More efficient 318d in October

poggy · 05-13-2008, 03:26 AM

Not sure if this has been posted before: couldn't find it though:

Looks like there may even more efficient engines in october when they release the facelift.

http://www.autoexpress.co.uk/news/au...reen_trio.html

- Paul - · 05-13-2008, 03:33 AM

£35 tax going down to £0 - NICE!

steve-p · 05-13-2008, 03:52 AM

Once a significant number of new cars fall into the sub-120 gram band the goalpost will probably change. After all, there are still a lot of civil servants, bureaucracy and quangos to fund

creepy coupe · 05-13-2008, 03:56 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by steve-p

Once a significant number of new cars fall into the sub-120 gram band the goalpost will probably change. After all, there are still a lot of civil servants, bureaucracy and quangos to fund

So true.

NFS · 05-13-2008, 04:25 AM

An incredible reduction of 4g/km reduction in emissions !

For an average driver doing 10,000 miles per year that would scale up to an awe inspiring reduction of 64kg of CO2 emissions.

The market value of a tonne of CO2 savings is £8 so economic value of this is an amazing 51p per year.

So the government is foregoing £ 120 per year of road tax to achieve a 51p reduction in CO2.

mjh93sa · 05-13-2008, 05:26 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by NFS

An incredible reduction of 4g/km reduction in emissions !

For an average driver doing 10,000 miles per year that would scale up to an awe inspiring reduction of 64kg of CO2 emissions.

The market value of a tonne of CO2 savings is £8 so economic value of this is an amazing 51p per year.

So the government is foregoing £ 120 per year of road tax to achieve a 51p reduction in CO2.

Cynic!

chrisbin · 05-13-2008, 08:19 AM

Never mind that ^.....

apparently "BMW’s engineers are confident that with some minor adjustments, the target emissions can be achieved. They are concentrating on the aerodynamics and gearing, as well as lower rolling resistance tyres"........

Can someone please explain to a non-engineer like myself how exactly altering the aerodynamics and tyres reduces the CO2 emmissions of a car.....??????

Oh and of course what they dont say is that the new engine will be jerky, unresponsive and hesitant......and they won't be able to make it any better.....

mjh93sa · 05-13-2008, 08:57 AM

By reducing the drag and lowering the rolling resistance of the car it will use less fuel and so produce less CO2. equally, tweaking the gearing to suit the CO2 test (rather than typical driving) could also make it seem a little more efficient.

I can see it now, a faired over nose and space-savers running at 110psi.

chrisbin · 05-13-2008, 09:02 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by mjh93sa

By reducing the drag and lowering the rolling resistance of the car it will use less fuel and so produce less CO2. equally, tweaking the gearing to suit the CO2 test (rather than typical driving) could also make it seem a little more efficient.

I can see it now, a faired over nose and space-savers running at 110psi.

Yeah...I knew really....it just makes you laugh though (well it does me).....they claim to be making a more efficient engine when all they are really doing is making the car produce better figures to suit the test.....

NFS · 05-13-2008, 09:21 AM

Given that 'low rolling resistance' runflats are a fairly new and rather niche product I would have a real problem buying a car fitted with them.

Standard runflats are already a twat to find in a hurry. Bluemotion style versions will be like hens teeth.

Also .... when you think about it ... similar gains could be achieved just by fitting narrower profile tyres.

We'll all be back on 14 inch 155's soon.

dxb335d · 05-13-2008, 10:25 AM

buy a bentley and turn the boost up i say!

NFS · 05-13-2008, 10:29 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by dxb335d

buy a bentley and turn the boost up i say!

I agree

poggy · 05-13-2008, 10:30 AM

All of the changes proposed are relatively simple to implement and i for one welcome any move to improve the fuel consumption of a vehicle, especially with the way fuel prices are going. Admittedly, diesel costs more, but the sums suggest at current rates that a 318d would save approximately £900/year over a 320i based on 12,000 miles a year - not to be sinfed at. Yes you have to look at the whole economics (purchase price/depreciation/servicing etc) but who's to say that the government aren't going to do something further to tax any kind of petrol car or lets for arguments sake say any car that does less than 50mpg. 50mpg is pretty achieveable with many reasonably sized cars these days. I never ever thought i would think about getting a diesel but i feel the time coming.

dxb335d · 05-13-2008, 10:42 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by NFS

I agree

I know mate, id love a Conti GT, re-mapped to 620bhp

5mpg here we come

NFS · 05-13-2008, 11:41 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by dxb335d

I know mate, id love a Conti GT, re-mapped to 620bhp

5mpg here we come

I was just looking at this thread on Pistonheads:

http://www.pistonheads.co.uk/gassing...p?h=0&t=490109

Nice V12 750 for £2K would be a bit of a laugh. Spend the money on petrol instead of depreciation for a change.

05-13-2008, 03:26 AM	#1
poggy Private First Class 20 Rep 185 Posts Drives: E90 318i SE Join Date: Mar 2007 Location: UK iTrader: (1)	More efficient 318d in October Not sure if this has been posted before: couldn't find it though: Looks like there may even more efficient engines in october when they release the facelift. http://www.autoexpress.co.uk/news/au...reen_trio.html
	Appreciate 0 Tweet Quote

05-13-2008, 03:33 AM	#2
- Paul - Major General 695 Rep 7,308 Posts Drives: see above. Join Date: Apr 2005 Location: Yorkshire, UK iTrader: (5) Garage List 2005 320D SE [10.00] 2005 645 [9.00]	£35 tax going down to £0 - NICE! __________________ My Photos
	Appreciate 0 Quote

05-13-2008, 03:52 AM	#3
steve-p Second Lieutenant 5 Rep 241 Posts Drives: 2012 ActiveHybrid 5 Join Date: Mar 2008 Location: Newbury, UK iTrader: (0)	Once a significant number of new cars fall into the sub-120 gram band the goalpost will probably change. After all, there are still a lot of civil servants, bureaucracy and quangos to fund
	Appreciate 0 Quote

05-13-2008, 04:25 AM	#5
NFS Major General 275 Rep 9,218 Posts Drives: M340i Join Date: Jul 2006 Location: UK iTrader: (0)	An incredible reduction of 4g/km reduction in emissions ! For an average driver doing 10,000 miles per year that would scale up to an awe inspiring reduction of 64kg of CO2 emissions. The market value of a tonne of CO2 savings is £8 so economic value of this is an amazing 51p per year. So the government is foregoing £ 120 per year of road tax to achieve a 51p reduction in CO2.
	Appreciate 0 Quote

05-13-2008, 08:19 AM	#7
chrisbin Colonel 112 Rep 2,333 Posts Drives: 640i MSport Coupe Join Date: May 2005 Location: S.Wales, UK iTrader: (1)	Never mind that ^..... apparently "BMW’s engineers are confident that with some minor adjustments, the target emissions can be achieved. They are concentrating on the aerodynamics and gearing, as well as lower rolling resistance tyres"........ Can someone please explain to a non-engineer like myself how exactly altering the aerodynamics and tyres reduces the CO2 emmissions of a car.....?????? Oh and of course what they dont say is that the new engine will be jerky, unresponsive and hesitant......and they won't be able to make it any better..... __________________ Current: F13 640i MSport, e85 Z4 3.0i Previous - Alpina D3 BiTurbo E90 LCI Manual, 320d M Sport E92 Auto, 330i M Sport E92 courtesy of BMW UK....320i M Sport E92 Auto, 320d SE E90 Manual.
	Appreciate 0 Quote

05-13-2008, 08:57 AM	#8
mjh93sa Major General 145 Rep 5,080 Posts Drives: 530d Join Date: Dec 2005 Location: Gloucestershire iTrader: (0) Garage List 2012 BMW M135i [10.00] 2011 Mini Countryma ... [5.50]	By reducing the drag and lowering the rolling resistance of the car it will use less fuel and so produce less CO2. equally, tweaking the gearing to suit the CO2 test (rather than typical driving) could also make it seem a little more efficient. I can see it now, a faired over nose and space-savers running at 110psi. __________________ Gone: Fiesta - Focus - E46 320dSE - E91 330dMSport - E82 135iMSport - R55 JCW Clubman - M135i Now: 530d
	Appreciate 0 Quote

05-13-2008, 09:21 AM	#10
NFS Major General 275 Rep 9,218 Posts Drives: M340i Join Date: Jul 2006 Location: UK iTrader: (0)	Given that 'low rolling resistance' runflats are a fairly new and rather niche product I would have a real problem buying a car fitted with them. Standard runflats are already a twat to find in a hurry. Bluemotion style versions will be like hens teeth. Also .... when you think about it ... similar gains could be achieved just by fitting narrower profile tyres. We'll all be back on 14 inch 155's soon.
	Appreciate 0 Quote

05-13-2008, 10:25 AM	#11
dxb335d The Tarmac Terrorist 949 Rep 29,345 Posts Drives: 997.2 GT3 Join Date: Mar 2007 Location: ''Fandango Towers'' iTrader: (3) Garage List 2010 Porsche 997.2 GT3 [9.50] 2003 BMW E46 M3 [6.00] 2007 BMW E92 335D [5.50]	buy a bentley and turn the boost up i say! __________________ 997.2 GT3
	Appreciate 0 Quote

05-13-2008, 10:30 AM	#13
poggy Private First Class 20 Rep 185 Posts Drives: E90 318i SE Join Date: Mar 2007 Location: UK iTrader: (1)	All of the changes proposed are relatively simple to implement and i for one welcome any move to improve the fuel consumption of a vehicle, especially with the way fuel prices are going. Admittedly, diesel costs more, but the sums suggest at current rates that a 318d would save approximately £900/year over a 320i based on 12,000 miles a year - not to be sinfed at. Yes you have to look at the whole economics (purchase price/depreciation/servicing etc) but who's to say that the government aren't going to do something further to tax any kind of petrol car or lets for arguments sake say any car that does less than 50mpg. 50mpg is pretty achieveable with many reasonably sized cars these days. I never ever thought i would think about getting a diesel but i feel the time coming.
	Appreciate 0 Quote