PDA

View Full Version : How many MPG on your X3?


jk330i
03-22-2005, 10:30 AM
Guys I'm getting only a mere 15 mpg on my x3!! I have to fill up twice full tank in one week. That means I am paying $320 a month and $80 a week on gas only!!

Compared to my 330i, I was getting 20 mpg and one tank of gas lasted me 1 whole week. I'm now paying double with the x3.

:bawling:

iChick
03-22-2005, 11:42 AM
I'm on my second month with the car and the mileage is getting better with time. I'm up to 18 mpg overall and on the last road trip (150 miles), I was getting 23.

ICEBERG
03-22-2005, 11:52 AM
Almost a week now that i had the X3. It has 450km on it. it is getting 15.1 mpg at the moment.

jliu34740
03-22-2005, 11:57 AM
750 miles, 17.1 MPG mostly local driving average speed 25 mph according to computer

mysticbluex3
03-22-2005, 12:12 PM
I do mostly highway

FirstBMW
03-22-2005, 02:11 PM
I get 15 mpg as well on my 2.5 X3. Mostly city driving, but that sucks! :thumbdwn:

JonathanIT
03-22-2005, 04:14 PM
Guys I'm getting only a mere 15 mpg on my x3!! I have to fill up twice full tank in one week. That means I am paying $320 a month and $80 a week on gas only!!

Compared to my 330i, I was getting 20 mpg and one tank of gas lasted me 1 whole week. I'm now paying double with the x3.

:bawling:
If you went from 20mpg to 15mpg, how did your gas expenses double? :dunno:

--J.

bredi
03-23-2005, 01:24 AM
undoubtedly, the most dissapointing aspect of the x3.

18mpg in mostly freeway.

CharlieG
03-23-2005, 07:18 AM
If you went from 20mpg to 15mpg, how did your gas expenses double? :dunno:

--J.

I always see these threads concern SUV's and I wonder what people are thinking. You have basic physics: mass, rolling resistance, and air resistance. Just look at the profile of the x3 from the front. At a least 1/3 more air to slice through as you drive compared with a sedan? Yup, at least. A third more weight? About. Tires bigger? Yes.

So unless BMW threw a really anemic motor in the car, it sounds like they did a fantastic job to give you the SUV you wanted with 15mpg, just 1/3 less than your 3.

xspeedy
03-23-2005, 07:30 AM
I have a 2.5 with manual.

15 does sound a little low. I haven't done the math, but my OBC tells me I get about 19-20 of combined driving (I guess you could call it more highway).

I suspect the low mileage is due more to the X-Drive than anything else. You have the weight to carry around and the engine is having to push all four wheels and the plumbing behind it. Mileage would have been much better if it was just a traditional RWD setup.

To add, the X3 also seems to be geared down pretty low to get as much out of the 2.5 as possible. It doesn't help that the engine is always working overtime.

sfca-325i
03-23-2005, 07:54 AM
2,279 miles virtually all city driving.
12.63 mpg overall average (that's about 0.5 mpg less than the predecessor, 2003 325i)

JeffKiel
03-23-2005, 07:58 AM
3.0l 6spd with 1.2k on the clock and I average just over 18 with "normal driving" (65-35 HWY driving). Took one longer trip (150m) and got 22 or so.

jk330i
03-23-2005, 08:32 AM
If you went from 20mpg to 15mpg, how did your gas expenses double? :dunno:

--J.

It's hard to explain, but it has to do with the total miles I can go on one full tank. On the 330i I could drive 330 or so miles averaging 20-21 mpg, cost me $34 a full tank and I filled up once a week.

Now that I have the X3, I can only drive 240-250 miles a full tank, averaging 15 mpg, costing me $37 for a full tank (My guess is that the tank capacity is a tad bit larger in the X3), and I fill up nearly twice a week.

:dunno:

jvr826
03-23-2005, 09:33 AM
I had an X3 3.0 step as a loaner for a week and the first thing I noticed was it's thirst for fuel compared to my E39. I get about 23mpg avg with my car, was getting 13-15 with the X3.

pipo
03-23-2005, 01:34 PM
I drive pretty aggressively, mostly on country roads at speeds ranging between 20-70, with a fair number of stop signs, left hand turns and accelerations/decelerations. I chose the 2.5 over the 3.0 mostly for the anticipated better gas mileage, and it has paid off for me, notwithstanding the salesman's suggestion that the mileage difference between the 2.5 and the 3.0 would be negligible. :thumbup:

ERdoc
03-23-2005, 03:52 PM
That's weird. My wifes brand new 2005 X3 3.0 has about 750 miles on it right now and it states she's getting over 20mpg at an average speed of 43mph. I guess she drives a little less aggresively than you guys (she also leaves it in the standard "D" mode all the time)

rbe
03-23-2005, 11:39 PM
I'm getting a pretty consistant mid 18 mpg with our 3.0 step. For comparison we get high 22s with our 325 step.

bredi
03-24-2005, 02:06 AM
i guess the main thing is that its 2005, and I we really havn't gained much in MPG considering other industries such as tech, comm etc.

gee, maybe they don't want it to improve.

I'm very dissapointed in the MPG. Regardless of aerodynamics. Its the same as a freakin Explorer!

at 18mpg average. with mostly freeway. it means that the 19/25 epa sticker is totally wrong.

frankly, its misleading and could be class action worthy.

farleywilbur
03-24-2005, 05:32 AM
Boo hoo! :cry:

All of you whining about poor fuel economy should have bought a Toyota
Prius.

Maybe you can't afford to be driving a BMW if you even have to think about the cost of fuel?

jk330i
03-24-2005, 08:54 AM
Boo hoo! :cry:

All of you whining about poor fuel economy should have bought a Toyota
Prius.

Maybe you can't afford to be driving a BMW if you even have to think about the cost of fuel?


I'm sure many people disagree with you.

First, BMW claims 19/25 mpg on the epa sticker, which is wrong. Secondly, gas prices are rising and reaching an all-time high in my area; actually, rumors say we will be near $3 a gallon by next year (I really hope not).

And your last statement spells donkey prick all over it, in comparison to my 330i (which was a bmw I was easily able to afford) I never complained with 20-25mpg, and only filled up once a week compared to now which is twice a week with the x3.

And by looking at your post count and joined date of 3/05, I can see your a newb posting to start a fight. :D

pipo
03-24-2005, 11:30 AM
While I am on your side, jk330i, as I understand it, the EPA figures are not representations by BMW, but are legally required to be disclosed by every manufacturer based on specified EPA methodology, which often does not replicate real world conditions. Silly, but true.

As far as farleywilbur is concerned, since he seems to be a committed environmentalist, we should condemn him to driving a Prius for the rest of his life. Most of us take multiple factors into account when we make a purchasing decision, and I am personally gratified that I am sparing the environment a few extra pollutants while also greatly enjoying my X3. Plus I don't mind saving a few dollars at the gas pump. I'd rather have the performance of the 3.0, but that's the choice I made.

So farleywilbur, as punishment for your near-sighted rigidity, you are hereby ordered to immediately cease driving whatever it is that you're driving, and switch to a Prius. If you're a good boy, we'll reconsider in a year and upgrade you to another hybrid of your choice.

By the way, talk about misleading EPA figures, the hybrids in general seem to get much lower real world mileage than the EPA figures would have you believe.

jk330i
03-24-2005, 11:44 AM
By the way, talk about misleading EPA figures, the hybrids in general seem to get much lower real world mileage than the EPA figures would have you believe.

That's very true, from what I hear from the hybrid owners, they are experiencing 10-15mpg less to what their stated EPA figures say. HAHA! :rofl:

rrinker
03-24-2005, 01:03 PM
I don't think the numbers are wrong or misleading. What I think is that people aren't reading the fine print near the numbers, or bothering to look up on the EPA site just how they get those numbers - NO ONE drives like they do when they do that testing. It's not a good representation of real-world driving.
I finally got to drive the X3 for more than a short trip to dinner, so I did a little testing. Wife's been driving it back and forth to school, avg MPG ont he computer was showing 15.2. I had to put gas in so I reset everything when I got gas. After 10 miles of 40-45 mph road, I was up to 25.3. Then I hit the open highway and got to open her up a little bit. Briedly was up over 80 - no excessive wind noise, dunno what those people are talking about. After another 10 miles of 65-80mph driving, I was down to 22.4. For the next 5 mile sit was 40-50mph and I was running in manual mode (I have Step), mileage went up slightly to 22.6. Reversing the journey on the way home, I drove about half of it in SD, the rest in regular Drive. When I pulled in the garage I was sitting at 22.4
Accuracy of the OBC will have to wait until the next fillup, this is the first time I put gas in it since we got it. But according tot he OBC calculations, I am getting right in there with the EPA listed numbers. If I was going to drive either a long open highway and average 70-75, I would not get as high a number. Nor would I be as high if I was on the freeway as defined by california - drive like mad, then sit for an hour, then drive like mad. The numbers would be HORRIBLE under those conditions. This IS a 2-ton vehicle after all. Consdiering my E36 328is with 5-speed got 26-27mpg under the same circumstances as my trip today witht he X3, it's not all that bad. And it beat the pants off our Grand Cherokee, hitting 18mpg is an ccomplishment in that pig (I-6, not V8 - In-laws have a V8 JGC and it gets BETTER mileage than the 6 - I'm wondering if people who get the X3 2.5 for economy reasons are being disappointed - the smaller engine has to work harder and ends up being LESS efficient).

--Randy

M-PIRE
03-24-2005, 01:54 PM
I've had my 05 X3 3.0 for about three weeks now, I've put in 3 tanks of gas. So far I've averaged 16.9 overall. That's about 90% in-town driving. Once the break in period is over, I expect that to go down a little. :p

pipo
03-24-2005, 03:06 PM
This is obviously not a rigorous scientific study, but from the postings I've observed over several months on this site and others, the 2.5 is generally reported to deliver better mileage than the 3.0. The OBC is probably 2-4 MPG overly optimistic, in my experience and as reported by others. I'd be interested to hear more reports on this.

rrinker, you must work for a credit card company or a bank if you believe that consumers actually take the time to read the fine print. I believe the EPA mileage figures are a useful indicator of expected mileage (just as the APR is a useful indicator -- probably more so -- of interest costs on a loan or yield on an debt instrument), but I also do believe that they are misleading to the average consumer, who simply looks at the reported numbers and leaves their analysis at that. My view is that the numbers should tie in more closely with the real world results. Perhaps the methodology should be altered.

Any engineers out there with some good ideas?

jk330i
03-24-2005, 04:33 PM
I don't think the numbers are wrong or misleading. What I think is that people aren't reading the fine print near the numbers, or bothering to look up on the EPA site just how they get those numbers - NO ONE drives like they do when they do that testing. It's not a good representation of real-world driving.


Do you really think the average consumer would bother reading every fine print or even bother looking up numbers on an EPA site? In that case everyone is a creditor and a banker! :p

rrinker
03-24-2005, 08:50 PM
What they do, however, is not the same as what they SHOULD do.

Call me callous, but when information is freely available, as it is in these days of the Internet, I have little sympathy for someone who claims to have been somehow cheated because they didn't have all the information HANDED to them. Now, if you are deliberately mislead by false information, that's a different story.
I am disturbed by the culture of, for lack of a better term, idiots, we are turning into. LAWS to protect us from McDonald's food? Who DOESN'T know that stuff is bad for you? Constant lawsuits the warnings ALREADY on products are somehow defficient - warnings that in most case shouldn;t even be required! I don't want to stray too far off the topic here, but the issue here is pretty much the same thing, except there is no safety issue involved. The facts are, it DOES say on the label that the EPA numbers are ESTIMATES (in fact the word ESTIMATES is block capitals on most window stickers I've seen) and are for comparison purposes only. Whether you chose to read this or not, the fact remains, the information was freely given
Kind of like "I have all wheel drive, you mean I CAN'T go around the icy corner at 60?" They DO still teach basic physics in 6th grade, my wife is a 6th grade teacher. Excuses - it's all excuses!

--Randy

pipo
03-24-2005, 09:37 PM
there's simply not enough time in the day to read all of the fine print that we're confronted with. It has nothing to do with intelligence or diligence or responsibility. It has to do with the fast-paced, complex society we seem to have created for ourselves, which tends to ignore the beauty of simplicity -- in our personal lives, our work lives and our commercial transactions. Why should a consumer have to spend needless time researching the meaning of the EPA figures? They should be meaningful in and of themselves, and if they're not, then the methodology should be re-examined. It may be that a more accurate methodology is difficult, if not impossible, to devise. I don't have the technical knowhow to make a statement on that subject. But my instinct tells me that the good ol' EPA could do a lot better for us ignorant consumers.

I probably sign 100 forms or more every year with paragraph after paragraph of fine print on the back, and I'll be damned if I'm going to muck up my life and my brain with senseless gibberish that's probably unenforceable anyway. I say, instead of blaming the consumer for laziness, let's make our society an easier place to navigate, for the good of all. Bet you voted for Bush; I voted for Kerry. ;)

farleywilbur
03-25-2005, 05:19 AM
I'm sure many people disagree with you.

First, BMW claims 19/25 mpg on the epa sticker, which is wrong. Secondly, gas prices are rising and reaching an all-time high in my area; actually, rumors say we will be near $3 a gallon by next year (I really hope not).

And your last statement spells donkey prick all over it, in comparison to my 330i (which was a bmw I was easily able to afford) I never complained with 20-25mpg, and only filled up once a week compared to now which is twice a week with the x3.

And by looking at your post count and joined date of 3/05, I can see your a newb posting to start a fight. :D

My wife calls me Donkey Prick two or three nights a week! :rofl:

And another point of interest... all you Americans paying $2 a gallon are complaining about fuel cost? You probably have the cheapest fuel of any developed country. Try moving to Europe where you would be paying around $1.50 to $2 a LITER (thats around $8 a gallon folks).

Of course that will all change when the middle east starts shipping more of their supply to China in the next decade and oil hits $70, $80, $100 a barrel. Then that Prius might make more sense when it's costs more to run your vehicle than it does to pay your mortgage. :bawling:

rrinker
03-25-2005, 07:15 AM
there's simply not enough time in the day to read all of the fine print that we're confronted with. It has nothing to do with intelligence or diligence or responsibility. It has to do with the fast-paced, complex society we seem to have created for ourselves, which tends to ignore the beauty of simplicity -- in our personal lives, our work lives and our commercial transactions. Why should a consumer have to spend needless time researching the meaning of the EPA figures? They should be meaningful in and of themselves, and if they're not, then the methodology should be re-examined. It may be that a more accurate methodology is difficult, if not impossible, to devise. I don't have the technical knowhow to make a statement on that subject. But my instinct tells me that the good ol' EPA could do a lot better for us ignorant consumers.

I probably sign 100 forms or more every year with paragraph after paragraph of fine print on the back, and I'll be damned if I'm going to muck up my life and my brain with senseless gibberish that's probably unenforceable anyway. I say, instead of blaming the consumer for laziness, let's make our society an easier place to navigate, for the good of all. Bet you voted for Bush; I voted for Kerry. ;)

Well, I believe they ARE meaningful. A vehicle with an EPA estimate 10 mpg higher than another WILL get better mileage, depending on how you drive. There simply is no way for any test be it by the government or some independent agency, to accurately estimate the way YOU, or that guy over there, or me, drives. Impossible. We all drive differently. Surely you've seen those peopel who drive around with their left foot on the brake at all times - wonder what kind of gas mileage they get? Then there's the 'grannies' who barely put pressure on the accelerator - bet they get great mileage. And then there's Speed Racer who smoke the tires from EVERY light and never shifts before redline. To that end, the EPA numbers at least give you a starting point for comparison purposes, which is al they claim to be.
It is not the job of the government to protect us from ourselves. Your statement is at cross purposes. If you want simpler, then you don't want or need silly laws that 'nanny' you. And you guessed correctly.

--Randy

jdeday
03-25-2005, 07:21 AM
I have had my X3 3.0i for 6 weeks now and I have noticed that my fuel economy has slowly increased over that period, when I had taken delivery the OBC was telling my I was getting under 16. I currently have 1500 miles on it and the OBC is telling me my average MPG is 21.3 with the current tank of gas, I reset it with every fill up. This includes two 50 mile trips with speeds ranging from 60-65 MPH, it also includes my 14 mile to and from work drive that I would consider combine driving. I'm happy with the fuel economy and expect it to increase as the vehicle gets newer.

I'm planning a 700 mile trip to South Carolina this summer; I will let everyone know what the out come is of my fuel mileage.

Jeff

pipo
03-25-2005, 10:03 AM
Well, I believe they ARE meaningful. A vehicle with an EPA estimate 10 mpg higher than another WILL get better mileage, depending on how you drive. There simply is no way for any test be it by the government or some independent agency, to accurately estimate the way YOU, or that guy over there, or me, drives. Impossible. We all drive differently. Surely you've seen those peopel who drive around with their left foot on the brake at all times - wonder what kind of gas mileage they get? Then there's the 'grannies' who barely put pressure on the accelerator - bet they get great mileage. And then there's Speed Racer who smoke the tires from EVERY light and never shifts before redline. To that end, the EPA numbers at least give you a starting point for comparison purposes, which is al they claim to be.
It is not the job of the government to protect us from ourselves. Your statement is at cross purposes. If you want simpler, then you don't want or need silly laws that 'nanny' you. And you guessed correctly.

--Randy

I agree with you that no single methodology is going to yield accurate fuel mileage estimates to account for the wide variety of driving styles in the real world. However, if real world mileage is consistently lower than the EPA's city estimate for a representative sample of drivers, then there's something wrong with the methodology. Not having done a statistically valid study of the issue, I can't be sure of the answer, but my hunch is that the EPA estimates are waaaaay off for a number of hybrid vehicles, and may be significantly inaccurate for the X3 3.0. Just an issue that is probably worth looking at more deeply. Where are you, Ralph Nader, when we need you?

As concerns your statement regarding the government's role, we'll certainly never agree; I've learned after numerous frustrating attempts to convert Republicans that it is often a fruitless effort. That said, I do think it is the government's role to help protect society from those of us who might do harm to others, particularly when that harm is systemic (e.g., environmental laws and regulations). We don't need a nanny government, but we do benefit from a government that insures fair practices in the marketplace when there would otherwise not be any controls over potentially unscrupulous or harmful behaviors (e.g., truth-in-advertising; truth-in-lending; usury laws).

If we still lived in the horse and buggy days, when the world was truly a simpler place, we would't need as much government involvement. Now we need the government to help us cope with an increasingly complex world in which unbridled market forces threaten to harm us in so many ways. We need wise stewardship from the top to make sure that sensible and appropriate restraints are in place to protect our people and our world. That is what I mean by a simpler life. A world in which the government does its job to protect us from identified systemic problems so that the individual in society does not have to concern himself/herself with them.

jk330i
03-25-2005, 02:22 PM
And another point of interest... all you Americans paying $2 a gallon are complaining about fuel cost? You probably have the cheapest fuel of any developed country. Try moving to Europe where you would be paying around $1.50 to $2 a LITER (thats around $8 a gallon folks).




We have every right to complain considering that gas use to be $1.59 a gallon for us not too long ago, and now we're looking at double that amount. It's more of a matter of what we were paying, or use to paying, and now since gas prices keep rising without falling, it gives us more reason to b1tch.

dkl
03-25-2005, 02:41 PM
I agree with you that no single methodology is going to yield accurate fuel mileage estimates to account for the wide variety of driving styles in the real world. However, if real world mileage is consistently lower than the EPA's city estimate for a representative sample of drivers, then there's something wrong with the methodology. Not having done a statistically valid study of the issue, I can't be sure of the answer, but my hunch is that the EPA estimates are waaaaay off for a number of hybrid vehicles, and may be significantly inaccurate for the X3 3.0. Just an issue that is probably worth looking at more deeply. Where are you, Ralph Nader, when we need you?

As concerns your statement regarding the government's role, we'll certainly never agree; I've learned after numerous frustrating attempts to convert Republicans that it is often a fruitless effort. That said, I do think it is the government's role to help protect society from those of us who might do harm to others, particularly when that harm is systemic (e.g., environmental laws and regulations). We don't need a nanny government, but we do benefit from a government that insures fair practices in the marketplace when there would otherwise not be any controls over potentially unscrupulous or harmful behaviors (e.g., truth-in-advertising; truth-in-lending; usury laws).

If we still lived in the horse and buggy days, when the world was truly a simpler place, we would't need as much government involvement. Now we need the government to help us cope with an increasingly complex world in which unbridled market forces threaten to harm us in so many ways. We need wise stewardship from the top to make sure that sensible and appropriate restraints are in place to protect our people and our world. That is what I mean by a simpler life. A world in which the government does its job to protect us from identified systemic problems so that the individual in society does not have to concern himself/herself with them.

You need to look at the EPA print a little bit more closely. The Bigger Bold numbers that EPA print is only an AVERAGE of what they are seeing. They DO also print a Low and High number as well (although, in much smaller prints). I have to agree with others that there are no fool prove way to make this computation since every fool drives differently. It's ONLY for relative comparision and NOT meant bo be used as an absolute number, which evidently everyone assumed it that way.

rrinker
03-25-2005, 10:08 PM
If we all drove like Ralph Nader wanted us to drive, the EPA numbers would likely be right on. Not over 55, etc.

But we drive BMWs, don't we? It's no fun driving slow.

I don't think the EPA numbers are way off from what people really see, FOR REGULAR GASOLINE ENGINE CARS. Hybrids are a different breed. The inherent steadiness in a scientific test is VERY conducive to a hybrid achieving maximum economy. Unfortunately, int he rea world we have idiots for traffic engineers who make sure we can't go more than 1 block without hitting a red light, often at the behest of the safety nuts because, OMG, if all the lights were green at once, people might SPEED! Want to reduce pollution and improve fuel economy? make it so you don't have to stop and start all the time! Case in point - they are building a new 'bypass' near me because the existing road has miles of stopped traffic at rush hour, too many business and side streets with lights. This wonderful new bypass will have, in place of the exiting road's 6 lights over the same distance, 4 lights. Wow... some bypass. Megabucks project for little improvement.

--Randy

Clarke
03-26-2005, 02:11 AM
We get 18-19 MPG around town with our X5 3.0 step and 21-22.5 highway driven aggressively.I think your X3s will probably loosen up a bit and warmer weather should help some as well.Bimmer engines start out pretty"tight"and performance improves over the first 6,000+ miles or so.As for legal action:rolleyes: ,you are pushing a heavy brick through the air-how much can you expect?

climrgrl
03-26-2005, 11:03 AM
Don't forget that many of you (even in So Cal) also have oxygenated "winter gas" right now -- I'll bet your mileage will improve in the summer.

Patrick330i
03-26-2005, 11:07 AM
Guys I'm getting only a mere 15 mpg on my x3!! I have to fill up twice full tank in one week. That means I am paying $320 a month and $80 a week on gas only!!

Compared to my 330i, I was getting 20 mpg and one tank of gas lasted me 1 whole week. I'm now paying double with the x3.

:bawling:

My neighbor has an X3 and I asked her this very question a couple of weeks ago. She is hitting just under 21, but mostly freeway driving. She has a 2.5 Step.

Boo hoo! :cry:

All of you whining about poor fuel economy should have bought a Toyota
Prius.

Maybe you can't afford to be driving a BMW if you even have to think about the cost of fuel?

Let's see, you join this month and you have 5 posts here at BF.com. What can this possibly mean? How about TROLLING? :thumbdwn:

If it is any consolation to you guys, my wife has an MDX. It was rated 17/23 mpg. Guess what? It gets more like 13/17. It sucks. What can I say? :dunno:

xspeedy
03-26-2005, 11:10 AM
Don't forget that many of you (even in So Cal) also have oxygenated "winter gas" right now -- I'll bet your mileage will improve in the summer.

Yep. That winter gas sucks. When I drove to Chicago (from TX), my mileage really tanked. In IL on the highway, I was getting a paltry 18 MPG (should have been 22 or so). Around Chicago, I was getting about 15 MPG.

farleywilbur
03-27-2005, 04:52 AM
Let's see, you join this month and you have 5 posts here at BF.com. What can this possibly mean? How about TROLLING? :thumbdwn:

5 posts because I just bought an X3 a week ago and took delivery on Thursday. I was happy to find this board while doing my initial research but there is a lack of quality posts here compared to other boards. :thumbdwn:

dlflyboy
03-28-2005, 12:08 AM
I've had my X3 for about 6 months. I drive in the city and it get 20 mpg (no less).

voltron1011
03-28-2005, 03:41 AM
My wife calls me Donkey Prick two or three nights a week! :rofl:

And another point of interest... all you Americans paying $2 a gallon are complaining about fuel cost? You probably have the cheapest fuel of any developed country. Try moving to Europe where you would be paying around $1.50 to $2 a LITER (thats around $8 a gallon folks).

. :bawling:

I live in Germany where gas costs me 1.09 Euro per liter. That comes out to 5.50 US dollars per gallon (after the exchange rate on our 'Incredible Shrinking Dollar'). That hurts.... BTW, BMW needs to bring there 2.0 and 3.0 diesels over to the US. Same power, 30% better gas mileage.

farleywilbur
03-31-2005, 10:47 AM
Goldman says $105 oil possibleBy TAVIA GRANT

Thursday, March 31, 2005 Updated at 12:37 PM EST

Globe and Mail Update

Goldman Sachs Group Inc. says oil markets may have entered what it calls a “super spike” period, giving crude the potential to reach as high as $105 (U.S.) a barrel.

The New York brokerage boosted its estimate for a so-called “super spike” range to between $50 and $105 amid unexpected strength in oil demand and economic growth, especially in the United States and China. Previously the range had been $50 to $80.

The report prompted crude oil to extend earlier gains, jumping $1.46 cents to $55.45 a barrel on the New York Mercantile Exchange.

“We believe oil markets may have entered the early stages of what we have referred to as a ‘super spike' period — a multi-year trading band of oil prices high enough to meaningfully reduce energy consumption and recreate a spare capacity cushion only after which will lower energy prices return,” the analysts said in a research note.

Goldman estimates earnings per share among oil companies will grow by an average of 30 per cent this year and 28 per cent in 2006.

Goldman repeated its “attractive” rating for the oil sector and said the major risk to the industry would be a sudden slowdown in economic growth in China and other emerging Asian economies.

The company reiterated its top recommendations in the industry, which include Exxon Mobil Corp., Suncor Energy Inc. and EnCana Corp.

Woody
03-31-2005, 03:56 PM
All of you are going to think I am crazy but I am getting better gas mileage since I put the tire pressures to the recommended PSI located on the door sill. I thought it was going to ride too rough previous to this & had them @ 35 PSI all around.

The only other thing that I can think of would be that I am getting better MPG due to it having more miles on it now (past break in), 4K miles. :dunno:

climrgrl
03-31-2005, 04:13 PM
All of you are going to think I am crazy but I am getting better gas mileage since I put the tire pressures to the recommended PSI located on the door sill.

You're not crazy, gas mileage does improve with increased tire pressure. Less rolling resistance and more sidewall stiffness help overall efficiency. Of course, you don't want to overinflate your tires, but keeping it up to the recommended PSI is good.

jk330i
04-01-2005, 08:36 AM
Just an update guys.

When I had originally posted this thread I only had the X3 for about 1-2 weeks with horrible gas mileage (approx. 15mpg). Now that I'm nearing 1200 miles (I have abut 1175), I'm averaging about 17mpg, so I'm getting 2 miles more per gallon than before! :woot: I hope after I inflate my tires and break in the engine a little more that I'll be averaging 19-20mpg.

It might be optimistic considering that I mainly drive in stop and go traffic.

jliu34740
04-04-2005, 01:20 PM
2005 X3 3.0i w/Steptronic, 1200 miles

On a recent trip (140 miles one way) test find out what I can really get MPG wise on this car, with average speed 65-70 miles I got 25.8 miles/gallon. Woohoo! This is more than I expected. Too bad my daily commute is not like this. I am gettgin 16-17 in stop and go traffic on weekdays.

I also noticed that steptronic in D mode is not very intelligent sometimes. For example, I am on cruise control at 70 miles/hr with engine running at about 2100 rpm. On a gentle incline, X3 downshifted to 4th gear to keep speed, that brought rpm to about 3200. Once over the hill, it remained about 3200 for a good half mile! I had to switch to M5 then back to D to drop RPM to 2100 or so. I wonder why step is not automatically shifting to 5th gear once it no longer need the extra power.

bill92
04-04-2005, 07:26 PM
Guys I'm getting only a mere 15 mpg on my x3!! I have to fill up twice full tank in one week. That means I am paying $320 a month and $80 a week on gas only!!

Compared to my 330i, I was getting 20 mpg and one tank of gas lasted me 1 whole week. I'm now paying double with the x3.

:bawling:
x3 3.0 with steptronic
I get around 23.5 when highway driving(70 to 80 mph)
I get around 19 back and forth to work(half on highway)
I've seen around 15 with steptronic in SD mode, and I am in the waste gas mode!

Laosk
04-05-2005, 12:16 AM
2005 X3 3.0i w/Steptronic, 1200 miles

On a recent trip (140 miles one way) test find out what I can really get MPG wise on this car, with average speed 65-70 miles I got 25.8 miles/gallon. Woohoo!

Portland road trip?!?

We are hoping to get ours out on the road for a more extensive road trip soon.
Maybe on a Vancouver BC trip or Tulip Festival!

Can't wait! :thumbup:

dkl
04-05-2005, 12:30 AM
2005 X3 3.0i w/Steptronic, 1200 miles

On a recent trip (140 miles one way) test find out what I can really get MPG wise on this car, with average speed 65-70 miles I got 25.8 miles/gallon. Woohoo! This is more than I expected. Too bad my daily commute is not like this. I am gettgin 16-17 in stop and go traffic on weekdays.

I also noticed that steptronic in D mode is not very intelligent sometimes. For example, I am on cruise control at 70 miles/hr with engine running at about 2100 rpm. On a gentle incline, X3 downshifted to 4th gear to keep speed, that brought rpm to about 3200. Once over the hill, it remained about 3200 for a good half mile! I had to switch to M5 then back to D to drop RPM to 2100 or so. I wonder why step is not automatically shifting to 5th gear once it no longer need the extra power.

Another trick you can try to get it to upshift without having to manually switch to M5 is to try easing off the throttle a bit after you've been over the hill. Doing so should make the auto tranny upshift into 5th, then you can ease back onto the throttle to get you back to that 70mph range.

jliu34740
04-12-2005, 02:32 PM
after about 1500 miles, I noticed my 05 3.0i MPG has gone from 16 to 19.5. This is mostly in town driving (avg. speed < 30 mph). This is better than what I had expected. I think this is a combination of warmer weather and engine breaking in. Needless to say I am pleasantly surprised. Combining that with outstanding handling and cool features, I am liking my X3 more every day.. :)

Bart001
04-12-2005, 06:29 PM
With my 2004 X3 3.0, manual transmission, I average 22-24 mpg each tankful. I have a commute that includes 5 miles of in-town driving first, then about 15 miles of highway driving that can be wide open or can be stop/crawl for big stretches. I can average 27-28 on highway-only driving.

On this same commute I was getting 26 with my 1994 E36 2.5 5-speed manual. I drove that E36 from Boston to LA this past summer and averaged 30.2 for the 3000 or so miles.

I drive pretty gently.

climrgrl
04-12-2005, 07:06 PM
With my 2004 X3 3.0, manual transmission, I average 22-24 mpg each tankful. I have a commute that includes 5 miles of in-town driving first, then about 15 miles of highway driving that can be wide open or can be stop/crawl for big stretches. I can average 27-28 on highway-only driving.


Woo-hoo! That's what I like to hear! Even though the wait is killing me (have I mentioned that yet? ;) ), I'm glad I insisted on going with the manual transmission.

HGX3.0
04-13-2005, 10:24 AM
I drive 50 miles a day on freeway - sav has 1400 miles total. Some days it is heavily congested traffic; but most of the time I drive 65-75 mph. When I first got the X3 I was averaging 21 now I'm up to 23 on the steptronic engine! Overall - am pleased with the averages.

stevenw66
04-13-2005, 11:37 AM
I've had my 3.0i X3 for 14 weeks and I've gone from an average of 17 MPG to about 17.5 MPG, I suspect that I may achieve 18 MPG based upon improvements in engine performance over time. I would not expect much better than that.

jk330i
04-13-2005, 12:55 PM
I've had my 3.0i X3 for 14 weeks and I've gone from an average of 17 MPG to about 17.5 MPG, I suspect that I may achieve 18 MPG based upon improvements in engine performance over time. I would not expect much better than that.


I agree, I'm now getting a consistent 18 mpg for the past 2 weeks. I don't think it's going to get much better than 18-19mpg. This is for highway, city, traffic driving. All types combined.

dherzfeld
04-13-2005, 01:19 PM
I drive 50 miles a day on freeway - sav has 1400 miles total. Some days it is heavily congested traffic; but most of the time I drive 65-75 mph. When I first got the X3 I was averaging 21 now I'm up to 23 on the steptronic engine! Overall - am pleased with the averages.

Offtopic, but, I used to live in Littleton - great place, many days I wish I was still there. Perfect X3 place!! :thumbup:

HGX3.0
04-13-2005, 01:58 PM
Offtopic, but, I used to live in Littleton - great place, many days I wish I was still there. Perfect X3 place!! :thumbup:

Glad to hear from an x-littletonite ...

We got close to 2 feet of snow in Littleton on Sunday and the X3 handled flawlessly!

Rick480
04-13-2005, 02:22 PM
How the heck do you guys drive. I get 26-26 highway on my X3 2.5 and 20-21 City. I was dissapointed with that because I got 31 on the highway with my 528i. By the way, the 2.5 is actully rated lower mpg by the EPA than the 3.0 and the Automatic is more than the manual. Go figure.

Bart001
04-14-2005, 04:39 AM
How the heck do you guys drive. I get 26-26 highway on my X3 2.5 and 20-21 City. I was dissapointed with that because I got 31 on the highway with my 528i. By the way, the 2.5 is actully rated lower mpg by the EPA than the 3.0 and the Automatic is more than the manual. Go figure.

I think that most of it can be blamed on aerodynamics. The X3 is a huge box on wheels compared to the 528 or my old 325 coupe.

B r i a n
04-14-2005, 04:22 PM
:) I am getting much beter MPG then what I have read, my 2005 X3 3.0i with 1,400 miles on it has averaged a little over 19 MPG, and most of that is washington DC traffic.
Driving back to Alexandria VA from NJ today door to door (driving between 65-75 mph) was over 27 MPG, and I hit traffic on the beltway. My wife has a 2001 MDX, she averages about the same around town but much less on the highway then the X3. Part of the issue is the X3's enginge revs higher eaiser, meaning I rev the X3 much more then the MDX around town.
X3 drives so much better I just drive it faster. :thumbup:

jliu34740
04-14-2005, 06:57 PM
Brian I guess I am more lead-footed than you are. I live in an area where not only there are more traffic lights, but also more steep uphills. There are couple of 10% inclines that are almost 1/2 mile long each that I need to go through each day, I guess that cost me at least .5 mpg a day. Anyway I think the consensus is that most people are getting 16-19/city and 24-27/highway with enginer broken-in (at least 1200 miles). So this is pretty good in my book.

ERdoc
04-15-2005, 10:25 PM
Well I think I figured out why my wife is getting such good gas mileage on her 2005 X3, Noone had bothered to check her tire pressures from the dealership when she took delivery last month. I checked them today and they were 46 psi all the way around. I dropped them down to 40 psi but my wife didn't want me to decrease them any further because shes worried she wont get the 20 mpg that shes currently enjoying (and with premium fuel around here over $2.50 a gallon, I don't blame her). I tried to find the reccomened pressures inside the driers door but I didn't see them (I'll consult the manual in the morning unless someone knows what the proper inflation is supposed to be).

Go figure...

pipo
04-15-2005, 10:55 PM
Well I think I figured out why my wife is getting such good gas mileage on her 2005 X3, Noone had bothered to check her tire pressures from the dealership when she took delivery last month. I checked them today and they were 46 psi all the way around. I dropped them down to 40 psi but my wife didn't want me to decrease them any further because shes worried she wont get the 20 mpg that shes currently enjoying (and with premium fuel around here over $2.50 a gallon, I don't blame her). I tried to find the reccomened pressures inside the driers door but I didn't see them (I'll consult the manual in the morning unless someone knows what the proper inflation is supposed to be).

Go figure...

The door jamb sticker only provides recommended pressure for a full load (4 passengers plus luggage): 32f 38r



The manual also provides this recommendation, plus the following for a light load (one or two passengers): 29f 32r

A nice middle-of-the-road compromise might be 32f 35r.

40 all around might lead to premature wear or erratic handling characteristics (emphasis on might; 40 is close enough to recommended pressure that it might not). It will certainly contribute to what many would consider a harsh ride, but harshness is in the seat of the driver (analogous to beauty being in the eyes of the beholder).

JG
04-17-2005, 07:14 PM
A nice middle-of-the-road compromise might be 32f 35r.


That's the setting I am using, and I am averaging around 22.5 MPG 35% City 65% highway. Most of the highway is 120-130km / hr.

I leadfoot most of the time - and use the sport setting - because this vehicle is just so entertaining to drive. So I could probably improve on that mileage a bit. :angel:

I am currently at just under 2000km.

99flhr
04-23-2005, 06:40 PM
i guess the main thing is that its 2005, and I we really havn't gained much in MPG considering other industries such as tech, comm etc.

gee, maybe they don't want it to improve.

I'm very dissapointed in the MPG. Regardless of aerodynamics. Its the same as a freakin Explorer!

at 18mpg average. with mostly freeway. it means that the 19/25 epa sticker is totally wrong.

frankly, its misleading and could be class action worthy.

Ahh, conspiracy AND lawsuits.... :eeps:

Aaron325iT
04-25-2005, 02:32 PM
Still on my first tank of gas. Fuel consumption has been scary, but I kind of expected that. 16l/100km or 14.5MPG so far :yikes: but I'm sure that will improve significantly. 90% urban driving too hasn't helped. Took 10,000km (6,000 miles) for my fuel consumption to really settle down on my E46.

Hopefully things will calm down once 2000km goes by. I hope so anyway, gas prices ain't going down anytime soon!

Well, at least I don't live in the UK...C$2.50/litre!!! Wouldn't be driving a 3 litre gas-engined car, that's for damned sure...

Laosk
04-25-2005, 05:01 PM
Still on my first tank of gas. Fuel consumption has been scary, but I kind of expected that. 16l/100km or 14.5MPG so far :yikes:

Same here.
This weekend we filled the tank for the first time since we picked it up and the OBC was saying 14mpg.

That is with roughly 95% city driving.
Fortunate for us, with the gas prices getting so high, we only fill up about once a month. :D
On the flip side, it sucks that we don't get to drive our X3 much!
:(

This break in period is going to take forever!

pps-325xit
04-25-2005, 05:05 PM
I haven't seen anything below 18mpg during our first two tankfuls... usually 19+mpg for around-town driving.

Still on my first tank of gas. Fuel consumption has been scary, but I kind of expected that. 16l/100km or 14.5MPG so far :yikes: but I'm sure that will improve significantly. 90% urban driving too hasn't helped. Took 10,000km (6,000 miles) for my fuel consumption to really settle down on my E46.

Hopefully things will calm down once 2000km goes by. I hope so anyway, gas prices ain't going down anytime soon!

Well, at least I don't live in the UK...C$2.50/litre!!! Wouldn't be driving a 3 litre gas-engined car, that's for damned sure...