2.0i v 3.0i

K

k.leeming

Member
I currently drive a 2.0l E85. Just wondering if I changed to a 3.0l, how much more it'll cost me.

I use my Zed as a daily drive and do around 300miles a week, filling up each tank at £65.
Tax is 120 or 140 quid cant remember and my insurance is £639.18 per year.

Is anyone out there who has had a 2.0 and now owns a 3.0 and can tell me if ill be spending more on the car in the long run?

Kane
 
My old 3.0i

£270 VED per year
300 miles per tank average at £75 to fill (V power)

It's definitely going to cost you more, but you'll enjoy it.

Paulgs has recently gone from 2.0i to 3.0si. You might want to PM for an opinion :)



Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
Are you sure it's only £140 a year? I had a E88 from 2009 which was £175 a year. I thought the E85 2.0l is a £220 pa car with the 3.0l being £280 a year currently. But still a step up in terms of running costs all round.

Depending on how you drive it will all depend on how much it's going to cost to fill up and how often, it's quite easy to get carried away with the extra power. As for insurance I would think it's going to be possibly a couple if not a few hundred more going by what you are paying just now but you can always check this via a quick quote at the moment even without a number plate.

It's a given that you will be paying more in the long term for the running of the car unless your doing lots of motorway miles when a 3.0l will cruise better than the 2.0l
 
You might save a tenner each week on fuel and you might save a tenner each month on tax. Other costs might be a little higher too, but the big one is always depreciation.

Buy the right car for the right money and look after it. When you come to sell it you'll find that the other costs become irrelevant.
 
Hi Kane,

Just made the change from 2.0i sport to 3.0si sport. . .

I changed as the cost of tyres, road tax, insurance even servicing all manageable and 'fairly' similar over a years motoring (with a specialist rather than a dealership and being in my 50s insurance ok road tax £280) BUT I've found that the fuel consumption is the biggest difference:

I use the Zed mostly for trips out on our favourite roads at weekends - say 70 miles circular. On these trips with spirited driving I'm getting 21 - 22mpg. On the same roads using all the performance of the 2.0i I was managing 29mpg. I also use the Zed for trips shopping and general visiting friends locally and urban driving brings about 23 - 24 mpg. On a long motorway journey (200miles) at 78 mph I managed 36mpg (6th gear could do with being a bit longer and lowering the revs to be a true overdrive). The 2.0 would achieve high 30s and even 40+ on a steady throttle at motorway speeds and urban driving would hit 30mpg.

The 2.0 is more economical and with the mileage you're talking about I would estimate your fuel bill would be increased a third - which given an extra 2 cylinders does kind of make sense - however I had hoped for slightly better consumption from the 3.0 (the performance does make up for it though).

I haven't had my 3.0 long and am still enjoying the performance so driven more sedately I'm sure my mpg can be beaten - but then why buy a 3.0 to drive like that?
I have experimented and found that you have to try very hard to improve the urban fuel consumption more than 2 or 3 mpg.

I would be very interested to hear what others have to say? Does the 3.0i with 231bhp do more mpg than the 3.0si at 265bhp - if so that could be a better route for you?
I would stick to the 2.0 litre as a daily driver - would you get the opportunity to use the performance of the 3.0 on a commute?

:driving: :thumbsup:
 
Angie4m said:
Are you sure it's only £140 a year? I had a E88 from 2009 which was £175 a year. I thought the E85 2.0l is a £220 pa car with the 3.0l being £280 a year currently. But still a step up in terms of running costs all round.

Depending on how you drive it will all depend on how much it's going to cost to fill up and how often, it's quite easy to get carried away with the extra power. As for insurance I would think it's going to be possibly a couple if not a few hundred more going by what you are paying just now but you can always check this via a quick quote at the moment even without a number plate.

It's a given that you will be paying more in the long term for the running of the car unless your doing lots of motorway miles when a 3.0l will cruise better than the 2.0l
Click to expand...

The way I drive it. Gear 2 always get a nice little kick :D

I don't drive economically to say the least. :evil:

I do however do 80% motorway, maybe more.

Hmmmm temptation.

paulgs1000 said:
Hi Kane,

Just made the change from 2.0i sport to 3.0si sport. . .

I changed as the cost of tyres, road tax, insurance even servicing all manageable and 'fairly' similar over a years motoring (with a specialist rather than a dealership and being in my 50s insurance ok road tax £280) BUT I've found that the fuel consumption is the biggest difference:

I use the Zed mostly for trips out on our favourite roads at weekends - say 70 miles circular. On these trips with spirited driving I'm getting 21 - 22mpg. On the same roads using all the performance of the 2.0i I was managing 29mpg. I also use the Zed for trips shopping and general visiting friends locally and urban driving brings about 23 - 24 mpg. On a long motorway journey (200miles) at 78 mph I managed 36mpg (6th gear could do with being a bit longer and lowering the revs to be a true overdrive). The 2.0 would achieve high 30s and even 40+ on a steady throttle at motorway speeds and urban driving would hit 30mpg.

The 2.0 is more economical and with the mileage you're talking about I would estimate your fuel bill would be increased a third - which given an extra 2 cylinders does kind of make sense - however I had hoped for slightly better consumption from the 3.0 (the performance does make up for it though).

I haven't had my 3.0 long and am still enjoying the performance so driven more sedately I'm sure my mpg can be beaten - but then why buy a 3.0 to drive like that?
I have experimented and found that you have to try very hard to improve the urban fuel consumption more than 2 or 3 mpg.

I would be very interested to hear what others have to say? Does the 3.0i with 231bhp do more mpg than the 3.0si at 265bhp - if so that could be a better route for you?
I would stick to the 2.0 litre as a daily driver - would you get the opportunity to use the performance of the 3.0 on a commute?

:driving: :thumbsup:
Click to expand...

I go about finding ways in which I can get the opportunity. I love it!!

Thanks for your input.
 
On comparison I'm getting better mpg so far from a e89 35is than I was getting from a E88 120i. I'm sure that'll all change come nicer weather!
 
I'm getting mid to high 40 mpg on a steady m-way run from my 2.0.

My GTI would barley do mid 30s so it's great for me.
 
For me my E86 is the most economical car I've had. 38 mpg on a run, average of 32 over a month of mixed driving. My ZX6-R returns around high 30's to low 40's and it's a lot colder and less comfortable!
 
My 3.0i Z4 was a delight on fuel economy.

A fortnight ago I had an Astra 1.6 SRi hire car from work that was 115bhp and only managed 31mpg average driving from Edinburgh to Stockport and back.... the 3.0i Z4 could've beaten that.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
I've had my Z4 3.0i for little over a year now. I use it daily and I love it!! I wanted one from the very first time I saw one back in 2003.

Any how, I drive it to work daily, only about a 7 mile return trip, but every now and then I drive to my parents house in north Donegal in Ireland about 85 miles from Belfast - partial motorway and A roads...my best at or about the speed limit was 39mpg and that was not even trying! On the combined cycle I average about 32mpg. It takes approximately £65 per fill and I get on average 310-320 miles.

A friend if mine drives a 2001 BMW 325i compact... totally immaculate and its his baby only 50k miles...but he manages only 26mpg but granted he only drives in town and in traffic....

I used to own a Mini Cooper S JCW... 1.6 litre with 210bbhp... awesome car/go cart... I still miss it but it was only marginally better mpg wise compared to my Zed!!

All I can say is that the 3.0i won't disappoint...but do a bit of man maths first... break down the costs of 2.0i vs 3.0i... a good way would be to compare fuel tank size, cost of fuel, mpg per vehicle (both by forum member suggestions and BMW manual suggestions), then miles per week, road tax and insurance costs. If you break it down it will probably work out less of a difference than you think. I recently checked my car versus a 2011 330d and it costs roughly £10-12 more per week to do the same miles...totally worth it in my opinion!!
 
I would definitely say get a 3.0 over a 2.0 if you can afford the extra insurance/consumables.

I went for the 2.0 as in my price range and required spec/condition, it was the best car. I saw some real dogs but my 2.0 was mint. I went for condition/spec over displacement.

I'm sure though down the line I will upgrade it to a 3.0
 
I didn't feel the difference between the two was worth the costs. But then I found the car I liked, it was a 2.0 and that bother me one jot.

I've got 47mpg on a 270miles run up north in my 2.0


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
I had a 2.0 for just under a year and have just upgraded to a 2.5si and the dip in fuel economy is well worth it for the extra grunt, so I'm sure a 3.0 would only be even more so!! :driving:
 
It's the joy of a straight six sound & torque, either in 2.5 or 3.0 form that makes it all worth while. Service it at a decent independent & won't cost you much more, if at all.

The engines seem to suffer fewer emission & other issues, so factoring in this I would say a 2.5/3.0 option works out to be cheaper.

My Zed gets used for a 45 mile daily round trip, 90% motorway... happy days & not a single complaint
 
I do a 70 mile commute in mine most days and my car runs like a dream. My battery went a few months ago (was the original) and I've had front discs and all pads replaced as well as a control arm bush - and that's it in 35k miles. Oh, and the roof motor replacement but that's not model specific as we all know. Over two years of ownership and I still love getting in it every time - little blip of the engine on start up and by the time I get to the motorway it's warm enough to boot it and get that howl in my ears :evil:

The only thing that is currently pissing me off is the Z's ability to attract stones & shite into the front-end and side paintwork :( I really want a front end / side skirts re-spray and a full proper professional detail, but I reckon it would cost about £1,200...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom