Originally Posted by M3Denver
for all those who mentioned fuel economy as a factor..... efff offffff. The only reasons you would care about gas mileage are
a. You cant afford the extra 150 bucks a month on gas!!
b. your a enviro friendly, green, tree hugger
c. gas mileage is a priority as a purchase decision
If you are either of these or think gas mileage is a priority then the M3 or any GT performance car should never be a thought... buy a prius
This post has already been refuted both adequately and elegantly, but let me add just one other factor - a technical one:
From my point of view, this is an incredibly good car, with an amazing array of capabilities, but the M guys should be ashamed of themselves in the one area of fuel economy.
On technical grounds, there is no way a 3600 pound car with a four-liter engine should get mileage this bad. Just no way. Horsepower is not an important issue in this regard, since the EPA tests are so gentle.
And get off your snob horse (see A and B, sbove). Any person with even a few firing neurons should have some concern about fuel usage.
Personally, if I see just one more report on "Bad News for Polar Bears", I may vomit. How about a "Good News for Arctic Seals" report instead.
That said, it's clear that there will be continuing pressure on fossil fuel availability and pricing from now on. Politically, I don't give a damn about gas hogs, but better mileage from any given performance package is a no-brainer good thing - and it seems clear the M guys missed the boat on this. Simple gearing changes could improve the M3's EPA numbers, and tuning can address throttle response issues that might arise.
Hell, if the current Mustang and Camaro entries can beat up on the M3, mileage-wise, and even the RS5 appears to be better in that regard, then BMW has screwed up in this regard, for no obvious reason.
I'm personally a fan of the M3's top-gear acceleration and throttle response, but would be willing to give some of that up in favor of respectable highway mileage.