The Motor Forum

Martin · Posted: Thu Oct 29, 2009 2:53 pm Post subject: 60.1mpg!

On the first tank full, the 520d managed 49.5mpg on the OBC, which was 47.8 'real' mpg over 685 miles. Most of that was on the motorway around 80mph or crawling in traffic on the M4, so it isn't a bad result.

I am 530 miles into the second tankful and the OBC is reading 53.5mpg and the range is 245 miles. I'm going to fill up earlier than that as the running in period is now over and I want to see what the real consumption is before I start using more of the performance!

This tank has been about 50/50 motorway/dual carraigeway and single carriageway roads and I've been doing 75-80 when possible and overtaking a reasonable amount, so it wouldn't be too painful to replicate.

So, 60mpg. This is what I managed yesterday, only trying a little... (taken from the journey computer which I reset in Wellingborough and then drove to Luton)

This picture is the OBC at the same time, I had done just over 400 miles since filling up at the point I took this picture.

_________________

Big TC · Posted: Thu Oct 29, 2009 3:35 pm Post subject:

Fantastic figures!

Now, where's the number for my BMW dealer...
_________________

It's a '57 Pontiac Star Chief, dontchaknow.

PG · Posted: Thu Oct 29, 2009 4:02 pm Post subject:

It was on Radio 2 yesterday about terrible tailbacks on the Wellingborough to Luton road due to "an unbelievably slow BMW"

Grampa · Posted: Thu Oct 29, 2009 4:07 pm Post subject: Re: 60.1mpg!

scamper · Posted: Thu Oct 29, 2009 5:06 pm Post subject:

That's an improvement over my older 320d. I never did it as scientifically as you, but I doubt I got more than a 48 mpg average over a decent m'way run.

Martin · Posted: Thu Oct 29, 2009 6:23 pm Post subject:

I guess the newer engine is more efficient? All the efficient dynamics stuff has probably improved as well. Also, remember that a 520d doesn't weigh any more than a 320d.

In terms of efficient dynamics, mine doesn't have the venitian blinds behind the grille (only on the SE for some reason) and the 5 series doesn't have stop start either, so the current 1 & 3 series ranges should do even better.

The type of roads I drive on does help, no stop/start town driving and a high proportion of single carraigeway A roads must be the optimum in terms of fuel consumption.

Trust me, I haven't been driving slowly enough to hold anyone up!! I think if I really tried to drive economically, I could get 60mpg on a tank and that would be nearly 900 miles on a tank!!

Don't worry, normal service will be resumed tomorrow! As soon as I've filled up and recorded the actual mpg figure......

Out of interest (to me only I guess!), I've looked back at my records for the Passat and driven exactly the same way on the same roads, the average consumption over the first two tanks was 46.4 and 42.4. It actually got better with more miles on the clock, my best mpg figure for a whole tank was 47.5 so I've beaten that already.
_________________

Martin · Posted: Thu Oct 29, 2009 6:26 pm Post subject: Re: 60.1mpg!

scamper · Posted: Thu Oct 29, 2009 7:30 pm Post subject:

Are you sure the 5 series is not heavier? How come the C02 tax ratings are 1% different then?

DaveGibson · Posted: Thu Oct 29, 2009 9:14 pm Post subject:

Martin · Posted: Thu Oct 29, 2009 11:25 pm Post subject:

According to BMW:

320d M Sport Touring - 1580kg
520d M Sport Bus Ed - 1585kg

The 320d has stop/start and the quick warm up venetian blind things, that must make the difference? The difference is only 6 carbons between the 320 Touring and the 520 Saloon, so it's not much.

I've just filled up near home, 706 miles with 62 left on the range and 50.8 actual mpg.
_________________

Pkh72 · Posted: Fri Oct 30, 2009 9:11 am Post subject:

Boxer6 · Posted: Fri Oct 30, 2009 9:19 am Post subject:

Mark · Posted: Fri Oct 30, 2009 9:33 am Post subject:

Frank Bullitt · Posted: Fri Oct 30, 2009 9:39 am Post subject:

"him" · Posted: Fri Oct 30, 2009 9:48 am Post subject:

garry · Posted: Fri Oct 30, 2009 2:29 pm Post subject:

That's really impressive. BMW have made great progress in economy but it doesn't get the recognition it deserves. I suspect because prius driving eco warriors are bitter little bmw haters at heart - can't let the facts get in the way!

Be interested to know how hard driving impacts economy. I can get 47mpg if I drive like a nun and 40mpg in normal driving style. The worst I've seen is 33mpg.

TimR · Posted: Fri Oct 30, 2009 3:39 pm Post subject:

Stuntman · Posted: Fri Oct 30, 2009 7:18 pm Post subject:

Bastard!
My BMW has averaged 19.7 mpg over nearly 7000 miles

_________________
Drifting through life

Martin · Posted: Fri Oct 30, 2009 8:44 pm Post subject:

Martin · Posted: Fri Oct 30, 2009 8:45 pm Post subject:

Gooner · Posted: Fri Oct 30, 2009 11:46 pm Post subject:

You need to behave less. I'm down to 44mpg in my Focus and counting. If I can get it to match the average of 38 that the Civic used too, then I'm probably going to have to behave. Until then life's too short to worry about my fuel cards feelings!
_________________

- Insert clever and/or amusing quote here -

Martin · Posted: Fri Oct 30, 2009 11:53 pm Post subject:

As you can see above, not behaving gave me 47.8mpg and I couldn't even keep it that low by the end of the day!
_________________

simonp · Posted: Sat Oct 31, 2009 12:38 am Post subject:

Mark · Posted: Sat Oct 31, 2009 6:59 pm Post subject: Re: 60.1mpg!

Martin · Posted: Sat Oct 31, 2009 10:43 pm Post subject:

Grampa · Posted: Sun Nov 01, 2009 12:37 am Post subject:

Both our cars have computers which I imagine will tell you what the fuel consumption is, but to be honest I've never been interested enough even to bother trying to find out which button you press to find out.

Far more interested in the way they go than how much fuel they use to do it.

When they need filling up they need filling up.
_________________
Andrew L

Mark · Posted: Sun Nov 01, 2009 3:16 am Post subject:

[quote="Martin"][quote="simonp"]

garry · Posted: Sun Nov 01, 2009 9:58 am Post subject:

Martin · Posted: Sun Nov 01, 2009 10:22 am Post subject:

Grampa · Posted: Sun Nov 01, 2009 5:37 pm Post subject:

Martin · Posted: Sun Nov 01, 2009 8:52 pm Post subject:

It's just an 'out of interest' thing, that's all!!

Economy as such doesn't make it into the top 10 considerations, but I wouldn't have a car that only did 200-300 miles on a tank. Ideally it would have double that, so I can go 3 days without filling up. I would be happy with a bigger tank and less mpg!

If it makes you feel any better, I popped to Tesco in the MINI this evening (one of the local ones) and it took me about an hour to do the 1 mile journey. There are some great roads not far from me and it was fantastic fun.

I didn't even look at the MPG and I'm paying for that myself....!!
_________________

Grampa · Posted: Sun Nov 01, 2009 11:23 pm Post subject:

Martin · Posted: Sun Nov 01, 2009 11:26 pm Post subject:

Apex clipper · Posted: Mon Nov 02, 2009 9:43 am Post subject:

60 MPG. Blinking heck.

Do you hoist a sail (Ala JAMES MAY) when favourable winds a allow?
_________________
Minky Moo & Millie Maloo.

TimR · Posted: Mon Nov 02, 2009 11:53 am Post subject:

I (we, more fairly) got 60mpg out of the Stilo once - over 600 miles and at 47mph.

Not bad for a full load either.

Couldn't get close to it again though

scamper · Posted: Mon Nov 02, 2009 12:47 pm Post subject:

I've been drivign around in a poverty spec A4 Avant 2.0tdi 120PS this weekend. Nice enough engine, and i see no need for the 140 or 170 versions, but was quite surprised that the fuel economy seemed no better, at around 43mpg over a wide varienty of driving.

gonnabuildabuggy · Posted: Mon Nov 02, 2009 8:40 pm Post subject:

tali · Posted: Mon Nov 02, 2009 10:21 pm Post subject:

franki68 · Petrolhead Joined: 10 Jan 2007 Posts: 2382

if you move the decimal point one place to the left you get the exact fuel consumption of the BMW m6 when I had it.

Dr. Hfuhruhurr · Posted: Tue Nov 03, 2009 1:03 pm Post subject:

That's why it was called the M6. Though there's no truth in the rumour that the cancelled lightweight version was going to be called the M6 Toll, because it was faster but more expensive.

Jasper · Posted: Tue Nov 03, 2009 2:50 pm Post subject:

I can always count on the Dr giving me a wee lunchtime giggle.

60mpg is impressive. I'm glad you're enjoying your new car Martin.
_________________

Martin · Posted: Tue Nov 03, 2009 8:08 pm Post subject:

Thanks Jasper, it's fantastic, I love it!

Lots of A roads and not too many 90 lepton motorway runs have me on 48.3 at the moment with 500 miles down so I expect it will be a real 46. I'm now driving it properly!!
_________________