[AlanQS]

... but nevertheless, I'm going to mention it.

When I bought my E92, a serious contender was the 520d SE and one thing I noted was although the 320d SE coupe was dearer than the 520d SE, it did have more equipment (January 2008) like full 2 zone ATC, xenon lights, ambient lighting, Professional radio, sports wheel - and it was prettier, but you did get more sheet metal for your money with the Five.

Tonight, for casual amusement, I specced a 520d SE the way I'd like it and then specced a 320d SE coupe to as close as I could get to the Five series.

The Five was a couple of hundred pounds LESS than the E92 yet (in my spec) it had all the kit the E92 had PLUS, 4 zone climate control, rear heated seats, variable damper control, rear and side cameras, power operated boot - and a whole lot more sheet metal.

I can only conclude that the E92 is unimportant to BMW and an excuse to shag E92 buyers in particular which leads me to bemoan the fact that I had to like best, the model range that BMW charges most for.

Seems an odd thing to complain about I suppose, but when my car crashes and bangs over the most innocuous disparities in road levels, it just makes me think "and it's the worst value for money."

[JLR1969]

I am going to order a 5 series for a change and it's a bigger car that will be hopefully better on long motorway journeys.

[dxb335d]

I'd like to get an answer from BMW about your findings!

[davyk31]

I don't think its to do with the E92 being unimportant, more a reflection of how important the 520d is to BMW and the company car world. It is clear they have reduced the cost of a 520d to look very competitive in its marketplace and indeed cheaper than the more niche product the E92 is. Look even at the cost difference between a 520d and a 530d, from memory its about 10 grand, would make most of us ask the question whether we need that extra 60 bhp or not.

[xenon]

^ nail on head. When you consider that the 520d can be mapped to acquire that 60bhp it looks even better value.

[dxb335d]

But the 530d can be mapped to 300hp

[xenon]

So? How is that relevant to the pricing rationale of the 520d?

No one's disputing the 530d has more output, obviously.

[chrisbin]

520d is fantastic value and "all the car you need" to quote Top Gear mag....!!!

Its a great car at a great price and BMW will sell loads of them!

[davyk31]

Most cars can be mapped so being able to map a 520d to the power of a 530d isn't relevant as above you can map your 530d to 535d power, and of course it can be mapped as well. Fact remains there is a massive price difference between 520d and 530d that makes it hard to look higher up the range.

[warriorboy]

simple supply and demand - I bet the 3 will hold its value better as it is a more desirable car

[Irnbrukid]

Originally Posted by AlanQS

... but nevertheless, I'm going to mention it.

When I bought my E92, a serious contender was the 520d SE and one thing I noted was although the 320d SE coupe was dearer than the 520d SE, it did have more equipment (January 2008) like full 2 zone ATC, xenon lights, ambient lighting, Professional radio, sports wheel - and it was prettier, but you did get more sheet metal for your money with the Five.

Tonight, for casual amusement, I specced a 520d SE the way I'd like it and then specced a 320d SE coupe to as close as I could get to the Five series.

The Five was a couple of hundred pounds LESS than the E92 yet (in my spec) it had all the kit the E92 had PLUS, 4 zone climate control, rear heated seats, variable damper control, rear and side cameras, power operated boot - and a whole lot more sheet metal.

I can only conclude that the E92 is unimportant to BMW and an excuse to shag E92 buyers in particular which leads me to bemoan the fact that I had to like best, the model range that BMW charges most for.

Seems an odd thing to complain about I suppose, but when my car crashes and bangs over the most innocuous disparities in road levels, it just makes me think "and it's the worst value for money."

Is that list for list.. the 3 coupe would probably end up cheaper once discount is taken into consideration as you would get a better discount than on the 520d (at this moment in time).

[AlanQS]

Although the 525d and 530d seem ridiculously dearer than the 520d, there will (eventually) be a lot more discount on them. Though funnily enough when I was buying the 320d and the cost to change - and my target figure was coming up, the dealer actually had more discount in the five than in the three and this was two years before it was to be replaced.

So, although the 520d price is trimmed to suit the marketplace (520d makes up 80% of Five series sales in the U.K.) they still, at that time, had more wiggle room in the 520 than a 320 - even though the 320 base price was higher!

Surprisingly, it's five series sales which count for BMW - in Britain at least. They provide the biggest profit (you would have thought that would be the E9x) and that explains the price of the bigger engined cars. Besides, that difference in price won't put off the businessmen who have some say in what they drive - they will want the big engine regardless.

[Irnbrukid]

Originally Posted by davyk31

I don't think its to do with the E92 being unimportant, more a reflection of how important the 520d is to BMW and the company car world. It is clear they have reduced the cost of a 520d to look very competitive in its marketplace and indeed cheaper than the more niche product the E92 is. Look even at the cost difference between a 520d and a 530d, from memory its about 10 grand, would make most of us ask the question whether we need that extra 60 bhp or not.

Exactly that car is aimed at the business users.