|
|
03-12-2012, 04:52 AM | #1 |
First Lieutenant
22
Rep 301
Posts |
Combined mpg?
Hi,
As mentioned in another thread, I'm looking at a 535d. I notice on the used site that they quote two different mpg figures: Combined mpg: 46.3 (seems to be cars built before Sept 11) Combined mpg: 50.4 (Sept-ish 11 onwards) Did they make a change to the engine? If so, are there other changes that I should be aware of? Wondering if I should restrict my search to post-Sept 11 models. Cheers
__________________
2012 F10 535d M Sport, Titanium Silver, Black Dakota Leather, Piano Black Trim, 19" 351M, Sport Automatic Transmission, Reversing Assist Camera, Powered Boot Lid, Soft Close Doors, Folding/dimming mirrors, Elec. fr seats, Surround View, Heads-up display, BMW Business Speakers, M rear spoiler, Sun protection glass, Visibility pack, Media Package Pro
|
03-12-2012, 05:02 PM | #2 |
Private First Class
18
Rep 186
Posts |
I would lower your expectations considerably Dodgy.. A colleague at work has a 2011 535d and he averages 35ish mpg. Fabulous car though and I would happily suffer the lower mpg if I could afford one!
|
Appreciate
0
|
03-12-2012, 05:31 PM | #3 |
First Lieutenant
22
Rep 301
Posts |
Oh, I know it's a load of crap - but one is a slightly more efficient load of crap.
Seems the newer spec has more torque and lower emissions too. And less expensive car tax.
__________________
2012 F10 535d M Sport, Titanium Silver, Black Dakota Leather, Piano Black Trim, 19" 351M, Sport Automatic Transmission, Reversing Assist Camera, Powered Boot Lid, Soft Close Doors, Folding/dimming mirrors, Elec. fr seats, Surround View, Heads-up display, BMW Business Speakers, M rear spoiler, Sun protection glass, Visibility pack, Media Package Pro
|
Appreciate
0
|
03-13-2012, 03:21 AM | #4 |
Brigadier General
220
Rep 3,016
Posts |
They increased bhp and torque, whilst managing to lower emissions - makes you wonder how far they'll go.
I average 38/39 mpg in my Sep '10 535d and that's without holding back on the throttle. On one trip from Aberdeen to Inverness I managed 47.5, but I wouldn't want to drive that conservatively all the time. Here's a useful link to compare figures: http://www.bmw.co.uk/bmwuk/efficient.../carcomparator |
Appreciate
0
|
03-19-2012, 07:42 AM | #5 |
Right Responsible
58
Rep 1,646
Posts |
The new engine has 13 more bhp and also revs out to 5.5k rpm i think. You will notice the rev counter now has a 6 on it. I think they now also have auto stop/start. You will see the little button below the starter button.
I changed from a pre-ED 335d to a 535d. My normal commute on the 335d was approx 38mpg wheras the 535d gets about 39-40mpg. The combined for the 335 is stated as 37.7 wheras the combined for the 535d is 46.2. Dont know how BMW have managed to bluff the new figures!!
__________________
Last: 330cd Sport - Silver Grey, 335d M Sport Coupe, F10 535d M Sport.
Current: AW F21 M135i, Coral Red, Pro Nav, Vis, HK, & Clunky Adaptive Suspension Current: F15 X5 XDrive 40d M Sport - Space Grey, lots of toys. |
Appreciate
0
|
03-23-2012, 07:13 AM | #6 | |
Lieutenant General
6659
Rep 15,858
Posts |
Quote:
I remember the times when it was very easy for many drivers to beat the official combined figures in their normal driving, but that is getting harder to do these days, even impossible in the latest cars for these same drivers. HighlandPete |
|
Appreciate
0
|
03-23-2012, 09:17 AM | #7 |
Second Lieutenant
5
Rep 205
Posts |
On Paper My 520d is way ahead of my Ford Galaxy but in practice using measured fuel economy, not what the on board computer reads, there is very little difference. - In reality I find that the 520d on board computer reads 3.5 to 4 mpg higher than what is really being achieved. For example if the computer on the 520d says I did 50 mpg the real figure is is 46.x mpg. I was not expecting to achieve the figures they quoted but I was expecting the figures to be scaled by the difference quoted by Ford and BMW for the same type of Journey. But this is most definitely not the case.
|
Appreciate
0
|
03-26-2012, 11:38 AM | #8 |
Right Responsible
58
Rep 1,646
Posts |
I remember doing a full tank refill test on my old 335d and the real figure was fairly close to the computer figure. I would hope that it was also that close if not closer on the new cars. There is no reason why this simple calculation cannot be done accurately by the car, unless BMW are being very naughty. (which i would not be surprised)
I must try a real test and see!
__________________
Last: 330cd Sport - Silver Grey, 335d M Sport Coupe, F10 535d M Sport.
Current: AW F21 M135i, Coral Red, Pro Nav, Vis, HK, & Clunky Adaptive Suspension Current: F15 X5 XDrive 40d M Sport - Space Grey, lots of toys. |
Appreciate
0
|
03-26-2012, 01:58 PM | #9 |
Second Lieutenant
5
Rep 205
Posts |
I've done the test comparing the on board computer with actual by measuring the fuel to refill on 5 occasions now with the Bimmer. Every time it has been between 3 and 4 mpg less in reality than the optimistic reading of the computer.
Mind you my Ford Galaxy is the same. Although my Fiat motor home is better. |
Appreciate
0
|
Post Reply |
Bookmarks |
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
|
|