|
|
|
|
|
|
BMW Garage | BMW Meets | Register | Search | Today's Posts | Mark Forums Read |
|
BMW 3-Series (E90 E92) Forum
>
My E92 got 33.2 mpg over 115 miles into Boston
|
|
05-10-2007, 10:48 AM | #23 |
Second Lieutenant
48
Rep 228
Posts |
??
I'm sorry, I have a real hard time believing those numbers. Too many people reset their 'Average MPG' computer and then watch that. The BMW PC is notoriously silly, changing constantly from 5mpg to 99mpg.
The only real way to get the average is pen and paper. Fill up, drive that same scenario and then fill up again, then do the math. I have not gotten better than 21.2 ever, and I have 11,000 miles. That was driving fairly normally, no A/C. My overall averages per tank are about 17.8 - 18.5 I'd like to hear Shiv's opinion on a 300HP car gettting 30+ mpg. Anyone agree? |
Appreciate
0
|
05-10-2007, 11:28 AM | #24 |
Private First Class
24
Rep 163
Posts |
Just for reference we drove from florida to boston this past weekend and over what came out to about 1400 miles, the car read ~29 MPG for the vast majority of the ride, and got up to ~30 MPG when we got further north and didn't have AC on as much. Average speed was around 72 mph and this was in a 330i sedan with about 11k miles
__________________
"You're going to have your heart broken, and you're gonna repair it with zipties." |
Appreciate
0
|
05-10-2007, 11:56 AM | #25 | |
Lieutenant Colonel
52
Rep 1,714
Posts |
Quote:
|
|
Appreciate
0
|
05-10-2007, 12:16 PM | #26 |
Private First Class
3
Rep 109
Posts |
I having been getting better and better mileage. At 4000 miles I'm getting 30mph on a weekly trip from the DC Metro area to the Delaware shore, about 130 miles averaging 60 mph in lots of different traffic etc.
__________________
335i Coupe Jet Black, saddle brown, nav, pdc
|
Appreciate
0
|
05-10-2007, 12:23 PM | #27 | |
Brigadier General
1575
Rep 3,888
Posts |
Quote:
|
|
Appreciate
0
|
05-10-2007, 05:33 PM | #28 | |
310
Rep 15,745
Posts |
Quote:
Wow...thats fucking rediculous. Well..next time I meet someone up in CT, Im taking the slow route. |
|
Appreciate
0
|
05-10-2007, 08:57 PM | #29 |
Second Lieutenant
48
Rep 228
Posts |
"I get exactly 21.1 on a mix of 85% hwy and 15% city driving (about 1700mi so far). It doesn't seem to want to go up or down."
That sounds right on the money. That is my findings as driven. I still say the 30 + mpg is staring at the BMW computer and not done by pen and paper. |
Appreciate
0
|
05-10-2007, 09:50 PM | #31 | |
hi
94
Rep 837
Posts |
Quote:
city/traffic/flooring it/driving moderately fast obviously is a different story, but i'm talking just open freeway here. |
|
Appreciate
0
|
05-11-2007, 08:33 PM | #32 |
Major
38
Rep 1,238
Posts |
I too would not trust the onboard computer on the car. (At least for my E90). The reading on my E90 has been way too optimistic on the fuel consumption reading. My actual fuel consumption is about 30% more than what the computer says. Maybe there's a problem with my fuel consumption meter but I would not place 100% trust on the computer itself. Confirm your results by manually calculating the fuel consumption.
|
Appreciate
0
|
05-11-2007, 10:50 PM | #33 | |
Brigadier General
1575
Rep 3,888
Posts |
Quote:
Mine reads 5% off at most. |
|
Appreciate
0
|
05-13-2007, 03:03 PM | #34 |
Second Lieutenant
48
Rep 228
Posts |
Good Christ
H.Christ.
Will anyone do the pen-and-paper-method with highway only driving so we all know once and for all? No such highway exists where I live, or I'd do it. REALLY nice if someone would do what I do and post pix of odometer readings before-and-after with the gas receipts. Doesn't take that much effort. |
Appreciate
0
|
05-14-2007, 07:11 AM | #35 |
Second Lieutenant
10
Rep 296
Posts |
I've been tracking mpg since new (~8500miles) -- my BC reads between 0-1mpg higher than pen/paper, generally only 0.5mpg off (2% error). A couple weekends ago I helped a friend move, and the 120 miles at 60-70mph (trailing the moving van), with gas stops at the beginning and end to measure mpg I got 34 for the trip (0 BC error). Normally, I get a consistent 21mpg per tank with mixed leadfoot/lightfoot.
__________________
2007 335i Sedan / Black Sapphire / Sport / Auto / FBO (Retired)
2013 535i Sedan / Black / MSport / Auto |
Appreciate
0
|
05-14-2007, 11:47 AM | #36 | |
Captain
57
Rep 879
Posts |
Quote:
|
|
Appreciate
0
|
05-14-2007, 05:34 PM | #37 |
Second Lieutenant
48
Rep 228
Posts |
Doesn't matter
I think most people will agree, none of the highway only/ street only mpg matters.
It's how many miles you get overall and how many miles you drove before filling up that counts. If you live in the Ozarks and do 98% highway you'll get what you get, but I seriously doubt it will be 500+ miles to the 335i's tank. For the rest of us who live in the cities and suburbs, we're clearing 270-310 miles to fill ups. That is the number that matters. |
Appreciate
0
|
05-15-2007, 12:35 AM | #38 |
Captain
36
Rep 625
Posts |
One of the car mags did a test with the 330i. They drove a constant 60 mph, 65, 70,75, and 80. For every 5 mph over 60 they went their mpg went down about 10%. In a 330i they achieved 39 mpg at a constant 60 mph, and it decreased 10% from there (to 35, then 32 at 70, 29 at 75, etc).
This just has to do with aerodynamics (every increase in speed increases air friction by x squared) plus gearing (higher rpms = more engine braking = friction). So 35 MPG at a stead 60 is very likely. But it is also a waste of a $45K performance car!
__________________
Driving sideways: It's not faster, but damn it's more fun!
|
Appreciate
0
|
05-16-2007, 09:01 PM | #39 |
Private First Class
10
Rep 141
Posts |
People who say the figures came from the onboard computer are correct, the figure I posted was indeed from that source. I have not done the pen and paper test. I recall that the computer does not count fuel used when completely stopped in the total average mpg, so for people who have that kind of commute it will probably overestimate the mpg compared with reality. However, my trip did not include any completely stopped traffic so I have no reason to disbelieve it.
I also think that this represents good engineering and efficiency - that I respect (nearly) as much as the good performance that I can only use when the traffic is not just moving along at steady 60-70. |
Appreciate
0
|
05-18-2007, 11:21 AM | #40 | |
Major
38
Rep 1,238
Posts |
Quote:
|
|
Appreciate
0
|
05-18-2007, 11:23 AM | #41 |
Major
38
Rep 1,238
Posts |
The way that my car calculates average consumption is correct. From obtaining info in the hidden OBC accessed via the dash, it seems that the computer is recording less fuel consumed than the car actually is therefore causing the computer to show a constant 30% offset error.
|
Appreciate
0
|
05-18-2007, 05:01 PM | #42 | |
New Member
0
Rep 5
Posts |
How do you figure?
Quote:
Must be the new math. IIRC the system is sent data from the engine management system as to fuel used as measured by the injector open duration and pressure. So that must be a very accurate number or your engine is running very poorly. Other side of the calc is distance traveled, and as these cars have an optomistic speed indication perhaps that is where the error is, but not to a 30% error. BTW, on M5board a user has listed the hidden menus and how to access them: http://www.m5board.com/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=96047 You will find a link that shows how to access the hidden OBC, IDrive, and Nav menus. Post number 7 outlines how to correct your MPG calc errors. Last edited by Vanderfan; 05-18-2007 at 05:23 PM.. |
|
Appreciate
0
|
05-19-2007, 04:22 PM | #44 |
Major
38
Rep 1,238
Posts |
Didn't want to hijack this thread so I started a new one specifically on this issue: http://www.e90post.com/forums/showthread.php?t=62449
|
Appreciate
0
|
Bookmarks |
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
|
|