Hi,

I'm hoping to buy a used 3 or 5 series BMW...probably early 90's model.

I've been trying to find out information on the likely fuel consumption, but with no success. Could someone point me in the right direction or some indication as to how thirsty these cars are.

It's likely to be a 1.8 or 2.0ltr model I go for in either series, given that I'm stranded in the "insurance postcode from hell" scenario! (I currently drive an Audi 80 which returns more than 40mpg, but am not expecting these sort of figures.)

Thanks in advance.

FraserH

Fraser,

I drive an E36 328i coupe which returns 28-32mpg on Optimax depending on Urban/open road driving.

HTH

Duncan

Duncan,

Thanks for that, it's more than I would have expected for a 2.8

Being new (read: "premature") to BMW, I'm a bit lost by the E-numbers...does this relate to engine types, or body design? All the E--'s seem to be 3 series of some form, as far as I can determine.

I'm hoping to get at least into the 30's somewhere in terms of consumption, but thought that for the older models - esp the 6 cylinders - this might be pushing things a bit. I only do about 3k miles a year, so its not too big an issue.

Thanks again.

Fraser

the e numbers relate to body type - e30 is the 3 series around during the '80s, etc.

M & S numbers relate to engine - my car the e30 320i shared with some others the 6 cylinder M20. The 320i had the M20 B20 - M20 2.0Liter whereas the 325 had the M20 B25 (2.5L). See http://e30bmw.8m.com/e-numbers.html">http://e30bmw.8m.com/e-numbers.html for more details.

Killian

Ah,

Suddenly all becomes clear. thanks for the link - very useful.

Can I ask how thirsty your 320i is for average driving conditions?

Fraser

It's busier here, than the rest of the site, so I'll join in if I may!

I have an E36 M3 saloon (3.0 model, of 95 vintage) and day to day driving I'm doing about 22-24mpg, on a good run I get well into the early 30's, so a 318 should better this, but the 2.0 may drag the economy side down a bit.

Quote: Originally posted by FraserH on 21-October-2002

---

Can I ask how thirsty your 320i is for average driving conditions?

---

Woooah!

Any consumption figure starting with a 2 is bad news in my eyes. (going from a '4' at present remember!) Given that it's almost exclusively urban driving I do, things aren't looking too promising then.

I assume the E34 - 5 series - will be worse by say 10% or so?

Re the site> I thought the forums were pretty quiet, for what is a very pro site and full of useful links etc. Dare I ask, do the events generate as low a turn-out....does anyone go to them??? I'd be keen on speaking to some folk who own or have owned one of the models I'm considering.

And just for the record, there are images of some pretty sharp looking cars in here!

Fraser

This forum is relatively new, so things take time to get going.

The meetings/events, depending on location/weather, do most of the time have a healthy turn out.

The 318's are a good balance of fair performance to mpg, and if you can find a decent 318is, then more's the better.

Try before you buy, you may be well surprised.

AG

I'll put me 2p's worth in here! ;-)

Be afraid be very afraid, My M5 (e28) gets 24Mpg on a good run and I've seen it dip, significantly, into single figures when I'm being brutal with the loud pedal!

James.

I'm getting a bit concerned, to say the least...

Is that figure taken momentarily from the on-board mpg-indicator or based on an actual calculation from full to full tank? (hopefully the former).

Whilst recognising that an M5 will be much more thirsty than a regular 520, I'm hoping that by slightly reducing the number of miles I do, I'll be able to cover the cost of increased consumption over the 40+ I'm currently getting in the Audi.

Cheers again.

Fraser 

inner city commuting ,  school runs shopping trip  ( by the wife )  the obc  returns a figure of 30 mpg , on a motorway drive i get  42 mpg  at a speed of  85-90  mph ,,,,,,,,,,,   my ex 323 ( 2499cc )  i was lucky to get  20 mpg  and 30 mpg respectively

also Does shell  optimax  return better MPG  ?????????????????

for  a 1.8 (1899cc)    i am very  impressed with  its  mileage returns and performance for a 4  pot .

 It will do for NOW !!!!!     lol ,,,,,,,,,,,,,   

In theory, Optimax should return better MPG ... in practice, on my car, I saw a 2-4mpg gain when I switched. I was using Shell SUL before.

There's a cracking thread on another forum (specifically, check out 'mycroft' posts) - http://www.gtr.co.uk/forum/upload/showthread.php?threadid=2480&perpage=20&pagenumber=1">http://www.gtr.co.uk/forum/upload/showthread.php?threadid=2480&perpage=20&pagenumber=1 - about this kinda stuff. Worth a read if you've got some time.