[Piers]

Sorry meant 520d. In sync with Nasman's 530d question...

I am 2,500miles into mine, and admittedly shorter journeys than normal due to christmas etc, but am struggling to get over 43 mpg, does this sound right to other 520d people?

On longer runs it is better obviously, but this is the first two months.

My E60 did 41.5mpg over my 50k miles, and the F10 is supposed to be better??

Seems if I hot the loud peddle to even go uphill not even accelerate, the graph drops right down!!

[andyk500]

I've covered 86,000 miles in my 11 plate 520d. For the first 60k miles my car averaged around 47.5, but for the past 25k miles it's dropped to 44. Also when I first had the car, if I clocked a long 200+ mile run at a steady pace it would be 52. That has now dropped to 49-50, but still good I feel for such a big car. Ordered another 520d for March, so will be interesting to see how that compares.

[Beancounter_74]

I do a lot of short journeys and then the occasional long one (trip to Wales or Lake District) and I think my mpg last time I looked was sitting at 40.1 based on 3,100 miles to date.

On a long run with Eco activated I can get just shy of 60 if I drive live a nun and about 52 if I cruise at about 80.

For me, coming from a run of Audi's (which weren't that economical) and a RRSport, this sort of mpg is heavenly Despite LR's claims, my RRS would struggle to get more than 23 if I even tried to depress the accelerator. Weekly £120 fill ups were the norm, certainly got to know my local garage staff well.

[DDarkEnergy]

Regarding mileage I personally find this database very useful

http://www.spritmonitor.de/en/

This below is a specific search for 520d F10+F11's

http://www.spritmonitor.de/en/overvi...=140&gearing=2

The average is 6.92 l/100km or 40.8 M/G and the median or norm is 6.81l/100km or 41.5M/G.

My 520d F11 2013 has an average of 6.18km/l or 45.7M/G .

Another database is that of Honest John. I personally do not pay much attention to it given that, unlike spritmonitor, the data from which the averages are obtained is not published and their averages provided cannot be verified.

[Nasman]

I agree Piers, it's all a matter of how you drive it vs mpg. I imagine, the first 10k miles on a new car, you give it some welly and when you get used to the fact you have a new car, probably drive it more sensibly - in theory anyway. I don't worry about the mpg too much - just enjoy the interior and power. I was listening to the radio yesterday and there was a Honda advert claiming one of their cars does 78.4 mpg or something - really...not in the real world!

[Beancounter_74]

Originally Posted by Nasman

............. I was listening to the radio yesterday and there was a Honda advert claiming one of their cars does 78.4 mpg or something - really...not in the real world!

I'm sure it does to be honest, some VW Blue Motion cars easily achieve 70-80mpg.

<snob alert>............74.8 mpg would be great, but at the end of the day, you're sat in a VW/Honda and not a BMW

[Nasman]

Haha - very true! I had a Honda Civic as a courtesy car a few years ago and have to say, did enjoy the ride but the steering lacked some feel. Safe bet as are the VWs but BMWs are a cut above in all aspects.

[DDarkEnergy]

When comparing mileage there are few aspects to take into account.

--Is the M/G taken from the on-board computer(OBC) or from a rim-to-rim (R2R) determination?. In my 520d the OBC is optimistic by about 3% on average respect to R2R

--There is a huge difference in M/G depending on how the car is driven.
Hard accelerations need a lot of power and therefore consumption rockets.
Driving gently, with a "feather touch" to the accelerator I've managed to reach in several opportunities more than 50 M/G (OBC) in mixed driving. Driving in the motorway at constant 55M/h my 520d can reach 66M/G (OBC) on long runs.

--Engine temperature is also very important. A cold engine consumption is much higher.

--Of less importance is proper tyre pressure, wheel size and tyre specification. Wheel size was a bit of a surprise to me but BMW quotes important differences in mileage between 17",18",19" and 20" wheels with 17" being the most economical. I assume that the difference in consumption is related to the width of the tyre fitted to the different rims being the 17" tyre at 225 the narrowest.

All these aspects should be looked at when comparing mileages.

In my 520d auto with 17" wheels the mileage recorded by the BMW ECO PRO Analyser application in the iPhone for about 100 trips, the highest mileage is 67M/g (OBC) and the lowest is 26M/G (OBC) . The lower values are always relatively short trips in the city.

Hope this information helps

[DDarkEnergy]

Originally Posted by Beancounter_74

I'm sure it does to be honest, some VW Blue Motion cars easily achieve 70-80mpg.

<snob alert>............74.8 mpg would be great, but at the end of the day, you're sat in a VW/Honda and not a BMW

I agree with your point. Furthermore, 40 years ago some cars achieved high mileage but at the cost of extremely slow acceleration and low maximum speed. A Citroen 2 CV was capable of 70mpg at constant 50 m/h but it would take more than 30 seconds to do 0 - 50m/h flooring the accelerator !!!
Today a 520d can achieve that sort of mileage with a very careful driving technique.

[remmib]

I'm at 5.8 L/100km or 49 mpg on the OBC so far.

[Beancounter_74]

^^^^

[Shake n Bake]

F11 2011 17". I avg 44.5mpg (obc)

On 100+ mile motorway journeys with cruise set at 67-70mph it will avg 55-57mpg. That is rare though as driving like that bores the pants off me.

[HighlandPete]

Originally Posted by Shake n Bake

On 100+ mile motorway journeys with cruise set at 67-70mph it will avg 55-57mpg. That is rare though as driving like that bores the pants off me.

But the only way to get high mpg. It is where the diesel just sips fuel.

HighlandPete