E85 v E89 on fuel

[Coyote]

So two months ago my wife replaced her 2005 E85 3.0i SE with a 2016 E89 2.0i S-Drive.

where as the E85 used to get 34 mpg average with normal everyday driving bur the E89 is only getting 30mpg for the same.

Surely this can not be correct the older V6 engine is much better on fuel?

My only other thought is maybe the E89 is set to US gallons or something?

Any ideas?

[Jasonn]

I've got an E89 and around town 27 - 30 is as good as I get, it gets better if I use decent fuel - I get around 26-28 on supermarket cheapo going to 30 - 33 on 97 RON (with more smiles per gallon)

[Rassi]

So two months ago my wife replaced her 2005 E85 3.0i SE with a 2016 E89 2.0i S-Drive.

where as the E85 used to get 34 mpg average with normal everyday driving bur the E89 is only getting 30mpg for the same.

Surely this can not be correct the older V6 engine is much better on fuel?

My only other thought is maybe the E89 is set to US gallons or something?

Any ideas?

The very rare V6 option is known to be very economical

[Silverstar]

If it is a UK car and not a US import then it will be set to read imperial MPG or you can toggle it to metric L/100Km. I have a 2009 E89 30i 3 litres inline 6 and over combined use a mix of motorways and some town driving I get around 34 MPG. On long motorway stretch from London to Southern Spain I achieved 44 MPG and if I drive around town doing around 5 to 7 miles per journey I get around 22 to 24MPG which to me are good figures for such an engine. I know the newer turbo 4s have on paper better fuel consumption but from what I have seen all these newer small capacity turbo engines rarely come anywhere close to what's stated on paper.

[Pbondar]

There have been other discussions on this as the dickensian luddites cling on to obscure emotions about the 6 cylinder engines versus the real world which moves on to turbo'd 4 cylinder variants!

As previously quoted elsewhere, I've spent the last 3 years hooning with some of the Forum's finest E85-ers over many runs (around 40 plus days of hooning)..dissapointingly, despite offset pistons, advanced oil pressure management, twin scroll turbos, 8 speed advanced ZF transmission with lockup, advanced coolant management, multi stage knock management I've found that over a say 200 mile day that when we top up tanks my technologically advanced and far superior N20 powered variant I end up putting 1 or 2 litres more into the tank than my E85 compatriats..

It could be of course that they are simply slipstreaming me..but..

[greg81]

Unless I'm mistaken, the E89 is a good 130kg heavier than its older brother

[Pbondar]

Unless I'm mistaken, the E89 is a good 130kg heavier than its older brother

30si vs 30i Manual versions

3086 lbs vs 3241 lbs unladen..according to BMW brochures..

[enuff_zed]

Maybe the E89 is so much more fun that we can't help putting our foot down that little bit more

[brillomaster]

What is her normal daily driving like? A naturally aspirated 3 litre will have completely different characteristics to a 2 litre turbo.

Id have thought a 3 litre under moderate acceleration isnt actually using that much fuel, whereas the second you put your foot down in a modern turbo the turbos spool up and use fuel.

Equally, maybe your wife has to put her foot down more in the 2 litre turbo to get the same level of performance that she was used to in the old car.

[montymoore]

I know the newer turbo 4s have on paper better fuel consumption but from what I have seen all these newer small capacity turbo engines rarely come anywhere close to what's stated on paper.

Absolutely especially in performance vehicles. In essence, they only achieve anywhere close to those figures if you drive impossibly carefully barely touching the accelerator! These small turbos rev so easily and that guzzles the fuel so one blip on the pedal and the MPG figures go right down!

[MACK]

My 3.0i pre facelift and the e89 20i near as dammit getting the same fuel economy on the same 100 mile + route, which is a mixture of all types of roads/driving. The 3.0i has also got a shorter diff than standard too, 3.64 instead of 3.07.

[buzyg]

It could be of course that they are simply slipstreaming me..but..

[Stevo1987]

In the short time I had the 35is I was getting about 27mph. As you know Norfolk ain’t got no motorways or more economical roads. This was in the cold weather as well. A long time ago I had a 944 Turbo and got about 25 out of that. Not that has any relevance to this thread but just reminiscing.