Talk:BMW 5 Series (E39)

LED taillights
I think LED rear lights must have been an option - my 2003 model has conventional filament bulbs in all rear light positions. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 80.195.131.4 (talk • contribs).


 * In the US, all 2001+ E39's had LED taillights (not brake lights). Not sure about Europe. Lord Bodak 20:18, 29 August 2006 (UTC)


 * Nope. My 2001 E39 has bulbs, NOT LED. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 63.172.27.2 (talk • contribs).


 * Remember we're talking taillights, not brake lights, back up lights, or turn signals. All 2001+ US E39's had LED taillights.  The owner's manual even says "Rear lamp/side marker lamps: LEDs". Lord Bodak 13:31, 27 March 2007 (UTC)


 * Hella Celis tail lights are LED except for the blinker (which is incandescent). These were mart of the 01 face lift kit, and were included on '01 and later E39s Nicholas SL Smith 18:19, 20 September 2007 (UTC)

530i Touring
The article says: All model numbers but the M5 were available in either a sedan or a touring wagon.

Is this accurate? There was never a 530i wagon in the US, but it's possible there was in Europe. Lord Bodak 13:31, 27 March 2007 (UTC)


 * On another note, I saw an E39 M5 wagon this morning. Could've been "fake," but it had the dual exhausts and such that signify an M5. Lord Bodak 16:25, 1 May 2007 (UTC)


 * I don't think you actually saw M5 wagon. I would rather say that was normal BMW E39 Touring with M-packet. M-packet is just a set of various visuals (steering wheel, emblems, different sporty-ish bumpers etc.).  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 89.69.87.61 (talk) 22:34, 26 November 2015 (UTC)

E39 Clean Up
In an attempt to clean this page (and give it the credibility it deserves) I've re-organized the years into bullets. Also, does any one know of any good references for information on this model? I'm looking, and will add any I can find Nicholas SL Smith 22:18, 22 April 2007 (UTC)


 * Online references, not really. There was an "E39 Buyer's Guide" issue of Bimmer Magazine that covered the model year changes that would be a good reference, but I'm not sure where my copy is. Lord Bodak 23:33, 22 April 2007 (UTC)


 * I just noticed Edmund's http://www.edmunds.com/bmw/5series/review.html -- I'll confirm model options through these reviews (which conveniently go back to 1997).Nicholas SL Smith 04:21, 23 April 2007 (UTC)


 * [Roadfly]http://bimmer.roadfly.com/bmw/forums/e39/ has a very active forum on this vehicle and a member there called Jim Levandoski (JimLev) is a walking encyclopedia on it. Also bmwtips.com has great info on DIY. (05:12, 7 June 2007 71.184.112.250)


 * We need to make sure we don't do any original research on this model -- we need published sources of information Nicholas SL Smith 17:42, 7 June 2007 (UTC)

Model year changes
I'm thinking of converting this into a wikitable rather than having it as a list - this cuts down the size of the article, and it can be made better too. What needs to be done is remove US-centric references, and mention it in a more global context. --SunStar Net talk 10:42, 16 June 2007 (UTC)


 * I'll support a table, however, I believe it to be critical that we do not lose information we have now. An international point of view is important so more research needs to bee done to incorporate what was offered in different countries. Nicholas SL Smith 22:50, 16 June 2007 (UTC)

Revising
I think the E39 page needs serious revision. I tried to add to it, but it was deleted. I have the BMW Introduction booklet from a BMW technical conference in 1996. Many parts of this page are misworded and contain incorrect information about the model. If someone will allow me, I will add what I have. However, I will not do it again if it is going to be deleted. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.183.115.48 (talk) 17:03, 20 September 2007 (UTC)


 * Sign up for an account and sign your posts - it will add to your credibility. Also, make sure you don't just copy text -- paraphrase it or quote it, adding from where you referenced it.  It saw what was removed and it all looked valuable.  I think that done more carefully no one would remove it.  I'm certainly interested in the reasons behind design aspects of the E39.  Nicholas SL Smith 21:10, 20 September 2007 (UTC)


 * I've restored your changes, and have made some alterations to what you included. Some information like the size of the disc brakes probably are best to be left out. Any cheers for the info, it has really given the article more factual depth. OSX (talk • contributions) 04:00, 21 September 2007 (UTC)

Daytime running lights standard in 2000?
I have a 2000 540i and it does not have daytime running lights. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 206.207.158.3 (talk) 17:58, 4 February 2008 (UTC)


 * It's a user option. The dealer can set this option for you. But since there are no true, separate, DRLs, it only means the regular low beams light when the car is on. Rlw (Talk) 19:04, 6 February 2008 (UTC)


 * Actually I believe it's the high beams that light on the E39. Lord Bodak (talk) 20:35, 6 February 2008 (UTC)


 * I have a 2001 e39 which i recently had the day time running lights function activated. it works like this : turn on the headlights with the engine running and when you remove the key the lights turn off automatically you never have to touch the switch again. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 193.120.116.180 (talk) 21:12, 27 February 2008 (UTC)


 * The Daytime Running Lights (or DRL) are a dealer option, and simply will illuminate the HIGH BEAM headlights at 30% voltage anytime the ignition is on. They switch off once you turn your headlights on. Every E39 is capable of having the DRL option turned on by a service center. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.246.40.34 (talk) 23:23, 9 November 2008 (UTC)

US view
This article is heavily biased towards the E39 in the US market. While some effort has obviously been made to introduce other engine sizes and models available in the rest of the world, some sections are still too US-centric. Such as the second paragraph in the intro and the year-by-year changes section. While the US market is obviously an important one for BMW, combined sales in Europe were higher and there was a wider choice of versions and engines available for the E39 than the few offered in the US market. Could a E39 aficionado have a go at internationalising this article please? AJKGORDON «»  10:11, 15 October 2008 (UTC)


 * I've removed the constant sedan and wagon references in the article for the international Saloon and Estate equivalents. Unamericanising this article needs to be done more seriously as it is very biased towards North America despite being a German company selling vehicles the world over and having Europe as a bigger market than North America. Jenova20 (talk) 16:31, 17 January 2011 (UTC)

Assembly
BMW also has a plant in Gauteng, South Africa. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Richardgrahamd (talk • contribs) 23:20, 7 January 2011 (UTC)

Compression Ratios
Can someone change the engine compression ratios to the correct format, i.e. 10:1, rather than 1:10. I would do it, but I'd have to create an account, and I don't want to do that — Preceding unsigned comment added by 132.185.240.120 (talk • contribs) 14:21, 17 February 2011

Model option, Latent Heat Storage?
recently came upon some forum posts and one textbook mention indicating that some older 5 series models (I'm guessing E39 based on year of posting) had an option for a "latent heat storage" or "latent heat accumulator" as a dealer option for cold climates. I'll list the references below, unfortunately there's not really enough detail to reconstruct information just from these. Working in a related field now, this would actually be a fairly note worthy real world use of 'latent heat thermal energy storage' which is getting a good amount of industry attention again. If anyone with detailed knowledge of the feature would have correct/useful information to add, I think it would be a valuable addition.

Nrjank (talk) 16:16, 26 August 2013 (UTC)
 * "Bridgegate Ltd. developed and tested a latent HS for BMW 5-series model vehicles. The HS provided 30% reduction in unburnt hydrocarbons and CO during the engine starting period. The salt mixture Mg(NO3) H2O and LiNO3 are successfully used as a PCM [4]." from L.L. Vasiliev, et al,'Latent heat storage modules for preheating internal combustion engines: application to a bus petrol engine,' Applied Thermal Engineering v20,p913-923 (2000).
 * the [4] above is: Bridgegate Ltd (Authorized dealership of BMW (GB) Ltd Chester®eld), Internal technology document, 1996, p.1-4
 * bimmerforums.com discussion mentioning "The latent heat storage, using sand to store heat and then releasing it, is - AFAIK - only on cold climate country Diesels; the Rest button only uses residual heat in the engine." forums.bimmerforums.com link
 * another bimmerforums.com discussion with the full options list for a "2001 BMW", includes item '538 Latent Heat Storage System' bimmerforums.com options list
 * BMWland forum discussion about Latent Heat Storage function, comment about it likely only being found on a 'loaded' 530i. BMWland.co.uk forum link
 * "There is another version of this called "latent heat storage" that uses a brine reserve tank (located in front of the firewall on the passenger side) to hold heat and return it quickly to the car when requested - that option is less used - it actually requires a different car body to make room for the tank." from a RoadFly.com forum post
 * googling 'latent heat accumulator bracket' will get you a ton of hits from parts sites for late 1990's early 2000's BMW's

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 one external links on BMW 5 Series (E39). Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20071110200909/http://www.carpoint.com.au:80/car-review/2438799.aspx to http://www.carpoint.com.au/car-review/2438799.aspx
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20150402140223/http://www.zf.com/media/media/document/int_print_catalogs_documents/usa_4/5HP30.pdf to http://www.zf.com/media/media/document/int_print_catalogs_documents/usa_4/5HP30.pdf

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at ).

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 11:12, 23 October 2016 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 3 external links on BMW 5 Series (E39). Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
 * Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.carpoint.com.au/car-review/2438799.aspx
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20030213202638/http://www.bmw-ids.com/protection.html to http://www.bmw-ids.com/protection.html
 * Corrected formatting/usage for http://forum.roadfly.com/threads/1128096-Consumer-Reports-Article-530i-Best-Ever

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 05:55, 13 July 2017 (UTC)

Development-Background Information (E39/Z3 + E38)
Not everything I am stating here is meant for inclusion in the article, but just for general knowledge for informative and comparative reasons. Until the E46 was launched in 1998, all (core) BMW models required 6 years or 72 months from start of development to market launch. The E32 started development in September 1979, before sales began in the second half of 1986. The E34 project started in July 1981 and ended with engineering sign-off in 1987 (does not include pilot production and testing them for niggles). Back then it was even longer, with the E38 and E39 being barely reduced to 6 years with the aid of CAD starting in the late 1980s. Anyway, the back story on many of these background "things" is that, in early 1988 BMW commenced work on the E38. By early 1991, styling was completed. By June of 1991, they were mostly focused on developing prototypes for the E38. During the midst of that, much of the earlier styling efforts between 1988 and 1990, were under the leadership of Claus Luthe. In April 1990, he left BMW after being arrested for murder of his delinquent 33-year old son. Until October 1, 1992, when Christopher Bangle replaced him, BMW had no official design director between May 1990 and September 30, 1992. For some reason, head of BMW Group R&D Dr. Wolfgang Reitzle, became de facto design director of BMW Group, until he named a direct replacement in 1992. During that 30 month period, BMW's E38, E39, and E36/7 (Z3) final designs were approved at the climaxing stages (as in 90% production body). The E38 7 design freeze definitely occurred after Luthe left, but as for concept approval, that is murky. The E38 went into production on February 17, 1994, which was about 46 months after he left. Final design choice for a BMW back in 1990 might have easily been decided well in advance for a 1995 model year vehicle, at maybe 4 years ahead. In reality, he was not there to choose Boyke Boyer's final body design as the winning choice. Ironically Boyer commented in 2000-01 (in Ger-Eng translation) that following Luthe's absence in 1990, being condescended to and disregarded by "engineers". Boyer was none other than referring to Wolfgang Reitzle, the top engineer at BMW in 1990-1991, who took over the E38 programme and Luthe's role as director of BMW designer. Reitzle was known for being flamboyant and very cocky. It explains the connection to Wolfgang Reitzle micromanaging BMW Design from 1990 to 1999. Later, E38 pre-production was started on July 23, 1993, following engineering sign-off earlier that summer (of 1993). Chris Bangle himself commented in late 2000 retrospect (Jan 2001 edition) on his first day at BMW, October 1, 1992, that the New 7, the E38 was in its final wrap-up...The fabulously successful Z3 and 5-Series were in the oven. While it is unfortunate Bangle decided to use poetic language, in the oven means they had been shaped before he came and were being "solidified" or "baked". Early 1993 creeps up regarding milestones for the E39 and Z3, in recollections. Carl-Peter Forster became chief engineer for the E39 at the beginning of 1993. Automotive media for much of 1992 didn't hear much about the "new BMW roadster" design, until the calendar had past a point when BMW had reached a final design and commented on it to the media in being "retro". "In August 1991, Reitzle's goal was to ensure that the E32 replacement due in 1994, "took 36 months to develop" versus that of their new E36 3-Series at 42 months (Pinky Lai's E36 sketches end in 1986, makes sense). This makes sense, as Reitzle and Carl-Peter Forster also later reported in 1995 a more realistic result of 38-39 months (varies with sources) for both the E39 5-Series and Z3 from styling approval to Job 1. Job 1 was of course in September 1995 for both cars, designed by the same man Joji Nagashima in 1992. Parallel to that, Claus Luthe had been courted by Reitzle and BMW management to return to BMW, upon his early prison release in 1992. Luthe rejected returning to leadership, but came on as an external consultant. During this time period, much of the year of 1992 was spent designing both the Z3 and E39. Alternatively, the E38 7-Series design was more of a project started and finished in the 1988-early 1991 period and was said by Bangle, as in its "final wrap-up" on October 1, 1992. The October 1992 edition of European magazines' spy shots highlight this reality and support it, in already being in FEP (Final Evaluation Phase) stages by late 1992. Taken in October of 1993, I have in my possession spy shots of a very, very definitive E39 prototype making the rounds Nurburgring, in some of the most unconvincing E34 camouflage. You basically saw the car itself, well before its September 1995 introduction. During 1992, the final designs for both had already been given away by journalists. At the moment I am very occupied, so I will organize and finish this later--Carmaker1 (talk) 12:56, 22 December 2017 (UTC)
 * Ahh, very interesting. Yes, the E38 design must have been in the final stages by 1992. Going a bit further back, the E36 article has a reference saying that E36 development began in 1981. This is even before the E30 was released, so I am a bit sceptical. Maybe there was a design study that the E36 ended up using elements of, rather than the start of the E36 program itself? Any info you have on this would be helpful. Cheers, 1292simon (talk) 22:02, 22 December 2017 (UTC)
 * Oh okay, I will show some visual examples. I will give you an idea of what I have seen so far. BMW had these types of test vehicles for the E38 programme during 1991-1993 and this design work from 1990-early 1991. Magazines speculated and reported on this. The E38 design was finalized before the W140 was introduced, according to Australian media in May 1994 (article mysteriously missing). As for the E36, this was one of my sources (copy of its text), many years ago. Many chassis codes, with some listing development dates. After seeing Entwicklung ab 9/79 about 5 years ago in this format, I started studying the E32 development history. It was only after reading an interview on Ercole Spada working with Claus Luthe and that of BMW advertisement from 1987, year of 1979 was confirmed for the E32 a 4th time. Not only just 1979, but the specific period of "late 1979" is when E32 development and design started. September 1979 being so specific, led me to believe that my source had some authority on these dates. For the E34, they listed July 1981. It checked out, as Ercole Spada had a definitive sketch for the E34 by November 1982. For the E31 8-Series, also July 1981. Styling efforts only began in 1984, design freeze in 1986. For the E36, they also listed July 1981 as well. For the E23, it stated October 1972. Their record of credibility is why July 1981 was listed in the article. Other sources, have stated E36 development began in the early 1980s. A final design was set 42 months before Job 1, which was in mid-1990. E36 design was frozen in early 1988 w/design details being engineering approved, as also Joji Nagashima has been credited for it, despite joining BMW in 1988. The original designer was Pinky Lai, who edited the E36 page himself a year ago. BMW had very long lead times, so many of their cars took 7 years from project start to showroom arrival. 9 years for the E36 is plausible, based on the required investment and revolutionary changes, but I did hear 1983 at one point, which fits in with BMWs 1980s lead time of 7 years.--Carmaker1 (talk) 17:07, 24 December 2017 (UTC)

Suspension
The article says that the rear suspension uses Chapman struts. It is the Z-link, which is a multi-link as reported in the article, but like any multi-link it does not include a Chapman strut, as is apparent from readily available images and descriptions of the E39 suspension and the definition of a Chapman strut in the Wikipedia article linked in this section. There is a reference for this section, but the source is not accessible.

The Chapman strut reference is so obviously incorrect that I am just going to delete it. brian&#124;bp 05:30, 30 August 2018 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Brian abp (talk • contribs)

Created A Section explaining Touring Suspension and Rear Differential
Changes that were made and added. I Added the rear differential final drive gears for all North American market 5 Series. The new table has final gears for the production years models, types of transmissions body styles and the different models of the 5 Series. I Created a new section for the touring model suspension with an explanation of how it works and what it does for the vehicle along with a diagram of how the system works. Also added to factory standard and optional options for the touring. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Bjplanz1 (talk • contribs) 01:42, 14 February 2020 (UTC)

Engine terminology
Hello. The reason for terminology within the article is the same as the titles of the articles themselves, to prevent confusing the casual reader through differing descriptions of the same layout. Regards, MrsSnoozyTurtle 09:19, 27 July 2021 (UTC)
 * The reason for renaming inline-four was just to bring the titles in line (natch) with each other; as per the earlier discussion at straight-four engine "inline-four" remains the more commonly used term. There is no need to change the links. We still abbreviate all of these I2, I3, I4, I6 and so on, for instance. Also, the preferred style is to spell out small numbers (i.e. "inline-four" rather than "inline-4"). I will add back your intro change since you seem very fond of it and it doesn't do any harm.  Mr.choppers &#124;   ✎  16:07, 27 July 2021 (UTC)
 * Nice pun, sir! If the article titles use a certain terminology, then I think it is best to use the same terminology within the article, to avoid confusion for casual readers. Regarding my changes to the intro, dismissing my efforts to improve the article as "you seem very fond of it and it doesn't do any harm", is not in keeping with WP:5P4. Also, you do not think that including adding the word "car" to the start of an article about a car is worthwhile? MrsSnoozyTurtle 00:03, 7 August 2021 (UTC)
 * Again, if "inline-four" is acceptable then there is no reason to change them. As for the units, I suggest you keep the discussion in one place, such as the automobile project talk page.  Mr.choppers &#124;   ✎  15:35, 11 August 2021 (UTC)
 * Note that BMW themselves, in the 2003 English-language brochure, use kW/PS exclusively.
 * Also, as per WP:RETAIN, the data table used PS since originally added in 2007. You removed PS in 2017. An IP restored PS a few months later, and then you removed them again. In 2018, again restored PS to the table. A month later, you removed PS again. Then, in July 2021 I again restored PS and then you removed it etc etc. Note that several editors have added PS, it was the original unit used in the table, and in fifteen years of existence, you are the only editor to have ever removed metric horsepower from this article.   Mr.choppers &#124;   ✎  09:58, 15 August 2021 (UTC)