BMW to bring twin-turbo diesel to the U.S.
Those of us Stateside have been deprived of more diesel models than you shake an oversized fuel nozzle at, but it looks like the folks over at BMW may be on their way to curing our high-mileage, high-torque lust. The automaker's 286 HP, 427 lb.-ft. of torque 3.0-liter twin turbo engine may find a way under the hood of various models throughout BMW's lineup, likely to append the "35d" designation to the 3-, 5- and 6-series models. Fuel mileage should be up over 35 MPG, but there's no word on when it will arrive. If we had to guess, we'd say late next year.
[Source: Wards Auto]
Get a WordPress.com Blog
Reader Comments (Page 1 of 2)
johnedyer 6:03PM (10/02/2007)
Finally...i wonder how the acceleration will compare with the standard '35 models...
Reply
why not the LS2/LS7? 6:31PM (10/02/2007)
Poorly. Diesels accelerate slowly in all-out tests because they are low on HP.
The good news is that due to greater torque availability at day-to-day RPMs, Diesels tend to accelerate quite well comparatively under more common conditions to what normally aspirated gas cars do.
Brett- BMW Advocate 6:57PM (10/02/2007)
the manufacture reports a 0-60 time to 6.2 seconds for the 335d. so around that, good question. plus it returns a 37.7mpg. i want one!
nagmashot 7:15PM (10/02/2007)
BMW factory claim
the 3.0l diesel with 286hp is avaible since a long time in Germany in different models
335d (sedan 286hp)
0-100km 6.2s
0-1000meter 25.4s
80-120km/h 4/5.gear (no 335d data avaible)
80-120km/h 4./.gear 5.0/6.4s < 330d 231hp
330d data just to get a idea what torque is made for
6.7l 100km mix = 35mpg
335i (sedan 306hp)
0-100km/h 5.6s
0-1000meter 24.6s
80-120km/h 4/5.gear 5.3/6.3s
9.1l 100km mix = 25.8mpg
330i (sedan 272hp)
0-100km/h 6.1s
0-1000meter 25.5s
80-120km/h 4/5.gear 6.2/7.7s
7.2l 100km mix = 32mpg
The big different... you need to drive a petrol car slow to get that mpg...if you push hard a 335i the mpg drops easy under 20mpg... if you push a 335d hard the mpg drops to 30...if you constant drive at 60mph over long distance the mpg easy gets over 40 to 45mpg
David 10:33PM (10/03/2007)
BMW ... there are a lot of dieselheads in the US who lust after european diesels (as if there was anybody else making good diesels). That engine would probably be better served in the X5 but get it over here!
Paul 6:10PM (10/02/2007)
Just the thing to make me consider BMWs again......I loved the 320D I rented in Portugal four years ago. Could only imagine what the six cylinder diesel is like. If only Mercedes sold their C220 CDI in the US, I wouldn't have gone for the '07 C230 I just bought...
Reply
Ed 6:28PM (10/02/2007)
I rented a new '08 C220 CDI in Italy last month. The thing was a real pleasure to drive, and the turbo-diesel had plenty of power for 150+ km/h driving (and good brakes when TomTom warned of a speed camera). Great handling and real comfortable. Like the looks too, except for the boxy front end.
Gary Blomquist 6:17PM (10/02/2007)
Sadly, forget us Californians, as CARB will stop that Bimmer diesel from crossing our borders.
It'll nearly have to be shooting H20 out of it's tail pipe before CARB will give a tentative OK.
We have such a messed up vehicular emissions policy in our state. In turn our state seems to lead a following of other states also, into the abyss of stupid, pie in the sky, environmental extremism.
Because California and these other states seem to comprise so many potential consumer auto sales, many very clean diesel powered vehicles from abroad haven't made it to our shores. The R&D to qualify a diesel car or SUV for California and it's wacky ally states, shuns-away so many great diesel powered vehicles from being offered to the remaining consumers in the more environmentally "sane" states.
So goes California, and the rest of the nation's drivers and or auto consumers suffer for our extremist-green policies.
We even have to burn our own blend of unleaded gasoline, refined in our own California based refineries. Yet it has been proven that our unleaded isn't any better or cleaner burning than the Federal EPA Unleaded. In fact our California unleaded up to a couple years ago had MTBE's in it, and was poisoning our environment. This was to oxigenate our gasoline. Found out CARB had a sweet heart deal with a Chemical firm in Texas that provided the poison to our gasoliine.
Sorry, bimmer........you got a great product, but California will stop it as it has done with Mercede's latest Blue Tech offering.
So sad. :(
Reply
iamhoff 6:26PM (10/02/2007)
Amen. In addition to the lovely things you mention, I personally love it when, twice a year our gas prices skyrocket when supplies dwindle while all of the refineries switch over from winter blend to summer blend and vice-versa. Stupid and wasteful.
why not the LS2/LS7? 6:27PM (10/02/2007)
Oxygenated gas isn't a California-only thing. It was mandated by the EPA in the winter for all cities over a certain sized based upon a (flawed) study in Seattle many years ago. California has recently been authorized to be exempted from oxygenating gas, the only state to get an exemption.
We have a huge problem with smog in valley areas here in California. The primary component of this smog is NOx. Even the cleanest Diesels (like this) emit 7x as much NOx as a gas car.
There's a reason we require these companies to clean up their Diesels, and that's because they are filthy. If companies want to sell Diesels here, all they have to do is meet the emissions standards for NOx that gas cars had to meet 10 years ago. If they cannot, I don't feel bad for them.
YouFaceTheTick 6:27PM (10/02/2007)
It'll come to CA or BMW won't bother. We're BMW's number 1 market by far. And from all I've read, they'll make it happen.
why not the LS2/LS7? 8:28PM (10/02/2007)
Great Valley? It's called the Central Valley by everyone I know.
And I'm located in San Jose, CA. People don't burn crops here.
Either way, it wasn't me who identified NOx being the problem, it was the EPA, and when they started to lower NOxes in the 70s, smog levels went down dramatically in the LA Basin (also not a crop burning area) and elsewhere. We have a lot more cars now, so we need to continue to drive NOxes (on a per car basis) lower.
Again, get over the oxygenated gas thing, oxygenated gas is is an EPA mandate, not CARB. The study it was based upon wasn't even done in a CARB area!
http://www.epa.gov/otaq/oxygenate.htm
You cannot blame oxygenated gas on CARB. The use of MTBE instead of ethanol for oxygenation in California is partially California's fault, as CA didn't approve ethanol for oxygenation use until after MTBE was found to be a problem.
Anyway, the real solution to that problem isn't to use ethanol (which drops fuel economy 1.5%) or MTBE (which hangs out in groundwater), it's to stop using oxygenated gas. It doesn't even work. The study was flawed.
You say that the air has gotten cleaner and cleaner as we have tightened emissions controls (it's documented!). So why do you want to allow Diesels which don't meet the controls? If Diesels are reintroduced, air quality will get worse, as surely as if people switched to the least clean gas cars (which are allowed to put half as much NOx into the air as a Diesel).
It's simple what the Diesel cars have to do to get on the market: be as clean as gas cars were 10 years ago. Is that too much to ask? I don't think so.
Solo Racer 11:20AM (10/03/2007)
First off, none of the automakers with any brains are going to bother with a diesel that doesn't meet the 50-state standard.
Second, there is no changeover from summer to winter gasoline anymore. Most of the price spikes we see in Calif. are because of refineries shutting down for maintenance or the occasional explosion.
The political fights over air quality in the San Joaquin Valley have gone as far as state reps with ag interests proposing stricter limits on ag in exchange for having any and every car older than X years rendered unable to be licensed or crushed. Thank god for SEMA, which helped stop that nonsense.
Gary Blomquist 7:08PM (10/02/2007)
Your Great Valley haze has much more to do with crop burning, when all the dried corn stocks are burned-off in the valley.
I drive through the Sacramento and San Juaquin Valley both throughout most of the seasons, and you do get a lot of haze from S.F. bay area Northwesterly winds that send our smog Southeast towards Visalia/Fresno, but by far, the valley has created so much of it's own smog and haze that coincides with crop burning in the form of burning prunings, and also dried corn stalks.
I've seen those plumes of smoke all over both the North and Southern regions of the ag. belt of the Great Valley.
*****
Here in the S.F. bay area we have had less and less smog alert days each year since we have gotten cleaner burning gas and diesel engines (light duty trucks only). That's documented! In fact this last Summer has been one of the most magnificent blue sky, and clear visibility Summers that I've seen in years. Things are working, but there is stil a lot of graft in CARB, and the environmental policies/bureacracy of this state. I will not be an apologist for them.
As far as oxygenation, the nasty chemical in California MTBE's was Bromine, I believe. It cause birth defects and was found to be non-biodegradable. When gasoline storage tanks in gas stations seeped or leaked, this MTBE was going into our ground water. That's from your super-duper California environmentalist bureaucrats that no nothing of good science, and sound environmental policy that takes into account both a states economic health as well as sound protection of it's environment.
I am proud of many of the environmental moves made by my state, but also am dumbfounded by the "sheeple" attitude of many people, that seem to think that CARB or any environmental bureacracy is actually working for them.
The Great Valley, back before great amounts of automobiles was a "catch basin" for any and all airborn chemicals or particulates. There is no outlet as it is surrounded by the Sierra, Tehachapis, and the Central coast range of mountains.
Sierra Forest fires haze the Great Valley's atmosphere yearly during the late Summer and early Fall too.
SPG 6:28PM (10/02/2007)
Awesome!
There was a time when it seemed like only old men with green VW's had diesel engines.
This car is going to change a lot of opinions.
Reply
rgseidl 6:34PM (10/02/2007)
@ Gary Blomquist -
the Mercedes E320 CDi achieved EPA Tier 2 Bin 6 with a lean NOx trap, part of the basket of technologies that make up BlueTec. CARB's LEV II level is identical to EPA Tier 2 Bin 5 - they pushed Mercedes down the LNT path even for engines that large because they do not much like the idea of the alternative - urea injection.
However, having demonstrated that LNTs simply aren't good enough for the larger diesels, CARB finally relented and produced a guideline that would allow diesels with urea injection systems to be sold in California and the other states that follow CARB emissions standards. Since these states account for roughly 1/3 of all light duty vehicle sales in the US, the decision has prompted virtually all auto makers to put their diesel projects for the US market into high gear.
VW, Mercedes and BMW will all be selling clean turbodiesel LDVs in all 50 states by late 2008/early 2009 - that does include California!
Audi, Toyota, Honda and others will all follow soon after, because high fuel prices mean consumers are now willing to spend more up front for fuel economy. Because of the high cost of both diesel engines and NOx aftertreatment, expect the bulk of offerings to feature displacements of 3.0L and above. SUVs and trucks are prime candidates. Only a few mid-sized models will feature ~2.5L engines with LNTs will be offered early on.
Single-stage turbodiesels in the 1.5-2.0L range probably won't be coming to US shores anytime soon, the economics just aren't attractive enough.
Reply
Hans 6:49PM (10/02/2007)
Let's hope these diesels stay out of California. The effort required to keep them clean from day one does not set a pretty picture for these vehicles 10 years down the road. The last thing we need is more of those older Mercedes diesels shooting the black soot all over the freeway in a pass attempt.
Solo Racer 12:44PM (10/03/2007)
Hans,
You're too late. Besides, if you care about diesel exhaust, convince the many school districts to switch to LNG from the diesel buses they use to transport kids. Public transit buses and garbage trucks in SoCal are mostly LNG.
Brett- BMW Advocate 6:53PM (10/02/2007)
its about time! hopefully we'll get the 2.3l turbo diesel. 204bhp 0-60 in 7 seconds (for the 1 series) and returns 46mpg! please please please BMW bring that engine to the 1, 3 and X3.
Reply
MikeW 10:47PM (10/02/2007)
Just because BMW names the car 123d doesn't mean there is a 2.3l engine. It is still the same 2.0 that is in the 118d & 120d, just with a serial-sequential turbocharger arrangement, and the piezo injectors-shared with the 120d.
Hopefully BMW will launch the new 5 series with this engine & 8 speed automatic in 2009 as a 2010 model. By then it should be 300hp/450ft-lbs and emissions compliant.