Well, I tried to reproduce what Sonny reported here this weekend. This was what I found. Setting the cruise control at 65 mph on a flat road and calm day, the mpg needle actually got very close to 40 mpg. I could travel this way for about 20 min and get between 30 - 40 mpg until I got tired and stepped on the gas. It is possible to see those numbers from the gauge, but I do not know the actual mpg without knowing the distance and the actual volume of gas used.
Announcement
Collapse
No announcement yet.
Gas Mileage
Collapse
X
-
I get mid to high 20s with my 3.73 in my 325i. I can do better but it's boring so I don't.Interested in vintage cars? Ever thought about racing one? Info, photos, videos, and more can be found at www.michaelsvintageracing.com!
Elva Courier build thread here!
Comment
-
Originally posted by dnguyen1963 View PostWell, I tried to reproduce what Sonny reported here this weekend. This was what I found. Setting the cruise control at 65 mph on a flat road and calm day, the mpg needle actually got very close to 40 mpg. I could travel this way for about 20 min and get between 30 - 40 mpg until I got tired and stepped on the gas. It is possible to see those numbers from the gauge, but I do not know the actual mpg without knowing the distance and the actual volume of gas used.
The gauge is useless for telling average mileage, it's not a linear scale either. You're also not accounting for the massive amount of fuel that is wasted while warming your car up, and I doubt you are monitoring it during stops. It doesn't even seem accurate to me, it underestimates fuel consumption during warm up, so I have no idea what its actually measuring. The gauge claims I get the same mileage at 60mph on a flat road when the engine is cold, as when it is hot. It's certainly not measuring actual fuel usage.
If I use my OBC to measure fuel consumption after the car has warmed up, I can get pretty close to 30mpg on my drive. It's the warm up period, and stop lights, which drops my average down to 24mpg or below.
OBC calculations are pretty close to what I've measured looking at distance driven vs. fill up volume.
Comment
-
Originally posted by earthwormjim View PostThe gauge is useless for telling average mileage, it's not a linear scale either. You're also not accounting for the massive amount of fuel that is wasted while warming your car up, and I doubt you are monitoring it during stops. It doesn't even seem accurate to me, it underestimates fuel consumption during warm up, so I have no idea what its actually measuring. The gauge claims I get the same mileage at 60mph on a flat road when the engine is cold, as when it is hot. It's certainly not measuring actual fuel usage.
If I use my OBC to measure fuel consumption after the car has warmed up, I can get pretty close to 30mpg on my drive. It's the warm up period, and stop lights, which drops my average down to 24mpg or below.
OBC calculations are pretty close to what I've measured looking at distance driven vs. fill up volume.
Yeah...I just tried to replicate what Sonny was reporting when he set the cruise control at 65 mph.
Comment
-
Originally posted by Sonny View PostAm I lucky to be reaping in 30 mpg usually. Cruise control managed to clean and get working and at 65mph I can hover at 40mpg for an hour straight on the interstate. Before cruise control I still managed 30mpg++
The E30 has the aerodynamics of a brick (which were pretty good for its time), so highway fuel economy, which is heavily influenced by aero is not great.
40mpg sustained is simply not plausible.2006 GMC Sierra 2500HD 4WD LBZ/Allison
2002 BMW M3 Alpinweiß/Black
1999 323i GTS2 Alpinweiß
1995 M3 Dakargelb/Black - S50B32/S6S420G/3.91
1990 325is Brilliantrot/Tan
1989 M3 Alpinweiß/Black
Hers: 1996 Porsche 911 Turbo Black/Black
Hers: 1988 325iX Coupe Diamantschwartz/Black 5spd
sigpic
Comment
-
Originally posted by r-mm View PostSaw this original sticker from an 89 fox body mustang 5.0 on BaT today. Same/Better than the ‘90 beemer with half the displacement?! And half the price. And no I do not want the mustang despite all that.
[ATTACH]127641[/ATTACH]
It’s double the price to, that is insane, how could it be $15k and the bmw $30k? Without inflation either
Comment
-
The fox body was at least as aerodynamic as the E30, and I'm sure the gearing is way more favorable, hence the better highway mileage. Highway is just gearing and aerodynamics for the most part. That E30 sticker is also for an autotragic, which is at least 5-10% worse than a manual.
You can see how the Mustang is penalized for the larger engine with the city driving. It is 1mpg lower, despite being about the same weight as an E30, even though the E30 has an automatic too.
Comment
-
Gas Mileage
Originally posted by earthwormjim View PostThe fox body was at least as aerodynamic as the E30, and I'm sure the gearing is way more favorable, hence the better highway mileage. Highway is just gearing and aerodynamics for the most part. That E30 sticker is also for an autotragic, which is at least 5-10% worse than a manual.
You can see how the Mustang is penalized for the larger engine with the city driving. It is 1mpg lower, despite being about the same weight as an E30, even though the E30 has an automatic too.
Is the build quality what brings the reason for a 2x price markup? I honestly feel like if I drive both cars into a curb at 40mph the bmw would be the only to make it.
Comment
-
Originally posted by LowR3V'in View Posti think a better question is from full tank to when the gas light turns on how many miles?
Comment
Comment