Your car 'vs' BMW.

[MK4 Slowride]

It's a bit ghey but worth a punt to see how your car compares to the BMW equivalent with Efficient Dynamics.

Go to: www.bmw.co.uk

Click on Efficient Dynamics & go to compare how BMW's perform against other cars. A 116i would save me all of £30 over 10,000 miles and 1 year, me being in my Festa.

[off_again]

Mmmm, that didn't work then!

An X5 3.0si in comparison with a Lexus RX350 (didn't have the 300) actually worked out better for the Lexus!

One thing that I didn't realise though - £6k in tax for either if its a company car! Bloody hell - that's £500 a month in tax for being provided one by your company. Jeez, I knew it was bad but I didn't realise it was that bad!

Edited to add:

Even the 3.0d X5 vs the Lexus RX400h had the Lexus win...... mmm

Edited by off_again on Thursday 22 May 15:36

[Wattsie]

Yes, quite gay...

I could save abit aparently... but of course, the £25000 for the 3-series vs £17000 for another Mondeo... meh

[MK4 Slowride]

Wattsie said:

Yes, quite gay...

I could save abit aparently... but of course, the £25000 for the 3-series vs £17000 for another Mondeo... meh

The mondeo is better than a 5 series as well or so I've been told

[Zod]

Funnily enough, my car isn't on the list. I think they'd struggle to find anything with worse fuel consumption!

[MK4 Slowride]

Efficient dynamics isn't avaialble on all models. Needless to say a top end sports car like an M5 won't be on the list.

[Wattsie]

MK4 Slowride said:

Wattsie said:

Yes, quite gay...

I could save abit aparently... but of course, the £25000 for the 3-series vs £17000 for another Mondeo... meh

The mondeo is better than a 5 series as well or so I've been told

OK, I like my car, but there's no need to burn me at the stake PH-wise... Besides, I'm not a bassist

[BigBen]

off_again said:

Mmmm, that didn't work then!

An X5 3.0si in comparison with a Lexus RX350 (didn't have the 300) actually worked out better for the Lexus!

One thing that I didn't realise though - £6k in tax for either if its a company car! Bloody hell - that's £500 a month in tax for being provided one by your company. Jeez, I knew it was bad but I didn't realise it was that bad!

Edited to add:

Even the 3.0d X5 vs the Lexus RX400h had the Lexus win...... mmm

Edited by off_again on Thursday 22 May 15:36

Isn't the £6k the extra amount you will be taxed on, i.e. 40% of 6k still a stload but not as bad as it first looks

Ben

[jamoor]

Crikey, they are too green, anyone know where I can get a similar car that will emit more carbons?

[off_again]

Gazboy said:

Couldn't compare my Supra to a 335i but did compare a 116SE to my Getz. The BMW is cheaper in fuel (£75 a year) for a touch more performance (1.1 seconds faster to 60) but it's £1-000 more expensive to buy, more to insure and they don't mention service costs and consumables...

I somewhat doubt that Hyundai charge £100 per hour labour too...

[john_r]

I notice that none of the BMW 'M' models are listed... however Audi RS's and similar are listed.

[MK4 Slowride]

john_r said:

I notice that none of the BMW 'M' models are listed... however Audi RS's and similar are listed.

That's because M-models and other large powerful models (eg: 650i) don't have ED. The Audi is listed for comparison reasons. Say you want to p/x you audi against a 320d.

[havoc]

Did anyone find Porsche in the manufacturers list? Unusual omission...

As for that - interesting, but it doesn't tell you anything about running costs (inc. depreciation).

[MK4 Slowride]

FFS it's about efficiency not overall ownership.

[J111]

john_r said:

I notice that none of the BMW 'M' models are listed... however Audi RS's and similar are listed.

Not the RS4 Avant *shrugs*

I'm more interested in how it performs at 6am on a warm summer's day blast, rather than how many planet destroying nasties it spews out, tbh.

[john_r]

MK4 Slowride said:

FFS it's about efficiency not overall ownership.

I disagree - they show a financial comparison at the end implying that an ED car would be substantially cheaper to own... Not very effective and potentially misleading if they omit depreciation.

And the small print at the bottom is hilarious: Annual fuel costs based on xxx miles at a cost of 107 pence/ltr (petrol) and 114 pence/ltr (diesel).

I'd fking love to buy petrol at 107p and diesel at 114p!

[havoc]

MK4 Slowride said:

FFS it's about efficiency not overall ownership.

But WGAF about fuel-efficiency if the depreciation and running costs are shafting your wallet every year?

Neither of my cars gives me over 30mpg on average, yet the depreciation and running costs are a LOT lower than most of the other cars that catch my eye...which means overall they're pretty affordable!

But by your reckoning I should buy a new(er), more fuel-efficient car which will actually cost me more overall???

[MK4 Slowride]

john_r said:

MK4 Slowride said:

FFS it's about efficiency not overall ownership.

I disagree - they show a financial comparison at the end implying that an ED car would be substantially cheaper to own... Not very effective and potentially misleading if they omit depreciation.

And the small print at the bottom is hilarious: Annual fuel costs based on xxx miles at a cost of 107 pence/ltr (petrol) and 114 pence/ltr (diesel).

I'd fking love to buy petrol at 107p and diesel at 114p!

Still got some work to do on the site then.

petrol is £111.9 near me (cheapest)