Bavarian-Board.co.uk - BMW Owners Discussion Forum Homepage
Forum Home Forum Home > Technical & Model Specific Forums > BMW 5 Series
  New Posts New Posts RSS Feed - E34 518i Fuel Consumption
  FAQ FAQ  Forum Search   Register Register  Login Login

Forum LockedE34 518i Fuel Consumption

 Post Reply Post Reply
Author
Message
JamesE30 View Drop Down
Groupie
Groupie
Avatar

Joined: 03-December-2002
Location: United Kingdom
Status: Offline
Points: 98
Direct Link To This Post Topic: E34 518i Fuel Consumption
    Posted: 05-December-2005 at 06:30
Just a quick question really. Does anyone know what the fuel consumption of the E34 518 M42 engine should be, or if you have one I would interested to know what fuel economy you get.

I work on an average of 100 miles per 1/4 tank urban to and from work and on a motorway journey can get 500 to a tankfull. The colder weather however has seemed to effect my short journey economy adversely.

Any comments would be appreciated,

Thanks,

James
Back to Top
Sponsored Links


Back to Top
Ging View Drop Down
Groupie
Groupie


Joined: 20-August-2005
Status: Offline
Points: 88
Direct Link To This Post Posted: 05-December-2005 at 11:26

i'm getting 17mpg out of my 525 now

it was 20mpg in the summer

the cold weather will rince ur fuel especialy if u are doing short trips because cold starts take a lot of fuel

once up to temperature u should be getting similar mpg as normal, a little less if it's really cold

if u do short trips with long gaps inbetween then it needs to warm up each time and u've probably finnished ur journey when it's up to temperature

Back to Top
fingerman View Drop Down
Really Senior Member II
Really Senior Member II
Avatar

Joined: 31-May-2005
Location: Stockport
Status: Offline
Points: 564
Direct Link To This Post Posted: 05-December-2005 at 15:10
I want to know the exact same question (was just going to post it !!!)

I used to have a 518 - think it was the M30 engine (not sure 1991?) and I used to get about 450 miles out of a full tank - if being carefull.

I'm thinking of selling my 730 in January and going back to either a 518 or a 520 (manual) as I miss the 518 - is was smooth, better fuel economy (better than my 525) and despite what people say, was quite nippy.

It would be interesting to find out how much people get to the tank or mpg out of the 518 or 520 - I've heard that the 525 is more economical than these but I'm not too sure - maybe the manual is, but the auto box definetely 'aint !

Hopefully we'll get lots of replies



Current: E34 1996 525tds 113-125k
Previous: 9xE34s, 5xE30s, 2xE39s, 1xE32, 1xE36.... phew!
My Ebay bits: http://search.ebay.co.uk/_W0QQsassZseany69ukQQhtZ-1
Back to Top
AndyS View Drop Down
Really Senior Member II
Really Senior Member II
Avatar
The Last of the Few

Joined: 21-August-2003
Location: 55 � North
Status: Offline
Points: 1365
Direct Link To This Post Posted: 05-December-2005 at 17:09
According to the 1990 brochure (auto in brackets):-

518                          520                525                  535
Urban      27.4            20.3 (20.3)      20.3 (20.2)      17.1 (16.3)
56 mph    45.6            40.9 (40.9)      42.8 (43.5)      35.3 (35.8)
75 mph    35.8            33.2 (33.6)      34.9 (34.9)      29.1 (29.4)
Average   34.9            28.8 (29.1)      29.7 (29.7)      24.8 (25.0)

Going by these figures you're better off with an auto rather than a manual.

I had a '91 520 manual which averaged around 25mpg with a best of 34mpg on a long motorway run. It would get down to 20/22mpg in heavy traffic.  All being equal, the 525 would be a better choice.

I believe the 518 used the M40 engine at first then moved on to the M42 with a chain instead of belt drive to the cam.

The 520/525 started with the M20 engines, M50 from '90 & gained single vanos with the M52 in '91.

The 535 had the M30 until '91 when the M60 V8's took over.


AndyS
Live each day as if it's your last - one day it will be.

Back to Top
JamesE30 View Drop Down
Groupie
Groupie
Avatar

Joined: 03-December-2002
Location: United Kingdom
Status: Offline
Points: 98
Direct Link To This Post Posted: 06-December-2005 at 08:15
I checked my owner's manual last night and the figures for my 1996 model are the same as AndyS quotes. The engine codes are as follows: -

1989–1993 518i - 1.8 L M40
1993–1996 518i - 1.8 L M43

The earlier M43's had a belt whereas the later ones (last of the E34 518i's and the E36 4 pots from there on) had a cam chain, which mine is.

Ging, I think you must be right, on the last tankfull I have been doing very, very short journeys with lots of cold starts (especially with the weather up here in the North West in the past weeks), hence the reason why my fuel economy has probably suffered.

The fuel economy against performance is a good debate. For the relatively small loss in fuel economy over the noticeable gain in performance (around 4seconds 0-62mph) I would probably opt for a 24v 525 next. The 520 has max torque come in a lot higher than the 518's 4 cylinder engine so is not as nippy (if you can call a 518 nippy) so I would stick with the 1.8 4pot over the 2.0 6 pot any day.

Apologies over my M42 typo, that is the E30 318is 16v engine.

Fingerman, out of interest how does the 730i V8 of yours fair, and is it quick? I drove an E34 530i V8 a few months ago and was impressed.

Thanks for your help guys,

James
James
BMW E30 327i
BMW E30 318is
BMW E34 518iSE
Back to Top
IAN540 View Drop Down
Groupie
Groupie
Avatar

Joined: 23-August-2005
Location: Hampshire
Status: Offline
Points: 70
Direct Link To This Post Posted: 09-December-2005 at 03:05
On the subject of fuel...

I'm assuming if your car is due for a serivce, or inspection, this will drink
more fuel?

My 540 is due an inspection2 soon. (2green lights left....) I'm hoping the
car will run smoother, and more economically better? (lol, a V8 running
economically!? )

Thanks, Ian.
I'm me, as in me me, not you me!
Back to Top
IAN540 View Drop Down
Groupie
Groupie
Avatar

Joined: 23-August-2005
Location: Hampshire
Status: Offline
Points: 70
Direct Link To This Post Posted: 09-December-2005 at 03:06
Hmmm...

How much will an inspection 2 be on a E34, 540?

Eeek!

Ian.
I'm me, as in me me, not you me!
Back to Top
autofix View Drop Down
Really Senior Member I
Really Senior Member I


Joined: 23-August-2003
Location: Kildare
Status: Offline
Points: 294
Direct Link To This Post Posted: 09-December-2005 at 03:35

Hi,

Unless you have a leak then all that fuel is going through the engine. There is no way the engine can burn that amount efficiently so there must be a lot of unburnt fuel going out through the exhaust. Unburnt fuel is the biggest killer of cats. I would suggest you get it sorted asap, besides the possible expensive cat damage, overheated cats are a serious fire hazard in extreme cases.

HTH

Alan 

Back to Top
540 V8 View Drop Down
Bavarian-Board Contributor
Bavarian-Board Contributor
Avatar
Lick my badge

Joined: 07-December-2005
Location: Running the asylum
Status: Offline
Points: 2280
Direct Link To This Post Posted: 10-December-2005 at 20:18

Originally posted by IAN540 IAN540 wrote:

On the subject of fuel...

I'm assuming if your car is due for a serivce, or inspection, this will drink
more fuel?

My 540 is due an inspection2 soon. (2green lights left....) I'm hoping the
car will run smoother, and more economically better? (lol, a V8 running
economically!? )

Thanks, Ian.

Just a useless fact you may be interested to know. A V8 is the most economical engine, cylinder for cylinder. In other words, if you had say for example, a 3 litre, 4, V6 ,V8 ,V10 & V12 cylinder, the V8 would have the best economy per cylinder than all the others. I don't know the scientific reason behind this but my theory is that maybe because the V8 always has 2 cylinders on the ignition stroke at any one time? and is lighter than the 10 or 12 cyl. Just a theory!


Current:E34 540i Touring 6 speed manual(Mpower bodykit & suspension)& Chrysler Voyager 3.3 V6 auto
Previous:E34 530iSE AC Schnitzer suspension.
E28 525e auto-Standard
Back to Top
RedOctober View Drop Down
Really Senior Member I
Really Senior Member I
Avatar

Joined: 19-April-2005
Location: Wirral
Status: Offline
Points: 279
Direct Link To This Post Posted: 11-December-2005 at 14:27

BMW-wise, a 2 litre 4 pot will use less fuel than a 2 litre six pot because, although they both have the same swept volume, the six pot block has a greater surface area on it's 6 bores to lose heat to.

In other words, the ratio of cylinder volume to cylinder surface area is greater on a 2 litre 4 pot than a 2 litre 6 pot, so the 6 pot loses more of the fuel's energy to heat dissipated in the cylinder walls and thence to the cooling system.

As you need to keep the heat in the cylinder to extract the energy to push the piston down the bore, you don't want to lose it to the cylinder walls.

This is why the official fuel consumption figures for the 320/325, and 520/525 show that the larger engine does almost the same mpg as the smaller engine, as it's more thermodynamically efficient, and goes faster into the bargain!

The ideal cylinder volume is around 500-600cc. Less than that and thermal efficiency falls off, more than that and engine speed is limited by the inertia of large pistons and con-rods etc.

So, ideal capacities are: 2 litre 4 cyl, 3 litre 6cyl, 4 litre V8, 5 litre V10, 6 litre V12. Of course, this is a gross simplification, but somewhere round these figures gives the best compromise between economy and rev capability.

The 325/525 is better themodynamically than the 320/520, which is why the bigger engine uses virtually the same amount of fuel, yet gives you greater power.

Bigger capacity slow revving engines are great on economy as they don't lose proportionally as much heat to the cooling system as smaller engines, and revving lower means you lose less energy to friction and 'windage', as these losses go up as the square of the engine speed.

Anyone remember the old E28 525e? Big 2.7 litre 6 pot petrol unit revving to 5000rpm max!! Would pull 2000rpm at 70mph on the motorway and return 35+ mpg. Lazy 177lbf/ft torque gave effortless step-off and thrashed 520i whilst using less fuel, even though they both had the same power.

Another thing, the E34's are very heavy cars, so will use lots of fuel in stop-start driving, and this applies whether you have a 518i or a 540i. Avoid towns in E34's! They are best at long motorway cruising where they give best economy.

Later E34 520/525 autos had the 5-speed autobox, which helped them to achieve overall mpg figures matching the manuals.

V8's are very fuel efficient for their size as they only have a 5-bearing crankshaft for 8 cylinders, compared with 7-bearings for a straight-six, and V8's are generally made big, so they have high ratios of cylinder volume to cylinder wall surface area, and this ensures less energy is lost to the cooling system as happens in small multi-cylinder engines.

In absolute terms, big V8's like to drink, but in relative terms, for their size and power, they are very efficient. My E34 540i auto returns 28-30mpg on long motorway runs, whereas my E34 525i touring auto will only manage 32-34mpg under similar driving conditions even with an engine just over half the size of the 540i's. Both cars have the 5-speed autobox and weigh about the same.

Round town the 540i returns 18-20 mpg, and the 525i returns 20-22 mpg.

However, thrashing the V8 on a cold day round town gives 14-16mpg and a big grin to petrol pump attendants!

For a given weight of bodyshell, I try to find the biggest engine you can get as it makes driving effortless.

E34 518i 4-pot is livelier then E34 520i six pot because the small six needs to rev like crazy to access the torque, whereas the 4-pot has more torque off the line.

My old E30 318i (M40 engine) was a lively little car and round town and had the legs on my E30 325i when nipping down small roads etc.

Close you eyes and it felt like a junior M3-well, almost!

Never been a fan of small engines in big cars as it's a technical mismatch. You need torque to shift the kilos, so get the bigger engine in specific engine families. That means 318i over 316i, 525i over 520i, 740i over 730i etc.

The smaller-engined cars aren't exactly bad, it's more that you don't gain much, if anything, by having a smaller engine, yet you lose that reserve of torque the bigger engines provide that makes driving effortless.

Sermon over!!

"I was just clearing out the cylinders, Officer"
Back to Top
 Post Reply Post Reply
  Share Topic   

Forum Jump Forum Permissions View Drop Down



This page was generated in 0.109 seconds.