Discussion
This is what happens when things are operated by bands rather than a constantly varying function, but because it's "easier for people to work out", that's the way it is..
You'd be really, really unhappy if I told you that the NEDC tests are also bracketed into vehicle weights, and those influence the results. It's desirable to have a car which is at the very lightest end of a weight bracket, as obviously it then performs well in that group and gets a better result.
Because of this, if a car should happen to be at the heavy end of a lower bracket, it's not unheard of for a manufacturer to add some weight back into a design just so it becomes the lightest possible weight in the next bracket up instead.
Probably the most counterproductive thing I've heard of in the whole NEDC process.
You'd be really, really unhappy if I told you that the NEDC tests are also bracketed into vehicle weights, and those influence the results. It's desirable to have a car which is at the very lightest end of a weight bracket, as obviously it then performs well in that group and gets a better result.
Because of this, if a car should happen to be at the heavy end of a lower bracket, it's not unheard of for a manufacturer to add some weight back into a design just so it becomes the lightest possible weight in the next bracket up instead.
Probably the most counterproductive thing I've heard of in the whole NEDC process.
chrisw666 said:
I've always liked the 630, does this mean they'll be cheap?
Yes, this is a point, if the VED was £200 a year we would probably find they would be more expensive to buy, if it is circa £200 difference, it is annoying but on a car like this it wont be the biggest cost, I suppose though, if you are paying that much for a non M version ont eh VED, you may as well go for the V8 ones.Surprised how quick these are considering they are the cooking version and are starting to look decent value, how much slower are they than a 330i with the same engine ?
Remarkably, they're only 60kg heavier, very impressive - an E92 330i comes in at 1545kg, but the similar-vintage 630i only 1605kg.
So you'd notice no difference whatsoever in real-world acceleration. Can't find any 0-100mph figures, which would be helpful, but 0-62mph says 6.1 for the 3er, 6.2 for the "big" 6er. Nice..
That's the hard top, obviously. Add 150kg or more for a drophead, I presume
So you'd notice no difference whatsoever in real-world acceleration. Can't find any 0-100mph figures, which would be helpful, but 0-62mph says 6.1 for the 3er, 6.2 for the "big" 6er. Nice..
That's the hard top, obviously. Add 150kg or more for a drophead, I presume
The whole point of a punitive tax bracket is undermined when a tank of fuel costs £150. My ML attracts the upper tax band but once you've resolved yourself to a tank of fuel per week the tax is just an irritation.
VED makes no sense and the argument for retaining it over junking it in favour of even greater fuel tax is farcical. Suits me though. I guess I'd be worse off and more disinclined to keep the ML if they changed the policy.
VED makes no sense and the argument for retaining it over junking it in favour of even greater fuel tax is farcical. Suits me though. I guess I'd be worse off and more disinclined to keep the ML if they changed the policy.
McSam said:
This is what happens when things are operated by bands rather than a constantly varying function, but because it's "easier for people to work out", that's the way it is..
You'd be really, really unhappy if I told you that the NEDC tests are also bracketed into vehicle weights, and those influence the results. It's desirable to have a car which is at the very lightest end of a weight bracket, as obviously it then performs well in that group and gets a better result.
Because of this, if a car should happen to be at the heavy end of a lower bracket, it's not unheard of for a manufacturer to add some weight back into a design just so it becomes the lightest possible weight in the next bracket up instead.
Probably the most counterproductive thing I've heard of in the whole NEDC process.
Well put (and why in god's name is the test bracketed by weight?)You'd be really, really unhappy if I told you that the NEDC tests are also bracketed into vehicle weights, and those influence the results. It's desirable to have a car which is at the very lightest end of a weight bracket, as obviously it then performs well in that group and gets a better result.
Because of this, if a car should happen to be at the heavy end of a lower bracket, it's not unheard of for a manufacturer to add some weight back into a design just so it becomes the lightest possible weight in the next bracket up instead.
Probably the most counterproductive thing I've heard of in the whole NEDC process.
Terminator X said:
Further good news is that the autoboxes help reduce CO2 levels so we can wave goodbye to the manual over time too 
TX.
Mmm, this is because when your automatic gearbox is used in the test, it's allowed to change gear whenever it wants, which you obviously calibrate to be an extremely efficient setting tailored to the test profile.TX.
In a manual car, though, there are prescribed shift points that must be used no matter how unfortunate a part of an engine map that takes you into. This means manuals tend to get worse results, and have to optimised for the NEDC when no consumer wants that, so their performance can suffer through the compromise.
Paranoid Airbag - always loved your username
- I have yet to see a good reason why the tests were bracketed in that way! It was decided to weight the results by vehicle mass class, why is beyond me, emissions are emissions.Gassing Station | General Gassing | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff