Demand for BMW 123d in the US market

[Nixon]

LLN is saying that the initial demand in the US market for clean diesels, like the 123d is strong.

http://www.leftlanenews.com/clean-di...al-demand.html

The 123d is twice the car that the $22,640 Jetta TDI is, and some dealers have sold out their Jetta allocations months before the TDI even goes on sale. BMW should be selling the 123d in the US at around the same price as the 128i -- BMW would clean house.

[G5Ti]

If BMW had offered the 123d, I would've picked it over the 128 even if it cost a shade more.

[Dr_Jones]

I would have picked it over the 135 and chipped the living SH$% out of it

[bdardashti]

I will defintely wait for a 123d if they announce plans to bring it over.

[Space gray]

Another yes to 123d. :thumbup:

[Year1of1]

dont see the big deal about it?

[bum944]

I gave up on BMW bringing the 123D here soon enough and went with a Jetta Sportwagen. I think they are missing a huge opportunity.

[ScottyGams]

i'd hit it, haha

[jeffgingras]

I agree. I would have payed a small premium over the 128i for a 123d. Especially here at altitude...

[TagMan]

Can't say for sure, but I'd be very interested and I'd certainly check it out!

[moff]

Seriously guys, performance diesels are 'not all that'.

I really do not think that a diesel engine should be in a sporty, performance car.

Yes, it has a load of torque, good mpg, and go pretty quick, but it also has a horrible noise, tiny rev range and is no where near as much fun as a good petrol engine.

Also, the price margin between petrol and diesel has shrunk since diesels cost more to buy and diesel is currently about 10% more per litre.

I am not saying that the 123d is not a good car, as it is. But, my other car is a 335d (wifes) and although it is fast and well suited to an auto box, even the 3.0 TT diesel sounds crappy and the 3.0 TT petrol found in the 135i is in a league above.

A performance diesel is good for someone doing a huge amount of mileage each year, but for the average driver I am not sure it's worth it - you would have to grab me kicking and screaming into driving a diesel as my primary car, and that's coming from someone who drives the best 3.0 diesel engine regularly.

[ptack]

Are you talking about bringing the hatch over or just dropping the diesel engine in the coupe/vert? If you want the hatch, forget it. If you want just the diesel option - interesting question, but I'm not sure BMW would consider it. Supposidly the X1 will be the next move in the hatch direction.

[1050Wien]

Same here, I would have gone with the 123d over the 128i had they offered it here in the US.

[atr_hugo]

FWIW, when I was at the press days in Chicago earlier this year, I talked to a couple of the PR folks I knew and asked about the 123d. There were a couple 'imported' to the US for evaluation running around NJ (and I think someones seen one in Michigan - Bosch maybe brought that one in). The PR folks had driven them and really liked them - suspect that there's some strong sentiment within BMW NA to bring them here.

The caveat is - BMW NA will not bring over anything less than a 50 state car. So if the 123d doesn't meet the most stringent states (read CARB ; -) requirements it won't be brought over.

[WhiteOne]

The Welt has a 123D wearing full sport trim. Seats, wheel, tail and all. It looked awesome. With gas at about $9.50 a gallon over there, I understand why they buy them.

[Heinzftw]

Would be interested, but need to see and drive Audi's new TT diesel first.

[adc]

Originally Posted by moff

Seriously guys, performance diesels are 'not all that'.

I really do not think that a diesel engine should be in a sporty, performance car.

Yes, it has a load of torque, good mpg, and go pretty quick, but it also has a horrible noise, tiny rev range and is no where near as much fun as a good petrol engine.

Also, the price margin between petrol and diesel has shrunk since diesels cost more to buy and diesel is currently about 10% more per litre.

I am not saying that the 123d is not a good car, as it is. But, my other car is a 335d (wifes) and although it is fast and well suited to an auto box, even the 3.0 TT diesel sounds crappy and the 3.0 TT petrol found in the 135i is in a league above.

A performance diesel is good for someone doing a huge amount of mileage each year, but for the average driver I am not sure it's worth it - you would have to grab me kicking and screaming into driving a diesel as my primary car, and that's coming from someone who drives the best 3.0 diesel engine regularly.

+1.

I just recently drove the VAG 2.0TDI while on vacation in Europe and can honestly say I would never ever own an engine like that in my car.

- On cold mornings it was downright noxious until warmed up - I could literally not stand behind the car to load up the skis.
- It had lag - massive, unglorious, old school turbo lag - and absolutely no guts below 1800 rpm.
- It had a totally uncool rev range. Fun was over before 4k rpm.
- It was still noisier and had lots more vibrations than a good gasoline 4.

Granted, the BMW twin-turbo 4 could easily be better than this, but I still would not want one for my personal car. There aren't many things I enjoy more in life than driving, and a diesel car would kill that joy more effectively than a double amputation. :wink:

[Nixon]

Originally Posted by moff

Seriously guys, performance diesels are 'not all that'.

I really do not think that a diesel engine should be in a sporty, performance car.

Yes, it has a load of torque, good mpg, and go pretty quick, but it also has a horrible noise, tiny rev range and is no where near as much fun as a good petrol engine.

Also, the price margin between petrol and diesel has shrunk since diesels cost more to buy and diesel is currently about 10% more per litre.

I am not saying that the 123d is not a good car, as it is. But, my other car is a 335d (wifes) and although it is fast and well suited to an auto box, even the 3.0 TT diesel sounds crappy and the 3.0 TT petrol found in the 135i is in a league above.

A performance diesel is good for someone doing a huge amount of mileage each year, but for the average driver I am not sure it's worth it - you would have to grab me kicking and screaming into driving a diesel as my primary car, and that's coming from someone who drives the best 3.0 diesel engine regularly.

I certainly wouldn't say that if money were no object, that the 2.0 dual sequential turbo diesel would be my first choice over the 3.0 twin turbo gas engine. The 3.0 TT engine IS a great engine, and for many who can afford it, it is the only engine choice for them. But if money were no object, there wouldn't be much point for BMW to sell the 128i, 125i, or 118i either.

In reality, many folks are reporting sub-20 mpg (US) with their 135i's, and unless you special order a stripper, all the 135i's are decked out to be 40K+ on dealership lots. I'm sure that is acceptable to many folks, because these cars certainly are being sold to folks out here. But that just isn't going to work for me at a time when my wife is just getting a new company off the ground. I need a different option.

That leaves the 128i. This is a bad choice for me on a couple of fronts. First, the mpg is only slightly better than the 135i. Second, turbos rule up here at altitude, and the 128i ain't got even one. Third, chip tuning the 128i doesn't do much. Fourth, resale on the smaller engined cars (323/325/328) in the BMW line are notoriously low here in my market.

So what I actually need is a 128i alternative, not a 135i alternative. I don't think of the 123d as a competitor to the 135i. It competes in my mind to the 128i. And for me, the stars all align perfectly for the 123d to personally be the better choice over the 128i. And I'd like to have that option, even though I recognize that if money were no option, I'd rather have a 135i. (Well, technically, I would rather have a 135i, and a 535Xi, an Enzo, a Lambo 4X4, etc...:biggrin

Here at altitude, a chipped 123d coupe would give a 128i a serious run for it's money in acceleration. Top speed doesn't matter to me anymore in my old age, because I rarely hit triple digits. So a top speed limited by drag in the 140's compared to ECU limited at 155 doesn't matter to me either.

It won't be as fast as a 135i, but the 123d will get around twice the mpg that folks are reporting with their 135i's. Diesel gas would have to be more than $9.00/gallon (compared to $4.50/gallon US premium) for the higher price of diesel to equalize the amount of money spent on fuel per mile between the two cars. On a cost-per-mile basis, the 123d will get the equivalent of $2.50/gallon compared to $4.50/gallon for the 135i to go the same number of miles. Even better for me, I happen to have access to bio-diesel at a pre-tax basis (only for when I'm using the 123d as farm equipment :wink

And at least in my market, turbo-diesels have an awesome resale value. Used VW TDI's (Passat/Bug/Jetta/Golf) here are going for a 25-40% premium over their non-turbo gasoline engine counterparts.

On the positive side for me, I'll be saving in the initial purchase price, in fuel, and in what I expect will be a much higher resale value than a 128i. And I will get a turbo engine that is chip-tunable for better power. For all of this, I'm willing to accept a different engine noise (I actually like the diesel noise my wife's turbo-diesel business truck makes). I'll also accept a lower rpm band as a trade-off. And I'll even be happy with just power and acceleration on the level of a 128i.


It's all a matter of choice.

[Nixon]

Originally Posted by adc

+1.

I just recently drove the VAG 2.0TDI while on vacation in Europe and can honestly say I would never ever own an engine like that in my car.

- On cold mornings it was downright noxious until warmed up - I could literally not stand behind the car to load up the skis.
- It had lag - massive, unglorious, old school turbo lag - and absolutely no guts below 1800 rpm.
- It had a totally uncool rev range. Fun was over before 4k rpm.
- It was still noisier and had lots more vibrations than a good gasoline 4.

Granted, the BMW twin-turbo 4 could easily be better than this, but I still would not want one for my personal car. There aren't many things I enjoy more in life than driving, and a diesel car would kill that joy more effectively than a double amputation. :wink:

I wouldn't own that car either. I also wouldn't own a 1980 Olds Cutlass with a diesel engine. I'm not sure why you would compare a 140 hp single turbo steel VW engine with a 200 HP all-aluminum BMW engine with 2 turbos, just because they are both diesels. :iono:

As for cold mornings, you might find your mornings much more pleasant if you buy a diesel instead of a 128i/or 135i. I haven't been able to confirm that this is in the 123d yet, but take a look at what can be done with BMW's that have the Webasto Thermo Top C fuel-burning heaters installed as a standard feature:


Subject: Re: Aux Heater E39 530 diesel
Please find a copy of an email I received from Rod Gascoyne the Sales Services Manager for Webasto GB

Dear Sir

Thank you for your valued enquiry regarding the above.

As you are aware, the BMW 5 Series Diesel is fitted with the Webasto Thermo Top C fuel-burning heater as standard, which is used as a supplementary heater. In this application, the Webasto heater only operates when the engine is running and the outside temperature is below 5°C. In conjunction with BMW GB, we have developed a simple upgrade, which includes the addition of a simple electrical interface harness, which will switch the heater on independently.

The parked car heater is started by a remote control device and warms the coolant independently from the vehicle's engine. The vehicle's blower system takes the warm air into the cabin and, at the same time, pre-heats the engine.
Once this upgrade has been installed, it will provide pre-heating for your vehicle prior to commencing your journey.

Some of the benefits associated with such a system are as follows:

· Warmth and comfort of a pre-heated interior - a centrally heated interior.
· Screen defrost and demist - increase safety with a safer clearer vision through the windscreen at the start of your journey.
· Pre-heated engine - no more cold starts/easier starting.
· A pre-warmed engine - a better engine response from cold.
· Reduced engine wear
· Reduced engine emissions - lower emissions from a preheated engine.
· "Just drive off straight away and enjoy your journey."

The standard installation includes full system integration with the parking heater controlled by a Telestart Remote Control. This allows switching on and off of the system by a remote control handset with a range of 600 metres.

In the UK, this accessory is exclusively offered by official BMW Dealerships under the following BMW Part Number: 95.06.0.000.008 or 95.06.0.000.009 (dependent upon model year), therefore you should contact your local BMW Dealer, quoting either of these part numbers in order to obtain the full technical and product support expected within the BMW programme.

So, it seems as though all BMW 530D's have one, but it's a BMW part only to get it going remotely. Hmmm, may look into that.

Cheers,

Gwaredd.

http://www.pistonheads.com/gassing/t...72&h=&t=219171


I would love to be able to click my remote from inside the house before I leave, and without ever starting the engine, being able to get into a nice warm car!

[adc]

Originally Posted by Nixon

I wouldn't own that car either. I also wouldn't own a 1980 Olds Cutlass with a diesel engine. I'm not sure why you would compare a 140 hp single turbo VW engine with a 200 HP BMW engine with 2 turbos just because they are both diesels. :iono:

First of all, the 2.0TDI is available in both 140BHP and 170BHP configurations (although to be honest I am not sure what version I drove). It's an advanced diesel engine, lauded by many and favorably compared in various magazines.

Beyond being diesel engines with different numbers of turbochargers attached, they do share some common characteristics which detract from the driving enjoyment:
- Still bigger NVH levels than gasoline engines
- Bigger turbo lag than gasoline engines
- Limited rev range compared to gasoline engines (which in turns mandates much longer gears, which in turn explains why they are slower despite big HP and torque numbers)
- Slower than corresponding gasoline engines

So while they may make perfect sense for commuting and fuel economy considerations, they will never be the enthusiast's choice.

So for me, I'll gladly pay the extra $ in fuel cost in order to derive that extra driving pleasure.


And please make sure you test drive these diesels, don't believe all the hype. Every generation they are touted to be "virtually" as quiet, or refined, or fast as the gasoline counterparts but guess what - every generation they fall short in some crucial way.

I mean I am not opposed to diesel in principle, it's just that the final product is not as good as I require. I'd never consider a gasoline engine that would perform in the same manner as a diesel either. :iono:

[hbiscuit]

I have a BMW Aftersales magazine I got from the dealer that said BMW definitely plans to bring diesels over :dunno:

[1er junkie]

I would have been all over the diesel instead of my motor. I would have paid more than the 135 IMHO for the diesel, just so I could chip the SH#$ out of it, as stated above. Diesels have alot of potential, not just performance wise, but mpg included.

* For the note, your sub 20 mpg 135i as mentioned above is well below my avg. of 28.9 mpg city/hwy driving Nixon, although I am sure that the altitude has a lot to do with it there.