From £29,7008
The BMW 420d's frugal diesel engine gives the handsome 4-series range extra appeal to cost-conscious owners

Our Verdict

BMW 4-series

The facelifted BMW 4 Series has improved on an already solid proposition but can it hold off the likes of the latest generation Audi A5 and Mercedes-Benz C-Class Coupé?

  • First Drive

    BMW 440i Coupe 2017 review

    The assumption was that a few minor tweaks to the 2017 BMW 440i Coupé wouldn't make much of a difference. It turns out they do
  • First Drive

    2016 BMW 4 Series 440i M Sport review

    More power doesn’t always make for a better car, but the BMW 4 Series 440i is one of the best four-seat coupés out there
Nic Cackett
25 October 2013

What is it?

The entry-spec model we're testing here is likely to be the biggest seller in the BMW 4-series range. There are three very good reasons for this: it emits 124g/km of CO2, it can cover a claimed 60mpg on the combined cycle and it's the second cheapest model in the range.

Like all 4-series models, the 420d shares its same basic architecture with the F30-generation 3-series. It is slightly longer and wider than the Three, but substantially lower, which means it has the lowest centre of gravity in BMW’s model range.

The 420d is powered by the same 181bhp, 2.0-litre turbodiesel as the 320d. It makes peak power at 4000rpm and hits 280lb ft between 1750-2750rpm. BMW claims a 7.5sec 0-62mph time and a top speed of 149mph.

An eight-speed automatic gearbox and BMW’s xDrive four-wheel-drive system are available as options, but the model we're testing has the standard-fit six-speed manual gearbox powering the rear wheels.

Our test car is also in SE specification, the first of five trims. It includes leather upholstery, 17in alloy wheels, two-zone air-conditioning and USB connectivity as standard.

What's it like?

The BMW 420d is particularly sweet. Its 2.0-litre 4-cylinder turbodiesel offers huge flexibility, and is far more potent than its 7.5sec 0-62mph time suggests. It is strong in the mid-range, but lacks the last few degrees of sparkle and responsiveness afforded by the larger six-pot diesels.

Refinement on the move is very good, but at tickover – particularly at start-up – there’s some typical four-cylinder clatter.

The six-speed manual gearbox is far from the slickest we've encountered. Initial springy resistance to the lever being slotted through the gate, coupled with quite long clutch pedal travel, means the 420d has a shift that rewards preciseness and patience, but feels less at home when you're trying to push hard up the gears.

Elsewhere the 420d is much the same as the rest of the 4-series range. It's a neatly balanced chassis that offers a grown-up brand of sportiness, wrapped up in a handsome and hugely desirable body.

The entry-level SE model tested here features a decent level of  kit, which helps to justify its £3000-plus premium. With smaller wheels and a more pliant suspension configuration, ride comfort and refinement is really rather good. It’s just a shame that there’s rather too much lateral movement when cornering hard. The £750 adaptive M Sport suspension would seem like a worthwhile option.

Should I buy one?

It's maybe unsurprising that the 4-series' maturity suits the 420d’s relaxed sensibilities, but it would perhaps be better suited to an automatic transmission. However, given that it's so closely related to one of our favourite new cars, the 3-series, it's still an outstanding model.

Little of that will matter too much to 420d buyers, though – the promise of an easy 50mpg, coupled with appealingly low benefit in kind bills for such a desirable model, will be the main draws.

BMW 420d SE

Price £31,575; 0-62mph 7.5sec; Top speed 149mph; Economy 60.1mpg; CO2 124g/km; Kerb weight 1525kg; Engine 4-cyl in line 1998cc, turbodiesel; Power 181bhp at 4000rpm; Torque 280lb ft at 1750rpm; Gearbox 6-speed manual

Join the debate


25 October 2013

Its still not as clean or economical as Volvo's new D4 engine ( in the S60 - 181bhp, 99gCO2, and claimed 73.4 mpg on the combined cycle as a manual or 109gCO2 and 67.3mpg as an 8 speed auto). Volvo are also quoting 6.9secs to 62 manual or 7.4 as an auto (it also has more torque 293 lb ft) it appears the days of BMW having the best performing diesel engines may well be numbered.

25 October 2013
Citytiger wrote:

Its still not as clean or economical as Volvo's new D4 engine ( in the S60 - 181bhp, 99gCO2, and claimed 73.4 mpg on the combined cycle as a manual or 109gCO2 and 67.3mpg as an 8 speed auto). Volvo are also quoting 6.9secs to 62 manual or 7.4 as an auto (it also has more torque 293 lb ft) it appears the days of BMW having the best performing diesel engines may well be numbered.

The only people who will match the Volvo's economy claims will be people on deliberate economy runs. It is high time the EU economy testing was more realistic and less easily cheated.

The same goes for all new cars.


I'm a disillusioned former Citroëniste.

25 October 2013
Citytiger wrote:

it appears the days of BMW having the best performing diesel engines may well be numbered

I think they still perform best in terms of outright performance but, yes, others now beat them on headline CO2 and combined fuel consumption.

However, you have to remember that the N47 unit installed here has been used for well over half a decade and while continuous development keeps it in the game it cannot compete with a brand new clean-sheet designs like Volvo's Drive-E or the Mazda SkyActiv on CO2.

When BMW clear the decks from launching their downsized petrol triple I think we may see the next (and final?) big step in diesel technology before it gets uneconomical to engineer in the face of super strict emissions regs.

25 October 2013

If you are cost conscious you would be mad to spend more than £31k on a brand new car...

25 October 2013
oop north wrote:

If you are cost conscious you would be mad to spend more than £31k on a brand new car...

80%+ of users won't actually be buyers. OTR is largely irrelevant to lease customers where a large proportion of these will go. OTR means something to CC drivers but CO2 is the main deal breaker.

Autocar needs to reflect the market that is driving the big 3 Germans success...they're keepers, not owners.

25 October 2013

Well, there was a time 25 years ago, at the start of my career, when I would be very excited by the introduction of a new BMW. How times have changed.

Of course, at that time there were only three main models 3, 5 and 7 series but each car was its own car, with its own character and style from the chassis to the buttons on the fascia. They were sporty, sophisticated, and oozed class. But BMW wasn't a mass producer at the time - and BMW realised that the affluent people that once bought their products wanted it that way. If your budget was £50K, you would get a £50K car specced at £50K.

That may sound obvious to most of you, but here is where the difference lies with todays range - each car is in some way a clone of another. BMW's mass production strategy becomes ever more evident with each new model. So if you spend £18K on a base 1 series or £25K on a base 3 series, or £50K on a top spec 4 series, you get pretty much the same cheap plastic buttons that grace the centre instrument panel. So nowadays, if you spend £50K on a 4 series, you get a £25K car specced at £50K - which is a big difference to 25 years ago.

BMW try to accomodate too many markets with too many products and variants, and you see where the cost cutting has been made- inside particularly.

So, if you want 'semi premium', then the 4 series may be for you. My advice - if you have £40K or £50K to spend, go buy a Porsche Cayenne or Range Rover Sport. Either way, you get a premium product. And BMW, sadly, dont make premium products any more.

It will sell very well. Mass produced cars do. Thats the whole idea.

29 October 2013

You've raised a very valid point Kamelo, and it's a great shame, as I was once a keen BMW fan.

People drive these vehicles, deluding themselves that somehow they are more special than other cars, but at the same time, doing their best not to notice how ordinary they actually are - one pull on a 3 series cheap & nasty plastic handbrake lever is all that is needed - no better than the cheapest Korean car. Listen to the horrendous rattle at idle of the diesels, and yet the drivers have convinced themselves that they are smooth and quiet. The evidence is apparent for all to see. Premium? No. Executive? Certainly not - a real executive would not be seen dead in such a car.

BMW (along with Merc & Audi) is no longer special - they are simply far too common - run of the mill. It seems every second car you see these days is either a BMW/Audi/Merc (usually a 320 diesel in BMW's case - or a 2.0 diesel Audi/Merc. They are thrown out like litter by companies to their employees, often reps, or bought by private buyers on cheap finance deals. Once they are 2 or 3 years old many are worth less than £10k, and yet millions of these drivers, wearing sunglasses any weather, with their arms glued to the windows, act as if they are Royalty. It's all very sad. To me they are the Ford Cortina's of years ago. It seems everyone "must be seen driving one of these badges" and so everyone either has one/ has had one or no longer wants one. BMWs these days are desperately over priced and over hyped, and a very good reference point, which puts BMW's products, quality and pricing into perspective is VW - "the People's Car", of which many cars are better made and higher quality than BMW. This is why anyone who pushes can often get 15% off a 3 series, bringing the base level car down to below £20k, and they'll still throw in some options. Unfortunately BMW sales are living off the reputation of years gone by, and a very unfortunate, but deluded, "must have that badge" attitude that infects Britain today. The great badges of BMW, and Mercedes and Audi have been ruined, and I fear the image can never be recovered.

25 October 2013



25 October 2013

I remember driving Dad's E92 320d when it was new and being really disappointed with the gearbox. 20k later and it felt much better - how a BMW should feel, though the clutch remained odd for the whole 70k he had it. I'd be willing to bet that if you gave this 4 series 20k, the gearbox would improve hugely. Nice to see a test on a standard car without adaptive suspension too.

Add your comment

Log in or register to post comments

Find an Autocar car review

Driven this week

  • First Drive
    23 March 2018
    Fully-loaded, big-hitting diesel CLS shows the potential perils of ticking too many options boxes on your order form. A good car with a bad suspension combination.
  • BMW M5
    First Drive
    22 March 2018
    Super saloon deploys four-wheel drive to improve every facet of its driving experience. Faster and more capable than any, and more exciting than most, of its celebrated predecessors
  • Range Rover Sport SVR
    First Drive
    22 March 2018
    More power and an intoxicating soundtrack have breathed new life into our love affair with the biggest, baddest Range Rover Sport variant
  • First Drive
    21 March 2018
    The new Vantage has been developed as a Porsche 911 beater, and our first taste on UK roads suggests it can live up to that bold claim
  • Nissan Leaf Tekna
    The is the new Nissan Leaf
    First Drive
    21 March 2018
    The new version of the world's best-selling electric car gains a bigger battery and more power. How does it compare to rivals such as the Volkswagen e-Golf?