[RSchneider]

It can be done under the right circumstances, but certainly not regularily. 55 mph on cruise, totally flat and empty highway, warm engine, no aircon no nothing (only lights) > 60 MPG UK, yesterday night again on the 30 mls to the airport. Can be even slightly better behind a truck ;-)

[HighlandPete]

Originally Posted by robwoods

The only way you ever get near to official figures is to accelerate slowly, and stay off the brakes. When you see a junction or traffic ahead, get off the accelerator ASAP and avoid the brake (unless you need to stop obviously!). Even then you will only get close to official figures, rarely will you match them.

Trouble is BMW buyers like us buy BMW's because we like to drive in a 'spirited' way and we perceive BMW to be a performance car brand. These days I'm afraid, 'performance' cars are not what the planet needs!

Hence my 20d which can be coaxed to do about 46mpg on longish journeys, but struggling to get to the 50.4mpg claimed officially unless the journey has A LOT of 60mph-ish stretches with few interruptions, pretty rare.

Well said. I'll add a few more thoughts, (being an mpg anorak).

We often forget with diesels that because we are not needing to give them too much welly to get going, that this sort of performance doesn't come without cost.

I'm surprised how the typical X3/5 is driven, heavy acceleration and high speed cruising, and then we get the "why won't it give decent mpg?"

I come from the era when the typical diesel driver was driving for economy, so could easily exceed the official figures. Done it myself, over many years.

Was nothing to get 60+mpg from a VW Passat diesel, with a combined figure of 53mpg. And that was not driving slow, keeping to speed limits would achieve those figures.

That has all changed, the makers are tweaking the engines/cars to get high official figures, even the economy driver has lost the 'slack' we used to have, when we compare against the combined figure.

But the typical diesel driver these days wants petrol like high performance, so drives accordingly. Nothing comes for free, it still takes virtually the same energy to accelerate fast and and drive at high speeds, as it ever did. But against projected mpg figures, it is looking as if the vehicles have something wrong.

We also have to factor in the way models get bigger... the X3 is a pretty big vehicle these days, virtually as big as the original X5.

We are getting better fuel efficiency these days, no doubt about that, but we often just burn away the gains, simply in the way we drive.

HighlandPete

[Rich4]

The problem is that people are lulled by benchmark figures which are quite artificial using the ECE driving cycle. Indeed, the X3 brochure states its based on “90% full Fuel tank, 68kg for the driver and 7kg luggage”; not too many 68kg drivers about, I doubt .

On the positive side, our mpg figures effectively measure consumption on a distance basis ignoring the times the engine is off when stationary at traffic lights making a real comparison more difficult (vis-a-vis non auto start); so 40mpg in X3 may be equivalent to 42mpg with non auto start. Quite possibly, BMW’s official figure may include an add factor of X% to account for the period the engine is stopped based on a pre-determined “average” driving habit; clearly that element varies widely between city traffic and open motorway and probably could account for an extra couple % mpg in city/urban conditions, at least in this country, and certainly here in the South.

[JOHNBMWM5]

Got the Car back, BMW found NOTHING ( as usual ) and will be puting a "Case" forward too BMW uk!!
This will probably mean NOTHING, so stuck withit for now.
Funny though on the way home the MPG went up to 45MPG must be all down hill on the way back .

[guycashmore]

One of the reasons I didn't choose the 35D was because it only comes with wide, low profile tyres, which spoil both the ride and fuel economy.

My own 30D has now passed 15,000 miles and the fuel economy has improved over that time from about 33 mpg to 37 mpg average.

On a steady dual carrigeway run recently it did 40 mpg over about 200 miles, but only with no AC and never exceeding 70, yawn..

[HighlandPete]

Originally Posted by guycashmore

One of the reasons I didn't choose the 35D was because it only comes with wide, low profile tyres, which spoil both the ride and fuel economy.

My own 30D has now passed 15,000 miles and the fuel economy has improved over that time from about 33 mpg to 37 mpg average.

On a steady dual carrigeway run recently it did 40 mpg over about 200 miles, but only with no AC and never exceeding 70, yawn..

That sounds about right... try it at 60mph, push that average up.

HighlandPete

[clivem2]

Originally Posted by HighlandPete

That sounds about right... try it at 60mph, push that average up.

HighlandPete

Doing that a while back gave me 47 mpg.

[HighlandPete]

"try it at 60mph"

Originally Posted by clivem2

Doing that a while back gave me 47 mpg.

And that's how you get the 'combined figure' in something like a 3.0d X3.

There are reported tests on fuel consumption, which reflect that many cars achieve the combined figure at 60 - 70mph driving. The less efficient the package (such as the brick like X3) the lower the speed.

HighlandPete

[xDrive35i]

I get 11.7 mpg in my 35i. My range is usually around 265 miles. I do only city driving. I'd love to get close to even 25 mpg. Count your blessings.

[Leighton]

+1.

1,700 35i miles in 7 months, 75% on NYC streets, 25% NY metro highways unvaryingly shows 13.0-13.2 mpg from computer with no fuel fill diary. Same computer mpg range and driving mix as 17K miles in Subaru Outback wagon with non-turbo premium-requiring 3.0 6-cylinder, 4-speed automatic, and disks all around, but X3 is a lot more fun and a lot less scary braking and turning, although Outback moves in 14-20" snow for which no comparison because of mild winter. Also, 32% better mpg than 14K miles on slightly better road mix in E39 M5 but X3 delivers a lot more all around view and a lot less left knee and ankle pain with no comparison for snow because M5's winter venue is limited to garage concrete floor. X3 - M5 fun factor differences are not easy to detect because NYC and NY metro roads limit potential unless burning rubber at traffic lights is your idea of fun.

[clivem2]

I wonder who pays more per mile? Us Diesel drivers in Europe I expect!

[JOHNBMWM5]

Originally Posted by clivem2

I wonder who pays more per mile? Us Diesel drivers in Europe I expect!

Well they must have done something as the MPG has gone up too 37.5MPG and I have been pushing it a bit more!!!.
Anyway the news is I am ordering on friday next The 3 series Touring 3.0M Sport with every extra possible .
I have secured a fab deal only needing to find £5800 next september/october time with this X3 as PX unlimited miles between times. Love it.
I have ordered the M Performance brakes as well as 19" MS wheels.
Full length panoramic roof . In Estoril blue total spec £49999.00

[cc3]

Wow great deal. X3 residuals must still be very strong looking at your figures.

[JOHNBMWM5]

Originally Posted by gaz26

Wow great deal. X3 residuals must still be very strong looking at your figures.

I got a really great deal mate, it's because I do a lot of business with BMW.