the know reading this that may have an idea of a date we'd have 100% non-speculative info.
> 
> I struggle to believe BMW would go the route of calling an unmodified 20d level engine a 28d, with sizable price increase but without performance increase; consider me skeptical and likely naive but I can't believe BMW would be so brazen to do so. The questions I wish to answer are will it fer'sher have urea injection or be a low-pressure diesel like VW chose to go? will it fer'sher have 1 or 2 turbos (which naively seems more logical to get the 25d engine -> 28d vs a 20d -> 28d), and what kind of power/torque and consumption can we expect?
> 
> ...


The whole badging thing really bugs me. A 320d with adblue performance (urea) costs that same as a 328i in Europe. I was really hoping for the same relative pricing here. I'm not sure if they'll use the badge to bump the price up or not. If they offer the ecocredit then it may be a wash, but kinda sketchy IMO.

The information released to date has the power output of the 3er d exactly the same as the 320d. It will be a 4 cyl single turbo with adblue performance. (That is the only way they can meet the US emission standards.)

Info posted by Jon Shafer has the 328d going into production in July.


----------



## BB_cuda (Nov 8, 2011)

I checked the bmwusa site about 2 weeks ago. I was hoping we could do a build your own to get a feel for pricing. BMW NA, are you listening? Wondering about the base price of a 2013/2014/? what ever the year is for the coming 535D??


----------



## UTGuy13 (Mar 14, 2013)

No sooner we finally get a US 3d series then they announce a nicely designed GT without a "d". D-cisions... D-cisions!


----------



## d geek (Nov 26, 2008)

good info from J Spira here:
http://www.thedieseldriver.com/2013/03/tdd-exclusive-bmw-328d-intro-video/

<$40k
>40mpg EPA hwy


----------



## AutoUnion (Apr 11, 2005)

d geek said:


> good info from J Spira here:
> http://www.thedieseldriver.com/2013/03/tdd-exclusive-bmw-328d-intro-video/
> 
> <$40k
> >40mpg EPA hwy


awesome! now where's the xDrive diesel? :tsk:


----------



## 3ismagic# (Mar 17, 2011)

That video is pretty silly. Man BMWUSA is working hard to polish this underpowered overpriced rebadged turd.

If the 335d was soooooo perfect for the E90 why is a rebadged 320d soooooo perfect for the F30?

I've heard more convincing rationalizations from my 3 year old.
Obvious that everyone at BMWUSA got the buzzword memo before this. "Tremendous" and "optimized"


----------



## 3ismagic# (Mar 17, 2011)

AutoUnion said:


> awesome! now where's the xDrive diesel? :tsk:


they said both RWD and AWD is coming.


----------



## AutoUnion (Apr 11, 2005)

3ismagic# said:


> That video is pretty silly. Man BMWUSA is working hard to polish this underpowered overpriced rebadged turd.
> 
> If the 335d was soooooo perfect for the E90 why is a rebadged 320d soooooo perfect for the F30?


It's perfect because they're probably not going to have to sell them with huge eco credits, like they did the 335d.

How is it overpriced? If anything, the 335d can be considered overpriced.

If you truly want a larger engine, they'll be happy to sell you the upcoming 535d :thumbup:


----------



## Pierre Louis (Oct 23, 2011)

3ismagic# said:


> That video is pretty silly. Man BMWUSA is working hard to polish this underpowered overpriced rebadged turd.
> 
> If the 335d was soooooo perfect for the E90 why is a rebadged 320d soooooo perfect for the F30?
> 
> ...


I don't think there is any doubt that for the US market, mpg is more important than 0-60 in the diesel segment. Just look at the way M3 drivers treat 335d specs to see that macho and stop light grand prix's are more important in the "performance" mindset than the kind of driving experience a powerful diesel engine can provide without the mpg or cost penalty.

BMW is just reacting, IMO, to consumer demand and regulatory reality. They will, to their credit, bring their 535d to North America soon after. Alas, there are no manual transmissions to be found in the diesel lineup.

PL


----------



## 3ismagic# (Mar 17, 2011)

close to $40k for a 320d? The guy said that as if it's a wonderful thing that it will come in under $40k.

They are taking an underpowered 320d from Europe and rebadging it as a 328d for gullible americans so that they can mark it up near $40k.
40mpg highway is pretty pathetic for a 4 cylinder diesel. my 335d can get that.

It's a 320d and should be sold and priced as a 320d.

I'd buy a 328i or a even a 320i over this all day long and I suspect most consumers will too.
Others may disagree but IMHO this is some [email protected] sauce.


----------



## Snipe656 (Oct 22, 2009)

My old 335d was under $40k new after all the discounts the dealers and BMW had to toss in to move the cars. No way I'd buy something with less power for close to the same price. I already felt I was paying a little too much for what I got but the power made me not think straight.


----------



## floydarogers (Oct 11, 2010)

3ismagic# said:


> close to $40k for a 320d? The guy said that as if it's a wonderful thing that it will come in under $40k.
> 
> They are taking an underpowered 320d from Europe and rebadging it as a 328d for gullible americans so that they can mark it up near $40k.
> 40mpg highway is pretty pathetic for a 4 cylinder diesel.


Well, look at the competition: the Jetta TDi is 42mpg, makes 140 hp and 236 ft-lbs and does the 0-60 in 9 secs. (It also costs only $26K for the highest trim level.) So viewed in the broader scene it's pretty good positioning.

Still, I also wish for a real 6-pot 325d...


----------



## Snipe656 (Oct 22, 2009)

I am rather baffled how someone would consider a $26k FWD car as competition to a near $40k RWD car. $14k better damn well buy a lot of "upgrades", to me it would be expected.


----------



## floydarogers (Oct 11, 2010)

Snipe656 said:


> I am rather baffled how someone would consider a $26k FWD car as competition to a near $40k RWD car.  $14k better damn well buy a lot of "upgrades", to me it would be expected.


In many respects the Passat at $33K would have been a better comparison (although I think it's slightly larger inside than a 3-series.) But they're all diesels, which is the more critical item for comparison purposes.

What? You don't believe that RWD/AWD (note that vw no longer sells Synchro AWD for their diesels) is worth $5K?


----------



## Pierre Louis (Oct 23, 2011)

3ismagic# said:


> 40mpg highway is pretty pathetic for a 4 cylinder diesel. my 335d can get that.
> 
> It's a 320d and should be sold and priced as a 320d.
> 
> ...


Oh really?

Lets see:

The new car will have 
the 8 speed automatic: + 2mpg
the other features s/a electric steering, brake regenerating generator, lower weight chassis/body, etc.: + 2 mpg
AND the 4 cylinder engine: + 2 mpg

The 40+ mpg is in line with the anticipated pathetic EPA numbers. The new 328d should run rings around any 320i or 328i in torque and driving dynamics as does the 335d over its competition. I doubt it will be close to our 335d's in fuel economy - it will be much better....

So I guess people will need to actually drive it to feel the difference and have a bit of knowledge about EPA fuel economy numbers to really know how to compare models.

PL


----------



## ynguldyn (Sep 23, 2005)

UncleJ said:


> Right, that is what I was referring to -- the X-class cars. Sorry, I should have been clearer. There was no mention of when or if we would see them here.:angel:


X5 35d has SOP 12/13.


----------



## BB_cuda (Nov 8, 2011)

*Passat TDI can be had with 6 spd manual*

Can't resist stirring the pot . If you get the base SE version and don't get the sunroof/nav upgrade, it comes standard with the 6 speed manual. With no other options besides the base non metallic paint (i picked white) and vinyl seats ( i picked cornsilk) the price including destination charges is $27,070.

I know, i know, the diesel has to shift a lot earlier but some people are hell bent on a stick, diesel or not. pot stirred


----------



## Snipe656 (Oct 22, 2009)

BB_cuda said:


> Can't resist stirring the pot . If you get the base SE version and don't get the sunroof/nav upgrade, it comes standard with the 6 speed manual. With no other options besides the base non metallic paint (i picked white) and vinyl seats ( i picked cornsilk) the price including destination charges is $27,070.
> 
> I know, i know, the diesel has to shift a lot earlier but some people are hell bent on a stick, diesel or not. pot stirred


If I were to buy a Passat then this is probably how I'd option it out, except different colors. I did not realize they could be had this cheap but also not have enough interest in one to go and look.


----------



## DnA Diesel (Jul 31, 2010)

UncleJ said:


> The numbers are right up there with the Ford Fusion Hybrid and CMax revised figures. Finally we might be getting a diesel here -- now when do we see the X versions?


They're missing the boat not providing an X3d...I may end up looking at a GLK or Q5 for a mid-size SUV. BMW is missing the boat on the smaller SUV front.


----------



## Snipe656 (Oct 22, 2009)

DnA Diesel said:


> They're missing the boat not providing an X3d...I may end up looking at a GLK or Q5 for a mid-size SUV. BMW is missing the boat on the smaller SUV front.


From what I have read on the Q5 and what the diesel offering should be like then I think it will be a hard mid sized SUV to pass up on.


----------



## DnA Diesel (Jul 31, 2010)

Snipe656 said:


> From what I have read on the Q5 and what the diesel offering should be like then I think it will be a hard mid sized SUV to pass up on.


Yup. I'll at least give it a test drive...


----------



## d geek (Nov 26, 2008)

All you folks whining over the lack of a manual trans offering in the 328d and 535d should read this review.


> Another gripe (and perhaps the largest) is with the manual. In order to shave a few thousand euro off the price we went with the 6 speed manual.
> 
> And opposite of what you'd expect it was the worst choice imaginable. Rather than increasing the fun it really only adds frustration. Sure its sacrilegious for a left foot snob to say a manual is the wrong choice but if I am being honest it surely was. Due to the low rev nature of the diesel and its turbo lag you end up shifting all the time. The ZF 8 speed (as pictured) is a much better choice for this engine and (in my mind) clearly BMWNA made the right choice as the only transmission available in the US for the upcoming 328d.
> 
> Everyone assumes that a manual is more fun, more engaging and the better choice for enthusiasts. I am here to tell you that is a crock of BS. The engine is torquey, efficient (we get 50 mpg mixed) and has enough life to be entertaining but the low rev nature and curve make it ideal for the fast shifting ZF and its algorithms; let alone the plus the auto has in MPG. It is the first time I have ever had buyer's remorse about an option choice, and damned if it isn't the tried and true manual tranny.


----------



## Snipe656 (Oct 22, 2009)

I personally never have liked out manual trans diesels drive and essentially for reasons that quote above gives. But if given a choice and it did not cost more money then I'd get a manual trans. My reasons are more to do with manual trans always last forever for me but automatics not so much.


----------



## BB_cuda (Nov 8, 2011)

I drove a co-workers TDI jetta sportwagen with stick. It was fine for me but not ignoring the author's strong suggestion either. That is interesting as normally the European's are more stick crazy than most. I knew fuel usage would be better with the 8 speed. I didn't know the 8 speed was a ZF. To me the 535D is getting more and more interesting. I would think the Q5 TDI an 535D would be comparable more so as the newer 3L diesel is a little bit down on power and torque. It is close to that of a european 530D spec wise.


----------



## Pierre Louis (Oct 23, 2011)

My experience and likes are different.

I had a diesel TDi with manual and then a family member got a DSG automatic with the same engine. The manual had better fuel economy and was more fun to drive, even in the city. The same went for a Volvo in the past where the manual transmission got much better fuel economy than what the EPA said it would while the automatic didn't.

I wouldn't go by EPA fuel economy ratings since they differ significantly from real world driving mpg.

Unless BMW has fallen in its design and engineering game, where it was one of the best manual transmissions, I would still opt for a manual even in a diesel. The low end torque needs getting used to and cannot be driven like some do their gasser manuals. I drive the diesel manual more like one when I try to save fuel and shift earlier anyway.

PL


----------



## Flyingman (Sep 13, 2009)

I'll take auto with thumb shifters anyday!:thumbs:


----------



## d geek (Nov 26, 2008)

Pierre Louis said:


> ...I wouldn't go by EPA fuel economy ratings since they differ significantly from real world driving mpg....


I don't disagree that the EPA cycle is wasteful to an extreme, and is particulary hard on diesel fuel economy ratings, but note that the Euro test cycle- which is extreme in the other direction- also indicates that the Auto trans obtains better FE. I'm not saying you can't beat the EPA or meet the ECE ratings with the manual, but it appears you need to try harder with the manual.


----------



## Pierre Louis (Oct 23, 2011)

d geek said:


> I don't disagree that the EPA cycle is wasteful to an extreme, and is particulary hard on diesel fuel economy ratings, but note that the Euro test cycle- which is extreme in the other direction- also indicates that the Auto trans obtains better FE. I'm not saying you can't beat the EPA or meet the ECE ratings with the manual, but it appears you need to try harder with the manual.


Its entirely possible that the test cycles don't "coast" as much as I do when I drive a manual. I also rarely use the brakes and no, I don't use the transmission to slow the car either.

Either way, an automatic is very expensive to build, pay for, and service compared to a manual. Unless of course you want to market it in the US where the government is there to help you with their severe restrictions on manufacturers ...... not.

PL


----------



## scootle (Jan 1, 2011)

It seems like concrete info about these diesel offerings is so hard to come by... 

Does anyone actually have a 328xd _Sports Wagon_ on schedule for delivery anywhere in the USA this year? My local dealer said he didn't think they'd be here until sometime late next year (2014), but that is counter to what the PR seems to have stated.

Thanks.


----------



## d geek (Nov 26, 2008)

scootle said:


> It seems like concrete info about these diesel offerings is so hard to come by...
> 
> Does anyone actually have a 328xd _Sports Wagon_ on schedule for delivery anywhere in the USA this year? My local dealer said he didn't think they'd be here until sometime late next year (2014), but that is counter to what the PR seems to have stated.
> 
> Thanks.


At least one member here on bimmerfest has received his 328d sport wagon and posted pics of it.

Check autotrader. there are several around the country


----------

