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

Still good ratings. Disappointing however if you're already an owner I'm sure. And this definitely leaves the door wide open for a new diesel 3-series sedan offering...

Yup, whell, what matters is real-world / combined driving anyway. Hope everyone who has cited their early findings in the "real world" thread continues to check-in, and members who have not will start, so that a consensus of "real world" can be solidly established.

Originally Posted by 3284me

TV commercials still running 36.

As long as they don't say "EPA" I guess it's ok, as their findings are documented to be that. I'm quite sure they've hired an independent party to arrive at a confirmed value; will be curious which way that wind blows the final rating.

Originally Posted by m8o

As long as they don't say "EPA" I guess it's ok, as their findings are documented to be that. I'm quite sure they've hired an independent party to arrive at a confirmed value; will be curious which way that wind blows the final rating.

I think what tarf provided in post #62 explains it all. It sounds as if the car still achieves the numbers BMW originally provided. However, due to what may be a fluke with the EPA testing, they're forced to use the lower numbers because that's what the EPA achieved. Given the EPA won't re-certify until the next model year it's quite possible the same car will achieve the previously published numbers. IMO the EPA should provide a re-certification process.

I think it is likely that those ads were bought and they didn't want to spend money redo them, just let them run the course, we will have to see.

When people see the TV ad, then walk in and see the lower EPA on the sticker, it's difficult to say if it will be a good thing for the salesperson to explain. Salespersons are not the most trusted people by the customers already.

I'm quite sure they've hired an independent party to arrive at a confirmed value; will be curious which way that wind blows the final rating.

Apparently, BMW didn't have an independent party test them:

"It should be noted that in addition to the manual 328i, none of the other four-cylinder models, which include the BMW Z4 sDrive28i, 528i, and X3 xDrive28i, were independently tested."

Also, BMW says that:

"He said that no other vehicle with the new twin-turbocharged 2.0-liter four-cylinder engine will have its numbers readjusted-not even the six-speed manual version of the 2012 BMW 328i sedan, which will retain its 23 mpg city/34 mpg highway rating."

If fact, they already seem to have make adjustments to the specs section of their website for some of the vehicles.

http://blogs.automotive.com/2012-bmw...mpg-85135.html

Who knows, maybe the EPA just forgot to take the parking brake off before they hooked it up to the dyno.

Originally Posted by dtc100

I think it is likely that those ads were bought and they didn't want to spend money redo them, just let them run the course, we will have to see.

When people see the TV ad, then walk in and see the lower EPA on the sticker, it's difficult to say if it will be a good thing for the salesperson to explain. Salespersons are not the most trusted people by the customers already.

I've bought a lot of cars in my days (sadly quite a few in the last three years alone) and I would say the majority of sales staff were professional, knowledgeable, and honest in their dealings with me. While I've dealt with a few who have been shady my general experience has been positive.

Originally Posted by tarf

Apparently, BMW didn't have an independent party test them:

I'm replying w/a quote as my statement was the one quoted so guessing my statement was the impetus of the reply...

when I wrote "they've" [they have] I did not mean to imply "had" in the form of what was performed over the past months or year. I read all the excellent explanations here and on Bimmerfile and there was no misunderstanding on my part of how EPA testing and approval of ratings are done.

I'm saying I'd bet right now, as a result of the dramatic EPA findings, they've [BMW or BMWUSA] now secured the services of a company to prove their rating and counter the EPA's findings. Supposition, but that's my thinking.

Originally Posted by tarf

"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).
."

I'm amazed EPA are not testing all car's fuel economy independently, there's not that many new models released each year. Also they should test a number of cars of same spec and average out the results, not have one test vehicle.

Originally Posted by sunny5280

I've bought a lot of cars in my days (sadly quite a few in the last three years alone) and I would say the majority of sales staff were professional, knowledgeable, and honest in their dealings with me. While I've dealt with a few who have been shady my general experience has been positive.

I have bought many cars in the past, never really had any issue with the sales, because from very early now I learned from a very trustworthy salesman, that when a professional salesman's lips were moving, he was lying. The same was true, when a customer's lips were moving, he was lying.

So we are all good.

Originally Posted by sr5959

I'm amazed EPA are not testing all car's fuel economy independently, there's not that many new models released each year. Also they should test a number of cars of same spec and average out the results, not have one test vehicle.

Money money money. I doubt honestly if the EPA is actually funded to that level. Seems like common sense that they would test every car.

Originally Posted by sr5959

I'm amazed EPA are not testing all car's fuel economy independently, there's not that many new models released each year. Also they should test a number of cars of same spec and average out the results, not have one test vehicle.

Nah. They shouldn't test any cars. They shouldn't exist. They do more harm than good, and cost us money in the process.

I may be going from the N54 AT in my 2009 335xi sedan to the N20 AT in an F31 wagon someday.
Hope the joy is not lost.

So everyone who bought an N20 got duped because it gets the same gas mileage as the N52 from the 2006 325i? And it cost $6000 more? And it sounds like an ECOTEC Ford Focus?

Actually, I'm having the opposite experience.

My average MPG after just over 1000 miles worth of driving is at 33.8, which I'd say is spectacular for this kind of car, and only about 2mpg less than what I was averaging at 50,000 miles in my last car.

Maybe it's because my last car was a stick-shift standard MINI Cooper 2008, which I loved. I also love getting good gas mileage because I hate getting gas. The whole process is slow and the handles are gross on the gas pumps. Lol.

Before that, I had a Prius, so I kinda like Eco Pro mode. It's like a video game - the object of the game is to get the best gas mileage possible.

Sure - maybe Eco Pro mode makes me drive like a grandma, but on the other hand, Eco Pro mode is about as fast as my MINI was, and definitely faster than the Prius. Just knowing that I can completely change the driving experience by flipping the car over to Sport mode is enough for me. All the gallons I save with Eco Pro justifies the times I choose to get a little crazy with Sport. And it's not like I can't eventually go fast in Eco Pro, it just takes a littler bit more time to get up to speed.

Also, I feel like Eco Pro might extend the life of the car, since it stresses the engine less.

Overall, I think my new 328i is an outstanding car.

Originally Posted by westwest888

So everyone who bought an N20 got duped because it gets the same gas mileage as the N52 from the 2006 325i? And it cost $6000 more? And it sounds like an ECOTEC Ford Focus?

It took you NINE DAYS to post on this?!?! Dude, you're slipping.

Yes. It sounds like a Ford Focus, just like a FWD, Audi A4 2.0t with the only transmission offered, a Continuously Variable Transmission. Oh, wait. The Focus offers a five speed manual or a six speed automatic transmission.

Originally Posted by tturedraider

It took you NINE DAYS to post on this?!?! Dude, you're slipping.

A lot has happened. iPad HD came out. We're shipping new software. The new 911 is tempting me but it's $98,500 MSRP the way I want it. Tech stocks are up 50% in 3 months which helps. My buddy might buy a 335i M-Sport so I was looking at flashing my S4 to 405 hp to show him who is in charge, but that requires a $2500 cooling upgrade to do it "right" so I'm not so sure. Looked at a C63 AMG coupe but it gets 10 MPG and is $75k. Nice looking car though.

Feeling better about my choice to get a E90 335d rather than wait for the F30.

Having said that, for those complaining about the N20 there is still a lot of upside to that engine with tuning that can improve both mileage and power output. The N52 is a great engine but let's face it, going forward there was not a lot more power and efficiency to be squeezed out of it.

Originally Posted by 3ismagic#

Feeling better about my choice to get a E90 335d rather than wait for the F30.

Having said that, for those complaining about the N20 there is still a lot of upside to that engine with tuning that can improve both mileage and power output. The N52 is a great engine but let's face it, going forward there was not a lot more power and efficiency to be squeezed out of it.

If the revised mpg stands, it is proof there is not a lot of efficiency to be squeezed out of the N20 either, if we compare the N52 528i and N20 528i both equipped with the 8spd AT.

The N20 does squeeze out more power than the N52, in part because the N52 was a detuned engine. The high powered N/A I6 (N53?) produces 270 hp.

Let's face it, this is less about fuel efficiency, more of getting on a bandwagon. If they were true to improving mpg, they would have brought the US the 320d.

Originally Posted by tturedraider

It took you NINE DAYS to post on this?!?! Dude, you're slipping.

Yes. It sounds like a Ford Focus, just like a FWD, Audi A4 2.0t with the only transmission offered, a Continuously Variable Transmission. Oh, wait. The Focus offers a five speed manual or a six speed automatic transmission.

West is all about cars $60k and up, with his S4 at the bottom of his "food chain." He just likes to post in the $45k car forum arguing why a $45k car is not as good as his $60k+ car.

Originally Posted by dtc100

West is all about cars $60k and up, with his S4 at the bottom of his "food chain." He just likes to post in the $45k car forum arguing why a $45k car is not as good as his $60k+ car.

I think my car was sticker $51,900. I got for invoice with conquer BMW owner discount.

I come here to study the anthropology of folks paying the same for 1999cc automatics.

Originally Posted by westwest888

I think my car was sticker $51,900. I got for invoice with conquer BMW owner discount.

Why I said it was at the bottom of your food chain.

I come here to study the anthropology of folks paying the same for 1999cc automatics.

Fair enough, you are one of a kind for examination as well.

I'm still seeing the old 24/36 on the EPA site:

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

Originally Posted by mkaresh

I'm still seeing the old 24/36 on the EPA site:

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

That's interesting, I wonder if it's just an error with the website or if they revised their numbers for some reason.

It's very hard to believe that the 328i gets the same fuel econ as the 335i.

If the EPA were to physically test the 335i, I'm sure the 328i will no longer be getting the same economy numbers. - lol