335d/435d or 535d
Discussion
tjlees said:
The F31 is carrying around an extra 60kg and is less dynamic, and since alot of the fuel used at 75mph goes towards overcoming drag (see http://www.lowtechmagazine.com/2008/09/speed-energ... and many others) it may go towards some of the reason. People with F34s will also struggle because of the drag and extra 115kg over and above an F30.
Anyway you have a cool touring car - enjoy! Use the more frequent fuel stops to admire its lines
I can see that an F30 will be a bit better on fuel but I'd have thought the difference would be only 2 or 3 mpg? Filled-up again this morning and, just to improve my humour, recorded my worst tank result so far at 34.4 mpg (which has in turn reduced the running average to just below 38); not impressed but hopefully things will improve when I start doing some longer runs and the weather warms up a bit. The F31 is without doubt a very nice car and generally I'm very pleased with mine; however, my main motive for going diesel was the increased range I thought would come with the better fuel consumption and so far it's not evident to anything like the extent I was expecting.......Anyway you have a cool touring car - enjoy! Use the more frequent fuel stops to admire its lines
JNW1 said:
I can see that an F30 will be a bit better on fuel but I'd have thought the difference would be only 2 or 3 mpg? Filled-up again this morning and, just to improve my humour, recorded my worst tank result so far at 34.4 mpg (which has in turn reduced the running average to just below 38); not impressed but hopefully things will improve when I start doing some longer runs and the weather warms up a bit. The F31 is without doubt a very nice car and generally I'm very pleased with mine; however, my main motive for going diesel was the increased range I thought would come with the better fuel consumption and so far it's not evident to anything like the extent I was expecting.......
Wow - do all 335d F31s get around 34-38mpg? Was the trip computer showing a similar figure? (just trying gauge how accurate the bmer trip is)Though the combined mpg differs by a couple of gallons, the drag difference between the f30 and f31 increases with the square of the speed and therefore the power difference needed to push a car through air increases with the cube of the velocity (if i've understood it properly). That is at higher speeds of 75-80 the mpg difference will be more significant.
However, for me, even on a 20 mile run in Eco the oil is only just hit 100c and possibly the DPF regen is kicking in more frequently, which probably explains why i'm only getting 42-44mpg hauling 1.7t at no more than 50mph up and down the Cotwolds. Whereas on flat constant speed on motorway of 70 (GPS verfied) i'm seeing 50+mpg and on the naughty of 70 the very right side of 40mpg - even if you throw in stop/start traffic.
tjlees said:
Wow - do all 335d F31s get around 34-38mpg? Was the trip computer showing a similar figure? (just trying gauge how accurate the bmer trip is)
Though the combined mpg differs by a couple of gallons, the drag difference between the f30 and f31 increases with the square of the speed and therefore the power difference needed to push a car through air increases with the cube of the velocity (if i've understood it properly). That is at higher speeds of 75-80 the mpg difference will be more significant.
However, for me, even on a 20 mile run in Eco the oil is only just hit 100c and possibly the DPF regen is kicking in more frequently, which probably explains why i'm only getting 42-44mpg hauling 1.7t at no more than 50mph up and down the Cotwolds. Whereas on flat constant speed on motorway of 70 (GPS verfied) i'm seeing 50+mpg and on the naughty of 70 the very right side of 40mpg - even if you throw in stop/start traffic.
Despite my post yesterday I don't generally get too hung-up on individual tank results, it's more the running average I keep an eye on; that's now sitting at 37.8 against a computer reading of 39.7. Being fair to the car I do think the current running total hasn't been helped by the combination of a lack of long journeys and the cold weather so I'll see how that changes as the weather warms up and I start to do more long runs. In truth I never expected the car to achieve the combined figure of 50mpg but I did expect it to be within 20% which would imply an average of something starting with a 4; in similar driving conditions my E92 335i missed its combined figure by "only" 10% and I suppose it's using that as a benchmark that's causing my disappointment with the 335d! Though the combined mpg differs by a couple of gallons, the drag difference between the f30 and f31 increases with the square of the speed and therefore the power difference needed to push a car through air increases with the cube of the velocity (if i've understood it properly). That is at higher speeds of 75-80 the mpg difference will be more significant.
However, for me, even on a 20 mile run in Eco the oil is only just hit 100c and possibly the DPF regen is kicking in more frequently, which probably explains why i'm only getting 42-44mpg hauling 1.7t at no more than 50mph up and down the Cotwolds. Whereas on flat constant speed on motorway of 70 (GPS verfied) i'm seeing 50+mpg and on the naughty of 70 the very right side of 40mpg - even if you throw in stop/start traffic.
Do people seriously put these cars into Eco pro from starting up? Surely you wait until its at 100 degrees then put in sport or Eco pro or leave it in comfort.
The damage you lot are doing on short trips using this mind set is very short sighted /if you are not intending on keeping the car long term clearly you wouldn't care.
The damage you lot are doing on short trips using this mind set is very short sighted /if you are not intending on keeping the car long term clearly you wouldn't care.
JNW1 said:
Despite my post yesterday I don't generally get too hung-up on individual tank results, it's more the running average I keep an eye on; that's now sitting at 37.8 against a computer reading of 39.7. Being fair to the car I do think the current running total hasn't been helped by the combination of a lack of long journeys and the cold weather so I'll see how that changes as the weather warms up and I start to do more long runs. In truth I never expected the car to achieve the combined figure of 50mpg but I did expect it to be within 20% which would imply an average of something starting with a 4; in similar driving conditions my E92 335i missed its combined figure by "only" 10% and I suppose it's using that as a benchmark that's causing my disappointment with the 335d!
Took the D3 into Central London yesterday for the whole day it averaged 34.1mpg which compared to the Merc which is shows around 28 if doing the same journey.
Welshbeef said:
Eco pro comfort sport or sport+?
A mixture of all three depending on the level of traffic I was in, it's funny though because I normally take the motorbike in it always frustrates me at how long it takes to get anywhere in the car during rush hour between 60-90 minutes(I don't know how people do it everyday) to get to the office vs 30-40 & it works out at about double for the fuel to, but sometimes needs must.Edited by ZX10R NIN on Tuesday 24th February 08:14
Welshbeef said:
Do people seriously put these cars into Eco pro from starting up? Surely you wait until its at 100 degrees then put in sport or Eco pro or leave it in comfort.
The damage you lot are doing on short trips using this mind set is very short sighted /if you are not intending on keeping the car long term clearly you wouldn't care.
Not sure this is true, in fact I'm wondering if you haven't got it the opposite way round.The damage you lot are doing on short trips using this mind set is very short sighted /if you are not intending on keeping the car long term clearly you wouldn't care.
Eco pro will be a lean burn. The engine will take longer to heat up possibly.
sport or comfort will be a richer burn, and probably cause more particulate matter or unburnt, but the engine will probably heat up faster.
I'm really not sure which would win out, and would be interested if your conviction is based on anything you have read that you could link to?
I rarely bother with EcoPro unless I plan to do a 70-75mph cruise in traffic as it's a pretty terrible mode.
Surprisingly to me I let me wife drive my 640d for the first time Sunday and even on a relatively short x-country cold journey of only 25 miles she managed 44mpg!!!! Although quite a few miles through SPECS average speed checks.
Still it surprised me as my average is 34.8mpg and I get 39ish when I take it easy over the same distance.
Surprisingly to me I let me wife drive my 640d for the first time Sunday and even on a relatively short x-country cold journey of only 25 miles she managed 44mpg!!!! Although quite a few miles through SPECS average speed checks.
Still it surprised me as my average is 34.8mpg and I get 39ish when I take it easy over the same distance.
Well (I don't have Eco pro) but this morning country roads it took 8 miles from starting for oil to be at 100degrees.
Seems like a big difference to Eco pro and clearly mine is then ready to use properly from that point. If someone is taking nearly 20 miles to get to operating temps and then turn it off I wonder if that's really the best option.
Seems like a big difference to Eco pro and clearly mine is then ready to use properly from that point. If someone is taking nearly 20 miles to get to operating temps and then turn it off I wonder if that's really the best option.
Welshbeef said:
julian64 said:
By the way, over this whole thread no-ones talked about DPF's in relatively large sized diesel engines.
Does the 335xd not have dpf problems, anyone ever heard about someone needing a new DPF in one of these?
Its not really an issue - personally have had no issues at all they last c150k+++ miles so its a consumable but long life. Does the 335xd not have dpf problems, anyone ever heard about someone needing a new DPF in one of these?
I believe the cheaper brands eg Ford/VW etc do have the issue but Jag/Merc/BMW/Bently/Bristol don't.
moffat said:
I rarely bother with EcoPro unless I plan to do a 70-75mph cruise in traffic as it's a pretty terrible mode.
I agree it is a terrible mode and I have only tried it once and it didn't make any difference to the MPG yet when I had a 320d as a loan car I put that in EcoPro and it did improve the MPG a fair bit.I don't bother with stop/start either I just turn it off as soon as I start the car up because when its active it just reminds me how unrefined the engine feels(typical diesel) when it cranks back up when you move off and it just vibrates the car to bits and it annoys me too much so I am happy just not to use it.
Welshbeef said:
Well (I don't have Eco pro) but this morning country roads it took 8 miles from starting for oil to be at 100degrees.
Seems like a big difference to Eco pro and clearly mine is then ready to use properly from that point. If someone is taking nearly 20 miles to get to operating temps and then turn it off I wonder if that's really the best option.
I think the reason that Eco pro takes so long to warm the oil is because it keeps the engine ticking over at around 1000rpm especially since i'm not doing more than 40-50 and its usually 5c or under when I start out - yesterday it was only 4c when I came back. Even at 70 in comfort you are at 1500ish rpm.Seems like a big difference to Eco pro and clearly mine is then ready to use properly from that point. If someone is taking nearly 20 miles to get to operating temps and then turn it off I wonder if that's really the best option.
Away 75% of the engine damage occurs during warm-up according to the oil companies, however other websites claim that running the engine at almost idle gently during warmup minimises wear. The only thing that seems consistent is running a cold engine hard causes lots of damage.
Because of the relatively bad comsumption on F335d in the winter so far, I've mainly reverted back to the other diesel which sees between 62-65mpg in the same conditions/journey and SWMBO gets to play with a straight six for her 70 miles round trip
ZX10R NIN said:
A mixture of all three depending on the level of traffic I was in, it's funny though because I normally take the motorbike in it always frustrates me at how long it takes to get anywhere in the car during rush hour between 60-90 minutes(I don't know how people do it everyday) to get to the office vs 30-40 & it works out at about double for the fuel to, but sometimes needs must.
Interesting, mine spends most of its time in comfort unless I'm wanting to go a bit more quickly on a twisty road in which case I use sport; tried eco-pro once just to see what it did and suffice to say I haven't bothered with it again!Edited by ZX10R NIN on Tuesday 24th February 08:14
Edited by JNW1 on Tuesday 24th February 18:43
On the same route same conditions similar traffic for the whole trip what have people found the step difference between comfort and Eco pro?
I don't have Eco pro but the difference in urgency between comfort and sport is huge the gearbox comes alive and your really on it.
Not sure if it was this thread or another but one PH chap thought it was accelerate change gear wait accelerate ie assuming its a slow changing box... Either he has never driven the ZF8 or his experiance is in a broken example.
I don't have Eco pro but the difference in urgency between comfort and sport is huge the gearbox comes alive and your really on it.
Not sure if it was this thread or another but one PH chap thought it was accelerate change gear wait accelerate ie assuming its a slow changing box... Either he has never driven the ZF8 or his experiance is in a broken example.
I get 39 out of my F32 435d. That's sat at 90 on the motorways the majority of time or spirited drives on the back roads. That's in comfort with 24 degree heating and heated seats so not to bad.
When I had an F33 430d that only got 35 on the same sort of driving. Put that down to the heavy roof.
My brothers F31 330d gets around 42. That's an xDrive one too.
When I had an F33 430d that only got 35 on the same sort of driving. Put that down to the heavy roof.
My brothers F31 330d gets around 42. That's an xDrive one too.
PHlL said:
I get 39 out of my F32 435d. That's sat at 90 on the motorways the majority of time or spirited drives on the back roads. That's in comfort with 24 degree heating and heated seats so not to bad.
When I had an F33 430d that only got 35 on the same sort of driving. Put that down to the heavy roof.
My brothers F31 330d gets around 42. That's an xDrive one too.
Is that 39mpg door to door (if so roughly what distance and how far from M way?) @ high m way speed?When I had an F33 430d that only got 35 on the same sort of driving. Put that down to the heavy roof.
My brothers F31 330d gets around 42. That's an xDrive one too.
I found my old 330d E90 the mpg hardly changed on m way between 65-85+mpg.
The F10 535d I can get 46-48mpg if at 60mph on the m way - did 46mpg today on a 20mile m way drive. If if have carried on it would have continued to go up just not sure how much more though.
When we go on long trips say 180-200miles 4 up (2kids laiden with luggage and brimmed with fuel heated seats on climate on (well both always are anyway) and comfort only -- generally I get 42mpg though have to add where we go it gets hilly towards the end which really kills economy.
Similar ish trips only 2 up in the E90 330d 231bhp I'd be high 40's mpg or sneaking into 50-53mpg.
Gassing Station | BMW General | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff