M3 11 miles per gallon.

[mkoesel]

Originally Posted by FifthStreetz

I think he was being sarcastic..

Maybe so, and if that's the case, my post is still useful re: the schhay reply.

[M3onTwomps]

Originally Posted by M3_2010

It is not a money issue. You have to consider the environment.

Then you shouldn't be buying performance oriented cars and instead should buy a Prius.

[nusevad]

Originally Posted by M3onTwomps

Then you shouldn't be buying performance oriented cars and instead should buy a Prius.

O yeaa, funny thing is for Prius owners they think their cars have performance...there was a thread somewhere that linked to a Prius forum talking about beating Mustangs and shit.

[CokerRat]

Originally Posted by gtb75

Trust me - you will not see anywhere near 11mpg out of a C6 Z06 on a road course... I'm usually somewhere in the 6-8mpg range with mine.

+1. My NSX got about 13 mpg doing track lapping and that's a 3.0L six. 11 mpg doesn't surprise me (or bother me) at all for a 4L V-8 at the track.

[lucid]

Originally Posted by ruff

Few talk about American engineering, but I believe the vette engines are the best engineered production engines in the world. They are simple in design, reliable, less parts to break down, such as fancy throttle bodies, vanos etc, etc. Loads of useable horsepower and torque on a commute or the track and the great mileage in relation to its competition.

I agree that the vette engine has been impressive throughout its evolution. However, keep in mind that it is stuck in a car that is currently about 270lbs lighter than the M3, and that really affects mileage.

[lucid]

Originally Posted by GregW / Oregon

Correct me if I'm wrong, but I thought high torque is more tied to displacement or forced induction that revs. What example are you using? The F430 has the same hp/torque ratio as the E92 M3 (though more of each).

Pretty close but not the same. See the attached sheet below I posted a few months ago. Also, torque is also associated with cylinder geometry.

Regards,

[lucid]

Originally Posted by M3onTwomps

Then you shouldn't be buying performance oriented cars and instead should buy a Prius.

Not sure that there is anything wrong with demanding more environmental awareness from performance car manufacturers. If that is not the case, they should all remove the emissions equipment and boost hp by 10%-20% on the fly. Would you support that?

[M3onTwomps]

Originally Posted by lucid

Not sure that there is anything wrong with demanding more environmental awareness from performance car manufacturers. If that is not the case, they should all remove the emissions equipment and boost hp by 10%-20% on the fly. Would you support that?

A lot of consumers do after they purchase their cars. Automakers follow the rules. If you're so concerned about the environment, I don't really understand why you're buying a performance car. Just doesn't make sense.

That's like recycling a sheet of paper every year and saying you did your part.

[T Bone]

Originally Posted by lucid

Pretty close but not the same. See the attached sheet below I posted a few months ago. Also, torque is also associated with cylinder geometry.

Regards,

Torque is heavily dependent on volumetric efficiency, i.e. the ability of a cylinder to suck in air. This in turn is determined by bore / stroke / camshaft / stuff like Vanos or VTEC (yo!).

[lucid]

Originally Posted by M3onTwomps

A lot of consumers do after they purchase their cars. Automakers follow the rules. If you're so concerned about the environment, I don't really understand why you're buying a performance car. Just doesn't make sense.

That's like recycling a sheet of paper every year and saying you did your part.

There is absolutely nothing wrong with expecting better efficiency from a performance car. Performance has higher priority but that does not mean efficiency does not matter at all. All design is a balancing act. When one designs an engine one considers many competing goals, and it is natural to prioritize, but that doesn't mean that some of those goals are simply ignored. One simply finds a balanced position in meeting those goals, which is appropiate for the application. Same is true for power vs. durability, power vs. cost, etc. In those lines, if BMW's sole goal was performance, they could get much more power out of the M3 engine...However, if I wanted to buy a race car, I would think differently, but the M3 is not a race car. Like it or not, it is not an exotic car either with only 2000 units sold, which will only be driven on weekends. They will sell 100,000+ of these things. For me, it is something I will drive to work every day, and track once a month for fun. Finally, efficiency and performance are not always competing goals: in certain respects, if the combustion is more complete, the cleaner the exhaust, the higher the thermal efficiency, the higher the power extraction, and the higher the power output. That's the main reason why auto manufacturers have been able to make huge leaps in power output and efficiency at the same time in the past few decades. There are many more examples: a lighter the car will not only handle better, but also be more efficient; a better designed transmission will not only rob you of less power through friction but also be more efficient (have you tried to design a series of meshing gears?)...

[swamp2]

Originally Posted by lucid

Pretty close but not the same. See the attached sheet below I posted a few months ago. Also, torque is also associated with cylinder geometry.

Regards,

I think he meant exactly what he typed hp/tq ratio which match to within 2% between the F430 and E92 M3. Ferarri does get some amazing tq/l numbers and that is an accomplishment.

[swamp2]

Originally Posted by lucid

There is absolutely nothing wrong with expecting better efficiency from a performance car. Performance has higher priority but that does not mean efficiency does not matter at all. All design is a balancing act. When one designs an engine one considers many competing goals, and it is natural to prioritize, but that doesn't mean that some of those goals are simply ignored. One simply finds a balanced position in meeting those goals, which is appropiate for the application. Same is true for power vs. durability, power vs. cost, etc. In those lines, if BMW's sole goal was performance, they could get much more power out of the M3 engine...However, if I wanted to buy a race car, I would think differently, but the M3 is not a race car. Like it or not, it is not an exotic car either with only 2000 units sold, which will only be driven on weekends. They will sell 100,000+ of these things. For me, it is something I will drive to work every day, and track once a month for fun. Finally, efficiency and performance are not always competing goals: in certain respects, if the combustion is more complete, the cleaner the exhaust, the higher the thermal efficiency, the higher the power extraction, and the higher the power output. That's the main reason why auto manufacturers have been able to make huge leaps in power output and efficiency at the same time in the past few decades. There are many more examples: a lighter the car will not only handle better, but also be more efficient; a better designed transmission will not only rob you of less power through friction but also be more efficient (have you tried to design a series of meshing gears?)...

Absolutely in line with my thoughts on the efficiency of a sports car! Nice post.

[lucid]

Originally Posted by swamp2

I think he meant exactly what he typed hp/tq ratio which match to within 2% between the F430 and E92 M3. Ferarri does get some amazing tq/l numbers and that is an accomplishment.

Ah, okay I misread Greg's post. Sorry Greg. Thanks for correcting Swamp.

[mkoesel]

I have $100 that says the new M3 will equal or better the real-world mileage of the current car. That means 25mpg+ on a highway road-trip, and 20 MPG in a typical everyday driving situation with some spirited driving thrown in.

That should be good enough for anyone buying a performance car. That's better than any SUV, any supercar and many sports cars. It's also around the same gas mileage as a BMW 5 series which most people here would buy as a family car never thinking twice about fuel efficiency.

Finally, my wife's old E46 325xi got no better gas mileage than my M3 if both were driven hard, and also her current 335i gets about the same mileage as my M3.

IMHO this thread will prove to be much ado about nothing once more real world experience is had with the new M3.

[TheRealDC]

Hi

During the course of 2006 I did around 30,000 miles travelling just over 120 miles round trip of mostly slow-moving motorway commute, mixed with town driving and back lane thrashing in my E46 M3. Started the year with 50,000 mile on the clock and ended with just over 80,000 miles showing. My average over the whole year was 30.1 mpg per my trip computer. Even allowing for the (in)accuracy of the trip computer that has to be regarded as fantastic in a car of this performance. If the new car is even close to this I'll be more than happy.




DC

[T Bone]

Originally Posted by mkoesel

I have $100 that says the new M3 will equal or better the real-world mileage of the current car. That means 25mpg+ on a highway road-trip, and 20 MPG in a typical everyday driving situation with some spirited driving thrown in.

That should be good enough for anyone buying a performance car. That's better than any SUV, any supercar and many sports cars. It's also around the same gas mileage as a BMW 5 series which most people here would buy as a family car never thinking twice about fuel efficiency.

Finally, my wife's old E46 325xi got no better gas mileage than my M3 if both were driven hard, and also her current 335i gets about the same mileage as my M3.

IMHO this thread will prove to be much ado about nothing once more real world experience is had with the new M3.

I will take your bet...... You can decide the wager, $100 is fine but not really fun. How about the the loser must put a Honda VTEC Sticker on their car and take a high-rez photo and post it?

How do we make the determination? I.e. whose numbers are we going to use?

[GregW / Oregon]

Originally Posted by T Bone

I.e. whose numbers are we going to use?

Good question since the EPA testing is changed for 2008. New test will yeld lower results than previous ones.

[mkoesel]

Originally Posted by T Bone

I will take your bet...... You can decide the wager, $100 is fine but not really fun. How about the the loser must put a Honda VTEC Sticker on their car and take a high-rez photo and post it?

Way too high of stakes for me, sorry. I'd sooner up the bet to $200 than do that.

How do we make the determination? I.e. whose numbers are we going to use?

Mine of course. You'll have to weight til I actually get the car though. It won't likely be until MY2009.

Actually we can use anyone's numbers who currently drives an E46 and plans to buy an E92 and use it in the same capacity.

[T Bone]

Originally Posted by mkoesel

Way too high of stakes for me, sorry. I'd sooner up the bet to $200 than do that.



Mine of course. You'll have to weight til I actually get the car though. It won't likely be until MY2009.

Actually we can use anyone's numbers who currently drives an E46 and plans to buy an E92 and use it in the same capacity.

OK, we will take the numbers of a person who owned an E46 m3 and then the E92 M3.

What is the wager??

[mkoesel]

Originally Posted by T Bone

OK, we will take the numbers of a person who owned an E46 m3 and then the E92 M3.

What is the wager??

How bout pinks? My M3, your M6?

I said $100 originally, so I'm inclinded to stick to that.

[T Bone]

Originally Posted by mkoesel

How bout pinks? My M3, your M6?

I said $100 originally, so I'm inclinded to stick to that.

OK, no probs.... $100 USD....

I was hoping for a more creative bet. Money is so boring but no probs.

We next need to identify the person who is going to provide the data. I guess when someone here posts they bought a new M3, we will peg them.

Just to be clear, you are betting the new M3 will have better fuel economy than the E46 M3 and I am betting the other way.

[mkoesel]

Originally Posted by T Bone

OK, no probs.... $100 USD....

I was hoping for a more creative bet. Money is so boring but no probs.

We next need to identify the person who is going to provide the data. I guess when someone here posts they bought a new M3, we will peg them.

Just to be clear, you are betting the new M3 will have better fuel economy than the E46 M3 and I am betting the other way.

Close. Actually I said "the same or better".

Of course, if it ends up being fairly close in the real world, then its totally possible that someone could see better mileage, while someone else could see worse mileage. Doesn't really matter much to me, I'll honor the bet either way. I just wanted to point out that it could come down to dumb luck whether we happen pick the right person. IOW, its just like betting on a horse race. Cool w/me.