4 cyl 5 series up at BMWUSA

Question, is anyone really going to pay $56k or $800 and change a month to lease a 4 banger?

In a word, yes. If that four banger provides more hp , better torque and higher gas mileage than its na i6 and does so without unacceptable levels of nvh then indeed it will (and should) sell.

***Sent from the interwebs on technology that's way beyond my pay grade***

BMW is not going to make a 4 cyl car that will rival the N55 in HP or torque only in mpg and lets face it, a 4 cyl engines performance is maximized when its FWD not RWD!

The specs for the 2012 4 cylinder engine exceed hp and torque for the NA I6 in this year's model. That said, it remains to be seen how well the new 528i will do. I can only speak for myself but I really don't think I would have bought the 528i if it was a 4 cylinder in 2011. I would have moved up to the 535i.

I'm holding out for the 2-cylinder, 2-cycle engine they will be introducing in 2015. Not only will it be cheaper for BMW to build, but you won't have to have oil changes because the oil will be added to the gas at fill-up. This will allow them to eliminate those pesky starter motors too as the new models will come equipped with a pull rope right next to the shift lever.

Originally Posted by PsychDoc1

In a word, yes. If that four banger provides more hp , better torque and higher gas mileage than its na i6 and does so without unacceptable levels of nvh then indeed it will (and should) sell.

***Sent from the interwebs on technology that's way beyond my pay grade***

x2

Originally Posted by PsychDoc1

In a word, yes. If that four banger provides more hp , better torque and higher gas mileage than its na i6 and does so without unacceptable levels of nvh then indeed it will (and should) sell.

+1. Unfortunately, it's the direction automakers are headed due to the stricter fuel requirements placed on them. I will be interested to test drive one to see how good or bad the nvh actually is -- if they've broken any ground on making a 4 cylinder engine actually an acceptable alternative. Look at the significant advancements BMW and MB have made with diesels.

Originally Posted by Elias

BMW is not going to make a 4 cyl car that will rival the N55 in HP or torque only in mpg...

That's correct. The N20 is not a replacement for the N55.

Originally Posted by Elias

BMW is not going to make a 4 cyl car that will rival the N55 in HP or torque only in mpg and lets face it, a 4 cyl engines performance is maximized when its FWD not RWD!

So the original M3 should have been FWD?
As I recall the E30 M3 had a 4 cyl engine

no way I would have bought a 4 cyl 528i even if it had more torque. I would not even buy the 4 cylinder Audi when I had one. two things. it is a mental thing and the car ran rough and sounded like a tin box.

Early reports are that the 4 cylinder engine is indeed smooth, refined and every bit the match of the prior I6 in terms of performance. It looks like a great engine.

The question for some is the psychological barrier of a US-market 5 Series, and a car costing well in excess of 50K when reasonably optioned, having four cylinders. It's a legitimate question, this is a market where buyer's expectations have been set by many years of the entry level car having an I6 and that I6 being a class benchmark. That said, despite the smooth and refined nature of the base I6, it's power output was relatively weak and the new engine is stronger. Frankly, I'd rather have seen a 520d available here than the new 2.0 liter 4 cylinder gas engine, but the new engine does look like an upgrade over the old one.

I'd buy the 4 before I'd buy a Diesel. Another psychological barrier, for me at least.
Messy and noisy, not to mention the smell...

I would definitely get a 528i with a 4 cylinder turbo. It performs better than last years I-6 and the fuel mileage is almost equal to the 335 diesel. Why the hell wouldn't anyone want that? You can even buy an aftermarket chip for a few hundred dollars if you want more HP and torque.

My only issue is that BMW does not offer the ARS option (Active Roll Stabilization) on the 528i. Only on the 535i and 550i. Maybe by the 2013 model year they'll make it available on the 528i.

Originally Posted by Heartsurg997

So the original M3 should have been FWD?
As I recall the E30 M3 had a 4 cyl engine

The E30 M3 did 0-60 in 7.1 sec and EPA estimates were 17/ 29 mpg nothing earth shattering compared to turbo charged 4 cyl engines of of today. To get the best all around results in performance and optimal mpg FWD is a better choice than RWD.

Originally Posted by BobRBob

I'd buy the 4 before I'd buy a Diesel. Another psychological barrier, for me at least.
Messy and noisy, not to mention the smell...

That would be a "NO" as to "messy, noisy and smelly."

Try driving a 335d, X5d or a Mercedes Bluetec. Then get back to us.

Richard

Originally Posted by 07X3platinum

I would definitely get a 528i with a 4 cylinder turbo. It performs better than last years I-6 and the fuel mileage is almost equal to the 335 diesel. Why the hell wouldn't anyone want that? You can even buy an aftermarket chip for a few hundred dollars if you want more HP and torque.

My only issue is that BMW does not offer the ARS option (Active Roll Stabilization) on the 528i. Only on the 535i and 550i. Maybe by the 2013 model year they'll make it available on the 528i.

How do you know it performs better-- by bmw 0-60 times? torque number? trust but verify. I bet it is not as butterly smooth as a inline six that has been around for years. I would never buy a 4 banger in a 5 series bmw. period. I have a true probelm dishing out this much cash for 4 cylinder for some reason. I drove both the 535 and 528 when I decider to purchase and loved the sound of the inline six. If I wanted a speedster- I would never have bought a 5 series - I would have gone to a M3 or even back to P cars.

For what it's worth, I was talking about the new engine with my dealer last week when I was in for service and he said the BMW 4 cylinder engine has been around for several years in Europe and has enjoyed excellent reliability. I didn't know it had been around for so long. So I guess it's not exactly a new innovation. I'd be willing to give it a try after it's been out in this country for a couple of years, providing it doesn't have any of the turbo-related problems that the 335/535 series has had. I just don't want to be one of the first "Beta-Testers" on this one.

I recently read a post from a German owner who stated that nearly 80% of all 5 series in Europe are of the 4 cylinder variety (which is why de-badging is so popular on the Continent).

Originally Posted by BobRBob

I'd buy the 4 before I'd buy a Diesel. Another psychological barrier, for me at least.
Messy and noisy, not to mention the smell...

Maybe true about the psychological barrier....but I think the diesel would be a far better drive...incredible torque and better gas mileage than a four banger. I drove a 335d....loved the motor and transmission, but other elements of the car were disappointing.....especially for the price.

After spending some time in a chipped 2010 Audi A4, 2.0T this weekend, I can say that I would NOT consider buying a 4 cylinder Bimmer. Now, I know that this is Apples and Oranges, and perhaps BMW could do a better job with a 4 cylinder. But let me say what a dreadful experience driving that A4 was in comparison to our e60 528i. Despite the Audi's better power figures than BMW's N52 I-6, it was nowhere near as responsive as the N/A I-6. Perhaps the gear ratios had something to do with it (the Audi has a taller final drive ratio,) but you have to get deep into the throttle (and perhaps drop a gear) to wake up the turbo and pull the car along. I am not convinced this is a more economical strategy. The same acceleration (at speed that is, say from 50-70) in the I-6 is an effortless thing. There is no need to depend on a laggy turbo, just call up some well placed torque and pleasantly accelerate along. And the price for that small (but still laggy) turbo, is top end response where it's runs out of steam and chokes the engine. The BMW on the top end just sings a sweet tune- literally, gotta love the sound of that N/A I-6. The turbo 4? Yuck, it just makes noise...

While I was behind the wheel of the A4, all I could think was that I couldn't wait to get back to my BMW's. Like I said, maybe BMW can do a better job with a turbocharged 4-cylinder. But I can say, I'd almost never spend my own money on one. I'm happy I got a N/A I-6 while I still can.

Originally Posted by Elias

BMW is not going to make a 4 cyl car that will rival the N55 in HP or torque only in mpg and lets face it, a 4 cyl engines performance is maximized when its FWD not RWD!

What's the reasoning behind that statement...

I understand what you're saying about the 4-pot not making the same power as the N55, that would be stupid financially for BMW and completely negate the point of having the N55.

However, I doubt that 4 cyl performance is maximized in FWD. With FWD the wheels need grip to drive AND turn. What that means is any grip available after turning is used to pull the car forward or viceversa. If torque/power exceeds friction (grip) from the front wheels, you'll loose traction and (more than likely) understeer. Even in straight line driving, weight transfer from hard acceleration shifts the weight rearward, hence alot of torque in FWD means that they'll likely spin the front wheels or torque steer as the car fights to get grip...

Keep in mind that a huge portion of 5 series buyers are NOT aficionados, but rather are badge people. A BMW 5 is a BMW 5 to them, and most won't notice the difference. If it keeps the CAFE down, better for the rest of us.

Originally Posted by jusmills

What's the reasoning behind that statement...

I understand what you're saying about the 4-pot not making the same power as the N55, that would be stupid financially for BMW and completely negate the point of having the N55.

However, I doubt that 4 cyl performance is maximized in FWD. With FWD the wheels need grip to drive AND turn. What that means is any grip available after turning is used to pull the car forward or viceversa. If torque/power exceeds friction (grip) from the front wheels, you'll loose traction and (more than likely) understeer. Even in straight line driving, weight transfer from hard acceleration shifts the weight rearward, hence alot of torque in FWD means that they'll likely spin the front wheels or torque steer as the car fights to get grip...

I'm talking gas mileage more than anything else, fwd loses 28% hp from the flywheel to the wheels in a rwd the hp loss is 33%

It is going to be interesting to hear the real world reports on this engine. I am not in the market for another BMW at this time as I just got mine earlier this year, but I'm pretty sure we would have ended up with the 535. We didn't like our Audi 4banger with turbo and since then he has been anti 4 cylinder cars.

It's a great little engine and surprisingly refined by all accounts. Though in the States I think it will split public opinion right down the middle because 4 cylinder engines have a reputation of either being not nearly as regined as 6 or 8 cylinder engines or for usually being fitted to cheap crap. I reckon this engine will over time change opinions from against to all for it.

Originally Posted by Elias

I'm talking gas mileage more than anything else, fwd loses 28% hp from the flywheel to the wheels in a rwd the hp loss is 33%

Do you have a source for this? I understand the packaging efficiencies of FWD, but I don't see how it would make any difference at all with the efficient transfer of power.