[Closed] Is anyone on here willing to own up to....

A family member of mine does, he gets ~48ish mpg on normal journeys, over 50 on long cruises.

...****ing in the disabled loos at work.

Oh. No, I don't have a BMW 330d. 😳

Curious admission BD

What?
Tossing in the toilets as well as being abused on a regular basis by that woman.

Are you insatiable or just making up for lost time?

😯

My friend claims about 45mpg if he drives it very gently, which he rarely does.

50+ just through France.

I've got the X5 with the same engine and I'm getting half of that mpg 😕

My friend claims about 45mpg if he drives it very gently, which he rarely does.

Interesting, my family member doesn't ever drive gently lol.

I've got the X5 with the same engine and I'm getting half of that mpg

Hauling around significantly more mass with different gearing I suppose!

...****ing in the disabled loos at work.

Disgusting.

Can't you use the non-disabled toilets?

T'is interesting, I was driving a new 330D today (courtesy car) and it was saying only 34.3mpg over it's first 4500 miles. I thought it was maybe just that it had been ragged....

I've got the X5 with the same engine and I'm getting half of that mpg

Ever heard of this thing called aerodynamics?

And btw - driving gently isn't necessarily the same thing as driving economically, although they are related.

I've got the X5

samuri - Member

My friend claims about 45mpg if he drives it very gently, which he rarely does.

I would say your friend is to be trusted unlike those who claim to get 55+mpg out of their 2ltr+ turbo diesels

Very lucky if you get mid 40's.

Take away 10mpg if it's a steptronic/auto thingy.

anyone getting 50+ is a blagger or drives like a corpse...

I used to get 45mpg ish - no bs.

unlike those who claim to get 55+mpg out of their 2ltr+ turbo diesels

I can get 53mpg from my 2l turbo diesel Passat between Cardiff and Aldershot, doing the speed limit at all times.

Tank averages only about 48-50 tho, although summer is coming up 🙂

Btw diesel fuel economy goes down by 10% ish in winter due to winter diesel having lower cetane number.

I would say your friend is to be trusted unlike those who claim to get 55+mpg out of their 2ltr+ turbo diesels

With all due respect, I regularly see 55 out of a 2 litre TD estate, and have seen over 60 repeatedly, based on tank-tank refils at the same pump to a visible level in the filler neck. Drops to mid 40s over winter or if I'm stonking at 70+ on motorway runs, or in city-only traffic. That's based on 2 years use, of a car with 100K on it.

I had a 320d Touring.

I never got better than 40mpg. Not heavy footed or owt, just a crap commute through Shipley & Bradford to get to the M62/M1 & then back again in the evening

now I have a different make & model & still get 39mpg. Until today when I managed 44mpg - where did that come from? oh yes, the schools are off, so the traffic atually [i]moves[/i]

Just goes to prove that the MPG you get probably depends as much on your route as on your vehicle...

although I'm sure molgrips will disagree

No, I've been saying that all along. Route is (obviously) a huge factor.

I only disagree with things that are wrong 🙂

you still never explained why you think I'm a poser though

let me remind you:
me: Maybe the next 3-series... if they can sort out the rear wheel arches
you: Blimey, you are a bloody poser aren't you?

context: I've [i]had[/i] a 3 series. The boot was too narrow. full stop

i get 32 out of my transit!!

Well I thought you were ruling out a car based on subtle points about the design lines.. which would be a bit daft imo..

I didn't realise you meant the INSIDE of the boot 🙂

Btw I think the inside of some car boots is narrow because they use multi-link rear suspension which handles better but takes up more space.. I founf the Focus looked a bit narrow when I tried it...

You shouldn't make assumptions, you know.

With regards to the MPG, there's a lot of point missing going on here. The computer figure over 4,500 miles on the trip will have a very different MPG figure to someone driving from point a to b on a motorwauy at 70. Yes, it's possible to get most diesel cars to show short trip averages of 50+, but if you reset the trip and drive a few thousand miles it's a different kettle de poisson. Managed to get my passenger side front window smashed over the bank holiday weekend, and driving into work to get it sorted on the Tuesday couldn't go over 45 MPH cos of the noise from the plastic I'd taped over it. 24 mile commute at 68mpg instead of usual 48ish....

Can't you use the non-disabled toilets?

Probably.

My Dad has a November 2005 330d (the 2007 was only a facelift).

He has averaged 41.4 mpg over the time that he has had it - that's from a spreadsheet with mileage vs. diesel put in (the trip computers are not very accurate). He does drive quite fast but I'd be amazed if you could sustain over 50mpg in the real world even if you drive very carefully.

Yes, it's possible to get most diesel cars to show short trip averages of 50+

We're not that stupid mate!

Like I said, 53mpg on the trip to work - 125 miles, and 48-49 tank average. I'm fairly sure that if I can do a whole tank without speeding or encountering cold/bad weather it'll be over 50.

Edd - it'd be possible depending on where you drive and how.

By the way Dad's is a manual touring version.

molgrips - We're talking here about fuel economy a BMW 330d not your 2l TD Passat. I still seriously doubt that you could sustain over 50mpg in a 330d - 50mpg would be a 20% improvement on what my father's getting.

Taken a 330D touring down to the alps and back, sitting at 85mphish on the autoroutes with aircon on and full car happily average 44mpg.

Same in a Passat 2.0TD too.

Errr ... *reported* MPG. Actual MPG could well be something entirely different! Fuel computers, while now being much more accurate than their earlier incarnations, rarely stack up correctly and as we know a mass produced car can be subject to greater variance in tolerance.

Fill it to the brim, drive it until empty and see how many miles you do - i'm sure it'd be fairly accurate but the figure will more than likely be off.

Pedantic? Yes.

Yeah but someone started going on about 2.0l diesels, and then telling me I didn't understand trip computer averages 🙂

I'm curious about this though - why do we think that petrol pumps are more accurate than the car's trip computer? People seem to take the default position that the pump is accurate, and if the computer disagrees it must be wrong...

I have validated all the cars i have owned (nerd) against the actual and computer mpgs and they have always been accurate.

Is anyone stupid enough to go from the trip computer?

Mine doesn't even HAVE a trip computer to go by, so my figures stand happily!

I'm curious about this though - why do we think that petrol pumps are more accurate than the car's trip computer? People seem to take the default position that the pump is accurate, and if the computer disagrees it must be wrong...

The pumps are very accurate, they're positive displacement measurement devices and are supposed to be regularly spot-checked. Ideally the onboard computer would be more accurate, but that depends on what assumptions the software makes, some will be, some will need to be checked across a range of operating ranges.

Got a 320D here. OBC claims mid to high 30s, even driven like a granny. Based on brim to brim calcs though, its more like 45mpg. Bit disappointed as my old Passat would easily see 50mpg, and 55+ wasn't difficult if you tried. (that said, the 320 is SOOO much nicer to drive)

330D, I'd be surprised to see much over 40 mpg in.

IIRC even BMW suggest the 330 gets better averages than the 320.

So you are saying some cars could be better than others for OBC accuracy?

Seems like the computer OUGHT to know the flow rate of its injectors and the pulse durations pretty well.. right?

I once worked with a guy who by his own admission 'cracked one out in the toilets everytime he had sealed a deal'.

This was London after all and no, I never shook his hand.

Daffy, if you are considering one you need to ensure the indicators do work. Thats a common design problem.

Quotey (Molgrips) - I can get 53mpg from my 2l turbo diesel Passat between Cardiff and Aldershot, doing the speed limit at all times

Quotey (Molgrips) - We're not that stupid mate!

Oh yes you are. Bit pointless saying 'blah blah blah 53 MPG' if it's on one journey. I can get my diesel to show 999 MPG if I go down hill with my foot off the gas. I was making the point that over thousands of miles including idling in traffic etc you're unlikely to get a figure of 53MPG from your car.

****in' Passat drivers.....

60,000 miles - average mpg 48.4 2.0TD Passat. 😛

Mainly sitting at 80mph on motorways / autoroutes.

Bit pointless saying 'blah blah blah 53 MPG' if it's on one journey. I can get my diesel to show 999 MPG if I go down hill with my foot off the gas

Not pointless at all. I told you where the journey was and how fast I did it. A long and entirely representative journey including a lot of well-travelled motorway and some A and B roads. Not at all a special case.

And I am not for a minute attempting to persuade you that I could average 53mpg over thousands of miles. If you read carefully you'll see that I mention a typical tank average of 48 ish mpg and with summer approaching I would expect that to creep up a bit...

Don't see the problem here. Except that it's a thread hijack since the original thread was about BMWs 🙂

I once worked with a guy who by his own admission 'cracked one out in the toilets everytime he had sealed a deal'.

This was London after all and no, I never shook his hand.

Banker?

Seems like the computer OUGHT to know the flow rate of its injectors and the pulse durations pretty well.. right?

Yes, they do, but speed sensor readings have a fairly low refresh rate and so are fairly inaccurate during transients, which is part of the reason that most OBCs are fairly accurate over a sustained fairly constant speed journey but less accurate in stop-start traffic. Some handle it well though, it depends whether the algorithm for calculating it was a gimmic added into the software for user viewing later on, or built in with some intent on accuracy. Things as simple as how the guy coding it decided to round the values in the calculation and how much "processor time" is allocated to gimmicks.

I'm still standing by original statement but perhaps I should have included the word average in the MPG bit.