First experiences of the M

I would be really interested to hear how you get on with the fuel consumption in comparison in a months time. It is the only thing that really puts me off the M, my mpg is appalling. It does not matter at the minute, but if we get anymore cuts at work or the move me to another office in the future, might consider swapping to the 3.0, totally hooked on the Z4.

Not sure whether you managed to dispose of Sitting Bull, but if he is still here - I am defintely a women, but as for being queer, certainly would be tempted to give up men if all guys had the tact and opionions of him. :thumbsdown:

I love this forum, it has really made me appreciate and get the best out of my car. :thumbsup:
 
That's a good point actually Inuit. I'd be interested to see how it fairs MPG-wise during the same trips. Isn't it supposed to be around 8-10mpg down on average?
 
Inuit said:
I would be really interested to hear how you get on with the fuel consumption in comparison in a months time. It is the only thing that really puts me off the M, my mpg is appalling. It does not matter at the minute, but if we get anymore cuts at work or the move me to another office in the future, might consider swapping to the 3.0, totally hooked on the Z4.

Not sure whether you managed to dispose of Sitting Bull, but if he is still here - I am defintely a women, but as for being queer, certainly would be tempted to give up men if all guys had the tact and opionions of him. :thumbsdown:

I love this forum, it has really made me appreciate and get the best out of my car. :thumbsup:
Click to expand...

I hope hope hes gone too....absolute tit!!!
 
IK, my intention is to keep the car a long time. My previous Z4 I kept for 1 year 7 months (but covered 31,000 miles in that time), and that is the shortest time i`ve kept a car in the last 10 years, but of course the reason to sell was to upgrade. I am quite a fan of the Z4 so if I didn`t get the M I would of kept the 3.0. At some point in the future I wanted something with even more power (and before I got old) so I now have that in the M and it is still a Z4. I`m very sure I will NOT feel the need to upgrade to more power so I see no reason to get anything even faster in the coming years, the M will do me fine. I was considering upgrading for a while so in the end just did it, and I can now forget the thooughts of getting a Caymen S in the future as the M is good enough (faster and cheaper!). I can also stop wasting time scanning the BMW website and Pistonheads for cars.

Inuit and IK, funny you should mention the MPG, I am monitoring it right now. I reset it Monday morning just as I started my commute. The MPG yesterdy was 31.2 although it has now dropped to 29.6MPG (euro). I don`t think that is bad, the same journey in the 3.0 the car would average around 30.6 or lower (once saw it average 29 over a few days). Admittedly I am quite light on a car when not purposely driving fast, but that 29.6in the M does include having some fun also! However, I would say that I am probably on average taking it a little slower in the M. My journey is a round trip of 60 miles through country roads and some small villages (and 30mph zones).

I get the feeling the M will guzzle during stop-go driving such as in traffic jams or driving around cities.And that is something that luckily while I am working with my current client, I will not have to do much of.

If anyone feels the need to downgrade to the 3.0Si I would say "do it". With Sport enabled the steering is improved. Change the runflats because that is something I said I wouldn`t do but after driving the M, Ive learned the runflats really are horrid. 265hp is still better than most of what is available out there also. Although it has a different sound and noise to the M, it still sounds fantastic also!!!
 
Darren, quick one for you... (I'll reply to you post in a sec!)

http://www.z4-forum.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=2&t=12763
 
Darren M said:
IK, my intention is to keep the car a long time. My previous Z4 I kept for 1 year 7 months (but covered 31,000 miles in that time), and that is the shortest time i`ve kept a car in the last 10 years, but of course the reason to sell was to upgrade. I am quite a fan of the Z4 so if I didn`t get the M I would of kept the 3.0. At some point in the future I wanted something with even more power (and before I got old) so I now have that in the M and it is still a Z4. I`m very sure I will NOT feel the need to upgrade to more power so I see no reason to get anything even faster in the coming years, the M will do me fine. I was considering upgrading for a while so in the end just did it, and I can now forget the thooughts of getting a Caymen S in the future as the M is good enough (faster and cheaper!). I can also stop wasting time scanning the BMW website and Pistonheads for cars.
Click to expand...

I really wanted a Cayman before I bought the Z4 (the 2.7 model), but it was slower, more expensive, and wasn't as unique or rare as the Z4. Once I properly saw the Z4 Coupe, with it's squared rear arches and beautiful but simple interior, I knew it was the one for me. It was exactly what I was looking for! The Cayman has a HORRIBLE interior, and I'll always remember what my friend said when people questioned why he bought a 'slow' AMV8. "I spend my time inside the car, so it has to look nice!".


Darren M said:
Inuit and IK, funny you should mention the MPG, I am monitoring it right now. I reset it Monday morning just as I started my commute. The MPG yesterdy was 31.2 although it has now dropped to 29.6MPG (euro). I don`t think that is bad, the same journey in the 3.0 the car would average around 30.6 or lower (once saw it average 29 over a few days). Admittedly I am quite light on a car when not purposely driving fast, but that 29.6in the M does include having some fun also! However, I would say that I am probably on average taking it a little slower in the M. My journey is a round trip of 60 miles through country roads and some small villages (and 30mph zones).
Click to expand...

I'll be interested to see what you're saying a few months down the line, as like you say, you're not fully exploiting the potential at the moment. My Si is doing quite well at replacing my Astra VXR so far, returning better MPG; so I'm happy with that!


Darren M said:
I get the feeling the M will guzzle during stop-go driving such as in traffic jams or driving around cities.And that is something that luckily while I am working with my current client, I will not have to do much of.
Click to expand...

For some reason, I get this feeling too - but is it unfounded? Anyone? Why would the M use more than the Si? (Because of the new engine technology in the Si?)


Darren M said:
If anyone feels the need to downgrade to the 3.0Si I would say "do it". With Sport enabled the steering is improved. Change the runflats because that is something I said I wouldn`t do but after driving the M, Ive learned the runflats really are horrid. 265hp is still better than most of what is available out there also. Although it has a different sound and noise to the M, it still sounds fantastic also!!!
Click to expand...

I can't tell much difference with Sport enabled to be honest, and never touch the button. It's the same as in the Astra VXR, where it basically does nothing. Shame really.
Runflats - well, I'd definitely like to change mine, but with the wear on my tyres thus far (5mm on the rears @ 18k miles!), it's going to take me another 2-3 years to even get round to replacing the REARS, let alone the fronts!

As for the sound... I totally agree. The Si sounds far nicer at lower revs, but the M probably sounds nicer at top revs (although I've not been out in one properly for long enough to really hear it)
 
IK. said:
Darren M said:
I get the feeling the M will guzzle during stop-go driving such as in traffic jams or driving around cities.And that is something that luckily while I am working with my current client, I will not have to do much of.
Click to expand...

For some reason, I get this feeling too - but is it unfounded? Anyone? Why would the M use more than the Si? (Because of the new engine technology in the Si?)
Click to expand...
There will always be a relationship between power and fuel consumption. My 2005 3.0 did 22-23 with mainly city driving, I expect an ///M to be 15-17 under similar circumstances. My SLK dips to 19-20 under the same use.
 
My 'M' returns a regular 23-24 MPG mixed driving. On a run taking it easy I can get 31-33 MPG which is impressive. On a 'hoon' around Welsh 'B' roads with 'sport' engaged that would drop to 16 MPG.

Overall I think the 'M' does a good job of being a GT criuser and a hardcore performance car. I had a 2.5 Si before the 'M' and it did return an average of 27MPG mived driving so I don't feel the 'M's fuel consumption is excessive in comparison.
 
I have a 47 mile drive that I make pretty often from my home up to my RV loacted in the Pocono Mtns. All but 6 miles are 4 lane highway. When I made this drive in my previous 3.0si using cruise control set at 65 MPH I could get an average of 34 to 35 MPG for the trip. In my M Roadster I get 28 to 29 MPG. As sammyz mentioned and I agree the 'M's fuel consumption is not excessive.
 
When compared to my previous cars (mainly Porsches) i think the M returns a really excellent mpg. I had a Golf GTI that did about the same 25mpg average that i get now (according to the computer, not actual calcualtions). I'd like to see how many other 300+ bhp cars return figures like those, not many i suspect.
 
Not sure what i am doing wrong - my trip computer averages around the 22mpg, but last time i actually worked out what i got on a tank it was 18.5, that was an average week for me 15 mile each way daily trip, some standing in slow traffic by 8 miles of motorway . Did a week of doing a 55 each way trip for a week, about 50 mile of it motorway and it went up to 23 mpg, only other two cars i can compare it to, which i have done the same trip in regularly is the audi 3.2 and that was 29 mpg and the 350z and that did 27 mpg, they where all driven in the same way. Really should use the Audi for the Northampton office trips, but love driving the M too much.

I have been trying to be very careful and having the trip on the computer on at all times for the past week or so. I am guzzling fuel when sitting or moving in slow moving traffic at around 16 mpg. On the motorway at around 65 - 70 it the computer is showing well into the 30 mpg. I do have a tendency to accelerate hard upto the speed limit and i think that is what is killing my average mpg.

Going to have my sensible head for the next few weeks and see how much of a difference it makes, cannot do anything about the slow moving traffic, so am going to try acclerating a little more slowly. Had the sport button on today and was surprised what a difference that made to accleration, never really use it much, think i need to be leaving that off if i want to improve the mpg.
 
outrun said:
When compared to my previous cars (mainly Porsches) i think the M returns a really excellent mpg. I had a Golf GTI that did about the same 25mpg average that i get now (according to the computer, not actual calcualtions). I'd like to see how many other 300+ bhp cars return figures like those, not many i suspect.
Click to expand...

Agree 100%.

You should have seen how much fuel my Impreza used to drink. I'd be very lucky to see 220 miles out of a tank of fuel (£45-50). I'm getting 300 miles easily out of the similarly sized tank on my //M. On an overall tank including some PH hoons and some very spirited driving I can still see a 26mpg average. It's magic I tell thee. :o

PS: Am I right in thinking Sittingbull is MikeZ28 of PH infamy?
 
Another thought, i have the roof down alot and i know this will make the car less aerodynamc, so maybe roof down and hard accleration is not a good combination. Anyone know if there is a major difference between the roadster and Coupe on the mpg.
 
Inuit said:
Another thought, i have the roof down alot and i know this will make the car less aerodynamc, so maybe roof down and hard accleration is not a good combination. Anyone know if there is a major difference between the roadster and Coupe on the mpg.
Click to expand...


Inuit, you're worrying too much about fuel consumption! 'Drive it slowly', ''don't use the sport button',' keep the hood up'- you'll be buying a diesel next :)

Come on girl, hood down, sport button on, and give it the beans....you know it makes sense. :driving: B
 
It`s still averaging 29.7MPG at the moment. Not as good as the 3.0 but not bad either, better than I thought it would be. That average has been taken over about 210 miles of commuting. This involves hardly any stop go driving other than stopping for a few roudabouts, junctions and zebra crossings and parking in a Tesco`s carpark once or twice a day(and the associated jam trying to get in or out of the carpark).
 
Cheers for the comments.
BTW, my old car is going to be up for £18450! Should anyone want a cared for and well driven 3.0Si Coupe with higher miles (but perfectly run in),Rybrook of Warwick is the place to call. I`m sure they would discount it decently. The milage is misleading as that car spent most of it`s life at 50-70mph cruising on motorways (not driven around cities). It was also never revved above 3000rpm until thoroughly warmed up.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom