Quote:
Originally Posted by GregW / Oregon
I believe turbo engines give you a bit of best of both worlds--when cruising and not really using the FI, they get good mileage. When you put the foot down they have the power, along with a much higher fuel consumption. The way fuel economy tests are run they don't really call for real aggressive throttle (although the new EPA test is more real world than the old).
The fuel economy of the M3 does bother me. As an architect, "sustainability" is a big part of our goal these days. I'm a LEED accredited professional (info on LEED here: http://www.usgbc.org/DisplayPage.aspx?CMSPageID=222). I rationalize the M3 because I do pretty well with sustainabllity in all other aspects of my life. Also, 80% of my driving is at a moderate intensity. My E46 only averages about 17 on my urban/suburban use, though it's great it can get in the high 20s at a steady 75 on the freeway. I wish BMW had worked more at this aspect of the S65, whether through direct injection, cylinder deactivation, or whatever. It's not enough to keep me from purchase, but it bugs me a little. |
I appreciate the reply and link. LEED appears to be at the forefront of evironmentally friendly designs. It is also nice to have a forum member who has followed and appreciated BMW's for more than just a few years.
Do you happen to flyfish? Oregon has some of the most productive rivers in the country.