advice please

[Reffro]

I've got a C350CDI and its the same, but that is because its a Merc. The BMW and Audi 3.0 diesels are much better on fuel. The Merc 3.0 diesel is pretty tragic for fuel economy. My Dad's 530d is more powerful, heavier and about 5mpg better on average than my C-class.

That said I have got a real 48mpg out of mine, but that involved a single 200 mile journey on the M6 at a steady 65-70mph. The moment you accelerate or use the power, the fuel consumption plummets, it almost as if its pouring fuel in by the bucket instead of precisely measured injection cycles.

[Architex_mA8tey]

i agree with tho others, all I would add is that the newer the engine technology the better the true average will be on a 3.0 tdi, so its always a balance between what age of car you can afford vs the better mpg after youve bought it and are running it

[HPsauce]

On the other hand some of the newer diesel technology is fearsomely complex and horrendously expensive when it goes wrong.

[PsYcHe]

Originally Posted by HPsauce

On the other hand some of the newer diesel technology is fearsomely complex and horrendously expensive when it goes wrong.

Yup.. top of my 4.2TDI looks more like the outside of the Death Star than a V8!

[sarg]

Originally Posted by Architex_mA8tey

i agree with tho others, all I would add is that the newer the engine technology the better the true average will be on a 3.0 tdi, so its always a balance between what age of car you can afford vs the better mpg after youve bought it and are running it

Disagree

The newer the car, the better the manufacturers have got at setting the cars up to reduce CO2 emissions in a controlled test, real life consumption bears little comparison to claimed mpg of the newest cars.

I doubt there is much real difference between a brand new car and a 5 year old, maybe 1-2 mpg

[Architex_mA8tey]

Originally Posted by sarg

Disagree

The newer the car, the better the manufacturers have got at setting the cars up to reduce CO2 emissions in a controlled test, real life consumption bears little comparison to claimed mpg of the newest cars.

I doubt there is much real difference between a brand new car and a 5 year old, maybe 1-2 mpg

I think it depends on the engine manufacturer and their level of technology and which markets they are in. of course you can always still improve on that with more ahem. . . tuning etc

[IT]

How did the BMW test go ?

Not convinced diesel is the way for you though....

2 things I disliked about my 3.0 Tdi D3:

1) The intrusion of diesel engine sound into the cabin, particularly at standstill, traffic lights etc. Even worse with the window open. That annoyed me constantly if I'm honest. Thank god the B&O drowned it out mostly.

2) The turbo lag trying to get out of junctions. Auto + Diesel is always a poor combination for this reason. Once > 10 mph all s fine, but getting out of the junction is horrible. I hate our Q7 for that.

But - When you're cruising on the motorway, there is little difference in it all admittedly, and the turbo can make it feel quire brisk if you get the changes right.

The DIS on this 4.2 LPG is showing 24 mpg all time average, and in real terms is costing less than £35 per fill up for 200+ miles whatever that works out to be. Its definitely cheaper than my 3.0 Tdi was.

And the V8 noise is loverly - Nothing sounds less executive than the tractor note under the hood.

How about a high spec 3.0 Petrol D3 ? More economy, better sound.....?

[daviesbike]

Well bmw test was not as bad as the merc but still just as awfull with the sound of a tractor under the bonnet. When doing 60mph its fine but when u are doing about 30mph its horrir. Must say though when u gave it some stick it sounded quite nice it was the best sounding oil burner i have herd as far as they go. Sounded like a straight 6. But alass its still a dreaded oil burner and the mpg did not go over 28 the whole day i had it and i get 22 out of the w12 so for the sake of 6mpg saving id much rather the power and quietnes. Maybe would have been a better experiance if i had the 750 petrol. Oh also the mmi in audi ****ed all over this silly i drive what a faf to oparate you have to navigate through sevral options just to change the air ride settings so silly. I think steve wander designed the i drive and steven hawking the mmi they are just worlds apart. The ride was good and the steering was much more direct than the audi however it was far too light i dont think it featured the servotronic powersteering it remaind far to light and felt rather clumbsy and hairy when trying to relax at 60 it felt one misstake had dire affects. Over all a good car but sadly i think my heart lies with petrol audi so its really looking like a a8 on lpg after all. So hard with this car when you have the high spec nothing else i drive comes close to comfort the toys the drive the power delivery ect maybe im compareing everything to the audi rather than just seeing the car for what it is ?

[sarg]

I think you should get a W12

Oh, wait, you've got one, keep it!

[HPsauce]

Originally Posted by daviesbike

maybe im compareing everything to the audi rather than just seeing the car for what it is ?

Does sound a bit like that and the BMW iDrive is famous for being a truly awful "user experience", but once set to your preferences how often will you use it?