Jump to content

kiwi535

Members
 View Profile  See their activity

  • Content Count

    6962

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    13

Posts posted by kiwi535

  1. Posted · Edited by kiwi535 · Report reply

    On 6/6/2018 at 7:10 PM, BatmanMW said:

    .

     

    agreed doesn't take much to skew it, overall the real data i found on fuelly based on users who have done 100+ fillups each logged about 6.6L/100km average which is not as eco as the stated 5L/100km for the 123d. this makes it $365 more than my calculated value but the offset for all the cars would be about the same as they're all in real world not as cheap per 100km than stated as their test is constant speed on highway with mild acceleration. since any given manufacturer would measure their own cars to the same standards, using this data for my personal calculations provides a good baseline for comparison (well thats my theory) given i'm trying to find the most suitable deal for me within the BMW line of vehicles.

     

    what's fairly funny is how a wide range of bmws performance vehicles are quite a lot more efficient than i would have previously assumed. for example you can see vitz here http://www.fuelly.com/car/toyota/vitz

    vitz 2009 average 7.6L/100km.. albiet with cheaper 91 so maybe the maths offset isn't as bad when you turn it in to $ per km, but given how slow a car that is i would have expected significantly better.

    2009 123d at 6.7L/100km average. http://www.fuelly.com/car/bmw/123d

    and finally 335i seems not that far off , however it is using premium fuel so won't work out economical choice for me anyway  http://www.fuelly.com/car/bmw/335i

     

    yup still waiting to hear back from Joe but i've almost ruled out the 335d now. given the target audience of bmw is usually performance (i was attracted for same reason), it's not that easy as it seems to find people willingly talking about owning a diesel haha, not even online. their tank sizes are different but in my calculations i done the maths based off 50L of fuel preceisely rather than each cars individual tank range as that would introduce additional variables.

    even my 120d manual chipped was an awesome wee car.Consumption was 6.5 l 100 k around twon,but that was not really much stop start,but it never really varied much from that.On the open road you could get 5.5 without really trying.6 spd manul very high geared it wasnt really paractical to change into 6th unless itwas dead flat under 110 km hr.On road performance was really good prolly equivalent to a 3 l petrol in normal driving.The "power band is small only 2000 rpm to 4500."But you dont get that high rev performance of a petrol.The power is kinda flatand you gotta keep it on boost .RUC is 6 c a kilometre.I had the 120d for about two years it never needed anything but oil and tyres,but it did get a good run every work day.I beleive thats important for a modern diesel.I seviced by the service indicator which was about 15k apart.I think it still lives on this forum somewhere.The only reason i sold it was it was a bit small interior wise for me.I am 190 cm,but it literally cost half the ammount to run than  my e34 535.

    a 123d would be better still.(esp if it was chipped and manual)

    this was mine

  6. Posted · Edited by kiwi535 · Report reply

    when i had mine (manual) it was very consistent 6.5 l per 100 k round town and on a trip 5.5 l per 100 k easy.I didnt do stop start kinda stuff but that 6.5 l never really changed much with different use.

    edit...i see you are welly based so my day to day trip was commuting from wellington to lower hutt.I dont recomend a diesel unless you are going to do longer trip.Mine was chipped

  8. Posted · Report reply

    9 hours ago, Olaf said:

    Essentially, yeah; at least a little inconvenience.  The e60 certainly likes a solid battery!  They'd had the boot open a lot during it's time in the workshop... and then an hour or two on the roadside with hazards on... bingo, flat batty.

    winters comin...you dont want a five series with a dodgy battery in the winter......

  12. Posted · Report reply

    1 hour ago, P3RMAFROST said:

    @kiwi535

    Thanks - will keep them in mind.

     

    Yes, currently have runFlats (Pirelli PZero) fitted.  I'm not keen on the replacement cost; circa $900-$1000 for the PZero's.  The budget has already been sssstttrrreeetttccchhheeeddddd (stretched).

    Was thinking normal tyres in combination with a tyre inflation kit.

    Anyone have personal experience with using a tyre inflation kit?

     

    Cheers, M.

    not sure what my model pirelli was but the price does vary somewhat.When it comes time, give yourself plenty of time to shop around

  15. Posted · Report reply

    On 4/25/2018 at 5:45 PM, Eagle said:

    In my E34\E32 experience its usually non perfect wheels, tyre balance or the need for hubcentric rings?. Worn control arms tend to exaggerate things but wont typically cause crazy shakes alone. 

    not arguing but my e34 developed a wicked shake over a short period of time .new arms&bushes solved it instantly.Nothing else changed in that time

    • Like 1

  16. Posted · Edited by kiwi535
    remove excess uneeded original post     · Report reply

    On 4/23/2018 at 2:46 PM, e46v12 said:

    The wagon had been sitting for 3 years so i think the tyres may have flat spots, while driving particularly around 80kmh the whole car would start shaking like crazy, so I changed the sedan wheels over with the wagon and it helped alot but still get the shakes and also happens during braking around the 80-100kmh.

    Any one know what could be the cause?

    Thanks Team  

     

    yes control arm bushings get e34 m5 ones or e32 750 to replace.Its an E34 "thing"

    • Like 1

  18. Posted · Report reply

    3 minutes ago, Jacko said:

    LL04 oil is what they'll be referring to. Other than that its alllll BS :D  Im sure  a bunch of the independents can get LL04 spec oil (BMW Long life). 

    They run Condition Based Servicing (CBS) so the car monitors various things and works out when to do them,  by date/odo/how its being driving etc. There is no every few services are expensive deal, unless it managed to line a few things up,  or BMW routine services like to line them up? 

    You can look up the service menu on your dash and see when everythings due, and whats due next etc. 

     

     

    you may be wrong.AFAIK there is an oil service,inspection 1 and inspection 2.In the background there is also tabs on brake fluid and coolant.Often these are part of the annual inspection.

  19. Posted · Report reply

    On 4/4/2018 at 1:19 PM, E30 325i Rag-Top said:

    Quite possibly if the NZ spec was to add all those options, the point I am trying to make is that the level of content in those cars is not linked to the "HD12" aspect, but the options added to get up to the NZ Spec levels.

    Still a big difference between an M5 and a 535i, even with the M-Sport kit and some fruit added.

    yes but for us NZ ers the HD 12 and the spec of the car are one and the same.In 1990 nz was still recoc=vering from the financial crash of 1987 and an hd 12 was about 130 000 and an e34 M5 was rumored to be about 200 000......thats why the Hhd12 spec exists.They just couldnt expect to sell many M5s

  20. Posted · Edited by kiwi535 · Report reply

    4 hours ago, E30 325i Rag-Top said:

    HD12 is simply the model code for the vehicle. It is just used to designate various standard equipment for the vehicle, as there can be more than one "320i" model or "535i" model either in production at the same time (for different markets, etc) or within the same series designation. There is absolutely nothing "special" about a car being a "HD12" as opposed to a "HD11" LHD version or any other model code for a 535i. The differences between will be within the options added to the factory standard equipment to bring it up to NZ specification, which can be found on a VIN decoder.

    you will find that the NZ HD12 is a poor mans e34 M5.They were manual, with a fullmtech spec,sports seats,body kit ,m tech suspension and LSDhd12.doc.I think all of them would have had metric wheels to begin with

    • Like 1

  24. Posted · Report reply

    On 2/17/2018 at 1:14 PM, M3AN said:

    Not quite, from the source themselves:

    http://www.pqiamerica.com/apiserviceclass.htm

    SN is just the "latest" standard, it's not targeted at a specific type of vehicle. You could use it just fine in your non-turbo Ferrari all other things being equal.

    The other thing that strikes me about this thread is that OEM certification will only be for the current range of vehicles. An "M" approved oil produced today won't necessarily be "M" approved for vehicles a decade or more older... so that certification is practically useless, perhaps even misleading, for older vehicles.

    If the original recommended oil for a vehicle isn't available I think valid questions of an oil manufacturer are; what's the replacement product? are there any additives or characteristics of the replacement product that will be worse for my engine than the original?

    The problem is I doubt we'd ever get a straight or reliable answer to those questions - manufacturers deliberately obfuscate oil product details.

    It's a less painful process if we can assume every product evolution is better than the last iteration but I'm not sure we can.

     

    i think we can say tha every generation is better than the previous one,but that doesnt mean to say the the latest generation oil will be any good for an old M30 lump(for example)

×
×
  • Create New...