R44 Performance
BMW Garage BMW Meets Register Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read

Go Back   BMW M3 and BMW M4 Forum > BMW F80 M3 / F82 M4 Forum > BMW M3 (F80) and BMW M4 (F82) General Forum

Post Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
      06-01-2014, 08:35 AM   #23
JRV
Captain
United_States
119
Rep
922
Posts

Drives: 2011.75 AWE90M3
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: CT

iTrader: (1)

Whatever the F10 M5 ( I think 17/22) this car should get 2-4 miles/gal better in grandma mode. That should give you a better idea. Some guys over there get 24-26 at highway cruising also so maybe you can hit 30. The best i can do on the S65 is 20.
__________________
'11 Black/Black GLK350 (Wife)
'19 Black RAM 1500 Big Horn Night Package
'11 Loaded AW Fox Red/Black/Black Carbon Leather ZCP E90 M3 (Halloween Delivery)
Appreciate 0
      06-01-2014, 08:49 AM   #24
Miko M3
Private First Class
Miko M3's Avatar
United_States
21
Rep
135
Posts

Drives: F80 M3
Join Date: Mar 2014
Location: Wi

iTrader: (0)

26 mpg wow I better sell it as soon as I get the car. Spending over 70K know we are looking to save penny or two.
Appreciate 0
      06-01-2014, 09:07 AM   #25
1stm3f80
First Lieutenant
1stm3f80's Avatar
United_States
48
Rep
380
Posts

Drives: F80 ///M3
Join Date: Apr 2014
Location: San Diego

iTrader: (0)

I was was hoping for 17.5 mpg in the city. Guess I'll have to cancel my order.
Appreciate 0
      06-01-2014, 09:09 AM   #26
Eau Rouge
Major
Eau Rouge's Avatar
United_States
140
Rep
1,242
Posts

Drives: 2012 E92 M3
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Florida's Emerald Coast

iTrader: (0)

Garage List
2012 BMW E92 M3  [9.00]
Quote:
Originally Posted by CanAutM3 View Post
Power output is generally directly proportional to more fuel used. You need 30% more fuel to produce 30% more power.

Running at higher RPM also uses more fuel due to higher friction losses, but not at the same rate as the RPM increase. Running at 30% higher RPM does not necessarily burn 30% more fuel.


Since during the EPA test, redline and maximum power are not used often if at all, both would have little impact on the EPA rating.

How efficient an engine is at low power and low RPM usually translates in good EPA ratings.
Indeed. We’ve seen the S55’s power curve with a max power plateau of ~2k rpm beginning @~5.5k rpm. I could be wrong, but is there any reason to doubt that fuel consumption will increase as rpm's rise from 5.5k rpm toward 7.5k rpm even as power remains constant?

Agree with your EPA testing and EPA ratings comments.


Quote:
Originally Posted by SOM3 View Post
You're not a very bright fellow, are you? It is all proportional as someone already mentioned. In any event I'm done responding to you.
Hmm. Just wise enough to pass on lobbing insults at strangers. Have a good day.

Quote:
Originally Posted by mkoesel View Post
Exactly, so that favors the S55 even more over the S54 because of their respective power curves. EPA tests likely out S55 closer to peak power than S54.

Power and RPM are interdependent. I'm merely saying it is important to consider the whole picture.

The huge power increase is key. Check out the non-M I6 for what the technology has done for EPA numbers when power is kept similar to the S54.
Agreed.

My comment was directed at this reply which didn’t exactly “consider the whole picture”; particularly so as the 5.5k to 7.5k rpm range of the S55 engine delivers no additional power in that range.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Keto View Post
Physics? The S54 made 333 hp. More power = more fuel.
Cheers.
__________________
Appreciate 0
      06-01-2014, 09:47 AM   #27
CanAutM3
General
CanAutM3's Avatar
Canada
21105
Rep
20,741
Posts

Drives: 2021 911 turbo
Join Date: Jan 2012
Location: Montreal

iTrader: (1)

Garage List
Quote:
Originally Posted by Eau Rouge View Post
Indeed. We’ve seen the S55’s power curve with a max power plateau of ~2k rpm beginning @~5.5k rpm. I could be wrong, but is there any reason to doubt that fuel consumption will increase as rpm's rise from 5.5k rpm toward 7.5k rpm even as power remains constant?
This is a good point, at WOT, the S55 is likely to use more fuel at 7300RPM than it does at 5500RPM even if it is producing the same power at both those engine speeds.

But as was discussed previously, this is a bit irrelevant since most of the EPA test is done at partial throttle.
Appreciate 0
      06-01-2014, 11:53 AM   #28
Damasconian
Lieutenant Colonel
Damasconian's Avatar
742
Rep
1,555
Posts

Drives: 2015 M4
Join Date: Mar 2014
Location: Texas

iTrader: (0)

Then what the hell was Chris Harris talking about when he said 30MPG?

So much conflicting info coming out, gets very frustrating.
Appreciate 0
      06-01-2014, 11:54 AM   #29
Keto
Lieutenant Colonel
Keto's Avatar
United_States
73
Rep
1,603
Posts

Drives: F80 M3
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: WHO DAT NATION

iTrader: (1)

Garage List
2015 BMW M3  [10.00]
Quote:
Originally Posted by Damasconian View Post
Then what the hell was Chris Harris talking about when he said 30MPG?

So much conflicting info coming out, gets very frustrating.
Imperial gallons most likely.
__________________
2015 SO/SO MT M3 :: Exec : Lighting : Adaptive : HK : CF trim : Full leather : DAP : Black 19's : sunshade
Crystalline tint 40%/70% on windshield : M performance mirrors, spoiler, splitters : Status Gruppe CF lip : RKP diffuser : Fully dechromed
Bavsound Stage 1 : V1 Savvy hardwired : Self-coded
Appreciate 0
      06-01-2014, 11:57 AM   #30
Keto
Lieutenant Colonel
Keto's Avatar
United_States
73
Rep
1,603
Posts

Drives: F80 M3
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: WHO DAT NATION

iTrader: (1)

Garage List
2015 BMW M3  [10.00]
Quote:
Originally Posted by Eau Rouge View Post
My comment was directed at this reply which didn’t exactly “consider the whole picture”; particularly so as the 5.5k to 7.5k rpm range of the S55 engine delivers no additional power in that range.
Strawman much? Since when was I talking about subsets of the power band?
__________________
2015 SO/SO MT M3 :: Exec : Lighting : Adaptive : HK : CF trim : Full leather : DAP : Black 19's : sunshade
Crystalline tint 40%/70% on windshield : M performance mirrors, spoiler, splitters : Status Gruppe CF lip : RKP diffuser : Fully dechromed
Bavsound Stage 1 : V1 Savvy hardwired : Self-coded
Appreciate 0
      06-01-2014, 12:12 PM   #31
Mako
(Sold) '00 M Roadster '06 M Coupe '16 M3 '20 X3MC
1545
Rep
2,586
Posts

Drives: '23 M3 comp
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: Chicago suburbs

iTrader: (0)

So exactly the same as an Audi S6 which is heavier and has a V8.

Why didn't BMW stick with the V8 if that's the case???
Appreciate 0
      06-01-2014, 12:13 PM   #32
Eau Rouge
Major
Eau Rouge's Avatar
United_States
140
Rep
1,242
Posts

Drives: 2012 E92 M3
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Florida's Emerald Coast

iTrader: (0)

Garage List
2012 BMW E92 M3  [9.00]
Quote:
Originally Posted by Keto View Post
Strawman much? Since when was I talking about subsets of the power band?
You weren't. That's been my interest. However, yes, I agree the power difference between the S55 and S54 is a factor in consumption; just not the only factor.
__________________
Appreciate 0
      06-01-2014, 12:18 PM   #33
Eau Rouge
Major
Eau Rouge's Avatar
United_States
140
Rep
1,242
Posts

Drives: 2012 E92 M3
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Florida's Emerald Coast

iTrader: (0)

Garage List
2012 BMW E92 M3  [9.00]
Quote:
Originally Posted by CanAutM3 View Post
This is a good point, at WOT, the S55 is likely to use more fuel at 7300RPM than it does at 5500RPM even if it is producing the same power at both those engine speeds.

But as was discussed previously, this is a bit irrelevant since most of the EPA test is done at partial throttle.
Agreed x 2

If history repeats itself, the EPA numbers will be XX/XX then owners will begin reporting their XX/XX at one, two, three or four mpg less than that on the Monroney sticker. Someday EPA may amend the label with "Do not expect EPA test fuel mileage if you drive it like you stole it."
__________________
Appreciate 0
      06-01-2014, 12:33 PM   #34
tdizzle
Colonel
United_States
107
Rep
1,997
Posts

Drives: 2017 F80 ZCP
Join Date: Aug 2012
Location: Memphis

iTrader: (0)

Quote:
Originally Posted by Eau Rouge View Post
Agreed x 2

If history repeats itself, the EPA numbers will be XX/XX then owners will begin reporting their XX/XX at one, two, three or four mpg less than that on the Monroney sticker. Someday EPA may amend the label with "Do not expect EPA test fuel mileage if you drive it like you stole it."
Agreed. X3

Many will report less mpg, especially when driven "like you're supposed to" aka lots of wot and never letting the car remember what efficient mode is. Then they'll be those who drive it often like a normal daily driver and see above the EPA estimates. I know from personal experience in my f30 335 at I normally see 2mpg above EPA estimates as I see no need to race from red light to red light . When I take it to the auto x or just feel some spirited driving need, however, my consumption increases and my mpg looks more like what I used to see in my 5.4L 4x4 f150. Ok not that bad but approaching that level.
Appreciate 0
      06-01-2014, 01:02 PM   #35
Powaup
Brigadier General
Powaup's Avatar
United_States
1252
Rep
3,688
Posts

Drives: 2021 Supra 3.0 (Past: 2015 M23
Join Date: Aug 2012
Location: San Francisco, CA

iTrader: (0)

Garage List
2015 BMW M4  [10.00]
I was expecting 30 mpg on granny mode, at least 28 but instead I'm getting 24 at the most.. I hope the range on a full tank is more than 400 miles.. Now I see why the next gen M4 is going to be 4 cylinder hybrid no way we're gonna make that 35 mpg combined with these current engine layouts
__________________
Check out my YouTube Channel Powaup
Instagram: @ Powaup
Appreciate 0
      06-01-2014, 01:03 PM   #36
tooch
Captain
United_States
112
Rep
806
Posts

Drives: F82
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: NOR-CAL

iTrader: (0)

I guess that'll have to do. Hopefully those figures are understated just a bit.
__________________

96 E31 JB
07 E92 AW
F82 BSM
Appreciate 0
      06-01-2014, 01:28 PM   #37
mkoesel
Moderator
United_States
7506
Rep
19,370
Posts

Drives: No BMW for now
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Canton, MI

iTrader: (1)

Quote:
Originally Posted by Powaup View Post
I was expecting 30 mpg on granny mode, at least 28 but instead I'm getting 24 at the most..
Keep in mind that people beat EPA numbers all the time using your "granny mode".

Quote:
I hope the range on a full tank is more than 400 miles.
As noted on the specs page linked to in the OP, it's a 15.8 gallon tank. So you need to average a bit over 25mpg to get 400 miles (exact number depends on reserve size and how close you are willing to push it toward E). Should be very doable on a long trip, but perhaps tough during a normal week of commuting. We'll see.

Quote:
Now I see why the next gen M4 is going to be 4 cylinder hybrid no way we're gonna make that 35 mpg combined with these current engine layouts
The powertrain for next M3 has not been chosen, nor did the article to which I believe you refer claim that it was. CAFE targets are a fleet average, by the way. Not every vehicle must get those numbers for the manufacturer to avoid fines.
Appreciate 0
      06-01-2014, 02:41 PM   #38
Powaup
Brigadier General
Powaup's Avatar
United_States
1252
Rep
3,688
Posts

Drives: 2021 Supra 3.0 (Past: 2015 M23
Join Date: Aug 2012
Location: San Francisco, CA

iTrader: (0)

Garage List
2015 BMW M4  [10.00]
Quote:
Originally Posted by mkoesel
Quote:
Originally Posted by Powaup View Post
I was expecting 30 mpg on granny mode, at least 28 but instead I'm getting 24 at the most..
Keep in mind that people beat EPA numbers all the time using your "granny mode".

Quote:
I hope the range on a full tank is more than 400 miles.
As noted on the specs page linked to in the OP, it's a 15.8 gallon tank. So you need to average a bit over 25mpg to get 400 miles (exact number depends on reserve size and how close you are willing to push it toward E). Should be very doable on a long trip, but perhaps tough during a normal week of commuting. We'll see.

Quote:
Now I see why the next gen M4 is going to be 4 cylinder hybrid no way we're gonna make that 35 mpg combined with these current engine layouts
The powertrain for next M3 has not been chosen, nor did the article to which I believe you refer claim that it was. CAFE targets are a fleet average, by the way. Not every vehicle must get those numbers for the manufacturer to avoid fines.
Thanks for answering my concerns. Now could you explain why the DCT is more fuel efficient when it is in fact heavier then the the 6MT?
__________________
Check out my YouTube Channel Powaup
Instagram: @ Powaup
Appreciate 0
      06-01-2014, 02:48 PM   #39
Boss330
Major General
Boss330's Avatar
No_Country
1712
Rep
5,108
Posts

Drives: BMW
Join Date: Mar 2012
Location: Earth

iTrader: (0)

Quote:
Originally Posted by Powaup
Thanks for answering my concerns. Now could you explain why the DCT is more fuel efficient when it is in fact heavier then the the 6MT?
It has a longer 7th gear allowing for lower rpm's during highway driving. DCT also has more efficient gear changes where the engine rpm/load is kept more constant than on a MT
Appreciate 0
      06-01-2014, 03:45 PM   #40
Dasm3nd
Private First Class
Dasm3nd's Avatar
29
Rep
124
Posts

Drives: 2015 YMB F80
Join Date: Jan 2014
Location: North Texas

iTrader: (0)

Does 17/26 mean a gas guzzler tax? EPA website states 55% city and 45% highway which would be 21.5 mpg. This would mean $1k gas guzzler per epa website.

I don't know if this is correct or not.

Thanks.
Appreciate 0
      06-01-2014, 04:37 PM   #41
myzmak
Advocatus Douchebagus. Sex Marxist.
myzmak's Avatar
Canada
2415
Rep
3,415
Posts

Drives: Lucy.
Join Date: May 2012
Location: Canada

iTrader: (0)

Garage List
2015 F80 M3  [10.00]
2013 MB E350 Wagon  [10.00]
Quote:
Originally Posted by Keto View Post
Imperial gallons most likely.

Yup. Here is UK specs:

http://www.bmw.co.uk/en_GB/new-vehic...nicaldata.html
Appreciate 0
      06-01-2014, 05:59 PM   #42
stressdoc
Moderator
stressdoc's Avatar
Dominica
616
Rep
10,854
Posts

Drives: BMW i8; Toy 4runner TRD pro
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Waco TX

iTrader: (0)

Quote:
Originally Posted by Dasm3nd View Post
Does 17/26 mean a gas guzzler tax? EPA website states 55% city and 45% highway which would be 21.5 mpg. This would mean $1k gas guzzler per epa website.

I don't know if this is correct or not.

Thanks.
No no no!!! No gas guzzler tax. Discussed ad nauseam in other gas mileage thread.
Appreciate 0
      06-01-2014, 07:09 PM   #43
GregW / Oregon
Commander-In-Chief
2067
Rep
8,898
Posts

Drives: 2023 M2 Coupe, 2020 GLE 450
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: Lake Oswego, OR

iTrader: (3)

Garage List
Manual vs. DCT mileage

Quote:
Originally Posted by cpippolo View Post
Source? All of the other BMWs with DCT and manual options get better mileage with the manual (M6, Z4is, 135i)
Post 327: http://f80.bimmerpost.com/forums/sho...927635&page=15
__________________

Greg Lake Oswego, Oregon, USA
2023 M2 Coupe - Brooklyn Grey/Cognac/CF, 6MT; 2020 MB GLE 450
Appreciate 0
      06-01-2014, 07:13 PM   #44
solstice
Major General
5457
Rep
7,037
Posts

Drives: 2015 M3 6MT
Join Date: May 2013
Location: Seattle

iTrader: (0)

The closest engine to the S55 BMW has built is the N54. It gives EPA 17/26...sounds familiar?

Give some for EPS, Valvetronic and some other advances and take some from raising psi with resulting power bump. There were too many confident people here aggressively talking up the expectation beyond reason. Quite rudely as well if I remember right.
Appreciate 0
Post Reply

Bookmarks

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 05:38 AM.




f80post
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, vBulletin Solutions Inc.
1Addicts.com, BIMMERPOST.com, E90Post.com, F30Post.com, M3Post.com, ZPost.com, 5Post.com, 6Post.com, 7Post.com, XBimmers.com logo and trademark are properties of BIMMERPOST