# BMW Petrol - The new diesel?



## paulb (May 6, 2002)

The time has come when I am to consider the next company car. I want (need) an auto this time but want something reasonably rapid and not dreadful on fuel.

BMW seem to have done some stunning work on fuel consumption and economy recently. In both the 325 and 330 case, the petrol has a lower tax rating than the diesel, generates more power, costs less and is only 4 or 5 mpg worse.

http://www.bmw.co.uk/bmwuk/pricesandspe ... uk,00.html

I'm gobsmacked. I also know that driving a BMW would make me a Grade A ****, but that does appeal somehow.

Any candidates to consider for a car of c.Â£30k, auto, that does better than 35 MPG and isn't dog slow?

Paul


----------



## Carlos (May 6, 2002)

I am a huge fan of diesels, but these figures deserve analysis.

Over 60,000 miles fuel costs (assuming 98p per litre) are as follows:

40 mpg Â£6674
35 mpg Â£7627
30 mpg Â£8898

I know this is not of interest necessarily to company drivers, but for those of us in the private used market it's pertinent to know that choosing a 35 mpg petrol car over a 40 mpg diesel will cost you only Â£1000 more over 60,000 miles.

Given the poor residuals of petrols it probably makes them better value as used propositions.


----------



## Hannibal (Dec 1, 2003)

Carlos said:


> Given the poor residuals of petrols it probably makes them better value as used propositions.


True, but they usually cost more to start with...so you'd need to work it out in terms of hard cash, not %

H


----------



## NaughTTy (Jul 9, 2003)

Hannibal said:


> Carlos said:
> 
> 
> > Given the poor residuals of petrols it probably makes them better value as used propositions.
> ...


And servicing costs are generally higher...


----------



## garyc (May 7, 2002)

...plus they lack range compared to diesels.


----------



## Carlos (May 6, 2002)

Hannibal said:


> True, but they usually cost more to start with...so you'd need to work it out in terms of hard cash, not %


I'm a big believer in hard cash over percentage (who get's paid in percentages?).

I don't think your assertion that petrol cars are cheaper is true. They used to be, but in my recent experience the equivalent diesel has always been more expensive than petrol (see paulb's BMW pricing for a good example, or Volkswagen).

I do have my suspicions about BMW's claimed economy figures. They've been put in a position where they need to make more environmentally friendly cars. This is judged using some EU tests that I don't think simulate real-world driving. I think there is a chance that they've designed cars that return 38 mpg (in the case of the 330i) in government tests, but can anyone really see a 1500 kg, 272 bhp petrol car returning 38 mpg?


----------



## Carlos (May 6, 2002)

garyc said:


> ...plus they lack range compared to diesels.


Yep, that's true, but if the mpg differences are becoming smaller, that gap is disappearing.


----------



## garyc (May 7, 2002)

Agree. If you use the revs in a BMW straight six, the consumption will still probably be for higher than for the derv variant.

For co2 purposes the 272hp 330i at 21%  , is a natural choice for co car driver. That's an impressive figure for an impressive engine.

My 330ci averaged more like 25 mpg with a leadfoot, where the 330ds i have had have all remained above 38mpg.

BMW have doubtless made efficiencies - magnesium blocks, electric water pumps etc, and these will all have small differences. But I can't see 38mpg from a 3.0 petrol in normal driving.

So Paul, a 330i Msport touring - le mans blue, with lemon leather, black gloss and 19" M5 wheeels

Bit like this one:

http://www.e90post.com/forums/showthread.php?t=58144

Nice co car. Reasonable balance of tax efficiency and fun.


----------



## Hannibal (Dec 1, 2003)

Carlos said:


> Hannibal said:
> 
> 
> > True, but they usually cost more to start with...so you'd need to work it out in terms of hard cash, not %
> ...


Have you contradicted yourself here, or am I reading it wrong?

H


----------



## Carlos (May 6, 2002)

Hannibal said:


> Carlos said:
> 
> 
> > Hannibal said:
> ...


Yes, sorry. I meant to contradict you :wink:

I thought you were suggesting that diesels were cheaper, but then I said petrols. Doh. 

My point is that the equivalent petrol/diesel car in a range costs approximately the same (give or take a thousand), but that the diesel is often worth a few thousand more used


----------



## Hannibal (Dec 1, 2003)

Carlos said:


> Hannibal said:
> 
> 
> > Carlos said:
> ...


I thought you did... but we're still in agreement....

Diesels cost more than petrol cars to begin with.

you think that they hold their residuals better (as do I, not that I'd said it before though) so may still work out the 'cheaper' option. If you're buying second hand then you may have to reverse the arguement - it may be cheaper to buy a petrol car, despite the higher fuel costs.

H


----------



## Carlos (May 6, 2002)

Heh, that's what I was saying - that if a petrol car depreciates from new more than a diesel, it may be better value than the diesel as a second hand buy, even if it drinks more fuel.

We agree


----------



## paulb (May 6, 2002)

garyc said:


> So Paul, a 330i Msport touring - le mans blue, with lemon leather, black gloss and 19" M5 wheeels
> 
> Bit like this one:
> 
> ...


Gary

Think I may be a tightwad and have a look at the 325i Msport. Would either be a touring or a coupe. I'm more of a black leather man myself and I want built in nav so have to go down the iDrive route.

I'll probably still end up with a 320d and a bit of extra cash though...


----------



## Wondermikie (Apr 14, 2006)

Carlos said:


> ...1500 kg, 272 bhp petrol car returning 38 mpg?...


No chance, mine does 18 average over a tank, and 20 if I drive like my mum.



paulb said:


> I'll probably still end up with a 320d and a bit of extra cash though...


You might as well, and pokey enough with the auto 'box too.


----------



## garyc (May 7, 2002)

paulb said:


> garyc said:
> 
> 
> > So Paul, a 330i Msport touring - le mans blue, with lemon leather, black gloss and 19" M5 wheeels
> ...


320d OK - but 4 cylinders are not patch on the 6 cyl units, petrol or derv.

Forthcoming twin turbo 323d interesting prospect.

A colleague has 325i t M with all the toys. Its a nice package, but you gotta rev it, which is no hardship as it is a sweet and silky smooth engine in 2.5 guise.


----------



## paulb (May 6, 2002)

Hmm. Not convinced they will have a 323d. It has more power than the 325d so can't see both surviving in the range.

The 330 in both petrol and diesel is a pricey option on our leasing deal but the 325s are both far more palatable. 325d could be worth investigating. LPT on a biggish diesel could be a lazy engine for motorways.


----------



## garyc (May 7, 2002)

paulb said:


> Hmm. Not convinced they will have a 323d. It has more power than the 325d so can't see both surviving in the range.
> 
> The 330 in both petrol and diesel is a pricey option on our leasing deal but the 325s are both far more palatable. 325d could be worth investigating. LPT on a biggish diesel could be a lazy engine for motorways.


Identical power but lower emissions. 120 co2 i think. Both 204 hp.

325d unit is effectively the old 204hp e46 330d. Great engine. And of course tunable to 26o hp...

I anticipate the 325d being replaced by the 323d


----------



## garyc (May 7, 2002)

On BMW Efficient Dynamics from BMWland:

<<335d - MPG up from 36.7 to 41.5, CO2 now 178 
335i - MPG up from 28.8 to 30.4 CO2 now 223

330d - MPG up from 37.2 to 42.2 CO2 now 176 
330i - MPG up from 30.4 to 38.2 CO2 now 178

In addition the 330i 0-62mph has improved from 6.8 to 6.4. Others have remained the same. This is just a sample, there are big improvements across the range - the 320d manual has made a huge increase - 0 - 62 = 8.1, 57.6 MPG and 146 CO2. >>

<<How does the 330i get nearly 40mpg? 
Well it is partly to do with the donuts. The donuts result in the 330i consuming fuel at the same rate as a 1.3i engine when cruising. 
The direct fuel injection injects a very small (size of your small finger nail) amount of fuel in a donut shaped cloud into the combustion chamber and it is ignited early before it gets down the cylilnder. This results in a very small amount of fuel used and none of it wets the cylinder wall where it woud go to waste. From an article in a recent edition of BMW magazine.>>

Hmmm donuts.

http://www.bmwland.co.uk/talker/viewtopic.php?t=57733


----------



## Carlos (May 6, 2002)

Need to see a review with real-world figures, but brilliant if true.

Death knell for diesel?


----------



## garyc (May 7, 2002)

Carlos said:


> Need to see a review with real-world figures, but brilliant if true.
> 
> Death knell for diesel?


Donut theory suggests that if you cruise on steady state part throttle you will get 1.3L economy. I'd imagine nice steady 75mph cruises to Scotland included.

That probably wont happen too often in real world - where the swell of derv torque helps overall economy hugely by alleviating the need for wide throttle openings and high revs to maintain momentum.


----------



## Carlos (May 6, 2002)

garyc said:


> I'd imagine nice steady 75mph cruises to Scotland included.


We're talking middle-of-the-night stuff, so the only times I'd want to see 75 mph is on the sliproad getting onto the motorway, and on the sliproad getting off. :wink:


----------



## paulb (May 6, 2002)

garyc said:


> 330d - MPG up from 37.2 to 42.2 CO2 now 176
> 330i - MPG up from 30.4 to 38.2 CO2 now 178


Those were the figures that prompted my original comments. Add in the 3% tax surcharge for diesel and the 330d looks a worse bet than the 330i.

That's where my musings about a 325i have come from.

2.5 auto with 218 bhp, 39.8MPG claimed and CO2 of 170 (21% tax)

0-60 in 7.1 and 154 mph.

BMW seem to be claiming 39.2 MPG and 173g/km CO2 for the new 330i M Sport Saloon too...

If it is as good as it says on the tin it sounds top notch.


----------



## Molehall (Jan 8, 2003)

Over a four year period I have actually managed a gnat's whisker over 40mpg for my Audi 2.5tdi Cabriolet. This includes 50% London driving.

I had a petrol BMW Cabriolet (funny, but I can remember mpg not engine size) on hire for six weeks earlier in the year and averaged 22mpg (same driving routes).

I managed 8mpg on a driving instruction day organised by Piston Heads in my Audi. I suspect that driving style has a bearing on mpg.

All figures taken from DIS.


----------



## garyc (May 7, 2002)

Carlos said:


> garyc said:
> 
> 
> > I'd imagine nice steady 75mph cruises to Scotland included.
> ...


And there in one is the clue to fast journey times in this day and age. :wink:


----------

