XSeries-forum

I thought we were safe ?http://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/2002-BMW-X5-D ... 35b9666d81

New one on me. Certainly the later versions (M57TU engine) have no swirl flaps when fitted to the X5, even though other BMW vehicles with the same engine do. Our E46 330Cd Convertible does have them and is a 2005. My 2004 E53 did not have them. So this is either bum info, or the owner was charged for unneeded work.

Swirl flaps were only needed on the M57 30d engine to meet EU4 emission regulations and the E53 was never type approved beyond EU3 so never had (or needed) them. The only way our E46 met EU4 was because of both swirl flaps, a 10bhp detune and a 'no auto' option were imposed by BMW. The adding of the auto meant it could only meet EU3, and when the Convertible variant was approved, EU4 was required - hence the changes specific for that model.

I think someone is telling porkies, or overselling the car, or has been taken for a ride, or it's not the original engine. I've checked RealOem for that year and the manifold part number is not the one fitted with swirl flap control.

From the multiple discussions on this site, which must have covered every production year by now, no one has found swirl flaps fitted. If you are still worried use a mirror and torch to look under the right side of the top of the engine under the intake manifold. If there are all sorts of rods and levers on the underside of the manifold, then they're fitted. No bits, no flaps.

is this visible from outside? how can i check if mine has swirl flaps or not? realoem doesn't seem to show swirl flaps.

j

Is it diesel? It won't have them.... Someone been watching too much 5th gear i think

[quote=""jaynana""]is this visible from outside? how can i check if mine has swirl flaps or not? realoem doesn't seem to show swirl flaps.

j[/quote]

Follow what it says in my post. The operating rods are visible under the intake manifold, but if you have a diesel you will not have them anyway.

[quote=""X5Sport""]if you have a diesel you will not have them anyway.[/quote]

phew, thx

read about what it is and the dangers of it last night and got me worried, but did't figure the above bit though; thx.

[quote=""X5Sport""][quote=""jaynana""]is this visible from outside? how can i check if mine has swirl flaps or not? realoem doesn't seem to show swirl flaps.

j[/quote]

Follow what it says in my post. The operating rods are visible under the intake manifold, but if you have a diesel you will not have them anyway.[/quote]

Thought on the 3-5ers it was only diesel and autos they was fitted to.

http://www.bmwswirlflaps.co.uk/swirl_flaps.html

Don't no how true the above us but my E39 530d auto had them.

On another site some dude claims his E60 manual ha them as well.
Sent from the phone via talktapa

There is still too much incorrect info floating about around the fitment of swirl flaps and the E53. Not helped by some idiot researcher for 5th Gear not knowing what he or she was on about. There was even a recent article in the BMW GB Club Magazine about this and it also had the same error - and was taken o task about it. I contacted the company that the author had spokn and they were pretty upset that information it had given had been used innaccurately and then published.

The E53 could not have achieved EU4 emission standards without major modifications so BMW never tried to and the flaps would have formed part of the required modifications.

What seems to have happened, and why this error persists, is that an assumption seems to exist that because the engine was fitted with swirl flaps in certain circumstances and markets then EVERY version of the M57 Engine was fitted with them for every market. Our 3-series 330Cd Manual diesel does indeed have them on the same unit as it was type approved after the point at which EU4 was required, but our X5 (and no other E53 X5s) do. One of my projects for 2012 is to remove them from our E46.

a bit off topic if u dont mind, all in the name of continuous education;)

x5sport, appreciate some info if u know - i've tried to understand the EU regulations a bit better, and compare it with what we hear on a day-to-day basis

as per wikipedia (the most human friendly version of the eu directive i've found), the EUx directives prescribe CO, NOx, PM per km, and don't mention CO2. Elsewhere it says that the CO2 based limits are obligatory at best.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/European_e ... _standards

that being the case, what we hear on a day-to-day basis is the CO2 emissions:
http://www.bmw.co.uk/bmwuk/index/F30-3L ... ce=vanity#

...which is not surprising given that that's what our tax man is after:
http://www.direct.gov.uk/en/Motoring/Ow ... G_10012524
(mentions Euro 4 for light goods vehicles only)

am i missing something here, or why arent' car manufacturers and our tax man governing by by EUx regulations rather than simple CO2 emissions?

or am i missing something here?

below statement makes it kinda feel like its the wrong tail to chase.. somewhat:
'EU transport emissions of CO2 currently account for about 3.5% of total global CO2 emissions'

[quote=""X5Sport""]There is still too much incorrect info floating about around the fitment of swirl flaps and the E53. Not helped by some idiot researcher for 5th Gear not knowing what he or she was on about. There was even a recent article in the BMW GB Club Magazine about this and it also had the same error - and was taken o task about it. I contacted the company that the author had spokn and they were pretty upset that information it had given had been used innaccurately and then published.

The E53 could not have achieved EU4 emission standards without major modifications so BMW never tried to and the flaps would have formed part of the required modifications.

What seems to have happened, and why this error persists, is that an assumption seems to exist that because the engine was fitted with swirl flaps in certain circumstances and markets then EVERY version of the M57 Engine was fitted with them for every market. Our 3-series 330Cd Manual diesel does indeed have them on the same unit as it was type approved after the point at which EU4 was required, but our X5 (and no other E53 X5s) do. One of my projects for 2012 is to remove them from our E46.[/quote]

Have to agree loads of info on flaps, most misleading.
What ever car as flaps some body as said it don't have them and vise versa.

I had to text my bro this morning as I told him his 330d 2002 may now have flaps, and at 150k this should be removed if not already done ASAP.





Sent from the phone via talktapa

If I understand the system at present, vehicle manufacturers have to meet certain emissions standards by certain dates in order to get their vehicles type approved for sale within the EU. This is to try to lower the overall emissions output in terms of CO2 from cars etc. That is commendable, and I doubt anyone has an issue with that. Just look at how clean cars now being built are compared to even a few years ago.

VED is based on the actual level of emissions produced rather than the EU standard that the car meets. I think the idea behind it is to try to force all of us to drive low emission & more efficient cars. Because cars tend to last longer than the EU standards at present, whacking more car tax on higher emission cars is seen as a level to try to force older cars off the road. Of course it doesn't work!! And there are some filthy older cars on the road from before the EU rules came in, yet they only pay about £175 a year - go figure!! Motorists are an easy target hence high fuel taxation costs and high VED charges. Whilst I take some notice of emissions etc, it's what the car drives like that I'm more interested in.

I get annoyed by the 'anti-SUV' fraternity as when you actually look at some of the reason they spout for not driving cars like we own because of their weight damaging roads, road space taken and filthy engines, you discover that actually our cars are no bigger than a 5 series, have a lower weight footprint because of the wider tyres, and are actually cleaner than many far more common petrol family cars. Yet the press still spouts their rubbish!! True, there are some engines in use on SUVs (and family cars) that have not caught up - as an example Land Rover took years to catch everyone else up and a number of car types will be banned from the Low Emissions Zone in London.

I agree, CO2 emissions from motor vehicles in Europe is probably in part the wrong tail to chase especially given the level of emissions from diesel-engined shipping, diesel powered trains and aircraft. I used to work with someone who was an engineer in the Merchant Navy and the emissions from these big ships are astronomical with little if any filtering at all, yet at present they get away with it. Diesel engines in other parts of the developing world are still filthy as are petrol engines. BMW refused to sell diesel cars in some markets not because of type approval issues, but because the fuel was too dirty as it was high sulphur and would damage their engines.

I remember reading on an American based website a year or so ago about the arrival of ULSD (Ultra-Low Sulphur Diesel) and that we have had in Europe for years, and wasn't it time the rest of the world did the same! The author went very quiet after a number of European members rapidly pointed out that Europe had been using ULSD for a decade or more and it was the US that was lagging far behind, and perhaps if they gave up their gas guzzling V8's it would make a bigger impact. the rest of the thread disintegrated into 'our rights to drive 6 litre V8s and f*** you!!' Talk about lighting the blue touch paper......

[quote=""scooby1doo1""][/quote]
Have to agree loads of info on flaps, most misleading.
What ever car as flaps some body as said it don't have them and vise versa.

I had to text my bro this morning as I told him his 330d 2002 may now have flaps, and at 150k this should be removed if not already done ASAP.
[/quote]

RealOEM shows that engine as certainly being a candidate - two versions of the intake manifold, but seems the Auto has it and the Manual (may) not. The version with says 'Auto = Yes' and the version without says 'Auto = No'. Page for a mid 2002 built 330d below.

http://realoem.com/bmw/partgrp.do?model ... 7642&hg=11

[quote=""X5Sport""]snip

VED is based on the actual level of emissions produced rather than the EU standard that the car meets. I think the idea behind it is to try to force all of us to drive low emission & more efficient cars. Because cars tend to last longer than the EU standards at present, whacking more car tax on higher emission cars is seen as a level to try to force older cars off the road. Of course it doesn't work!! And there are some filthy older cars on the road from before the EU rules came in, yet they only pay about £175 a year - go figure!! Motorists are an easy target hence high fuel taxation costs and high VED charges. Whilst I take some notice of emissions etc, it's what the car drives like that I'm more interested in.

snip[/quote]


Which ultimately means that if ALL cars are "low emission & more efficient cars" then the maths of VED (a fixed and or rising amount)/car will innevitably mean that tax bands wil continue to change irrespective of how CLEAN they are. Cheap to tax cars can't reamain cheap for ever when the "convenient" gas guzzlers are gone

emmision is total bollox when applied to a tax banding system. If everyone had an EU compliant car of exactly the same emision rating they'd have to either tax everyone the same amount or resort to some spurious WINDOW or PASSENGERS CARRIED tax to differentiate

Which is why we got..............'Showroom Tax'................or am I being cynical (again)

To be followed by......

Wax Tax
21" Wheel Tax
Metallic Paint Tax
Satnav Tax
You own more than one car tax......and........and.....

[quote=""X5Sport""]Which is why we got..............'Showroom Tax'................or am I being cynical (again)

To be followed by......

Wax Tax
21" Wheel Tax
Metallic Paint Tax
Satnav Tax
You own more than one car tax......and........and..... [/quote]

sorry for being a bit OT but

I SATNAV TAX a bonus or a penalty

Less getting lost so less petrol burnt
More ingnoring common sense and going down cul-de-sacs and swerving across 3 lanes of motorway at the last minute and causing accidents behind