F30 3 Series Fuel Economy NOT as Good as Advertises: EPA Revises MPG Down

I'm curious as to how this reduction in MPG in the N20 engine in the various models will affect BMW's compliance with the "required fleet average" target under the CAFE rules. I thought that they had to get to an average of 37.3 MPG by 2016. Will this throw a monkey wrench into BMW's plans to achieve the target? Since the N20 is or will be in the 328, 528, Z4 and X3, I'm sure that this engine constitutes a major factor in BMW's plans to meet the MPG standard. Could this reduction in MPG lead to other actions by BMW in the future to meet the targets such as trying to sell more 128's or giving incentives to customers to buy more fuel efficient engines (more 528's and less 550's)?

Originally Posted by tarf

I'm curious as to how this reduction in MPG in the N20 engine in the various models will affect BMW's compliance with the "required fleet average" target under the CAFE rules. I thought that they had to get to an average of 37.3 MPG by 2016. Will this throw a monkey wrench into BMW's plans to achieve the target? Since the N20 is or will be in the 328, 528, Z4 and X3, I'm sure that this engine constitutes a major factor in BMW's plans to meet the MPG standard. Could this reduction in MPG lead to other actions by BMW in the future to meet the targets such as trying to sell more 128's or giving incentives to customers to buy more fuel efficient engines (more 528's and less 550's)?

I think that's where the hybrids come in.

Originally Posted by tarf

I'm curious as to how this reduction in MPG in the N20 engine in the various models will affect BMW's compliance with the "required fleet average" target under the CAFE rules. I thought that they had to get to an average of 37.3 MPG by 2016. Will this throw a monkey wrench into BMW's plans to achieve the target? Since the N20 is or will be in the 328, 528, Z4 and X3, I'm sure that this engine constitutes a major factor in BMW's plans to meet the MPG standard. Could this reduction in MPG lead to other actions by BMW in the future to meet the targets such as trying to sell more 128's or giving incentives to customers to buy more fuel efficient engines (more 528's and less 550's)?

It's hard to say. They could very well raise the price of the larger engined models to shift the numbers to the more efficient models. But, there are a lot of factors that go into CAFE. Here are links to 2 C&D articles. The first, from May, 2010 notes that the CAFE score is based on the old, un-adjusted EPA score and the OLD 328i (18/28 mpg) already met the 27.5 standard for 2016.
http://www.caranddriver.com/features...cafe-standards

There are lots of complexities, from credits you can carry forward to the fact that the numbers are based on CO2 emissions and some of the gain will come from more environmentally friendly AC systems. Also factored in is the cars' footprint, which may have had something to do with the wheelbase stretch and increase in track of the F30.

http://www.caranddriver.com/features...ations-feature

The manufacturers will also get mpg credits for adopting efficient technologies that often show no effect on the official test cycles. These include active grille shutters (F10), electric heat pumps, stop-start systems (coming across BMW lineup), high-efficiency lights, and solar roof panels. The credit for such items could amount to about 3 mpg if several are used or even more if a manufacturer provides data to justify it.

Originally Posted by tarf

I'm curious as to how this reduction in MPG in the N20 engine in the various models will affect BMW's compliance with the "required fleet average" target under the CAFE rules.

I'm very curious too. Hopefully, they will have to stop overthinking and bring that 4 cylinder diesel much sooner than they thought. Oh, yes!

Now the N20 in the 528i gets better mpg than the N20 in the 328i.

Hence these EPA mpg rating are of minimal value.

Originally Posted by Robert A

Hence these EPA mpg rating are of minimal value.

when they are not favorable, and of significant value when they look good.

It is obvious the EPA ratings are important for many. I want to know how are the numbers obtained? Do manufactures submit them to the EPA, the EPA accept them as is, then if you get audited by the EPA the numbers can be adjusted?

Originally Posted by dtc100

Now the N20 in the 528i gets better mpg than the N20 in the 328i.

From the BMW website under specs for each model with AT:
328i mpg is 23/33
528i mpg is 22/32

So we are really back to the guidance I always give people. Buy the automatic transmission for luxury. Buy the manual transmission for better performance and better mileage. This rule really hasn't changed for the past 60 years.

Every few years, Consumer Reports tests a group of cars that are "identical twins". Each "twin" has one car that is MT, and the other that is AT. Otherwise, they are as similar as possible. They try to get a sampling of various types of cars (sports cars, economy cars, etc.). The car with the MT virtually always has better acceleration and better mileage than the identical car with the AT. Other testing organizations report similar results.

In terms of the EPA ratings, it is important to remember these tests are conducted under laboratory conditions, not real world driving. Many people with AT cars complain their cars do not achieve the EPA ratings. Most people with MT cars get fairly close to the EPA numbers. I am a bit surprised the new EPA 328i rating shows the MT version getting better mileage than the AT version. Maybe a dose of reality?

Sorry, an automatic is still an automatic, regardless of how many speeds it contains. I am using the term automatic to mean a transmission that has a torque converter. This does not include the automated manual transmissions.

Originally Posted by alpinweiss

So we are really back to the guidance I always give people. Buy the automatic transmission for luxury. Buy the manual transmission for better performance and better mileage. This rule really hasn't changed for the past 60 years.

Every few years, Consumer Reports tests a group of cars that are "identical twins". Each "twin" has one car that is MT, and the other that is AT. Otherwise, they are as similar as possible. They try to get a sampling of various types of cars (sports cars, economy cars, etc.). The car with the MT virtually always has better acceleration and better mileage than the identical car with the AT. Other testing organizations report similar results.

In terms of the EPA ratings, it is important to remember these tests are conducted under laboratory conditions, not real world driving. Many people with AT cars complain their cars do not achieve the EPA ratings. Most people with MT cars get fairly close to the EPA numbers. I am a bit surprised the new EPA 328i rating shows the MT version getting better mileage than the AT version. Maybe a dose of reality?

Sorry, an automatic is still an automatic, regardless of how many speeds it contains. I am using the term automatic to mean a transmission that has a torque converter. This does not include the automated manual transmissions.

2011 328i EPA numbers are identical for manual and automatic:

http://www.fueleconomy.gov/feg/Power...8i&srchtyp=ymm

The same for the 335i:

http://www.fueleconomy.gov/feg/Power...5i&srchtyp=ymm

My automatic equipped vehicles achieve or better the EPA numbers. Now you've heard from the other side. The reason someone should buy a manual is because they prefer a manual.

Did the EPA actually test the 335i? Any chance that the 335i AT results will be adjusted down so that MT gets better mileage?
I've got a 335 ordered for ED - The only reason I went with AT was due to the gas mileage. But I can still change to MT.

Originally Posted by a71mg

Did the EPA actually test the 335i? Any chance that the 335i AT results will be adjusted down so that MT gets better mileage?
I've got a 335 ordered for ED - The only reason I went with AT was due to the gas mileage. But I can still change to MT.

Previously, the BMW website listed the 335 as:
20/30 with MT
23/33 with AT
The EPA website still shows these figures.

Now the BMW website lists TBD for both transmissions. So I would think that they are rethinking things.

Also, here an article that includes BMW's press release on the issue:
http://www.autospies.com/news/EPA-Lo...-To-Why-69741/

"All manufacturers are responsible for testing and submitting fuel economy figures each year to the EPA (based on physical tests following the EPA test cycle on a dynamometer). Occasionally, the EPA will validate the figures that we provide. When this happens, there are sometimes small changes in the published EPA fuel economy figures (usually 1 mpg up or down).
The EPA recently tested the 2012 328i Automatic and obtained a highway mileage result that was 3m pg lower (33mpg versus 36mpg) than the BMW test result. We are very surprised by this result and are currently working to determine how this is possible. The new rating seems abnormally low in relation to the other models in the BMW range and by the real-world fuel economy that we are seeing from this model.
Unfortunately, there is no provision in the EPA rules for a re-test this year. Therefore regardless of the results of our investigation, the new rating will stand for this model year."

Originally Posted by tarf

From the BMW website under specs for each model with AT:
328i mpg is 23/33
528i mpg is 22/32

1. This is wrong. 528i hwy rating on BMWUSA is 34.
2. EPA numbers matter. People rely on them for comparisons.
3. YMMV means something. I wonder what it is.

I would disagree that EPA ratings matter. Even if you look at them in relative terms, they are of little value. How is it possible that the 2011 528i achieved a 4 mpg year over year increase in city rating when the car gained, what, 400 pounds?

Originally Posted by raleedy

1. This is wrong. 528i hwy rating on BMWUSA is 34.
2. EPA numbers matter. People rely on them for comparisons.
3. YMMV means something. I wonder what it is.

Originally Posted by Robert A

I would disagree that EPA ratings matter. Even if you look at them in relative terms, they are of little value. How is it possible that the 2011 528i achieved a 4 mpg year over year increase in city rating when the car gained, what, 400 pounds?

Luck of the draw that EPA did not get around to validate the 528i numbers? Although it may not be just luck that EPA decided to validate the 328i numbers since the 36 mpg number was significantly ahead of the rest of the pack. Most people will say the EPA numbers matter, whether you agree with the numbers or not.

How do you explain a similar YOY bump in 335i city ratings?

Originally Posted by raleedy

1. This is wrong. 528i hwy rating on BMWUSA is 34.
2. EPA numbers matter. People rely on them for comparisons.
3. YMMV means something. I wonder what it is.

OK I see BMWUSA.com at one place says 34 mpg but the other page says 22/32 mpg.

Originally Posted by raleedy

1. This is wrong. 528i hwy rating on BMWUSA is 34.

Showing 32 highway in the spec section of their website:
http://www.bmwusa.com/Standard/Conte...fications.aspx

Originally Posted by Robert A

How do you explain a similar YOY bump in 335i city ratings?

According to the above explanation, manufactures provide EPA those numbers annually after they do their own tests based on the EPA standards. I guess we have to ask BMW why the YOY bump. It did not seem to have anything to do with EPA, unless the EPA changes its standards every year.

Good luck on that.

Originally Posted by dtc100

I guess we have to ask BMW why the YOY bump.

Originally Posted by dtc100

OK I see BMWUSA.com at one place says 34 mpg but the other page says 22/32 mpg.

It seems to have changed because I remember having seen 23/34 on that page.

Originally Posted by bl@ster

BMW USA website now lists 33mpg on highway for both 328 and 335.

TV commercials still running 36.

Originally Posted by Robert A

I would disagree that EPA ratings matter. Even if you look at them in relative terms, they are of little value. How is it possible that the 2011 528i achieved a 4 mpg year over year increase in city rating when the car gained, what, 400 pounds?

You have a point, but it's different from the one I was trying to make. The EPA ratings matter in the marketplace because people look at them, compare them and rely on them in making buying decisions. Whether or not that is a smart thing to do.

Originally Posted by raleedy

You have a point, but it's different from the one I was trying to make. The EPA ratings matter in the marketplace because people look at them, compare them and rely on them in making buying decisions. Whether or not that is a smart thing to do.

exactly...we often forget to take off our enthusiast glasses and pretend to be the average purchaser.

i.e. the rich soccer mom wife who wants a BMW because: 1) its the right color; 2) it has leather; and 3) it has the BMW roundel on it.

LOTS, in fact MOST average car buys rely on the EPA estimates on the window stickers when comparing cars.

Honda just lost a big class action lawsuit and had to pay each owner $300 for falsely advertising mileage.

Mileage is very interesting issue. Are any of you familar with Hyundai? They seem to be able to fudge their numbers across the board. Almost all their cars have great EPA numbers (Sonata, etc) but significantly worse real world fuel economy...

LOTS of complaints about this in the forums, etc...

Better to revise now than have people pissed off they don't get advertised ratings. They are still great ratings