[HighlandPete]

Originally Posted by arnsbrae

I personally strongly prefer the 320d but some suit at BMW decided it would be a good idea to offer the first xdrive in the UK as a 320i.

Crazy.

It is only a matter of time, the 320d xDrive is coming to the UK, BMW have stated that in the releases.

I imagine the delay with diesel xDrive, is due to the petrol xDrive models having development and production priority. Remember the UK RHD market is not the key market for xDrive cars. The availability of the 320i xDrive to the UK, ahead of next winter, shows we are not totally left out as before.

HighlandPete

[arnsbrae]

Originally Posted by HighlandPete

It is only a matter of time, the 320d xDrive is coming to the UK, BMW have stated that in the releases.

I imagine the delay with diesel xDrive, is due to the petrol xDrive models having development and production priority. Remember the UK RHD market is not the key market for xDrive cars. The availability of the 320i xDrive to the UK, ahead of next winter, shows we are not totally left out as before.

HighlandPete

Yes, I'm sure they have their reasons (and I'm sure we'd both love to know what they really are) but from a consumer's point of view, I would have thought that there are a lot more diesel F30s sold in the UK, so therefore a higher demand. I agree the UK market is not the key market for xDrive cars but that will be due, at least in part, to the fact that it hasn't been available 'til now (or soon at any rate).

The xdrive system for the F30 would appear to be pretty much developed, so I believe this may be a marketing decision rather than a technical one and I still question that decision.

And from MY point of view, my build is scheduled to start Week 1 in August so, on a purely personal level - I'm frustrated! Unless there is a wee miracle in the next few weeks (which is unlikely in the extreme), I'm going to miss out badly.

At the end of the day - that's life. BMW doesn't exist to cater for my every whim, but I'm left with a so near yet so far feeling. Why did it have to be the bleedin' 320i first?

[HighlandPete]

Originally Posted by arnsbrae

The xdrive system for the F30 would appear to be pretty much developed, so I believe this may be a marketing decision rather than a technical one and I still question that decision.

And from MY point of view, my build is scheduled to start Week 1 in August so, on a purely personal level - I'm frustrated! Unless there is a wee miracle in the next few weeks (which is unlikely in the extreme), I'm going to miss out badly.

At the end of the day - that's life. BMW doesn't exist to cater for my every whim, but I'm left with a so near yet so far feeling. Why did it have to be the bleedin' 320i first?

I'm sure there has to be a valid reason for only presenting us with the 320i as a launch xDrive, as the 320d is the logical lead model for an xDrive in the UK.

As to frustrations, I know that as well, I'm trying to put a specification together for the F31 328i touring. But there is not a trim level that gives me my first choice, so if I go ahead, there will have to be compromises.

Problem is, there is always going to be the next model, upgrade, etc., which puts the current user behind the latest, newest offering.

HighlandPete

[arnsbrae]

Originally Posted by HighlandPete

I'm sure there has to be a valid reason for only presenting us with the 320i as a launch xDrive, as the 320d is the logical lead model for an xDrive in the UK.

As to frustrations, I know that as well, I'm trying to put a specification together for the F31 328i touring. But there is not a trim level that gives me my first choice, so if I go ahead, there will have to be compromises.

Problem is, there is always going to be the next model, upgrade, etc., which puts the current user behind the latest, newest offering.

HighlandPete

Couldn't agree more.

[ducatiboy72]

Tested the 320d today and was quite impressed with the torque. None of the dealers here in Norway seem to have a 320i demo car.

Asked the dealer which model he would choose (he has driven both the 320i & 320d on a test track). He said the 320i was most fun to drive on the track and he would choose the 320i.

But don't feel confident about buying a car I have not tested, so I might go for the diesel anyway, even if it sounds like a tractor...

[arnsbrae]

Originally Posted by Haarschmerzen

Why do you thinnk it is crazy? Why would you choose an 320i xdrive over the 320d or the 320i?

I actually ordered the 320i xdrive... Mostly because it's snowy in switzerland

Bit of a misunderstanding here. I think it is crazy that BMW are introducing the 320i xdrive in the UK and not a 320d xdrive, which is what most people would want.

[aarslan]

I had test driven 3.20d, and then bought 3.20i.

I have 2 main reasons for going with 3.20i:

1. 3.20d was 5000 Euros more expensive than 3.20i, here in Turkey. I cannot compensate this price difference for over 10 years with my current driving habits.

2. I often drive from home to work. The distance is about 10km.s. It is not wise to drive a diesel for short distances.

All of my previous cars were injection engines. I dislike the noise of diesel engines and the exhaust smell is disgusting.

On the contrary of what have been said, I do not agree that 3.20i torque is low. I had a long drive of about 1200 km.s last week, and the performance was spectacular. I switch to sport mode while driving at 160 km/h and can still feel the power of acceleration at that speed. I have seen 230 km/h, which I believe is the electronics limit. I wouldn't hesitate a moment regarding power or torque if they are criteria of your selection.

My humble opinion would basically be the main criteria shall be the fuel economy vs. the price difference you pay. All other are side criteria, which do not really have significant affect on the outcome.

[ducatiboy72]

Originally Posted by aarslan

I had test driven 3.20d, and then bought 3.20i.

I have 2 main reasons for going with 3.20i:

1. 3.20d was 5000 Euros more expensive than 3.20i, here in Turkey. I cannot compensate this price difference for over 10 years with my current driving habits.

2. I often drive from home to work. The distance is about 10km.s. It is not wise to drive a diesel for short distances.

All of my previous cars were injection engines. I dislike the noise of diesel engines and the exhaust smell is disgusting.

On the contrary of what have been said, I do not agree that 3.20i torque is low. I had a long drive of about 1200 km.s last week, and the performance was spectacular. I switch to sport mode while driving at 160 km/h and can still feel the power of acceleration at that speed. I have seen 230 km/h, which I believe is the electronics limit. I wouldn't hesitate a moment regarding power or torque if they are criteria of your selection.

My humble opinion would basically be the main criteria shall be the fuel economy vs. the price difference you pay. All other are side criteria, which do not really have significant affect on the outcome.

Thanks for your comments about the torque in the 320i since My main consern is torque.

In Norway the price of the 320i is the same as the 320d. You can even get a 163 hp version of the 320d for 2500 euros less than the 320i. Gas prices is not a consern since I only drive 12000 km/year.

[aarslan]

Originally Posted by ducatiboy72

Thanks for your comments about the torque in the 320i since My main consern is torque.

In Norway the price of the 320i is the same as the 320d. You can even get a 163 hp version of the 320d for 2500 euros less than the 320i. Gas prices is not a consern since I only drive 12000 km/year.

If your primary concern is torque, I believe you have to test drive both, before deciding. All of our opinions will be subjective anyways. ;-)

[Carjack]

Originally Posted by aarslan

If your primary concern is torque, I believe you have to test drive both, before deciding. All of our opinions will be subjective anyways. ;-)

+1 You have to drive both. I will say, that a manual is best for a 320i. An auto much better on the 320D. I much prefer my auto 320D. My previous 320i was an auto, and you had to work it hard at quite high revs.
With the 320D there is power at lower revs with relative little effort. Ideal for the urban & motorway driver.

[ducatiboy72]

I emailed a journalist for a car magazine and asked if they would test the 320i. He said they had already testet it and sent me the results compared to the 320d. I am not allowed to disclose the result before they are published.

But in short:
-320i is much more quiet at low speeds
-320i is about 1 second faster at overtaking when using kickdown from 80-120 km/h
-320d accelerates faster in high gears due to higher torque
-10% higher fuel consumption on highway driving for the 320i

I have decided to go for the 320i in imperial blue with saddle brown interior

[aarslan]

Originally Posted by ducatiboy72

I emailed a journalist for a car magazine and asked if they would test the 320i.
...
-320d is faster in high gears
-10% higher fuel consumption on highway driving for the 320i

I have decided to go for the 320i in imperial blue with saddle brown interior

I do not know what he means by "faster in high gears". After all, I have driven my 3.20i almost at the highest possible speed of 230 km/h. The same limit applies to 3.20d AFAIK.

Regarding the fuel consumption, I have driven for over 80 kms, cruise control engaged and set to 120 kms. The road was very straight, no ups and downs. The average consumption was 6.1 lts/100km. At this speed, the dial shows a little past 2000 rpms, at the highest gear. This sound promising to me. You may get a slightly better fuel economy than 10% under these conditions with a 3.20d.

[ducatiboy72]

Originally Posted by aarslan

I do not know what he means by "faster in high gears". After all, I have driven my 3.20i almost at the highest possible speed of 230 km/h. The same limit applies to 3.20d AFAIK.

Regarding the fuel consumption, I have driven for over 80 kms, cruise control engaged and set to 120 kms. The road was very straight, no ups and downs. The average consumption was 6.1 lts/100km. At this speed, the dial shows a little past 2000 rpms, at the highest gear. This sound promising to me. You may get a slightly better fuel economy than 10% under these conditions with a 3.20d.

I meant to say that the 320d accelerates faster in high gears when overtaking. But when you downshift the 320i is faster.

[hesitating]

Hey,

I am also hesitating between 320i xdrive AUt and 320d xdrive AUT. Does anybody have driving experiences with the 320i xdrive, real consumption figures? First I was sure to go for the diesel, but now...Actually there is 1500 EUR difference between petrol or the diesel one.

thanks for any comments, suggestions.

V

[KoenG]

I don't understand this.

The output power is identical, the 320d is equally fast as the 320i when revving out. The difference in accelerating to let's say 120mph will be entirely neglectable. The Torque of the d is devastating the i in the range uptil 2500rpm. So in 90% of the driving conditions, the d will feel an entire unit stronger than the i.

Most of the reviews I read actually conclude that the 320d is a better/smarter buy than the 328i since delivering comparable level of motoring fun. The d sounds a bit worse (the i doesn't sounds like a symphony either), but efficiency is massively better. It doesn't smell bad all the time, it rather never does, since exhaust is filtered.

There is no way the 320i is the better alternative. Although both cars are magnificent. The 320i is not a wrong decision, but a bit less good than 320d I'd say. I have the impression that there are a lot of posters prejudged against diesel. The i seems obsolete to me since the d is available.

I prefer to drive my 520d over my 530i any day... no real comparison, but anyway, concerning sound and torque, the comparison holds.

[KoenG]

I've driven the E46 320d, the E90 320d, the E91 320d and now the F10 520d for in total more than 300,000 miles. I tell you, this is a miraculous engine, like the world has never seen before.

This engine pulls the heavy pig of a 520d easily over 200km/h and returns me less than 6l/100km while spirited driving. No gasoline nor hybrid can match this.

Agree that it sounds sometimes a bit agricultural (but don't brag about the sound of the 320i either, not nice easy), but so what, it's the delivery on the road and in your wallet that counts.

[clarence]

Originally Posted by KoenG

I don't understand this.

The output power is identical, the 320d is equally fast as the 320i when revving out. The difference in accelerating to let's say 120mph will be entirely neglectable. The Torque of the d is devastating the i in the range uptil 2500rpm. So in 90% of the driving conditions, the d will feel an entire unit stronger than the i.

Most of the reviews I read actually conclude that the 320d is a better/smarter buy than the 328i since delivering comparable level of motoring fun. The d sounds a bit worse (the i doesn't sounds like a symphony either), but efficiency is massively better. It doesn't smell bad all the time, it rather never does, since exhaust is filtered.

It's to do with the narrower power band of the diesel motor vs petrol motor. Bascially at the higher end of the rev range the petrol motor picks up revs much faster than the diesel motor, as the N20 motor maintains it's max torque for a wider rev range. Also the 20i achieves 270Nm at around 1300rpm, which is more or less the same as the 20d, but don't forget the 20d has longer gearing so the initial step-off will be less responsive than the petrol motor. From idle to abt 1300-1400rpm both motors have similar torque so the 20i will be faster due to shorter gearing.
If u compare 320d w/328i then there's no comparison, the 328i wins hands down in terms of engine performance. There's no way u can compare a car that does 0-100 in less than 6s than one which does it in 7.5s.

[KoenG]

Originally Posted by clarence

It's to do with the narrower power band of the diesel motor vs petrol motor. Bascially at the higher end of the rev range the petrol motor picks up revs much faster than the diesel motor, as the N20 motor maintains it's max torque for a wider rev range. Also the 20i achieves 270Nm at around 1300rpm, which is more or less the same as the 20d, but don't forget the 20d has longer gearing so the initial step-off will be less responsive than the petrol motor. From idle to abt 1300-1400rpm both motors have similar torque so the 20i will be faster due to shorter gearing.
If u compare 320d w/328i then there's no comparison, the 328i wins hands down in terms of engine performance. There's no way u can compare a car that does 0-100 in less than 6s than one which does it in 7.5s.

Yes you can compare. The d has an iron fist between 1700 and 3200rpm, even more than the 328i has, the 320i is clearly lagging here and even not coming close. Concerning gearing, your reasoning is correct, but... I tend to drive within a low to mid rpm band. When you have a shorter transmission, you just go one gear higher sooner and the effect is neutralised. When I observe other drivers, being a passenger now and then, I notice the same behaviour.

I agree that in the same gear acceleration between two speeds, the i can match the d, but in reality, I would be one gear higher at the same speed with the i seen the short gearing. Therefore, the normal driving experience of the 320d is near to the one of the 328i uptil about 3500rpm. Acceleration from standstill is not a good indication since based on power in the highest part of the rpm band.

Everybody knows that a 328i is faster and of course it will lap the ring faster, but that doesn't represent normal driving conditions.

[clarence]

Originally Posted by KoenG

Yes you can compare. The d has an iron fist between 1700 and 3200rpm, even more than the 328i has, the 320i is clearly lagging here and even not coming close. Concerning gearing, your reasoning is correct, but... I tend to drive within a low to mid rpm band. When you have a shorter transmission, you just go one gear higher sooner and the effect is neutralised. When I observe other drivers, being a passenger now and then, I notice the same behaviour.

I agree that in the same gear acceleration between two speeds, the i can match the d, but in reality, I would be one gear higher at the same speed with the i seen the short gearing. Therefore, the normal driving experience of the 320d is near to the one of the 328i uptil about 3500rpm. Acceleration from standstill is not a good indication since based on power in the highest part of the rpm band.

Everybody knows that a 328i is faster and of course it will lap the ring faster, but that doesn't represent normal driving conditions.

Diesel engined cars have longer gearing not because of choice but because of the rev range of the engine. For example, the d redlines at abt 5000rpm whereas the i redlines at 7000rpm, so if u have the same gearing then the d will run out of breath very quickly. U don't change gears at the same revs when driving a petrol engined car vs a diesel engined car, for example if u change gear in a diesel car at 2000rpm then for a petrol car u change gear at 2500rpm. U just need to compare the normal shifting points of the 8AT for both engines - it's more or less in the same gear at the same speeds despite the d shifting up earlier than the i.
Acceleration from standstill is not only abt top end power, it is also abt low end torque, that's why the 20d is not quicker to 100 than 20i (brochure figs:7.3s vs 7.5s). Don't forget at initial step-off (i.e. 1000rpm) the 20d have only got 175Nm of torque to play with, & it takes 750rpm more to reach peak torque of 380Nm. The 20i has peak torque of 270Nm at 1250rpm, & if u extrapolate the power/torque graph of the 20d u'll get 270Nm at around 1300rpm, so at initial step-off the 20d doesn't have an advantage over 20i (there's no comparison with the 28i as it has over 225Nm at 1000rpm, not to mention much higher power output thruout the rev range). Don't say hard acceleration from standstill is no use, u'll need all the speed u have at busy junctions or roundabouts. Fyi, according to Auto Zeitung, the 520i does 0-40, 0-80, 0-100 & 0-120 @ 2.2s, 5.3s, 7.3s & 10.1s respectively. The 320d does it in 1.9s, 5.2s, 7.6s & 11s. Don't forget the 520i is 180kgs heavier than the 320d. U can see the 20i is no slouch compared to the 20d, the difference will be apparent if u drive a manual with lots of constant speed cruising & u like to overtake without changing down. The difference between the 2 is less if it's an automatic as it'll kickdown if u floor the throttle during overtaking.

[KoenG]

Originally Posted by clarence

Diesel engined cars have longer gearing not because of choice but because of the rev range of the engine. For example, the d redlines at abt 5000rpm whereas the i redlines at 7000rpm, so if u have the same gearing then the d will run out of breath very quickly. U don't change gears at the same revs when driving a petrol engined car vs a diesel engined car, for example if u change gear in a diesel car at 2000rpm then for a petrol car u change gear at 2500rpm. U just need to compare the normal shifting points of the 8AT for both engines - it's more or less in the same gear at the same speeds despite the d shifting up earlier than the i.
Acceleration from standstill is not only abt top end power, it is also abt low end torque, that's why the 20d is not quicker to 100 than 20i (brochure figs:7.3s vs 7.5s). Don't forget at initial step-off (i.e. 1000rpm) the 20d have only got 175Nm of torque to play with, & it takes 750rpm more to reach peak torque of 380Nm. The 20i has peak torque of 270Nm at 1250rpm, & if u extrapolate the power/torque graph of the 20d u'll get 270Nm at around 1300rpm, so at initial step-off the 20d doesn't have an advantage over 20i (there's no comparison with the 28i as it has over 225Nm at 1000rpm, not to mention much higher power output thruout the rev range). Don't say hard acceleration from standstill is no use, u'll need all the speed u have at busy junctions or roundabouts. Fyi, according to Auto Zeitung, the 520i does 0-40, 0-80, 0-100 & 0-120 @ 2.2s, 5.3s, 7.3s & 10.1s respectively. The 320d does it in 1.9s, 5.2s, 7.6s & 11s. Don't forget the 520i is 180kgs heavier than the 320d. U can see the 20i is no slouch compared to the 20d, the difference will be apparent if u drive a manual with lots of constant speed cruising & u like to overtake without changing down. The difference between the 2 is less if it's an automatic as it'll kickdown if u floor the throttle during overtaking.

I guess we say the same

What you experience and appreciate is determined on how and where you drive it. To me, the d is extremely well balanced for real traffic: very frugal, iron fist in lower rpm the cost is a grumpy sound. Of course the i is also magnificent, but you'll appreciate it better when you have the opportunity to let the beast go but it is never so efficient and the fist is a bit smaller at lower rpm (although available a bit faster like you state).

[King Canute]

Originally Posted by ducatiboy72

I emailed a journalist for a car magazine and asked if they would test the 320i. He said they had already testet it and sent me the results compared to the 320d. I am not allowed to disclose the result before they are published.

But in short:
-320i is much more quiet at low speeds
-320i is about 1 second faster at overtaking when using kickdown from 80-120 km/h
-320d accelerates faster in high gears due to higher torque
-10% higher fuel consumption on highway driving for the 320i

I have decided to go for the 320i in imperial blue with saddle brown interior

How is your 320i? I guess you got it by now?

I've ordered a F31 320i sport with m-tech, mainly because I don't like the smell of diesel, and I like higer revs.
I've tested both 320D F31 and 320i F30, but I felt that going for 320i was best suited for me, since I don't care that much about fuel usage. Coming from a 520 E39 2003 touring with automatic, everything else will use less fuel

The 320D was good, and I did kind of feel that it had more punch on lower revs. But I think it's abit boring with engines stopping to rev where others keep going about 2000-2500rpm more.

[CKau]

I tested the 320d and the in gear acceleration is manic! If you need to do a lot of freeway overtaking then i would go for the 320d for sure.

I did quite a bit of research on the diesel and it seems like you do need to think about your driving pattern. If you do lots of short distance, then the DPF will clog up a lot. There have been reports of problems due to clogged DPF.

In the end the diesel sound and fact i do short trips did it in for me. If you dont mind the sound, and confident you can sneak in at least one long trip per week, 320d is the answer