Fuel Economy Predictions?

[Sedan_Clan]

Originally Posted by Lups

Asphalt. I'll never go to the ice again, since I quit. I refuse even watch the sport, except when Evgeni Plushenko comes on.

Don't laugh, the love is real.

I can feel it!!!!!!!!

[stressdoc]

What??? Plate of shrimp... There are other bimmerphiles that also play hockey? Or just stickless skaters...

[Koldun]

Originally Posted by tdizzle

I think you can do even better! All the cars at the m performance school were rocking around 6 mpg avg!

It was actually less, the gauge can't register below 6.

[1slowE82cp]

So I bought my F80 M3 today and I was not charge a gas guzzler tax. Looks like BMW might have pull it thru as far as making it fuel efficient enough not to carry a gas tax.

[STooK]

I'm lucky if I get 20mpg combined in my stock 335i xdrive. I guess I do about 50/50 city/hwy and I do punch the gas quite often. If the new m3 gets same or even better, then that would be amazing as it has quite a bit more power.

[mdss6]

Hi. I've been looking around for the EPA numbers on the M3/M4, which "should" be out soon?! Anyway I was surprised to see the M6 6-spd manual had better fuel economy (15/22) numbers than the 7-spd M-DCT (14/20).

Note, these are the same numbers as 2014, and for the Coupe as well as the M5. What surprised me was the relative standing of the manual and M-DCT. The relationship between the relative gearing in the manual and M-DCT is roughly the same in the M3/4 as it is in the M5/6, and this makes me now wonder if the manual will be rated with higher mileage in the M3/4 similar to how it is in the M5/6?

It is my understanding the M-DCT has the same (internal) gear ratios in these applications, but all M5/6s have a 3.15 final drive while all M3/4s have a 3.46 final drive. The manual in the M5/6 covers the ratio range 4.06 to .87 while the one in the M3/4 is a very similar 4.11 to .85 (the M-DCT covers a notably wider 4.80 to .67).

So, again I'm surprised the M-DCT (in the M5/6) is rated with lower milage by the US EPA. And I don't know what would be so different in the M3/4 that would reverse the relative ratings in that application? But multiple first-drive reviews have stated the M-DCT will get better mileage than the manual...

2015 BMW M6 Gran Coupe
AM-S7, 4.4L, 8cyl 16 14/20 $3,750 3 P T Tax SS
M-6, 4.4L, 8cyl 17 15/22 $3,550 4 P T Tax SS

[GregW / Oregon]

Originally Posted by mdss6

So, again I'm surprised the M-DCT (in the M5/6) is rated with lower milage by the US EPA. And I don't know what would be so different in the M3/4 that would reverse the relative ratings in that application? But multiple first-drive reviews have stated the M-DCT will get better mileage than the manual...

Interesting. Could be that US tests give an advantage to the manual for some reason? I guess we'll find out shortly.

[stressdoc]

Although it is a relatively small factor, the supposed better fuel economy of the DCT has me leaning that way. If the manual has better efficiency, then it's back to the stick for me.

[JoeFromPA]

From what I know of the F30 platform to date (n20/n26/n55), the 8 speed auto is rated better than the 6MT - but real world reports seem to indicate they are the same or even that the 6mt does slightly better.

Now I would expect the 8AT to do better given two additional gears, IDK, but I do know that manufacturers more and more game the setup for government fuel economy ratings. And they can best do that with automatic transmission compared to manuals.

[Brosef]

maybe the American EPA test drivers are just lazier when driving stick than Europeans and less likely to downshift??

[JoeFromPA]

If these cars are at dealers where are the monroney stickers?

[jc05e46m3]

Originally Posted by stressdoc

Although it is a relatively small factor, the supposed better fuel economy of the DCT has me leaning that way. If the manual has better efficiency, then it's back to the stick for me.

Even if there is a difference, it will be minimal at best and your individual driving style will prevail when it comes to the "real life" number. I wouldn't at all have the transmission choice of the vehicle (which is $2900) depend on some EPA test numbers. Given the delta, I think you should choose EXACTLY what makes you happy because they are two different experiences, IMO.

Originally Posted by JoeFromPA

From what I know of the F30 platform to date (n20/n26/n55), the 8 speed auto is rated better than the 6MT - but real world reports seem to indicate they are the same or even that the 6mt does slightly better.

Now I would expect the 8AT to do better given two additional gears, IDK, but I do know that manufacturers more and more game the setup for government fuel economy ratings. And they can best do that with automatic transmission compared to manuals.

I agree! I think it's all based on who is driving and the ratings are exactly what they are labeled as: estimates

Originally Posted by Brosef

maybe the American EPA test drivers are just lazier when driving stick than Europeans and less likely to downshift??

[JoeFromPA]

Just thought I'd mention that the M235i 6mt is rated at 19/28 and I believe has a few less efficient dynamics than the M3 (while also having less frontal area and a taller final drive ratio).

I'm guessing the M3 is going to be rated at the same or 19/27.

[Jdebitjr]

On the BMW USA website, it says the M3/M4 gets 26MPG Highway, to the right of the picture, right above the 425HP.

[Carl L]

US figures are 17 urban and 26 hwy. Hopefully it can match those numbers, the V10 and V8 were rarely able to meet theirs due to often needing high revs.

One worry thing is the DCT may be rated at 24 why rather than 26 of the manual. It's not clear on the site but if true that's a fairly disappointing hit considering early rumors were that the DCT would get a taller 7th gear than the E92's.

[fabolous]

Indeed now it says
City 17
Hwy 26 (24)

Im guessing the 24 is for the 6MT

[Sir Loin]

Looks like it is official. http://www.bmwusa.com/Standard/Conte...fications.aspx

26MPG for DCT and 24MPG for MT? I can't tell.

[GregW / Oregon]

Originally Posted by Sir Loin

Looks like it is official. http://www.bmwusa.com/Standard/Conte...fications.aspx

26MPG for DCT and 24MPG for MT? I can't tell.

No, not clear which is which. That would kick butt if the manual got better mileage, but I'm not expecting it! It's not on fueleconomy.gov yet. I have sent an email to BMWNA for clarification.

[stressdoc]

If this follows convention the 26 is for the standard, i.e., manual; (24) is for optional DCT.
But who knows. And who knows what this means for real life driving.

Bit of a disappointment relative to 335: 22 / 32

[GregW / Oregon]

Originally Posted by stressdoc

If this follows convention the 26 is for the standard, i.e., manual; (24) is for optional DCT.

Well, the E9X was EPA-rated the same for manual & DCT (14/20).

[Sir Loin]

The highway MPG is kinda far away from the numbers I derived from the numbers posted by UAE previously.

http://f80.bimmerpost.com/forums/sho...&postcount=857

[QUOTE]

Originally Posted by Sir Loin

Based on uae's mileage numbers in imperial MPG, I converted them to US MPG.

[Stevens21234]

Is anyone underwhelmed by these numbers? 17 and 26? I was hoping for 25 to 26 combined. this is atrocious as BMW had quoted drastically higher numbers at the onset and then downward recalibrated the figures to being 25% higher than the old M3.