F31 330d xdrive economy - not great
Discussion
I’ve just completed an 1800 mile round trip to the south of France and thought I'd post my fuel economy figures.
The car had 1300 miles on the clock at the start of the trip and it's got a TDI Tuning box on it which supposedly gives another 40+ bhp and 150+ NM of torque.
On the way down, I recorded 33mpg averaging 90-100mph most of the way. I used cruise control when I could.
As I was expecting a bit more I decided to take the tuning box off it for the journey back and averaged 35mpg with an average speed of 85-90 so not a lot better.
I did try running it in eco pro mode but this made no difference to the mpg except for giving me messages on the dash to reduce speed ! I also noticed it was more gentle on the throttle when resuming the set cruise control speed.
So overall;
Not that good on fuel
Maybe better after the engine has done a few more thousand miles?
TDI tuning box didn’t have any effect on MPG
TDI tuning box does give a bit more oomph but the standard engine is so good I’m not sure I really need it
ECO Pro doesn’t improve economy when cruising at high speed.
That said, I don’t really care that it only does 30ish mpg as it is a brilliant car, the engine is fabulous and it sounds great so it just encourages you to drive it hard. It does suffer a bit from buffeting when passing vans/trucks (maybe down to the estate body?) but other than that it was a totally relaxing drive.
Has anyone got anywhere near the 55mpg BMW advertise?
The car had 1300 miles on the clock at the start of the trip and it's got a TDI Tuning box on it which supposedly gives another 40+ bhp and 150+ NM of torque.
On the way down, I recorded 33mpg averaging 90-100mph most of the way. I used cruise control when I could.
As I was expecting a bit more I decided to take the tuning box off it for the journey back and averaged 35mpg with an average speed of 85-90 so not a lot better.
I did try running it in eco pro mode but this made no difference to the mpg except for giving me messages on the dash to reduce speed ! I also noticed it was more gentle on the throttle when resuming the set cruise control speed.
So overall;
Not that good on fuel
Maybe better after the engine has done a few more thousand miles?
TDI tuning box didn’t have any effect on MPG
TDI tuning box does give a bit more oomph but the standard engine is so good I’m not sure I really need it
ECO Pro doesn’t improve economy when cruising at high speed.
That said, I don’t really care that it only does 30ish mpg as it is a brilliant car, the engine is fabulous and it sounds great so it just encourages you to drive it hard. It does suffer a bit from buffeting when passing vans/trucks (maybe down to the estate body?) but other than that it was a totally relaxing drive.
Has anyone got anywhere near the 55mpg BMW advertise?
RichardM5 said:
I think 30mpg at 90-100mph is pretty bloody good!
I'm sure if you drove in Eco Pro at a constant 55mph on the level you'd get over 55mpg.
If you drive at 90-100mph then economy will of course take a hammering. I'm sure if you drove in Eco Pro at a constant 55mph on the level you'd get over 55mpg.
I did the same trip in an e61 550i (South London to Perpignan and back) and averaged 27.5mpg. I also did the same (well similar, South London to Provence) trip in my e46 330d and averaged 41mpg.
I must admit I would have thought the F31 330d would have spanked both of those cars in the mpg stakes by a reasonable margin!
If you look at what the test involves for the mpg figures manufacturers quote then there's no surprise they plummet above 80mph. The extra urban part of the test is mainly constant 70kph (~43mph) then a small time at 100kph(60mph) and then 120kph (~73mph) with lots of coasting in between 
I'd say it was fairly realistic to take the urban figure they quote as a real life average.
I'd say it was fairly realistic to take the urban figure they quote as a real life average.
I guess the economy isn’t too bad considering the average speed although it felt like I went a fair bit slower on the way back without any real improvement in economy.
I’m only getting around 30 mpg on the urban cycle as well.
As I said, I don’t really care and measured it more out of interest than anything else.
I’m only getting around 30 mpg on the urban cycle as well.
As I said, I don’t really care and measured it more out of interest than anything else.
Not an F31 330d xdrive, but in my comparable 2011 C 300 CDI 4matic (4 wheel drive and similar power/weight: 231 bhp/540 nm, remapped to 290 bhp/680 nm) I averaged 30 mpg on my last trips Belgium-Brussels, with an average speed of 89 mph over 1000 km. This includes slow 100 kph driving as well as 180-200 kph cruising where possible, with occasional 220-250 kph stints.
Your fuel economy seems pretty good to me.
Your fuel economy seems pretty good to me.
il sole said:
Phateuk said:
33mpg doing 90-100mph isn't bad going IMO
I agree. if I did those sort of speeds in the 330i, i wouldn't see more than 26!I have a 330d xDrive touring with 9000 miles on it. My commute which is 70 miles each way returns early 40's. Overall average is 37 with spirited driving. Never use ecoPro as over 70 it makes no difference.
I took a 535d touring to Italy a couple of years ago via Germany so lots of 120+ mph crusing and some flat out, plus all the local roads, Alps etc and it managed 34.5 overall. Suspect yours isn't that bad OP with only a few miles on.
I took a 535d touring to Italy a couple of years ago via Germany so lots of 120+ mph crusing and some flat out, plus all the local roads, Alps etc and it managed 34.5 overall. Suspect yours isn't that bad OP with only a few miles on.
Big (ish) heavy (ish) 4wd car driven at high speeds returns only average fuel economy.
Not really the story of the century now is it!
Modern cars get good fuel economy by being efficient. However, if as a driver you demand a lot of power (like doing 100mpg), then they must burn a corresponding amount of fuel to produce it.
Not really the story of the century now is it!
Modern cars get good fuel economy by being efficient. However, if as a driver you demand a lot of power (like doing 100mpg), then they must burn a corresponding amount of fuel to produce it.
The point is that the op is talking about dissapointing fuel economy.
The implication is that car companies are selling cars based on unrealistically advertised mpg figures.
For pistonheaders this is doubly frustrating because the idea that people can retain performance and any sort of fuel economy is looking like a marketing hoodwink once the car has been driven away from the dealership.
SOOOOOOOOOO
you need to compare an old world fun car with the new world equivalent, and actually look at the 'pistonheadfun:fuel cost' ratio. Hence my post and hence the comparison not only being relevant, but actually bang on thread?
The implication is that car companies are selling cars based on unrealistically advertised mpg figures.
For pistonheaders this is doubly frustrating because the idea that people can retain performance and any sort of fuel economy is looking like a marketing hoodwink once the car has been driven away from the dealership.
SOOOOOOOOOO
you need to compare an old world fun car with the new world equivalent, and actually look at the 'pistonheadfun:fuel cost' ratio. Hence my post and hence the comparison not only being relevant, but actually bang on thread?
julian64 said:
The point is that the op is talking about dissapointing fuel economy.
The implication is that car companies are selling cars based on unrealistically advertised mpg figures.
For pistonheaders this is doubly frustrating because the idea that people can retain performance and any sort of fuel economy is looking like a marketing hoodwink once the car has been driven away from the dealership.
SOOOOOOOOOO
you need to compare an old world fun car with the new world equivalent, and actually look at the 'pistonheadfun:fuel cost' ratio. Hence my post and hence the comparison not only being relevant, but actually bang on thread?
Why are the car companies doing that? Where do they say you will achieve their stated mileage when averaging "90-100mph?The implication is that car companies are selling cars based on unrealistically advertised mpg figures.
For pistonheaders this is doubly frustrating because the idea that people can retain performance and any sort of fuel economy is looking like a marketing hoodwink once the car has been driven away from the dealership.
SOOOOOOOOOO
you need to compare an old world fun car with the new world equivalent, and actually look at the 'pistonheadfun:fuel cost' ratio. Hence my post and hence the comparison not only being relevant, but actually bang on thread?
Frankly anyone who expects to get anywhere near the manufacturers' figures driving at those speeds is naive in the extreme and any 'disappointment' is well deserved.
I've never found it difficult to achieve or better manufacturers figures driving 'normally, nor found it hard to get much worse figures whilst pushing along.
REALIST123 said:
julian64 said:
The point is that the op is talking about dissapointing fuel economy.
The implication is that car companies are selling cars based on unrealistically advertised mpg figures.
For pistonheaders this is doubly frustrating because the idea that people can retain performance and any sort of fuel economy is looking like a marketing hoodwink once the car has been driven away from the dealership.
SOOOOOOOOOO
you need to compare an old world fun car with the new world equivalent, and actually look at the 'pistonheadfun:fuel cost' ratio. Hence my post and hence the comparison not only being relevant, but actually bang on thread?
Why are the car companies doing that? Where do they say you will achieve their stated mileage when averaging "90-100mph?The implication is that car companies are selling cars based on unrealistically advertised mpg figures.
For pistonheaders this is doubly frustrating because the idea that people can retain performance and any sort of fuel economy is looking like a marketing hoodwink once the car has been driven away from the dealership.
SOOOOOOOOOO
you need to compare an old world fun car with the new world equivalent, and actually look at the 'pistonheadfun:fuel cost' ratio. Hence my post and hence the comparison not only being relevant, but actually bang on thread?
Frankly anyone who expects to get anywhere near the manufacturers' figures driving at those speeds is naive in the extreme and any 'disappointment' is well deserved.
I've never found it difficult to achieve or better manufacturers figures driving 'normally, nor found it hard to get much worse figures whilst pushing along.
If you watch an advert on TV for a BMW 330 you will not see them driving at 43 miles an hour. You will see references to the joy of life, the love of cars and their ability to affect you emotionally. A half naked women will sit beside you enjoying the wind through her hair and the car will speed off into the distant setting sun at warp factor six.
Note the advert doesn't show a OAP accountant watching his speedo through his bifocals to make sure it doesn't move away from peak fuel efficiency at 'you are a boring git' speeds.
Obviously the OP, if you read between the lines like to enjoy his transport at spirited speeds. I too like to enjoy my car at spirited speeds. Hence I think the comparison is justified at spirited speeds.
If this was a thread about how boring you can be in a car rather than real world for an enthusiast you would undoubtedly have my full attention.
Gassing Station | BMW General | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff