[bluewater328]

Beemers are actually best at 60mph (so are a lot of cars).

They aren't great in the city...but to be fair, NOTHING that has a I6/V6 or greater, that doesn't shut down cylinders, does well in the city/stopNgo.

[dakine_surf]

Originally Posted by bluewater328

Beemers are actually best at 60mph (so are a lot of cars).

They aren't great in the city...but to be fair, NOTHING that has a I6/V6 or greater, that doesn't shut down cylinders, does well in the city/stopNgo.

Maybe, but at 60 my wagon actually runs a little too low and requires a downshift on grades to keep that pace without more throttle... I really think 70ish+ is the sweet spot if you are going up and down in altitude. The motor is making enough torque to keep a 70+ pace without struggling in the top gear and needing excessive throttle manipulation or a downshift. Over the course of a 400+mile trip, that actually makes a huge difference.

Now most of this comes from personal data... I've done a few trips to Mammoth going up to the mountain from the LA area, deliberately seeing how the car returns the best mileage using CC. For me with gear in the back, keeping a little higher pace actually yielded slightly better results. Keeping a higher pace seemed to also keep time spent in the behind semis and RV's (60ish) at a minimum which means less throttle changes (using CC) which in the end gives better mileage.

[wallacelau]

Originally Posted by porsche959

basically, i shoulda bought an m3 for this mpg.

That is exactly what I think when I see my 12mpg in the city.....

If I cruise at 70mph on a flat road, I can get about 26 mpg (some people claim that they can get 30+). However, the mpg drops like a straight line when city driving involves. Mine is a N51 if that matters.

[tlow98]

Originally Posted by porsche959

i get around 9-13 mpg in nyc/new jersey.

what kills it is idling and driving below 10mph.

on longer road trips (highways) i get +25 mpg.

basically, i shoulda bought an m3 for this mpg.

Subtract 25-33% more gas and you’re at M3 numbers. They’re pretty bad. Subtract that same amount again to s85 numbers hahahahha

[gunnerxq]

OP I'd say your mpg is abnormal and pretty bad. The worst I ever get is 16mpg but usually 18 and up. Maybe check things like your air filter (drop in a K&N and cut out your carbon filter) and tire pressure? I'm sure your wheels are really heavy and your run-flats don't help either. My 18" summer setup is lighter than my winter set-up. And they're actually stronger.

[porsche959]

Originally Posted by tlow98

Subtract 25-33% more gas and you’re at M3 numbers. They’re pretty bad. Subtract that same amount again to s85 numbers hahahahha

u telling me an m3 gets 7mpg and m5 gets 5mpg in the city? damn

[porsche959]

Originally Posted by dakine_surf

Yeah a log would really tell all.

I have been quite surprised by how well my e91 does in fast freeway driving. Even moving at 80+ I can get 27-32 mpg (altitude dependent.) The n52 really was developed to be a pleasant high speed highway mill.

I really feel if the OP spent a few weeks outside his normal commute is less congestion he would probably see his MPG increase. LA is where cars go to get beaten to death.

i got 30 mpg going 80-85 on longer trips

6mt e90 325i

[dakine_surf]

Originally Posted by porsche959

u telling me an m3 gets 7mpg and m5 gets 5mpg in the city? damn

I'd say you are probably around 6 for the m5 and 7 or 8 for the m3 realistically in congested city driving, better if you live in a city where traffic isn't a huge issue. Depends on how long your traffic lights are, and how long spent in stop and go traffic, and how often you use the loud pedal.

My old e60 m5 with 130k on it did 4mpg average in the city... but I drove the wheels off that thing... and it was a cheap salvage car with a million issues so I'm sure there were other forces at play which is why I didn't mention it before. That car was always super thirsty.

[e90yyc]

Sounds pretty terrible to me, but if you’re in horrendous LA traffic, then maybe that’s normal.

My OBC average is about 21-22 MPG. That’s all city, but usually with decent stints on freeways.

In the middle of our hellish winter, when I’d idle way more and traffic was just worse in general, I was averaging around 17 MPG.

I guess YMMV! No pun intended.

[mecheng77]

Originally Posted by Pladi

No no not at all man. I have heard that LA is very bad. ON does not even compare. US has almost the same amount of people in one city than entire Canada..

Yeah to me it does seem wayy to bad and potentially a combination of driving and an actual fueling issue but then the good HWY numbers makes me question that.

What he needs to do here is log LTFT and STFT and A/F ratio during city driving. That will tell you quite a bit.

Originally Posted by Pladi

No no not at all man. I have heard that LA is very bad. ON does not even compare. US has almost the same amount of people in one city than entire Canada..

Yeah to me it does seem wayy to bad and potentially a combination of driving and an actual fueling issue but then the good HWY numbers makes me question that.

What he needs to do here is log LTFT and STFT and A/F ratio during city driving. That will tell you quite a bit.

Have you not been on the 401? Busiest highway in North America; 16 lanes of misery during rush hour.

https://www.google.ca/amp/s/opposite...1559577839/amp

[Pladi]

Originally Posted by mecheng77

Have you not been on the 401? Busiest highway in North America; 16 lanes of misery during rush hour.

https://www.google.ca/amp/s/opposite...1559577839/amp

LA has multiple 401s. Thats kind of what i was saying. More population in general. We have one bad highway but thats about it. Ontario in general is not bad for traffic. Where as California would have way more traffic zones.

[tlow98]

Originally Posted by porsche959

u telling me an m3 gets 7mpg and m5 gets 5mpg in the city? damn

Pretty close. You’ll also find a lot of the threads from initial owners being basically pissed and disgusted. Subsequent owners tend to put up with it more as I believe they’re just incredibly enamored. The range on those cars in city environments is just kind of a PIA. once on the highway they’re ok, but not good. How many cylinders and how many liters makes a huge impact at low speeds. Doesn’t help when the car is also heavy.

[John 070]

Originally Posted by mecheng77

Have you not been on the 401? Busiest highway in North America; 16 lanes of misery during rush hour.

https://www.google.ca/amp/s/opposite...1559577839/amp

I think it was in 2015. I was going from Etobicoke to Ajax for a week. I had no way of knowing, but people aka locals seemed to know where to go express and where to go collectors, and they darted back and forth....

As much as I like the area, I need to live where there's a good hockey team that doesn't disappoint

[e90yyc]

Originally Posted by John 070

...As much as I like the area, I need to live where there's a good hockey team that doesn't disappoint

[mecheng77]

Originally Posted by John 070

I think it was in 2015. I was going from Etobicoke to Ajax for a week. I had no way of knowing, but people aka locals seemed to know where to go express and where to go collectors, and they darted back and forth....

As much as I like the area, I need to live where there's a good hockey team that doesn't disappoint

I won't defend the Leafs, so much money spent on the team this and they keep choking at the end. I still remember the series they were leading 4-1 against Boston in the 3rd period. I went to get a drink and the game was tied. After that game, I only watch the final game of the playoffs. If I didn't have a good job, with family and lots of opportunities here; I'd be living somewhere hot like Arizona and Florida; small town with no traffic. Luckily transit is good and I stay off the roads during rush hour.

[mecheng77]

Originally Posted by Pladi

LA has multiple 401s. Thats kind of what i was saying. More population in general. We have one bad highway but thats about it. Ontario in general is not bad for traffic. Where as California would have way more traffic zones.

Originally Posted by Pladi

LA has multiple 401s. Thats kind of what i was saying. More population in general. We have one bad highway but thats about it. Ontario in general is not bad for traffic. Where as California would have way more traffic zones.

Waterloo Ontario traffic is a dream. Venture out to the GTA, it's awful.

[Pladi]

Originally Posted by mecheng77

Waterloo Ontario traffic is a dream. Venture out to the GTA, it's awful.

Lived most of my life in Mississauga. I pretty much ran away from GTA

[dakine_surf]

Originally Posted by mecheng77

Have you not been on the 401? Busiest highway in North America; 16 lanes of misery during rush hour.

https://www.google.ca/amp/s/opposite...1559577839/amp

I think what we were referring to is not necessarily one road with tons of traffic, but LA is a huge spiderweb of multiple 401's (be it a lane or two narrower) all intersecting. So when it comes to getting ANYWHERE at just about ANY hour you are dealing with stop and go... not just in on the freeway but in surface streets and it isn't limited to rush hour.

Right now best estimates put the greater LA area somewhere around 40 to 45 million people including undocumented persons. That number comes down a bit if you are only talking documented residents, but the simple fact is that is a ton of vehicles in an area that is only a few hundred square miles. I don't even know what the population of canada is right now, but I think it is below 40 million... it would probably be the equivalent of the entire population of canada all converging on one city for a weekend.

[Pladi]

Originally Posted by dakine_surf

I think what we were referring to is not necessarily one road with tons of traffic, but LA is a huge spiderweb of multiple 401's (be it a lane or two narrower) all intersecting. So when it comes to getting ANYWHERE at just about ANY hour you are dealing with stop and go... not just in on the freeway but in surface streets and it isn't limited to rush hour.

Right now best estimates put the greater LA area somewhere around 40 to 45 million people including undocumented persons. That number comes down a bit if you are only talking documented residents, but the simple fact is that is a ton of vehicles in an area that is only a few hundred square miles. I don't even know what the population of canada is right now, but I think it is below 40 million... it would probably be the equivalent of the entire population of canada all converging on one city for a weekend.

Wow thats insane. It honestly doesnt compare our area.

[Schmitz]

Originally Posted by dakine_surf

I think what we were referring to is not necessarily one road with tons of traffic, but LA is a huge spiderweb of multiple 401's (be it a lane or two narrower) all intersecting. So when it comes to getting ANYWHERE at just about ANY hour you are dealing with stop and go... not just in on the freeway but in surface streets and it isn't limited to rush hour.

Right now best estimates put the greater LA area somewhere around 40 to 45 million people including undocumented persons. That number comes down a bit if you are only talking documented residents, but the simple fact is that is a ton of vehicles in an area that is only a few hundred square miles. I don't even know what the population of canada is right now, but I think it is below 40 million... it would probably be the equivalent of the entire population of canada all converging on one city for a weekend.

40 million?? The metro pop is 13 million...

[dakine_surf]

Originally Posted by Schmitz

40 million?? The metro pop is 13 million...

Key word is metro... LA is an interesting spot... downtown the official census is around 4 million, metro is anywhere from 17-24 million, these are population numbers tracking actual residence... things get crazy after that and at any one given day, they estimate the number of persons in The LA area to be over 40 million. This is the the number they estimate use the roads, freeways and highways as well. Yeah his includes "visitors" which are made up of people who stay less than a year (Key metric here.)

The number can be a bit confusing and you have to extrapolate some info but the number isn't far off... the documented permanent residence of CA is right around 40 million but best estimates put it closer to 60 million actual persons.

[mecheng77]

Originally Posted by dakine_surf

I think what we were referring to is not necessarily one road with tons of traffic, but LA is a huge spiderweb of multiple 401's (be it a lane or two narrower) all intersecting. So when it comes to getting ANYWHERE at just about ANY hour you are dealing with stop and go... not just in on the freeway but in surface streets and it isn't limited to rush hour.

Right now best estimates put the greater LA area somewhere around 40 to 45 million people including undocumented persons. That number comes down a bit if you are only talking documented residents, but the simple fact is that is a ton of vehicles in an area that is only a few hundred square miles. I don't even know what the population of canada is right now, but I think it is below 40 million... it would probably be the equivalent of the entire population of canada all converging on one city for a weekend.

Originally Posted by dakine_surf

Key word is metro... LA is an interesting spot... downtown the official census is around 4 million, metro is anywhere from 17-24 million, these are population numbers tracking actual residence... things get crazy after that and at any one given day, they estimate the number of persons in The LA area to be over 40 million. This is the the number they estimate use the roads, freeways and highways as well. Yeah his includes "visitors" which are made up of people who stay less than a year (Key metric here.)

The number can be a bit confusing and you have to extrapolate some info but the number isn't far off... the documented permanent residence of CA is right around 40 million but best estimates put it closer to 60 million actual persons.

Originally Posted by dakine_surf

I think what we were referring to is not necessarily one road with tons of traffic, but LA is a huge spiderweb of multiple 401's (be it a lane or two narrower) all intersecting. So when it comes to getting ANYWHERE at just about ANY hour you are dealing with stop and go... not just in on the freeway but in surface streets and it isn't limited to rush hour.

Right now best estimates put the greater LA area somewhere around 40 to 45 million people including undocumented persons. That number comes down a bit if you are only talking documented residents, but the simple fact is that is a ton of vehicles in an area that is only a few hundred square miles. I don't even know what the population of canada is right now, but I think it is below 40 million... it would probably be the equivalent of the entire population of canada all converging on one city for a weekend.

That's due to the sanctuary city status and the perfect weather: not too hot, perfect humidity. You also need a car in LA it's not walking friendly. Our moron of a prime minister also believes in open borders, if we had California's weather we would be 400million. As big as Canada is, people congregate towards the big cities, there is 7 million just in the Toronto area and suburbs where the jobs and opportunities are