E39 - 530 or 540?

Looking at both of these models as a replacement for the 523 - the 540
appeals hugely but fuel consumption is higher, insurance is higher and
IIRC it has recirculating ball instead of rack and pinion steering.

I have decided to go for an auto this time.

Why should I consider a 540 over a 530?

--
jeremy
['97 BMW 523i SE Touring]

In article > ,
Jeremy > wrote:
> Looking at both of these models as a replacement for the 523 - the 540
> appeals hugely but fuel consumption is higher, insurance is higher and
> IIRC it has recirculating ball instead of rack and pinion steering.

> I have decided to go for an auto this time.

> Why should I consider a 540 over a 530?

Only the performance.

There's plenty of reasons not to - much higher maintenance/repair costs
being the major one, if you are paying direct for them.

And the performance increase isn't as great as you might think, given the
size of the engine.

But drive them both before you decide.

--
*I wonder how much deeper the ocean would be without sponges.

Dave Plowman London SW
To e-mail, change noise into sound.

"Jeremy" > wrote in message
t...
>
> Looking at both of these models as a replacement for the 523 - the 540
> appeals hugely but fuel consumption is higher, insurance is higher and
> IIRC it has recirculating ball instead of rack and pinion steering.
>
> I have decided to go for an auto this time.
>
> Why should I consider a 540 over a 530?

I would take the 530 in a heartbeat. Better balance, better steering and the
only performance figure it loses at is in a straight line (5 or 6 tenths,
depending on who you read). Almost every single magazine that tests in a
slalom or loop has recorded the 530 faster than the 540, sport to sport,
auto to auto, manual to manual.

I believe the 530 was the absolute best representation of that platform.
Reasonable cost, solid reliability, decent economy, great performance.

Unless you REALLY need (more correctly "want") the straight line
performance, the 530. Better balanced handling, bulletproof engine, great
mileage (I pulled 550+ miles on a tank between fuel stops on a cross-country
trip). Performance with the auto is adequate, but be advised there are
Japanese V-6's out there that can take you.

R / John

"Jeremy" > wrote in message
t...
>
> Looking at both of these models as a replacement for the 523 - the 540
> appeals hugely but fuel consumption is higher, insurance is higher and
> IIRC it has recirculating ball instead of rack and pinion steering.
>
> I have decided to go for an auto this time.
>
> Why should I consider a 540 over a 530?
>
> --
> jeremy
> ['97 BMW 523i SE Touring]

I've OWNED a couple of those Japanese V-6's. Perhaps they could "Take" my
'03 530 in a straight line, but the larger rice-burners can't hold a candle
to my BMW with RWD. FWD is the main reason I dumped my Maxima (Lousy dealer
was the next).

On Mon, 08 Nov 2004 13:00:05 +0000 (GMT), "Dave Plowman (News)"
> wrote:

>In article > ,
> Jeremy > wrote:
>> Looking at both of these models as a replacement for the 523 - the 540
>> appeals hugely but fuel consumption is higher, insurance is higher and
>> IIRC it has recirculating ball instead of rack and pinion steering.
>
>> I have decided to go for an auto this time.
>
>> Why should I consider a 540 over a 530?
>
>Only the performance.
>
>There's plenty of reasons not to - much higher maintenance/repair costs
>being the major one, if you are paying direct for them.
>
>And the performance increase isn't as great as you might think, given the
>size of the engine.

It's a BIG difference.

Ever hear of a G35? The Bimmer is better, but it is not better by anywhere
near the price difference.


George Litwinski
"Jimmy G" > wrote in message
news:jrRjd.37444$SW3.29466@fed1read01...
> I've OWNED a couple of those Japanese V-6's. Perhaps they could "Take" my
> '03 530 in a straight line, but the larger rice-burners can't hold a
candle
> to my BMW with RWD. FWD is the main reason I dumped my Maxima (Lousy
dealer
> was the next).
>
>

Jeremy > wrote in message et>...
> Looking at both of these models as a replacement for the 523 - the 540
> appeals hugely but fuel consumption is higher, insurance is higher and
> IIRC it has recirculating ball instead of rack and pinion steering.
>
> I have decided to go for an auto this time.
>
> Why should I consider a 540 over a 530?


You will find compelling reasons why people chose one over the other.
It's your personal choice that counts. Take them both out on proper
test drives. Then you'll know. As for the insurance and fuel costs,
make sure you get accurate numbers and if the numbers cause you to ask
questions then you shouldn't buy the car because the questions will
always bug you. It may weill be the difference between impulse and
long term satisfaction.

As for test drives, I test drove an SL55 today. It was worth the
trouble.


Michael

Drove it. VERY impressed, but it didn't come CLOSE to having that "Feel"
BMW's have. Also, the interior looked too "Techno" for my liking.

I agree. The difference is great, however I still chose my 530 as I
couldn't get over that lousy gas mileage & insurance hit.

I get 28mpg on a regular basis on the highway & at speeds over 75mph.

I find the performance fine, but sure would opt for the sport package if I
had to do it over again.