[HighlandPete]

Originally Posted by E90F30er

Thanks for all your replies and keep posting; the petrol have lower mpg but as a compromise there's the 320i ED model? Also it depends if you are buying brand new or second hand as brand new the diesel is more dearer than the equivalent petrol?

Obviously when buying new, costs and depreciation take on a bit more relevance than buying used. Diesel can look more attractive, but it isn't the whole picture.

I remember a sales guy I respect advising caution on speccing up a new 335i, advised buying nearly new with a big discount over the new price. (A new petrol can appear like throwing money away). Then he'd be just as cautious advising buyers to be careful of individual or odd specs, as there can be limited buyers in the used market. So even your diesel buyer can add to costs with poor options and/or odd colour/trim choice. I suppose it depends if that matters, are we buying for ourselves, or just on projected residuals 3 - 4 years down the line?

I've chosen to go nearly new this time, to get added value out of the car, it also allowed me also to consider petrol, as projected long term costs of buying into petrol are then hardly any different from a diesel, even if fuel is about 10 - 12% more expensive on my mileage. Depreciation at say 5 - 6 years, is not much different for desirable models whatever the fuel.

HighlandPete

[HighlandPete]

Originally Posted by Nick the Greek

I agree with your point on handling Pete, but not on performance. 330d and 328i both in the 14s to 100mph, 325d three seconds behind and 320d another three seconds behind that. Think of the distance you travel at that speed and those increments are quite substantial.

I know we can easily get into the off the mark stats, for me I'd rather balance the overall performance against a similar cost base. I look at the average real world driving character. Hence why I see the 328i more matched to the 325d. Even then the 325d will feel more muscular than the 328i to many drivers. The 330d is in another league for the average driver than the 328i.

Not many users will be concerned with a 0 -100 time, but more so the engine performance used all the time, hence why many would choose the even less performing 320d, over a 328i.

HighlandPete

[robbiep]

Originally Posted by E90F30er

Thanks for all your replies and keep posting; the petrol have lower mpg but as a compromise there's the 320i ED model? Also it depends if you are buying brand new or second hand as brand new the diesel is more dearer than the equivalent petrol?

The price difference will still be there when secondhand, quite possibly even more pronounced. Everyone wants diesel fuel economy. That's why the manufacturers have invested so much money into diesel engines, the demand is there and proven.

Regarding the 320iED, going off HJ real mpg site people are reporting 40 mpg for it. A long way off the 58 mpg for the 320dED (same site)

Regarding price, the 320iED saloon is £26060, with 172 bhp. The 320dED is £28410, with 165 bhp. £2350 more expensive

If you take those economy figures as accurate, over 50k miles the 320iED will use £7557 in fuel (£1.33 per litre). The 320dED would use £5486 (£1.40 per litre). So the savings would be £2071. Less the additional cost new, and the diesel has cost £280 extra to run.
And now you sell it, for quite a bit more than the petrol one.
In addition, because the used market wants that fuel economy, there are far fewer prospective buyers for the petrol car.

[Nick the Greek]

And now you sell it, for quite a bit more than the petrol one.
In addition, because the used market wants that fuel economy, there are far fewer prospective buyers for the petrol car.

Of course if it's a company car one is not concerned with resale.

[Pablo68]

Originally Posted by Nick the Greek

Of course if it's a company car one is not concerned with resale.

Or a lease/pcp

[teaston]

Originally Posted by robbiep

The price difference will still be there when secondhand, quite possibly even more pronounced. Everyone wants diesel fuel economy. That's why the manufacturers have invested so much money into diesel engines, the demand is there and proven.

Regarding the 320iED, going off HJ real mpg site people are reporting 40 mpg for it. A long way off the 58 mpg for the 320dED (same site)

Regarding price, the 320iED saloon is £26060, with 172 bhp. The 320dED is £28410, with 165 bhp. £2350 more expensive

If you take those economy figures as accurate, over 50k miles the 320iED will use £7557 in fuel (£1.33 per litre). The 320dED would use £5486 (£1.40 per litre). So the savings would be £2071. Less the additional cost new, and the diesel has cost £280 extra to run.
And now you sell it, for quite a bit more than the petrol one.
In addition, because the used market wants that fuel economy, there are far fewer prospective buyers for the petrol car.

320iED?!

Is that the 320 improvised explosive device?

Only available in the middle east i suppose!

[Chris Peacock]

Originally Posted by robbiep

The price difference will still be there when secondhand, quite possibly even more pronounced. Everyone wants diesel fuel economy. That's why the manufacturers have invested so much money into diesel engines, the demand is there and proven.

Regarding the 320iED, going off HJ real mpg site people are reporting 40 mpg for it. A long way off the 58 mpg for the 320dED (same site)

Regarding price, the 320iED saloon is £26060, with 172 bhp. The 320dED is £28410, with 165 bhp. £2350 more expensive

If you take those economy figures as accurate, over 50k miles the 320iED will use £7557 in fuel (£1.33 per litre). The 320dED would use £5486 (£1.40 per litre). So the savings would be £2071. Less the additional cost new, and the diesel has cost £280 extra to run.
And now you sell it, for quite a bit more than the petrol one.
In addition, because the used market wants that fuel economy, there are far fewer prospective buyers for the petrol car.

My long term mpg over 27k miles from new is 55.1 for a 320d m-sport, those figures look wrong to me.

[robbiep]

The thing with mpg figures is that they are all so variable. If you've done 27,000 miles in an F30 already, then you're probably doing a fair amount of motorway cruising, where that engine is barely sipping fuel.

The HJ site doesn't take any of that into consideration. It doesn't look at whether you've calculated it out exactly (maybe even allowing for odometer being out slightly) or whether you've just looked at what the trip computer says before re-zeroing it. It's an average of an average - probably of an average.
According to the numbers put in by people, the 320i ED is 40 mpg. the 320d ED is 58 mpg. The 320d is 50 mpg.
For me, I do mostly single carriageway driving (15-20k a year), so my numbers would probably be worse than someone who does 40k a year on the M6 in the northwest, who will probably get better figures than the same driver, in the same car, doing that mileage on the M25.

In short, I know the figures aren't going to be exactly correct, or even close to it. But what they are is a reasonable guide. Probably a lot more so than the 'official' mpg. But that's another thread entirely

[Pablo68]

Originally Posted by robbiep

The thing with mpg figures is that they are all so variable. If you've done 27,000 miles in an F30 already, then you're probably doing a fair amount of motorway cruising, where that engine is barely sipping fuel.

The HJ site doesn't take any of that into consideration. It doesn't look at whether you've calculated it out exactly (maybe even allowing for odometer being out slightly) or whether you've just looked at what the trip computer says before re-zeroing it. It's an average of an average - probably of an average.
According to the numbers put in by people, the 320i ED is 40 mpg. the 320d ED is 58 mpg. The 320d is 50 mpg.
For me, I do mostly single carriageway driving (15-20k a year), so my numbers would probably be worse than someone who does 40k a year on the M6 in the northwest, who will probably get better figures than the same driver, in the same car, doing that mileage on the M25.

In short, I know the figures aren't going to be exactly correct, or even close to it. But what they are is a reasonable guide. Probably a lot more so than the 'official' mpg. But that's another thread entirely

If it helps, over the life-time (A year) of having my E92 330D I kept a spreadsheet of fuel-ups and mileage and always fully brimmed the tank (yes my wife thought I was sad too), so I had an exact log of the fuel economy. And over 15K miles of mixed roads it did 44.2mpg calculated compared to the onboard computer which said it had done 45.7mpg.

[HighlandPete]

Originally Posted by robbiep

The thing with mpg figures is that they are all so variable. If you've done 27,000 miles in an F30 already, then you're probably doing a fair amount of motorway cruising, where that engine is barely sipping fuel.

The HJ site doesn't take any of that into consideration. It doesn't look at whether you've calculated it out exactly (maybe even allowing for odometer being out slightly) or whether you've just looked at what the trip computer says before re-zeroing it. It's an average of an average - probably of an average.
According to the numbers put in by people, the 320i ED is 40 mpg. the 320d ED is 58 mpg. The 320d is 50 mpg.
For me, I do mostly single carriageway driving (15-20k a year), so my numbers would probably be worse than someone who does 40k a year on the M6 in the northwest, who will probably get better figures than the same driver, in the same car, doing that mileage on the M25.

In short, I know the figures aren't going to be exactly correct, or even close to it. But what they are is a reasonable guide. Probably a lot more so than the 'official' mpg. But that's another thread entirely

Fair comment and other groups gather data similar to the HJ site, get the "average of averages" as more data gets fed back into the system. Motor mags' compile similar data from all the long term road tests and user feedback they get. It is how we get the average mpg shortfalls for a given period, like the average used to be about 11%, (as an average) now often reported as nearer 15% and ever increasing it seems.

Fuelly and similar sites also help us to get to the "averages".

At least HJ's site does also give the spread of mpg and does highlight which models get closest to the official figures. Not complete data, but it does give us a feel for mpg expectations.

HighlandPete

[HighlandPete]

Originally Posted by Pablo68

If it helps, over the life-time (A year) of having my E92 330D I kept a spreadsheet of fuel-ups and mileage and always fully brimmed the tank (yes my wife thought I was sad too), so I had an exact log of the fuel economy. And over 15K miles of mixed roads it did 44.2mpg calculated compared to the onboard computer which said it had done 45.7mpg.

I'm sad as well, keep a spread sheet of mpg records. My 2006 E91 330d averaged 37mpg over 55k miles. Current car F11 535i, at my last brim, 30.6mpg for my 9K miles with it.

HighlandPete

[Pablo68]

Originally Posted by HighlandPete

I'm sad as well, keep a spread sheet of mpg records. My 2006 E91 330d averaged 37mpg over 55k miles. Current car F11 535i, at my last brim, 30.6mpg for my 9K miles with it.

HighlandPete

Good to know I'm not alone

This 335i is early doors (only done 700 miles so far) and is sitting at 30.1 after two full brims.

[Tengocity]

Originally Posted by Pablo68

Good to know I'm not alone

This 335i is early doors (only done 700 miles so far) and is sitting at 30.1 after two full brims.

Not alone at all! I have spreadsheets going back over last 7 cars!

[NISFAN]

Originally Posted by Pablo68

Good to know I'm not alone

This 335i is early doors (only done 700 miles so far) and is sitting at 30.1 after two full brims.

Pablo, How many litres does your car take please? BMW specs show the Petrol as having a 3 litre larger fuel tank than the Diesel. This sounded odd to me.

[Pablo68]

Originally Posted by NISFAN

Pablo, How many litres does your car take please? BMW specs show the Petrol as having a 3 litre larger fuel tank than the Diesel. This sounded odd to me.

Hmm that's a good question. My manual says 60 litres but I haven't filled from empty yet to confirm.

[PrinceBarin]

Originally Posted by Tengocity

Not alone at all! I have spreadsheets going back over last 7 cars!

I love a spreadsheet. And I love cars. And I spend a considerable amount of time on this forum. So I definitely won't judge any of you guys for keeping MPG records - evidently many do.

Thing is, I don't and am not sure what the motivation is? Is it curiosity, a competitive desire to improve, a simple love of data analytics? Could you guys humour me by sharing your fascination in mpg records?

[HighlandPete]

Originally Posted by PrinceBarin

....I definitely won't judge any of you guys for keeping MPG records - evidently many do.

Thing is, I don't and am not sure what the motivation is? Is it curiosity, a competitive desire to improve, a simple love of data analytic? Could you guys humour me by sharing your fascination in mpg records?

I must admit I do like chewing over a bit of data. As a design engineer have a bias that way. I've always been an engine guy right from a boy, when I'd repair engines for mowers and rotavators and the like, and then onto industrial engines. If you have read many of my comments over the forums I am a bit of an mpg anorak. Have been since back in the 1970's when my mate ran a 1200 Cortina and I was in a Cortina 1500 GT, I'd return better mpg with (and using) more performance than the 1200, the reasons why intrigued me. The rest is history as they say.

My personal fuel records over many years, are only part of the data I collect and analyse, I follow mpg trends, read and chew over quite a few of the official technical reports and mpg study data.

Plus I like to know how the car is for tune, seasonal impacts on fuel consumption, etc.. Sad to some, but I'm not into football or cricket.

HighlandPete

[Nick the Greek]

My personal fuel records over many years, are only part of the data I collect and analyse, I follow mpg trends, read and chew over quite a few of the official technical reports and mpg study data.

Plus I like to know how the car is for tune, seasonal impacts on fuel consumption, etc.. Sad to some,

You need to see a good therapist


I can recommend one.

[Tengocity]

Originally Posted by PrinceBarin

I love a spreadsheet. And I love cars. And I spend a considerable amount of time on this forum. So I definitely won't judge any of you guys for keeping MPG records - evidently many do.

Thing is, I don't and am not sure what the motivation is? Is it curiosity, a competitive desire to improve, a simple love of data analytic? Could you guys humour me by sharing your fascination in mpg records?

Curiosity originally and now because I've done it so long it's now a bit of OCD I suspect!

The original question I was trying to answer was whether the Premium diesel was more sufficiently more economical to justify the extra price, or whether supermarket fuels were any worse than a brand name fuel.

After a few months my conclusion was that diesel was diesel, as far as the spreadsheet would tell me objectively! The most amazing thing I even noticed was that my E46 330d did exactly the same mpg two years running.. to the tenth of an mpg! 33.6 IIRC...

Now it's just interesting to compare the cars I've had.

[HighlandPete]

Originally Posted by Nick the Greek

You need to see a good therapist


I can recommend one.

I've got a good therapist... she reckons a bit of housework brings me back to reality.

HighlandPete