E90 / E92 M3 MPG (City/Highway)?

[Mii]

Most people are probably going to make M3 as daily driving car. Some suggest performance and MPG do not go well which is quite true for high performance car. What do you predict the new E90/E92 MPG?

Some comparison: (City/Highway) MPG (US) | MPG (UK)
E36 M3 (240 hp): 20/27 Source
E46 M3 (333 hp): 16/24 Source
E92 M3 (414 hp): 13.2/25.6 | 15.8/30.7 Source
B7 RS4 (420 hp): 14/21 Source

Update:
Combined fuel economy: 19 MPG (US) | 22.8 MPG (UK) Source
Tank: 16.6 Gallons

1.200949857 US gallons to 1 UK gallon:
Convertor

[T Bone]

Originally Posted by Mii

Most people are probably going to make M3 as daily driving car. Some suggest performance and MPG do not go well which is quite true for high performance car. What do you predict the new E90/E92 MPG?

Some comparison: (City/Highway)
E36 M3 (240 hp): 20/27 Source
E46 M3 (333 hp): 16/24 Source
E90/92 M3 (414 - 422 hp): ?/?
Audi RS4 (420 hp): 14/21 Source

It is going to suck. The M3 is based on the S85 V10 which is extremely thirsty. My average MPG on the M6 is 13 mpg over the last 3000 miles. Even when I baby it on the highway, I get only 19 mpg.

The M3 V8 will have 8 cylinders but you cannot just take a linear measurement.....

My swag would be 15-16 combined. (20 mpg highway, 13 city)

[ase2dais]

Originally Posted by T Bone

It is going to suck. The M3 is based on the S85 V10 which is extremely thirsty. My average MPG on the M6 is 13 mpg over the last 3000 miles. Even when I baby it on the highway, I get only 19 mpg.

The M3 V8 will have 8 cylinders but you cannot just take a linear measurement.....

My swag would be 15-16 combined. (20 mpg highway, 13 city)

+1
having said that I think it would be a bargain driving these older e46s

[Mii]

13/20 is kind of low IMO. I'd rather take E90/E92 M3 with only 414 hp but keep the same 16/24 as E46 M3 or better. After all, BMW is supposed to improve fuel economy while raising the power band for the new engine.

The car starting as 2008 MY will be rated under the new EPA method. Under the new method, consumer will see more realistic MPG figure on the window sticker. Hopefully we will see better than 13/20 MPG on M3 window sticker...

New EPA Fuel Economy Source:
http://www.edmunds.com/advice/fuelec...2/article.html

[swamp2]

BMW absolutely should put direct injection on this car. It not only improves power for a given displacement but also can drastically improve mileage. To the tune of about 10% (on both power and efficiency!) If they do not have it on the car it will display a major lack of technology (given the other vehicles and manufacturers that have it) and will keep that mileage really low.

[southlight]

Originally Posted by swamp2

BMW absolutely should put direct injection on this car. It not only improves power for a given displacement but also can drastically improve mileage. To the tune of about 10% (on both power and efficiency!) If they do not have it on the car it will display a major lack of technology (given the other vehicles and manufacturers that have it) and will keep that mileage really low.

C'mon swamp, how often do you want to say the same again... There's not one other manufacturer that has second generation DI combined with a redline above 8.000.
If you want to save fuel, don't press the power button.

Best regards, south

[Mii]

I agreed with swamp, according to BMW second generation DI aka High Precision Injection will yield a 10% improvement on both power and fuel efficiency. Let's suppose the new V8 is rated around 400 bhp, and 13/20 MPG worst scenario, if E90/92 M3 employs the new HPI on the new V8, a 440+ bhp V8 with 14.3+/22+ (City/Highway) MPG can be easily achieved and dust the competitors.

Although there hasn't been one manufacture using second generation DI with high rev engine, we'd expect BMW to be the leader in this realm. Let's hope the official press release for the new M3 will amuse us with this improvement.

[southlight]

Originally Posted by Mii

I agreed with swamp, according to BMW second generation DI aka High Precision Injection will yield a 10% improvement on both power and fuel efficiency. Let's suppose the new V8 is rated around 400 bhp, and 13/20 MPG worst scenario, if E90/92 M3 employs the new HPI on the new V8, a 440+ bhp V8 with 14.3+/22+ (City/Highway) MPG can be easily achieved and dust the competitors.

Although there hasn't been one manufacture using second generation DI with high rev engine, we'd expect BMW to be the leader in this realm. Let's hope the official press release for the new M3 will amuse us with this improvement.

Don't get me wrong. I'm a big fan of DI and would be overwhelmed if BMW would introduce DI on the M3. Especially the HPI has proven its benefits on the x35i engine. I just had to contradict swamp with his statement that other manufactureres have done that already...

Best regards, south

[T Bone]

DI is really used for power. It cools the chamber better and allows the sick 12:1 compression ratio..... some side benefit is better fuel economy versus non-DI engines.......but who are we kidding?

This is a low torque, high HP motor and it is going to suck gas according.....

13/20......

[SpencerM3]

I agree, it will SUCK, though I doubt it will be much worse than my S4 which gets me about 225 miles on a tank. However we would not be buying these cars if gas mileage was a real concern, get a Toyota if that’s how you feel. Plus I have a gas card, SO I DON’T CARE

[swamp2]

Originally Posted by southlight

C'mon swamp, how often do you want to say the same again... There's not one other manufacturer that has second generation DI combined with a redline above 8.000.
If you want to save fuel, don't press the power button.

Best regards, south

Sure I have repeated myself - and you never have?

DI was totally relevant to post about on a mpg thread.

You can argue all day about 1st gen. vs. 2nd gen. DI but Audi has DI on the RS4 and it revs to 8000. It helps performance and mpg on the RS4. BMW should have it, period, no matter what generation. I also noticed you never responded to my question back to you during our last exchange on DI to prove that the Audi system did not have such advantages over non DI!

[coaster]

13/20 sounds awful!

A couple of months ago I remeber the ISF guys in detroit said that their car will NOT incur a gas guzzler tax but the M3 will. Does anybody know what the dividing line is for a car to not incur this tax? Does it have to average above 20 mpg or something like that?

[swamp2]

Originally Posted by coaster

Does it have to average above 20 mpg or something like that?

It is based on "combined" city/highway, 55%/45% highway/city. $1000 for cars that get at least 21.5 mpg combined but less than 22.5 combined, all the way up to $7700 for less than 12.5 combined. If the 20/13 number is correct combined will be about 16.9 and the tax will be $3000. Ugh. Lets pray for DI!


Combined fuel economy of: Amount
at least 22.5 mpg No tax
at least 21.5, but less than 22.5 mpg $1000
at least 20.5, but less than 21.5 mpg $1300
at least 19.5, but less than 20.5 mpg $1700
at least 18.5, but less than 19.5 mpg $2100
at least 17.5, but less than 18.5 mpg $2600
at least 16.5, but less than 17.5 mpg $3000
at least 15.5, but less than 16.5 mpg $3700
at least 14.5, but less than 15.5 mpg $4500
at least 13.5, but less than 14.5 mpg $5400
at least 12.5, but less than 13.5 mpg $6400
less than 12.5 mpg $7700

[coaster]

Thanks swamp, appreciate your research on this. Yeah, for that $3K extra you could buy the upgrd sound plus navi, or maybe that active damper option I keep hearing about.

[Mii]

Not only MPG makes difference in power/fuel efficiency, it makes difference in the final cost of M3 too. Dealers actually add the gas guzzler tax to the cost of vehicle and then apply sales tax on top of that.

[Epacy]

Yeah, a tax that huge would be tough. Surely BMW has put some thought on that one.

[T Bone]

Originally Posted by swamp2

Sure I have repeated myself - and you never have?

DI was totally relevant to post about on a mpg thread.

You can argue all day about 1st gen. vs. 2nd gen. DI but Audi has DI on the RS4 and it revs to 8000. It helps performance and mpg on the RS4. BMW should have it, period, no matter what generation. I also noticed you never responded to my question back to you during our last exchange on DI to prove that the Audi system did not have such advantages over non DI!

What BMW is claiming is the second gen DI, all the fuel is atomized and doesn't hit the cylinder wall. Any fuel that hits the cylinder wall is a waste and this is the basis for BMW's claim of slightly better fuel economy and better emissions.

In the end if people what fuel economy don't buy an uncompromised engine.

[Mii]

Originally Posted by ukm3

22% more power
8% less fuel consumption

http://www.m3post.com/forums/showthread.php?t=52554

Base on the new S65B40 engine spec, is it safe to assume the new M3 gets better MPG vs E46 M3?

People in the market for the M cars probably already knew fuel economy is not going to be their top priority. It is the "power and fuel efficiency" people are concerning.

[T Bone]

Originally Posted by Mii

http://www.m3post.com/forums/showthread.php?t=52554

Base on the new S65B40 engine spec, is it safe to assume the new M3 gets better MPG vs E46 M3?

People in the market for the M cars probably already knew fuel economy is not going to be their top priority. It is the "power and fuel efficiency" people are concerning.

no way dude.... It is based on the thirsty S85 V10 and the fuel consumption is stupid high.

The good surprise about the new S85 is it reaches peak volumetric efficiency very early in the rpm band....so it will be more efficient than the V10...

[e36jakeo]

The new V8 should be able to equal the Porsche GT3's 17/24, don't you think? Similar power, torque, redline, etc.

I don't think you can compare the M5's V10 since the M5 also weighs at least 500 lbs more and they went for power above all else in the M5. Really poor MPG may be a deterant to some buyers of a $55-65K car, especially in our Al Gore era.

The RS4 may have DI, but it also has AWD and an extra 400 lbs to carry around.

I'll bet the M3 will get 16/24 like the E46 M3.

[e36jakeo]

More food for thought: The 335i's DI turbo six gets 19/29, and those with the 380 HP PROcede get 1-2 MPG BETTER on the highway (30 or more). If BMW kept an eye on efficiency while designing the M3's V8 there is no reason it cannot achieve the same (uninspiring) fuel economy as the E46 M3.

505 HP Z06 Corvette gets 16/26 !!!

[Mii]

Originally Posted by e36jakeo

I'll bet the M3 will get 16/24 like the E46 M3.

If 16/24 or better turn out to be true (please make it happen BMW), then the new V8 is technologically advanced. The HP and flat torque plus the rumored 7-speed ZSG will probably make the new M3 the fastest and most fuel efficient vehicle in its class.

The whole theme in 07 Geneva autoshow talked a lot about "energy and dynamics". Hopefully BMW pays a lot of attention on fine tuning the new V8.

I'd not be surprised by some 400+hp or 300lb torque in the new V8, it's expected all along. I'd be amused if BMW announce its production M3 will achieve better than 16/26 in a few weeks (assume BMW followed the same pattern as it announced M5 back then).