M52 + 6sp + 3.15 = 33mpg

[dinanm3atl]

Sounds like you had plenty of weight aboard. And you're not running the same wheel/tire package as the one in your sig?



Agreed, I've found most vehicles will do a couple mpgs over the EPA rating. But you guys are talking about 8-12mpg over the EPA rating.

I think there are a lot of people taking OBC information at face value here vs. calculating their actual fuel economy.

Not the case. GPS confirmed with OEM tire sizing the ODO is pretty darn argument. I went off 200-250 mile fill ups. I was filling up to fuel shut off. Then driving. Filling up again. In 6-7 gallon runs. It came out to 33mpg. My OBC is not accurate because I have an engine swap.

When you consider the engine I have was supposed to pull around a car that weighed hundreds of pounds more and can get 25-28MPG on the highway... 33mpg is not crazy. If I went really fuel saving mode and didn't have the weight in the car I think it could hit 38-40mpg.

[nando]

Honestly? Yes. Substantiate your claim that the new formula is somehow flawed.

experience. I routinely *averaged* 29mpg in that 318is. I have no idea what it would have done on a long freeway trip. My stock ix automatic easily did 21-26mpg, with *oversized* tires (there goes your tire size theory).

The EPA figures for both, originally, were pretty close to that. Then suddenly they dropped overnight. Now the EPA says my ix should average far less than what I get with a modified stroker, R-comp tires and shorter gearing. Huh? Did I improve fuel efficiency somehow or are the figures way off now?

Do you think they've retested all those old cars? 25mpg on the freeway in a 318is? you're kidding me, right?

What's really going on is they don't want people driving perfectly good old cars, when you could be buying a new one.

The OBC, like the ODO, is only accurate if you are running tire sizes that are equal in diameter to stock specs. What percentage of claimed 30+mpg cars in this thread are running stock diameter packages? I don't know.

And you think I don't know that? For the record, I usually run tires that are oversized. My 26mpg run with the auto ix was with 205/50-16's. I'm currently on 235/50-15s getting 22mpg (average).

My package? 3.8% to be exact, and accounted for in my mpg calculation.

okay, so what does that mean then? that the OBC and ODO are highly accurate? because if they weren't, your calculation for the girl tires you run wouldn't add up. :p

and even a 4% difference doesn't explain the difference between the magic updated EPA figures and reality.

[dinanm3atl]

I fully believe they are down rating older cars to make them look bad.

[euroshark]

Any of you 30+ guys using a GPS for miles traveled numbers?

I used GPS for my trip to Moab in the Pontiac and my trip to GJ in the 533i. The 533i and 535is have both used a combination of 205/55/16 or 225/50/16 tires which are as close as you can really get to the original circumference for an E28. I think altitude (air density and drag) have a lot to do with it. My dad has been daily driving an old 633CSi with an M90 + G265 combo in it for going on 11 years or so now, and even he averages 25+ on the rural 45-55mph roads out here where he racks up 250+ miles a week. All of these old things were rated in the low 20s for highway MPG when they were new... no idea what the new system says but I can't imagine it would be much different. Regardless, these are real numbers that we have lived with for years!

[nrubenstein]

I fully believe they are down rating older cars to make them look bad.

New cars perform worse in the new tests as well. I don't see why you guys think this is such a conspiracy. And frankly, in normal driving conditions, the new tests are closer to right.

[dinanm3atl]

New cars perform worse in the new tests as well. I don't see why you guys think this is such a conspiracy. And frankly, in normal driving conditions, the new tests are closer to right.

Not so sure about that... MANY a new car is getting more than their numbers. Golf Diesels are beating the EPA numbers.


However I am more referring to older vehicles like the E30. 325e EPA says 19/26. You can EASILY beat that...

[nrubenstein]

Not so sure about that... MANY a new car is getting more than their numbers. Golf Diesels are beating the EPA numbers.


However I am more referring to older vehicles like the E30. 325e EPA says 19/26. You can EASILY beat that...

*shrug* The city numbers always used to be way high for me. Now they are about right. It all depends on driving conditions.

[nando]

New cars perform worse in the new tests as well. I don't see why you guys think this is such a conspiracy. And frankly, in normal driving conditions, the new tests are closer to right.

there was no "new test" for older cars.

[dinanm3atl]

there was no "new test" for older cars.

Right. It used to be 21/28. Now 19/26. Why?

[Bimmerman325i]

*shrug* The city numbers always used to be way high for me. Now they are about right. It all depends on driving conditions.

If you're in stop and go traffic most of the time, then yea the new numbers are more accurate. There's no traffic around here, thus my mpg is better.

[nando]

the city #s are harder to nail down, where traffic and light timing is a huge factor. on an open freeway though, they should be much closer, since you're just driving in a straight line at a constant speed.

[dinanm3atl]

the city #s are harder to nail down, where traffic and light timing is a huge factor. on an open freeway though, they should be much closer, since you're just driving in a straight line at a constant speed.

Not if you are my wife... she gets better mileage while using the cruise in any vehicle we have. I get in the car and I can really do work. If my wife has been driving the X5 for a week and we go out to dinner. We can go 20-30 miles and the 'range till empty' will only go up. On the highway I could go 50 more miles at least between her and me driving. She is terrible. On and Off the gas. Cannot maintain a speed.

[nando]

yeah, that's true. I rode 150 miles on the freeway with a guy who literally would floor it for 3 seconds, and then lift. floor it for 3 seconds, then lift. for 2 hours. WTF?

I think those are the people the EPA was targeting with their new test. Turn on A/C with the windows open. Ride the brakes with your left foot. Floor it until you get right up to another car (understanding following distance? nahhh), then slamming on the brakes. etc. etc.

[dinanm3atl]

Yup. She makes me nervous. I ask her if she can just maintain the speed with barely lifting the throttle or applying throttle. She tries and it is either closed throttle or accel. I don't understand.

[Ryann]

What's really going on is they don't want people driving perfectly good old cars, when you could be buying a new one.

I love theories like this. I think this sort of shit goes on. But in this case I suspect figures were more likely adjusted to account for the shitty fucking gas most people are being forced to buy these days. I also agree and know from personal experience that BEFORE this adjustment the EPA figures were typically 2-3mpgs conservative.

okay, so what does that mean then? that the OBC and ODO are highly accurate? because if they weren't, your calculation for the girl tires you run wouldn't add up. :p

If you were paying attention you'd notice that my argument in reference to OBC and ODO readings wasn't questioning the quality or accuracy of either, it was simply pointing out that there are a lot of jackasses running 22" tall tires pressing their little OBC avg mpg button and posting the resulting numbers as though they are gospel. And if undersize tires are girly then r3v is the biggest bunch of flaming homosexuals on the web.:)

and even a 4% difference doesn't explain the difference between the magic updated EPA figures and reality.

It does for me. The best I've seen from my m42 using E10 pump gas on long trips @ 75 mph is 27mpg. I suppose I might break 30mpg if I dropped my speed to 55 but that is just not going to fucking happen.

As we all know there are other variables here too. Terrain, wind, tire compound/width/tread style, alignment, diff. ratio, speed limit, blah blah. I just don't think that 30+mpg is representative of typical e30 gas milage regardless of driving style *edit* OR engine.