dman
- May 10, 2008 10:04 am
(#27 Total: 27)
|
|
|
|
this article is bringing out all the bmw fanboys. More kool-aid pls!
but I agree that M3 was likely leadfooted around town. Why would anyone buy an M3 or similar performance car and drive it in a civilized manner really. Makes no sense.
|
|
 |
|
tahoe77
- Apr 25, 2008 7:29 am
(#26 Total: 27)
|
|
|
|
i have an 04 530i, about 50K miles.. the comp. says that im averaging 14 MPG, thats probably an error, can someone inform me otherwise?
|
|
|
|
|
|
Suby,
I have a powerful pro-M3 bias, so I have trouble conceding that there's anything wrong with the car. But alright, yes, it could do with a slightly throatier exhaust note. The engine note, however, is outstanding at all speeds.
By the way, that WRX engine seems to respond really well to aftermarket exhaust systems. There was a WRX wagon at the track the other day with an aftermarket unit, and I swear it almost sounded like a really refined V8 at WOT. Think Audi S5.
Josh
|
|
|
|
|
|
Suby's right. Fuel log entries during track days are excluded from our calculations.
|
|
|
|
|
|
My Alpina B7 press loaner averaged around 10 mpg when I ran the Motorsport Ranch short track. Not bad for a 500 hp 4700 lb. luxury boat. My dead stock 3 series pulls down track economy numbers of @16 mpg; that's what reduced mass and low horsepower will do for you. I don't want to think about how much gas the Mazdaspeed3 will use on the track. That DISI 2.3 runs so rich on boost that the exhaust tip looks like it belongs on a diesel...
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
" And who doesn't love the boxer rumble of a Subaru flat-four?"
Me! I think it sounds like a lawn tractor. JMO.
|
|
|
|
|
|
"One of the reasons the Vette (and G8) gets such great numbers is its gearing. The M3 is a little above 3000rpm at 80mph. What rpm is the Vette turning at 80mph? Taller gearing is a benefit from low-end torque."
Yep, that's true. I don't do 80 mph much in the Vette (55 MPH speed limits in the communist state I live in), but its probably about 2,000-2,200 RPM in 6th at that speed. 65 MPH is about 1,400 RPM, and yields 33 MPG at that speed.
Got torque? ;)
|
|
|
|
|
|
teekay13, if you got 11 mpg at the track, you're not driving your M3 hard enough! j/k I only get about 8 mpg in my WRX at the track. Are you sure you didn't accidentally roll some freeway driving into your calculation? :o)
Louis, I would think they exclude track fuel usage. After all, my friend James corrected me in one of the Mitsubishi Outlander blog entries.
Josh, I don't know if it's one of the best-sounding engines in modern automotive history. At WOT, it sounds fantastic most of the time. On other occasions, I'm not a fan of the raspiness of a stock E46 M3's exhaust note.
Similarly, I think the Honda Civic Si sounds terrible when one is putzing it around. Mash the gas, though, and one is treated to an aural delight. :o) And who doesn't love the boxer rumble of a Subaru flat-four?
|
|
|
|
|
|
Josh - I don't think anyone is being critical of the way Edmunds' staff drives any of the cars, let alone this one. My point was merely one explanation of the lower MPG results.
|
|
|
|
|
|
If I am not mistaken, Inside Line took the M3 to the track not long ago so that worst tank (13.0mpg) could very well be the result of that.
|
|
|
|
|
|
BlueGuy et al.,
I think I speak for most of the editors when I say that it's pretty difficult not to drive the M3 like a teenager. The car all but has a "Drive Me Like A Teenager" sticker on the steering wheel. One of the best (and best-sounding) engines in modern automotive history, in my humble opinion. It's hard to resist exercising it at every oppportunity.
Josh
|
|
|
|
pengwin
- Apr 23, 2008 8:42 pm
(#15 Total: 27)
|
|
|
|
only 90%, im thinking 99.9999999%
|
|
|
|
|
|
I think the main thing to keep in mind w/ Edmunds' MPG figures, and with cars like this one especially, is that the bloggers/drivers aren't paying for the gas. In that case, obviously they're not going to be driving the car like you or I would be. While I may drive the car "hard" 20% of the time, I suspect this M3 is being driven hard ~ 90% of the time.
Wouldn't you?
|
|
|
|
|
|
pengwin, I agree. They get horrid mileage with their Cooper S - mileage so bad it seems like they must live above 4500 rpm.
|
|
|
|
pengwin
- Apr 23, 2008 5:19 pm
(#12 Total: 27)
|
|
|
|
i think the edmunds employee's think the accelerator is like a light switch. Its either on (all the way) or off.
|
|
|
|
|
|
benson2175, did you just diss all Mercedes cars, including the MacLaren SLR supercar? LOL.
The problem with the M3 is that it's SOOO easy to rev it up to 8k, and it's so addictive to hang around 4500 to 7000 in 3rd and 4th gears. I sometime forget to shift into 6 simply because I enjoy the sound of the revving engine too much. That explains the low mileage.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Joe;
I think a car with an automatic ceases to be a sports car so automatics in sports cars can't happen. It's like a paradox or something.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Compare that MPG to the new twin turbo 3 liter...
I imagine Edmunds is giving it a run for it's money and enjoying that high revving demon-inspired engine.
Sometimes I do think that automatics yield better economy in sports cars. They'll automatically go to the highest gear for a certain speed, thereby giving you the most fuel economy when you lift off. Whereas in my Civic SI, I like to let it hang around 4000-5000 rpms, even in everyday traffic.
Of course, my best tank was 35mpg (driving from new hampshire to PA) and worst was around 22mpg...
Joe
|
|
|
|
|
|
The M3's computer gives optimistic fuel mileage calculations. In my '01 M3, I got about 23mpg on a trip from San Jose to Santa Barbara going mostly 80-90 w/ the AC on. I think that is pretty good. My average MPG is around 18-19 for normal mixed driving.
One of the reasons the Vette (and G8) gets such great numbers is its gearing. The M3 is a little above 3000rpm at 80mph. What rpm is the Vette turning at 80mph? Taller gearing is a benefit from low-end torque.
|
|
