FuelEconomy.gov Official F30 328i/335i MPG Ratings

by Tim Jones on January 26, 2012, 3:55 pm
2012 BMW F30 328i & 335i Get Great MPG - Official MPG numbers

US fuel economy numbers for the 2012 F30 3 series sedan are now officially available. The 328i puts up some impressive numbers. The 335i is also impressive considering the 300hp and 300ft/lbs of torque the N55 is making.

2012 F30 328i
8-speed auto: 23 city / 33 highway / 26 combined - FuelEconomy.gov link
6-speed manual: 23 city / 34 highway / 27 combined - FuelEconomy.gov link

2012 F30 335i
8-speed auto: 23 city /33 highway / 26 combined - FuelEconomy.gov link
6-sped manual: 20 city / 30 highway / 23 combined - FuelEconomy.gov link

UPDATE The EPA has revised the F30 328i automatic fuel economy miles per gallon numbers down. The numbers dropped 1mpg city, 3 highway for a combined driving number down 3mpg. The numbers above have been updated to reflect the change. More information on the reduction of miles per gallon here -> http://www.bimmerfest.com/forums/sho...d.php?t=608713


Leave a Comment

You must be a registered member to comment on stories. Please take a moment to register for your free account now. If you already have an account, log in using fields below.










34 responses to FuelEconomy.gov Official F30 328i/335i MPG Ratings

pix335i commented:
January 26, 2012, 4:17 pm

So basically right around where they were saying in all the release information. I have always gotten better mileage in my E92 335i than the stats said so I'm curious to see how the Long Term Review 328i stacks up.
jackson328xi commented:
January 26, 2012, 6:56 pm

I think this is very impressive. Kind of makes the 335 look more appealing to me seeing the MPG number so close to the 328. If the car actually gets these numbers then (2 mpg x 16 gallon tank) = 32 more miles per tank in a 328. So a 335 needs around (32/26 miles) 1.23 more gallons of gas to go the same distance. So this is all a very long winded way of saying it would really only be about $5 more a week in gas to operate the 335. Sounds like a good price to have an I6 and the extra power.

That being said I understand things will vary based on how you drive the car etc etc.
brkf commented:
January 26, 2012, 7:42 pm

Good grief, I can only imagine all the belly-aching when people are getting 22-23 MPG from their F30s in a year.
tturedraider commented:
January 26, 2012, 8:31 pm

Quote:
Originally Posted by blueguydotcom View Post
Good grief, I can only imagine all the belly-aching when people are getting 22-23 MPG from their F30s in a year.
What?

It is not uncommon with EPA's new measuring procedures for drivers to get very close to the estimates or even exceed them.
mr_clueless commented:
January 26, 2012, 8:32 pm

It's interesting that the automatic gets better efficiency than the manual, and the difference between the two is even more pronounced for the 335i.

What are the reasons to get a manual on the F30?
- Weight? Not sure how to read these numbers -- 3406 (3461) lbs -- but I assume the auto is heavier?
- Performance?
- Fuel economy? (Not any more)
- Weight balance? (Not any more...auto is 50/50, manual is off a bit).
- Cost? (Not anymore)
- Just for fun?
tturedraider commented:
January 26, 2012, 8:35 pm

Quote:
Originally Posted by mr_clueless View Post
It's interesting that the automatic gets better efficiency than the manual, and the difference between the two is even more pronounced for the 335i.

What are the reasons to get a manual on the F30?
- Weight? Not sure how to read these numbers -- 3406 (3461) lbs -- but I assume the auto is heavier?
- Performance?
- Fuel economy? (Not any more)
- Weight balance? (Not any more...auto is 50/50, manual is off a bit).
- Cost? (Not anymore)
- Just for fun?
Just for fun. A more involved driving experience, more personal control over the transmission and engine.
Bob Shiftright commented:
January 26, 2012, 9:24 pm

Quote:
Originally Posted by mr_clueless View Post
It's interesting that the automatic gets better efficiency than the manual, and the difference between the two is even more pronounced for the 335i.

What are the reasons to get a manual on the F30?
- Weight? Not sure how to read these numbers -- 3406 (3461) lbs -- but I assume the auto is heavier?
- Performance?
- Fuel economy? (Not any more)
- Weight balance? (Not any more...auto is 50/50, manual is off a bit).
- Cost? (Not anymore)
- Just for fun?
If you've looked at the BMW parts catalog, a replacement 6 speed manual transmission has listed for more than a replacement automatic transmission. The price premium charged for an AT is more of a historical artifact. They probably get a much better deal from GM than from ZF or Getrag. It would be in BMW's financial interest to minimize the number of manuals sold.

It will be interesting to see what kind of fuel economy numbers the magazines get.

BMW has the performance specs on the F30 on it's website now and rates the the 328i manual 0-60 time as 5.7 seconds versus the 5.9 for the automatic, 0.2 seconds quicker to 60. It gives the 335i an identical 5.4 seconds, manual or AT.

So yes, mostly "fun"! Plus I wouldn't ever know what to do with my left foot.
boostedX5SAV commented:
January 26, 2012, 9:51 pm

Nice! Too bad my money is tied up to the X5 right now. Also, I'd like to see what Audi does to their 2013/2014 A4s.
brkf commented:
January 26, 2012, 10:27 pm

Quote:
Originally Posted by tturedraider View Post
What?

It is not uncommon with EPA's new measuring procedures for drivers to get very close to the estimates or even exceed them


Just for fun. A more involved driving experience, more personal control over the transmission and engine..
I realize that but still you see people complaining that they do not hit EPA targets.

Agreed about the manual. It's not the cost. It's the involvement.
SoonerJohn commented:
January 27, 2012, 12:31 am

Finally!! I've already ordered regardless, but was curious. These are in line with what I was expecting. I may not quite hit the estimate, but even if I get close, 26 combined for my 300-horse-fun-as-hell-to-drive-damn-good-looking-loaded-with-cool-techology-335i will suit me perfectly!
Scorchpa commented:
January 27, 2012, 9:42 am

Quote:
Originally Posted by mr_clueless View Post
It's interesting that the automatic gets better efficiency than the manual, and the difference between the two is even more pronounced for the 335i.

What are the reasons to get a manual on the F30?
- Weight? Not sure how to read these numbers -- 3406 (3461) lbs -- but I assume the auto is heavier?
- Performance?
- Fuel economy? (Not any more)
- Weight balance? (Not any more...auto is 50/50, manual is off a bit).
- Cost? (Not anymore)
- Just for fun?
I would buy an MT for the same reason I would buy a 335 (over 328) which is the same reason I would buy a BMW (over MB). With a MT, you become part of the machine, you're an integral part of the driving experience, and you're driving the car to get a thrill out of driving. I think anyone wanting the TRUE driving experience needs to have a MT.

Unfortunately the wife doesn't know how to use the third pedal, and I don't really want her to test it out on a new F30 335.
mr_clueless commented:
January 28, 2012, 12:54 pm

Quote:
Originally Posted by Scorchpa View Post
I think anyone wanting the TRUE driving experience needs to have a MT.
That's my thinking as well but I have started to wonder what happens 20 years from now when cars are mostly electric. Maybe I'll worry about that when we get there.
brkf commented:
January 28, 2012, 4:43 pm

... these numbers probably came from driving in Eco Pro Mode. Not sure how many people want to put up with that.
Saintor commented:
January 28, 2012, 4:50 pm

Those figures are NOT a compelling case for a 4-cyl.

Automatic, the 335i has only 1mpg worse city and 25% more power than the 328i. BMW should have not bothered with the N20 and have offered a detuned N55 or NA 6 c-yl. with the latest direct injection gizmos.
raleedy commented:
January 28, 2012, 5:44 pm

Quote:
Originally Posted by Saintor View Post
Those figures are NOT a compelling case for a 4-cyl.
I was thinking just the opposite - hardly any compelling reason to pay up for the I6 since the performance numbers are so similar (and more than adequate) with the I4.

BTW I was one of the biggest whiners when the N20 was announced to replace the N52, which is in the car I drive now. But a couple of sessions in a 2012 528i have turned me around completely. The N20 is a fine engine and well suited to its purpose. It will be my choice when the time comes, if it ever does. I'm really interested, though, to see real world mileage numbers. I think the whole point of turbocharging is to provide a relatively weak engine that is very thrifty until you step on it.
Saintor commented:
January 28, 2012, 6:01 pm

I drove the N20 as well and found it unfit in a luxury vehicle. Unless there is a Performance Exhaust for it that changes its 14K$ Civic-like engine note, I'll pass.
m8o commented:
January 28, 2012, 8:43 pm

I'm surprised to find this to the true, but ... my daily is a '09 JCW which is rated at 29mpg combined by the EPA, and continually after resetting the OBC it keeps settling around 28.8mpg; more when my wife drives it as she tends to always short-shift. So I'm optimistic these ratings would be accurate for me too.

With that said, I'm very surprised, disappointed even, the combined rating on the 335i manual is as low as it is. Given how accurate the JCW's EPA rating has been for me, I have to believe I'd be getting 23mpg. And that's a bit lower than I want, going forward. Will make me have to try a modern slush-box to see if I can live with it.

Otherwise, the mention about the ricey engine note of the N20 was a surprise. I hadn't considered that being a possibility. It is also a surprise as the current Mini JCW line proves BMW can make a fantastic sounding turbo'd 4-cyl. Will be interesting to see if the sport package coming in the summer will offer a freer flowing and throatier exhaust. Well, you know aftermarket will have it covered even if BMW doesn't.
Blax commented:
January 29, 2012, 12:45 pm

Quote:
Originally Posted by mr_clueless View Post
It's interesting that the automatic gets better efficiency than the manual, and the difference between the two is even more pronounced for the 335i.

What are the reasons to get a manual on the F30?
- Weight? Not sure how to read these numbers -- 3406 (3461) lbs -- but I assume the auto is heavier?
- Performance?
- Fuel economy? (Not any more)
- Weight balance? (Not any more...auto is 50/50, manual is off a bit).
- Cost? (Not anymore)
- Just for fun?
Fun for sure, nothing better and completely transforms the characteristics of the car.

But also reliability. I've had six 3-series in the past 10 years or so. Three were manual, three were automatic. Two of the automatic transmissions had to be replaced completely (both under 2 years old). The sticks were all fine.
Inline Sixer commented:
January 5, 2013, 8:09 pm

This is intriguing -- the mpg numbers on the 335i are identical to that of the 328i in the 8AT. I'll be darned.

Sorry for the thread bump -- used the search function instead of creating a new thread, being the good bimmerfest citizen that I am.

Will likely get an F30 at lease end. The only argument for the 328i in my mind was better mpg. But based on these estimates, there seems to be no advantage at all. Heck, I'll take all 300 horses on the 335i then...

To F30 festers out there, do these numbers reflect your real world averages?
Chris90 commented:
January 5, 2013, 8:24 pm

Quote:
Originally Posted by Blax View Post
Fun for sure, nothing better and completely transforms the characteristics of the car.

But also reliability. I've had six 3-series in the past 10 years or so. Three were manual, three were automatic. Two of the automatic transmissions had to be replaced completely (both under 2 years old). The sticks were all fine.
Having a clutch is also nice for going sideways on slow corners.
Keith2000328i commented:
January 5, 2013, 8:57 pm

I've had a 2012 328i for 6-months and my real world numbers have never been as low as posted by FuelEconomy.gov in city or highway driving and I do not use ECO Pro mode (not that I'm obsessed with fuel economy, but just stating my observations). I came out of a 2008 535i and have been thoroughly impressed with the F30 4-cylinder thus far.

The take away for me is that both engines are fantastic. Both are good on gas. Drive both and find out if the extra power under the hood is worth it for YOU.

For me, I probably would have opted for the 335i this go around if it was a tad quicker than it already is versus the 328i. To clarify, there is no doubt the 335i is quicker and an absolute blast to drive, but I just didn't feel the difference between the two engines was enough for me personally right now.

It will be interesting to see if BMW eventually distances the two engines further so that there will be even more difference in output. That is what they did with the F10 vs. E60 550i.
Inline Sixer commented:
January 5, 2013, 9:34 pm

That certainly makes sense Keith. A test drive is in order.
pkim1079 commented:
January 7, 2013, 3:06 am

Blah i never buy cars based on mpg and my opinion is that the testers are all driving like grandmas. Let the damn cars breathe once in a while. Ive never even gotten 30mpg on a single mostly hwy trip. My feet are too heavy.
Jamesonsviggen commented:
January 7, 2013, 9:55 am

I ran my 6mt N20 and 8at N55 on the same loop. Not 100% scientific. I got 35.5 in the N55 and 39.9 in the N20. The gap comparing 6mt to 6mt is far larger, the 8spd to 8psd is a bit closer.
Chris90 commented:
January 7, 2013, 10:00 am

Quote:
Originally Posted by Jamesonsviggen View Post
I ran my 6mt N20 and 8at N55 on the same loop. Not 100% scientific. I got 35.5 in the N55 and 39.9 in the N20. The gap comparing 6mt to 6mt is far larger, the 8spd to 8psd is a bit closer.
Anyone know why that is, why does the 6 speed get a lot worse in the 335i vs the 328i? Gearing?
Jamesonsviggen commented:
January 7, 2013, 10:34 am

Quote:
Originally Posted by Chris90 View Post
Anyone know why that is, why does the 6 speed get a lot worse in the 335i vs the 328i? Gearing?
I think the 8spd has a great way of inflating figures, making up for a thirstier engine.

It does more for the N55 than the N20.

Just my hypothesis that the numbers seem to support.

The N55 8spd combo seems to really give amazing highway MPG for it's performance.
550i Beast commented:
June 20, 2013, 12:07 pm

Quote:
Originally Posted by jackson328xi View Post
I think this is very impressive. Kind of makes the 335 look more appealing to me seeing the MPG number so close to the 328. If the car actually gets these numbers then (2 mpg x 16 gallon tank) = 32 more miles per tank in a 328. So a 335 needs around (32/26 miles) 1.23 more gallons of gas to go the same distance. So this is all a very long winded way of saying it would really only be about $5 more a week in gas to operate the 335. Sounds like a good price to have an I6 and the extra power.

That being said I understand things will vary based on how you drive the car etc etc.
OMG!
Pappy Pipes commented:
June 20, 2013, 12:13 pm

Still a lot better than the 11.5 mpg I average in stop and go L.A. traffic traveling an average 14mph.
bimmerfan3 commented:
June 20, 2013, 12:59 pm

Quote:
Originally Posted by Pappy Pipes View Post
Still a lot better than the 11.5 mpg I average in stop and go L.A. traffic traveling an average 14mph.
Is that in Eco Pro/Comfort mode with A/C on or off?
t335xi commented:
June 27, 2013, 3:24 pm

2013 335xi. I average about 23.5mpg I primarily drive in under 30 mph freeway stop and go crawl, no chance for the ASS to kick in. Lowest I have been able to get it is 16mpg doing some serious sport driving. I have never attained above 28mpg even in eco pro on a highway trip, although I dont go under 75mph often and I am a mile high.

I didnt think I would get sticker MPG but I am still impressed at how fuel efficient it is. S4 MPG was stickered in the 17 range so I can only imagine how bad that is in real life.
kpgray commented:
June 27, 2013, 8:30 pm

I have a 328i xDrive with over 10K miles, I have been averaging over 33 MPG for the last 4,000 miles commuting. I go about 460-490 miles per tank and fill up about 14 gallons of premium I drive 35 miles each way, 10 miles on the main roads in comfort mode and run 25 miles in eco-pro on the highway.
Byron Walter commented:
June 27, 2013, 9:08 pm

I just got back from a 700 mile trip in my 328 F31 touring. With my 17 foot kayak on top the car managed 34 going and 31 on the return at around 65 mph, sometimes in sport and sometimes comfort. The odometer read 1000 miles at the start of the trip so I do expect my mileage to improve a little. Not so shabby for a hefty little car with a water toy on top.

Today with the odometer at around 1700 miles I opted for an oil change as it will help me sleep better. Most likely I'll now stick with the regularly scheduled oil changes.
KLC commented:
June 28, 2013, 6:59 am

Driving aggressively through mountains in Germany I averaged 24.1. Mostly in sport+.
SD90 commented:
June 28, 2013, 9:31 pm

Quote:
Originally Posted by brkf View Post
... these numbers probably came from driving in Eco Pro Mode. Not sure how many people want to put up with that.
My thoughts exactly! It feels like the car has about 150 hp in EcoPro mode! I'll spend the extra $3 per week to drive in Sport mode! That makes it fun!