The petrol that thinks it`s a diesel ??

E

encee

Member
Apologies in advance, as I know that this is a totally boring subject, but I really felt that I HAD to sing the praises of the fantastic engine in my 3.0si Coupe ! 8)

Basically, it`s the fuel consumption, and as per the title, does this thing think it`s a bl*ody diesel, as I`m getting roughly 10mpg more than my last car, which was a 240bhp 3.2 V6 Alfa GT ? It`s honestly not too far off the consumption of my last BMW, which WAS a diesel; the 330d !

I`ve also owned an E46 M3 (again, surprisingly good for a 340bhp car), a 3.2 V6 Audi TT, and a Golf R32 within the last few years, but NONE of them get anywhere near the 3.0si for consumption.

Notwithstanding the fantastic performance from this engine, it really is remarkable how fuel-efficient it is.

So congratulations to BMW for an excellent feat of engineering.........yet again !! :thumbsup:
 
so what is the mpg figure then?

im interested to know as i quite fancy a coupe next. well it on the shortlist anyway !
 
Best mpg ive got in my 30.si roadster was 41mpg and this was on A roads to East Anglia. Managed 420 miles on a tank and do 400 relatively easily, so I'm well impessed too. :)
 
You guys aren't trying hard enough :driving:

Although I agree, even the older, i.e. less efficient, 3.0 is a great engine. My average for ownership and approx 10k miles is a fraction over 30mpg (for the older 231ps engine), working it out manually (don't rely on the OBC). That's with the roof down probably 50% of the time, so I'd imagine the more slippery Coupe shape should be better than the equivalent-engined Roadster.
 
easty027 said:
so what is the mpg figure then?

im interested to know as i quite fancy a coupe next. well it on the shortlist anyway !
Click to expand...


easty: I`m generally getting about 33mpg mate, and I was getting around 23 in the Alfa, so as I said, NOTICEABLY better ! It`s a real bonus to find a car that performs like this one does, yet still returns properly decent mpg. Until this one, I was under the impression that anything performance based (and I`ve owned quite a few, believe me) was incapable of achieving much above that figure, and for driving of my usual routes, I always found 23mpg to be about average for most cars with more than 200bhp, apart from a Mazda RX8 PZ I owned a while ago, which did only 17mpg, no matter HOW you drove it ! :?

So yes, this car, yet again, is proving to be more of a potential keeper than anything else I`ve owned over the past 8 years, or so :thumbsup:
 
Since ownership i have averaged 32mpg (based on fuel not computer) and i have a pretty heavy right foot.

I once took it steady on the M1 at 65-70 mph (2.5k rpm) and the computer told me i had done 42mpg and only used the first line on the petrol gauge (although not exactly scientific) from derby to n london - which was 130 miles :D
 
know what you mean - my average is 30mpg over 4 years...

mrs gannet's Mazda 2 sport (1.5 litre petrol)... 1 year old returns the ....... SAME..... surely that aint right :?
 
Off topic but how was the R32? I was looking at one, but put off a tad by the 22mpg ish :lol: Plus not exactly fast, well did not seem it at all. Nice car though.
 
chris said:
Off topic but how was the R32? I was looking at one, but put off a tad by the 22mpg ish :lol: Plus not exactly fast, well did not seem it at all. Nice car though.
Click to expand...

If I`m honest, Chris, a touch slower than I was ever expecting. :cry:

Okay, I test drove it first, but the dealer was a good distance from where I live, and when you test them on roads you don`t know they always seem quicker, somehow ? It was definitely slower than my 3.0 coupe, which is NEVER found wanting; certainly in any situation I`ve yet come across.

Looks-wise it was okay, but mine was a Mk V, which doesn`t look as purposeful as the Mk IV did, or as aggressive.

Plus-points, the handling was good, and the interior was very good, with superb seats, and a very good level of equipment (down to the previous owner speccing it up, as I didn`t buy it new). The soundtrack was also VERY nice.......... 8)

All in all, good car, but not one that I`ll remember amongst my finest !

Couple of pics here for you.............

R32-2.jpg

R32-3.jpg

R32-4.jpg



I
 
I had a go in a MKIV at first, as they do in my eyes look a lot more aggressive than the MKV's do. MKV's are propably better, but i did not want to spend loads on a golf :lol: I found the gearbox and 4wd surprisingly good, well to what i was expecting anyway. Not a bad car, but most of the GTi boys were producing more power than the R32's too :?
 
The R32 sounds fantastic but not that fast, particularly for the MPG.

This is what my 3.0i (231) did to my mates MkV R32 DSG on a recent european tour.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=i2n_og0t7cU

On topic: I have found my car to be rather parsimonious on juice, on the 3000 mile trip above i managed 34mpg brim to brim. That was with 2 blokes, loaded with gear and some fast driving on the Nurburgring/Alps. Not bad considering mine has the older m54 engine and a good 10mpg better than the SLOWER R32 on the same trip :D so god knows what i would have got from a 3.0si!
 
tomTVR said:
The R32 sounds fantastic but not that fast, particularly for the MPG.

This is what my 3.0i (231) did to my mates MkV R32 DSG on a recent european tour.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=i2n_og0t7cU

On topic: I have found my car to be rather parsimonious on juice, on the 3000 mile trip above i managed 34mpg brim to brim. That was with 2 blokes, loaded with gear and some fast driving on the Nurburgring/Alps. Not bad considering mine has the older m54 engine and a good 10mpg better than the SLOWER R32 on the same trip :D so god knows what i would have got from a 3.0si!
Click to expand...


Confirms exactly what I said Tom; not as quick as the Zed, and not as good on fuel either, both by some margin ! :thumbsup:
 
Encee, I too had an Alfa GT V6 3.2 before I bought my Z4 3.0i in July. I def agree with your mpg thing - the Alfa did about 23-ish whereas I'm getting early 30's in the Z4. Gotta say though I do prefer the Alfa V6 engine! More responsive, smoother, feels faster, looks awesome ... and of course a noise which no other V6 can compete with. Glorious. It's even better in the GTV 3.0 V6, it felt more vicious in that. The rest of the GT wasn't as good as the Z4 though. As the old saying goes - when you buy an Alfa you pay for the engine & the rest of the car comes free :roll:
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom