|
|
|
|
||||||||||
| Xoutpost server transfer and maintenance is occurring.... |
| Xoutpost is currently undergoing a planned server migration.... stay tuned for new developments.... sincerely, the management |
 |
|
|
LinkBack | Thread Tools | Display Modes |
|
|
|
#1
01-08-2008, 12:32 AM
|
||||
|
||||
|
Off Topic Response
Quote:
To balance out AZNm's post: The short answer: Yes The technical answer: It will not hurt your engine. It MAY cause reduced power, and increased fuel consumption, depending on the actual fuel quality in your area, and your ambient conditions. The only way to know is to try it. If you notice any deterioration in power or fuel consumption, it is a pretty good bet that the ECM is retarding the timing to prevent predetonation; in that case, you should go back to premium fuel and get all the performance you paid for. I used mid-grade (89) for years with absolutely no adverse effects, but did notice a power drop on 87. That said, you won't save much in annual fuel costs, and many will slag you with analogies such as tinned food for athletes, don't buy a BMW if you can't afford the fuel, it isn't a Honda, etc. 
__________________
2007 X3 3.0si, 6 MT, Premium, White Retired: 2008 535i, 6 MT, M Sport, Premium, Space Grey 2003 X5 3.0 Steptronic, Premium, Titanium Silver 2002 325xi 5 MT, Steel Grey 2004 Z4 3.0 Premium, Sport, SMG, Maldives Blue 
|
|
#2
12-28-2007, 12:39 AM
|
||||
|
||||
|
No regrets here! This is my second 07' X5 as my first was totaled. I immediately ordered another X5 3.0. I agree with jago that this vehicle is what it is and will be used by me accordingly. I did however lease my X5 for 2 years in the hopes that the diesel will be available by the conclusion of my lease.
__________________
2007 BMW X5 3.0- loaded with every option! 2006 911 C2S Cab- loaded with techart touches 2006 MB CLK500 Cab- wife's car 1986 944 TURBO- track car
|
|
#3
12-28-2007, 11:51 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
You are used to HP so not sure you would like the 3.0. I have an M5 and an M3 and I got the 4.8i. Glad I did. It is a heavy vehicle but moves quite nicely with the extra hp. Gas mileage, not much difference between the two to give up on the power. I also tow a boat so the 3.0 really wasn't feasible. You won't be unhappy with the 4.8i but you might be with the 3.0.
|
|
#4
12-28-2007, 04:12 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
No regrets but yesterday I was on Hwy 50 on my way to Lake Tahoe and during a passsing situation and during the last climb up to the summit I felt underpowered. I did have 6 people in the car and it was packed full.
Is it true that the 3.0 uses 20% less gas than the 4.8? Finally, I do not tow and have a 2 year lease and as mentioned here I was able to get a fully loaded 3.0 for what a less optioned 4.8 would have cost.
__________________
2007 X5 3.0 Alpine, Tobacco, Dark burl, Prem, Sport, Tech, Rear Climate, 3d row, Running boards, Ipod. 2006 530i Amythest Gray, Sand, Dark burl, Sport, Comfort seats, CA, Sat and best of all 6 speed. Retired: 2007 X3 (auto) 2004 Z4 5 Speed, Sport (RIP) 1995 325i 1989 325i
|
|
#5
12-28-2007, 04:38 PM
|
||||
|
||||
|
^ did you try DS mode? Shift the lever over to the left... it provides better acceleration since it plays with the gears/revs.
__________________
'08 X5 3.0si - Alpine White / Saddle Brown interior Specs: Sport Pkg, Premium Pkg, Tech Pkg, Comfort Access, Aero Kit, Style 433 staggered 20s on Conti DWS Mods: Carbon 35 tint, LED angel eyes, GP Thunder 7500k fogs, H&R 20mm/25mm spacers, clear reflectors, gunsmoke-tinted taillights Coded: Digital speedo, windows/sunroof/tailgate close via keyfob X5 pics at Flickr
|
|
#6
12-28-2007, 08:18 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Quote:
__________________
2007 X5 3.0 Alpine, Tobacco, Dark burl, Prem, Sport, Tech, Rear Climate, 3d row, Running boards, Ipod. 2006 530i Amythest Gray, Sand, Dark burl, Sport, Comfort seats, CA, Sat and best of all 6 speed. Retired: 2007 X3 (auto) 2004 Z4 5 Speed, Sport (RIP) 1995 325i 1989 325i
|
|
#8
12-28-2007, 04:43 PM
|
||||
|
||||
|
Quote:
I would highly suggest you test drive both. If cost isn't a factor then I would go with the 4.8. Based on your other cars, I gather your someone who likes performance cars? The 4.8 still puts a smile on my face!
__________________
2008 BMW X5 4.8i (E70) Alpine White, Burl Walnut, Nevada Black, Sport Package, Cold Weather Package, Premium Package, Technology Package, Rear Climate Package, iPod adapter
|
|
#9
12-28-2007, 08:50 PM
|
||||
|
||||
|
I test drove both before the purchase.....3.0 was underpowered, even the dealer warned me before test driving. Then I drove the 4.8 and ordered that same day. Like what 08WhtX5 said, "This is a very subjective question and strictly depends on your needs and desires. If cost isn't a factor then I would go with the 4.8."
|
|
#10
12-28-2007, 09:56 PM
|
||||
|
||||
|
4.8i
IMHO, even the 4.8i will not give you the bang (its what i call it, the neck breaking acceleration) that is comparable to the M5. With 5 passangers merging onto a busy highway can get revvy very quickly with the 4.8i but really everyday driving 3.0 is just right.
I agree that it is subjective. Test drives don't do justice unless done a lot. I trust that the 4.8 has enough power ( driving the 3.0 I thought i'd consider what if...) since it is the top of the line. just my 2 cents. 4.8 is fun but I would like more torque.  Totally individually subjective.p.s. Got my eye on that twin turbo engine on the X6...
|
|
| Bookmarks |
|
|
|
|
Hybrid Mode
