Entry Level Luxury Performance Sedans

benjaminh

cdnpinhead said:

benjaminh said:

But it misses a feature that my 1988 Oldsmobile 98 had—an under hood light lol!

Haven't you heard? Almost no one looks under the hood in the daylight these days, let alone at night. That's part of how BMW got away with eliminating the dipstick lo these many years ago.

Wait—you mean you can't manually check your oil level with new BMWs??

dino001

benjaminh said:

cdnpinhead said:

benjaminh said:

But it misses a feature that my 1988 Oldsmobile 98 had—an under hood light lol!

Haven't you heard? Almost no one looks under the hood in the daylight these days, let alone at night. That's part of how BMW got away with eliminating the dipstick lo these many years ago.

Wait—you mean you can't manually check your oil level with new BMWs??

That’s correct.

qbrozen

benjaminh said:

But it misses a feature that my 1988 Oldsmobile 98 had—an under hood light lol!

Haven't you heard? Almost no one looks under the hood in the daylight these days, let alone at night. That's part of how BMW got away with eliminating the dipstick lo these many years ago.

Wait—you mean you can't manually check your oil level with new BMWs??

Oh, you can manually check. You manually push some sequence of buttons and a level appears in the cluster that "estimates" how much oil you have. At least, that was the case in my 2008, so I'm assuming that is still the case.

roadburner

They've improved the sensors quite a bit on the Fxx and Gxx cars. I'd prefer to have a dipstick as a backup, but on the newer cars I'm comfortable with the sensor.

benjaminh

Before I had it, I thought "rain sensing wipers" fell in the realms of unneeded and even silly features. But yesterday driving my son c. 80 miles in traffic with variable rain conditions the darn thing worked pretty well. Not worrying about how fast to put the windshield wipers on made it slightly easier to carry on a conversation and worry about the other aspects of driving. Obviously not an essential feature, but it can actually be useful imho.

benjaminh

@ab348 : I think your ATS is a really sharp looking car. Are those seats as comfortable as they look? I assume it's a lot of fun to drive, esp. with that super powerful engine?

benjaminh

Alex on Autos likes the performance of the A-Spec TLX....

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YZfhE1BA7tQ

ab348

It is an absolute gas to drive. Much faster than any car I've ever owned so I need to watch myself. The handling is something else too, as it has far more capability in that department than I am used to using.

The seats are OK. The lumbar support is adjustable (via an inflatable bladder) and the side bolsters also can move in and out. Truthfully I don't notice much difference regardless. There is also an adjustable thigh support (the front part of the cushion is separate and can move in and out) but again I notice little difference. Maybe a smaller person would appreciate these things more than I do. I am probably not the best judge of seats. To me the most comfortable seats of any car I ever had were in my '09 Lacrosse, which were the standard 8-way power adjustable leather thrones. They were cushy and soft with very pliable leather so you sunk into them and with the adjustment set correctly they were just about perfect. I remember being disappointed when I traded it on the 2011 Regal and had lived with it for a while at how hard those seats were and how stiff the leather seemed in comparison.

henryn

I have a good friend who owns a late model Cadillac SRX, I disremember the year (2016? 2017? Whatever.)

The seats in that thing feel to me like they forgot to put in any padding. Vaguely reminiscent of a wooden church pew.

andres3

stickguy said:

He certainly seems To be quite picky. And if you want a 200k Porsche, buy one!

I think that KBB review is "fair." The TLX just isn't a real sports sedan. If you bought one thinking you'll go canyon carving with your BMW and Audi friends, you may be disappointed. If you got one thinking you got the better Accord, chances are you'll be happy.

The funny thing is there are a lot of cars that can keep up on the Angeles Crest Highway (ACH). You don't have to spend $200K on a Porsche to keep up. A lot of people in LA do put a few mods on their cars though.

Canyon carving, like any task, requires having the right tool for the job. That being said, most of the cars carving canyons on the weekend are not getting anywhere near the fuel economy of the TLX @benjaminh is getting.

benjaminh

Alex on Autos, on the other hand, thinks the TLX A-Spec awd is close in performance to an uplevel BMW or MB—and for a lot less.

The version I got, the TLX 2.4, is close to being competitive with a base model 320i or A4.

In any case, my latest hand calculated mpg numbers for my TLX 2.4 are: 401 miles/11.8 gallons= 33.98 mpg. This time my gas station calculation was almost the same as the car's trip computer, which said I'd gotten 34.1 mpg over the same 401 miles. This was for about 80% highway.

I've already put c.1300 miles on the car. At the rate I'm going I might need to need to start driving my wife's CR-V to stay within my lease mileage.

stickguy

or buy it out at the end!

benjaminh

My TLX already had almost 300 miles when I bought it. It had actually been traded with a dealer in TN at some point (I could tell from the window sticker). 300 miles is obviously small potatoes when compared with 36,000, but with a lease do they give you that credit so your actually mileage limit is 36,300 at the end of three years?

Anyway, while I get ready for yet another c. 160 mile round trip from Louisville to Lexington with the new TLX, here are a few more random pix. The first is the light that my son discovered that's under the center armrest. Somewhat useful when digging around in there. One of the other pix is of the new for 2018 LED turn signal lights on the TLX.

kyfdx

@benjaminh Yes, you get a full 36K for your own use.

andres3

benjaminh said:

Alex on Autos, on the other hand, thinks the TLX A-Spec awd is close in performance to an uplevel BMW or MB—and for a lot less.

The version I got, the TLX 2.4, is close to being competitive with a base model 320i or A4.

In any case, my latest hand calculated mpg numbers for my TLX 2.4 are: 401 miles/11.8 gallons= 33.98 mpg. This time my gas station calculation was almost the same as the car's trip computer, which said I'd gotten 34.1 mpg over the same 401 miles. This was for about 80% highway.

I've already put c.1300 miles on the car. At the rate I'm going I might need to need to start driving my wife's CR-V to stay within my lease mileage.

I think I forgot to mention, why the hell is Acura putting GREEN X tires on a SH-AWD model (referring to KBB's review of a test model with those tires!?)?

That's an inappropriate tire for an A-spec model.

Changing out the tire to something like a Michelin Pilot Super Sport 4S would probably make the car twice as fun in the canyons, literally. I'm not exaggerating.

I'm sure the tires were the source of criticism in that review. You never get a 2nd chance to make a first impression.

flightnurse

I have enjoyed listening to people takes on the Accord v TLX.. Interesting reading.

The itch to purchase another car has hit us, and we scratched. We wanted to do another Euro Delivery but the dealer was hot to make a deal, we got a new 2018 BMW X2 FWD, M sport, all Bells, and toys. My 330i had been in the shop for 2 weeks (transmission problems) and was given an X2 as a loaner. The days of 1% of MSRP as your lease price is long gone at BMW, but we are happy with what we got. I do have to say the X2 is a lot of fun to drive.

My 330i still has transmission issues, BMW has done all the diagnostic testing and all data had been sent to Germany as well as ZF, and the word is, nothing is wrong, however, there is. I've been waiting for the field service rep to make an appearance at the dealer so we can talk. The dealer has 1 more week and then I get a lawyer involved. I've been having problems going on 6 months. The car is driveable, the issue is only startup. I have the SA as well as the Service Manager on tape saying there is something wrong with my car. I think it's the torque converter.

Car and Driver have started 2 new long test/reviews this month.

A Stinger GT https://www.caranddriver.com/reviews/2018-kia-stinger-long-term-road-test-introduction-review?src=nl&mag=cdb&list=nl_dvr_news&date=071818

A Alfa Giulia Quadrifoglio https://www.caranddriver.com/reviews/2018-alfa-romeo-giulia-quadrifoglio-long-term-road-test-introduction-review?src=nl&mag=cdb&list=nl_dvr_news&date=071818

stickguy

sorry to hear about your tranny issue. Seems though that is a really rare occurence on a BMW, with the ZF? I thought those were pretty bulletproof. But, can always get a lemon anything. The X2, will that replace the 330, or your other car (a 4 series?)

interesting readying on those tests. The Kia (RWD) is withing a 10th and 1 MPH of the Alfa in the quarter. Impressive. Less impressive is both cars having serious failure issues so early, and not surviving the test regimen. I wonder if they just went too far hopping up these sedans? Or some sheep in wolves clothing going on (fine for around town, and normal spirited driving, but just not really able to cope with wringing out all the performance).

qbrozen

flightnurse said:

I have enjoyed listening to people takes on the Accord v TLX.. Interesting reading.

The itch to purchase another car has hit us, and we scratched. We wanted to do another Euro Delivery but the dealer was hot to make a deal, we got a new 2018 BMW X2 FWD, M sport, all Bells, and toys. My 330i had been in the shop for 2 weeks (transmission problems) and was given an X2 as a loaner. The days of 1% of MSRP as your lease price is long gone at BMW, but we are happy with what we got. I do have to say the X2 is a lot of fun to drive.

My 330i still has transmission issues, BMW has done all the diagnostic testing and all data had been sent to Germany as well as ZF, and the word is, nothing is wrong, however, there is. I've been waiting for the field service rep to make an appearance at the dealer so we can talk. The dealer has 1 more week and then I get a lawyer involved. I've been having problems going on 6 months. The car is driveable, the issue is only startup. I have the SA as well as the Service Manager on tape saying there is something wrong with my car. I think it's the torque converter.

Car and Driver have started 2 new long test/reviews this month.

A Stinger GT https://www.caranddriver.com/reviews/2018-kia-stinger-long-term-road-test-introduction-review?src=nl&mag=cdb&list=nl_dvr_news&date=071818

A Alfa Giulia Quadrifoglio https://www.caranddriver.com/reviews/2018-alfa-romeo-giulia-quadrifoglio-long-term-road-test-introduction-review?src=nl&mag=cdb&list=nl_dvr_news&date=071818

So what happens at startup?

If you do have any interest in another BMW, lease a service loaner. Typically below the 1% threshold.

benjaminh

flightnurse said:

....The days of 1% of MSRP as your lease price is long gone at BMW....

Somehow I hadn't heard of this before—but I'm glad I seemingly got it on the TLX.

qbrozen

stickguy said:

sorry to hear about your tranny issue. Seems though that is a really rare occurence on a BMW, with the ZF? I thought those were pretty bulletproof. But, can always get a lemon anything. The X2, will that replace the 330, or your other car (a 4 series?)

interesting readying on those tests. The Kia (RWD) is withing a 10th and 1 MPH of the Alfa in the quarter. Impressive. Less impressive is both cars having serious failure issues so early, and not surviving the test regimen. I wonder if they just went too far hopping up these sedans? Or some sheep in wolves clothing going on (fine for around town, and normal spirited driving, but just not really able to cope with wringing out all the performance).

Not sure what 1/4 mile times you are looking at, but they are far from close. Of course, the Alfa costs a helluva lot more.

stickguy

Alfa: 11.8 seconds at 122 mph through the quarter-mile

Kia: a ludicrous 12.9-second quarter-mile at 111 mph

OK, it was 11 MPH not 1. Oops. But, on a cost per eyeball peel basis, Kia is still a hell of a value!

and look at that for a minute, and think about the automotive world we live in. A freaking Kia, that most people could afford (I think a $41K sticker for that model), can pull off a quarter mile in the 12s at over 110 MPH!

the difference, at least to me, is probably meaningless since there is no way I would ever come close to using all the acceleration the Kia has.

flightnurse

qbrozen said:

So what happens at startup?

If you do have any interest in another BMW, lease a service loaner. Typically below the 1% threshold.

After the car sits for 12 hours And on start up the car lurches forward like it's not completely in natural. It doesn't make any noises like gears grinding, it has gotten worse in the 15 months I've had the car. Part of me says, screw it, I have less than 2 yrs left on the lease, the other half says, BMW knows there is a problem but they don't want to fix it.

My 330i was a service loaner, and yes, I got it less than 1% of MSRP.

flightnurse

stickguy said:

sorry to hear about your tranny issue. Seems though that is a really rare occurence on a BMW, with the ZF? I thought those were pretty bulletproof. But, can always get a lemon anything. The X2, will that replace the 330, or your other car (a 4 series?)

I haven't read anyone issues like it mine with the ZF either on Bimmerfest or Bimmerpost. The ZF is a pretty build proof unit. The X2 will replace Ricks 328GT. He really liked the one I had as a loaner.

As a replacement for the 330i the new Genesis G70 has caught my eye... https://www.caranddriver.com/reviews/2019-genesis-g70-first-drive-review?src=nl&mag=cdb&list=nl_dvr_news&date=071618

qbrozen

stickguy said:

Alfa: 11.8 seconds at 122 mph through the quarter-mile

Kia: a ludicrous 12.9-second quarter-mile at 111 mph

OK, it was 11 MPH not 1. Oops. But, on a cost per eyeball peel basis, Kia is still a hell of a value!

and look at that for a minute, and think about the automotive world we live in. A freaking Kia, that most people could afford (I think a $41K sticker for that model), can pull off a quarter mile in the 12s at over 110 MPH!

the difference, at least to me, is probably meaningless since there is no way I would ever come close to using all the acceleration the Kia has.

also 1.1 secs, not a tenth.
I still say the Kia could be a good value. I don't seem to see a great deal of agreement on that, though.

flightnurse

benjaminh said:

Somehow I hadn't heard of this before—but I'm glad I seemingly got it on the TLX.

Ben in the BMW world, it was not unheard of getting a new BMW lease for 1% of MSRP, that was a good indicator that you got a good deal. When I was looking to replace my 320i, I was offered V6 TLXs for under 1%, reason, they weren't selling... Would you share your deal you got on your TLX?

flightnurse

stickguy said:

Alfa: 11.8 seconds at 122 mph through the quarter-mile

Kia: a ludicrous 12.9-second quarter-mile at 111 mph

OK, it was 11 MPH not 1. Oops. But, on a cost per eyeball peel basis, Kia is still a hell of a value!

and look at that for a minute, and think about the automotive world we live in. A freaking Kia, that most people could afford (I think a $41K sticker for that model), can pull off a quarter mile in the 12s at over 110 MPH!

the difference, at least to me, is probably meaningless since there is no way I would ever come close to using all the acceleration the Kia has.

You know the 1/4 miles times and trap speed means nothing today. Most cars are going to be fast, fast enough to get you in trouble. My 330i will run the 1/4 in 13 sec's and about 100. 0-60 times in the high 5's (stock) drop a stage 1 onto (like I did) 0-60 in the mid 5 to low 5, and 1/4 times and speed goes up. We have a neighbor who has his new M5 w/comp package on order and all he talks about is how fast it goes. Some of us are betting that an accident will happen shortly after he gets it.

stickguy

given the road quality and congestion around here, and the level of police interest, it quickly becomes all about bragging rights. Not anything you can actually use (or in any realistic way need).

flightnurse

stickguy said:

given the road quality and congestion around here, and the level of police interest, it quickly becomes all about bragging rights. Not anything you can actually use (or in any realistic way need).

YUP...

henryn

I am forced to agree. A 12 second quarter mile is an impressive thing, but I doubt I will ever again do that. Or at least it would be a very rare occurrence. But I do like acceleration.

When I'm coming up the freeway on ramp, spot a hole in the traffic, punch it, and the car lunges forward, I mean really jumps -- yeah, I like that. Yes, I will pay extra for that.

But the difference in 1/4 mile times between the Kia and the Alfa -- not going to matter in my world. Both of them will jump just fine, more than enough for me.

A few years back, when I was seriously considering a used Genesis, I did several test drives. Both 6 cylinder models and V8's. The guy who wrote the review for Edmunds said you didn't need the V8, it would only be for bragging rights. A conclusion which I vehemently disagreed with.

I alternate two daily drivers, a Town and Country and an F150 with an Ecoboost. The Town and County is fast enough, it will get out of it's own way. But you have to punch it, wait for the downshift, wait for the engine to spool up, and THEN it will move pretty good. The Ecoboost, lightly touch the throttle and you are moving!

qbrozen

My problem with the T&C is traction. One front tire powered by a 3.6 pulling 4800 lbs behind it results in nothing but wheelspin if you try to get going too quick.

As for fast cars, I agree it is mostly pointless. If I, however, can get back to track days, that would be a different story. I am doubtful that would ever happen again though.

benjaminh

flightnurse said:

benjaminh said:

Somehow I hadn't heard of this before—but I'm glad I seemingly got it on the TLX.

Ben in the BMW world, it was not unheard of getting a new BMW lease for 1% of MSRP, that was a good indicator that you got a good deal. When I was looking to replace my 320i, I was offered V6 TLXs for under 1%, reason, they weren't selling... Would you share your deal you got on your TLX?

It's complicated because of my trade-in, but if somehow that could be taken out I'd be at less than 1% of msrp for my monthly payment.

Michaell

benjaminh said:

Somehow I hadn't heard of this before—but I'm glad I seemingly got it on the TLX.

Ben in the BMW world, it was not unheard of getting a new BMW lease for 1% of MSRP, that was a good indicator that you got a good deal. When I was looking to replace my 320i, I was offered V6 TLXs for under 1%, reason, they weren't selling... Would you share your deal you got on your TLX?

It's complicated because of my trade-in, but if somehow that could be taken out I'd be at less than 1% of msrp for my monthly payment.

Figure roughly $30/mo for every $1000 of trade equity. 

roadburner

A 12.9 quarter mile is currently acceptable for me- until I finally install the M Performance locking differential- at that point I will probably bump the power up a bit, for more fun at HPDEs, the local drag strip, and the occasional stop light grand prix...
I'm still leaning towards an M2 Competition or CPO M4 for my next car.

benjaminh

My new gas station mpg calculation for the 2018 TLX 2.4 was as follows: 345 miles/10.18 gallons=33.9 mpg. My car's trip computer says 34.1 mpg for those same miles, which is obviously very close. This was for about 70% highway miles. This is is beginning to seem like slightly higher mpg than for my 2016 Accord with the CVT—a car that weighs c.200 lbs less. Puzzled by this. Could it be the 8-speed dual clutch transmission? Is a DCT sometimes more efficient than a CVT?

My 2016 Accord CVT was rated 36 on the highway—and that's about what I got. Sometimes I got a 1-2 mpg more, sometimes 1-2 mpg less, and sometimes right on.

The 2018 Acura TLX 8-DCT is rated 33 on the highway—and yet I seem to be getting 36-39 mpg on the highway. I regularly seem to be getting 3-5 mpg higher than the EPA rating, which has never happened for me before in decades of checking my mpg on my cars. And this is in the hot summer with the AC on. During the Fall months, when I won't be using the AC much, seems like I'll probably do even better?

Overall, I like my new TLX a lot. Really a lot. In almost every way it's better than my 2016 Accord—which itself was the best car I'd ever owned up until I got the TLX. Cars, unlike some things in life, really can get better than in the old days.

The suspension is one of the things that impresses me about the TLX. It's controlled and yet comfortable, seemingly getting a nearly perfect mix of sporty and luxurious, but with a slight emphasis on the former.

And the ELS stereo is excellent. I'm ashamed to say that I think of reasons just to drive my car so that I can listen to the stereo and enjoy the ride....

cdnpinhead

It's fun to watch people in love.

andres3

stickguy said:

given the road quality and congestion around here, and the level of police interest, it quickly becomes all about bragging rights. Not anything you can actually use (or in any realistic way need).

No mountain or canyon roads where you live? Or nearby?

andres3

benjaminh said:

My new gas station mpg calculation for the 2018 TLX 2.4 was as follows: 345 miles/10.18 gallons=33.9 mpg. My car's trip computer says 34.1 mpg for those same miles, which is obviously very close. This was for about 70% highway miles. This is is beginning to seem like slightly higher mpg than for my 2016 Accord with the CVT—a car that weighs c.200 lbs less. Puzzled by this. Could it be the 8-speed dual clutch transmission? Is a DCT sometimes more efficient than a CVT?

My 2016 Accord CVT was rated 36 on the highway—and that's about what I got. Sometimes I got a 1-2 mpg more, sometimes 1-2 mpg less, and sometimes right on.

The 2018 Acura TLX 8-DCT is rated 33 on the highway—and yet I seem to be getting 36-39 mpg on the highway. I regularly seem to be getting 3-5 mpg higher than the EPA rating, which has never happened for me before in decades of checking my mpg on my cars. And this is in the hot summer with the AC on. During the Fall months, when I won't be using the AC much, seems like I'll probably do even better?

Overall, I like my new TLX a lot. Really a lot. In almost every way it's better than my 2016 Accord—which itself was the best car I'd ever owned up until I got the TLX. Cars, unlike some things in life, really can get better than in the old days.

The suspension is one of the things that impresses me about the TLX. It's controlled and yet comfortable, seemingly getting a nearly perfect mix of sporty and luxurious, but with a slight emphasis on the former.

And the ELS stereo is excellent. I'm ashamed to say that I think of reasons just to drive my car so that I can listen to the stereo and enjoy the ride....

I would say for sure a DCT is more efficient than a lowly CVT, but a DCT with a torque converter sounds less efficient, but it seems Acura found a good middle ground. There's a reason many people won't consider a car with a CVT, even if Honda does it better than just about anyone.

flightnurse

benjaminh said:

My new gas station mpg calculation for the 2018 TLX 2.4 was as follows: 345 miles/10.18 gallons=33.9 mpg. My car's trip computer says 34.1 mpg for those same miles, which is obviously very close. This was for about 70% highway miles. This is is beginning to seem like slightly higher mpg than for my 2016 Accord with the CVT—a car that weighs c.200 lbs less. Puzzled by this. Could it be the 8-speed dual clutch transmission? Is a DCT sometimes more efficient than a CVT?

My 2016 Accord CVT was rated 36 on the highway—and that's about what I got. Sometimes I got a 1-2 mpg more, sometimes 1-2 mpg less, and sometimes right on.

The 2018 Acura TLX 8-DCT is rated 33 on the highway—and yet I seem to be getting 36-39 mpg on the highway. I regularly seem to be getting 3-5 mpg higher than the EPA rating, which has never happened for me before in decades of checking my mpg on my cars. And this is in the hot summer with the AC on. During the Fall months, when I won't be using the AC much, seems like I'll probably do even better?

Overall, I like my new TLX a lot. Really a lot. In almost every way it's better than my 2016 Accord—which itself was the best car I'd ever owned up until I got the TLX. Cars, unlike some things in life, really can get better than in the old days.

The suspension is one of the things that impresses me about the TLX. It's controlled and yet comfortable, seemingly getting a nearly perfect mix of sporty and luxurious, but with a slight emphasis on the former.

And the ELS stereo is excellent. I'm ashamed to say that I think of reasons just to drive my car so that I can listen to the stereo and enjoy the ride....

In the last 7 months my 330i has averaged 28.4, lets not forget that the last 3 months I've had the AC running all the time, the best highway was on a trip to Austin TX, 37 MPG, I really don't think this is bad for a car that can run mid-to low 5 0-60.

benjaminh

According to this article....

"DCTs are 3–5% more fuel-efficient than manual transmissions, which in turn are 5–10% more efficient than automatic transmissions."

https://www.mathworks.com/company/newsletters/articles/optimizing-performance-and-fuel-economy-of-a-dual-clutch-transmission-powertrain-with-model-based-design.html

This seems to be the reason that a TLX DCT can sometimes be more fuel efficient than an Accord CVT.

andres3

flightnurse said:

benjaminh said:

My new gas station mpg calculation for the 2018 TLX 2.4 was as follows: 345 miles/10.18 gallons=33.9 mpg. My car's trip computer says 34.1 mpg for those same miles, which is obviously very close. This was for about 70% highway miles. This is is beginning to seem like slightly higher mpg than for my 2016 Accord with the CVT—a car that weighs c.200 lbs less. Puzzled by this. Could it be the 8-speed dual clutch transmission? Is a DCT sometimes more efficient than a CVT?

My 2016 Accord CVT was rated 36 on the highway—and that's about what I got. Sometimes I got a 1-2 mpg more, sometimes 1-2 mpg less, and sometimes right on.

The 2018 Acura TLX 8-DCT is rated 33 on the highway—and yet I seem to be getting 36-39 mpg on the highway. I regularly seem to be getting 3-5 mpg higher than the EPA rating, which has never happened for me before in decades of checking my mpg on my cars. And this is in the hot summer with the AC on. During the Fall months, when I won't be using the AC much, seems like I'll probably do even better?

Overall, I like my new TLX a lot. Really a lot. In almost every way it's better than my 2016 Accord—which itself was the best car I'd ever owned up until I got the TLX. Cars, unlike some things in life, really can get better than in the old days.

The suspension is one of the things that impresses me about the TLX. It's controlled and yet comfortable, seemingly getting a nearly perfect mix of sporty and luxurious, but with a slight emphasis on the former.

And the ELS stereo is excellent. I'm ashamed to say that I think of reasons just to drive my car so that I can listen to the stereo and enjoy the ride....

In the last 7 months my 330i has averaged 28.4, lets not forget that the last 3 months I've had the AC running all the time, the best highway was on a trip to Austin TX, 37 MPG, I really don't think this is bad for a car that can run mid-to low 5 0-60.

That's better than I can do in the relatively light weight 7-speed Optima with the 1.6T engine. 28.4 would be an improvement. I'm gonna peg my lifetime average at 27 mpg.

dino001

andres3 said:

In the last 7 months my 330i has averaged 28.4, lets not forget that the last 3 months I've had the AC running all the time, the best highway was on a trip to Austin TX, 37 MPG, I really don't think this is bad for a car that can run mid-to low 5 0-60.

That's better than I can do in the relatively light weight 7-speed Optima with the 1.6T engine. 28.4 would be an improvement. I'm gonna peg my lifetime average at 27 mpg.

I get 30 mpg on my commute quite consistenly, as long as I keep light on the pedal and the traffic is average. My best highway was nearly 40, going downhill from Atlanta to Tampa, but it drops quickly on any disturbance, or uphill. It’s more like 35 on a typical trip.

flightnurse

dino001 said:

I get 30 mpg on my commute quite consistenly, as long as I keep light on the pedal and the traffic is average. My best highway was nearly 40, going downhill from Atlanta to Tampa, but it drops quickly on any disturbance, or uphill. It’s more like 35 on a typical trip.

My 320i would average 38 on the highway... The 4 cyl and ZF is a great match for Performance and MPG BTW my MPG was in Comfort mode

roadburner

dino001 said:

andres3 said:

In the last 7 months my 330i has averaged 28.4, lets not forget that the last 3 months I've had the AC running all the time, the best highway was on a trip to Austin TX, 37 MPG, I really don't think this is bad for a car that can run mid-to low 5 0-60.

That's better than I can do in the relatively light weight 7-speed Optima with the 1.6T engine. 28.4 would be an improvement. I'm gonna peg my lifetime average at 27 mpg.

I get 30 mpg on my commute quite consistenly, as long as I keep light on the pedal and the traffic is average. My best highway was nearly 40, going downhill from Atlanta to Tampa, but it drops quickly on any disturbance, or uphill. It’s more like 35 on a typical trip.



My M235i averages 26-27 mpg in suburban driving and a tick over 31 mpg on the highway if I keep it under 80. Considering the performance I'm more than happy with the fuel economy.

Mr_Shiftright

I don't what it is with some cars. My Mini gets 26 mpg, no matter what I do, or how I drive. 26 +/- 1.

benjaminh

Mr_Shiftright said:

I don't what it is with some cars. My Mini gets 26 mpg, no matter what I do, or how I drive. 26 +/- 1.

You need a new car.

Mr_Shiftright

Don't remind me. As usual, I'm hunting unicorns.

benjaminh

Mpg on a trip from Louisville to Cincinnati and back in the TLX (c. 200 miles for the round trip). It was raining off and on both ways, sometimes heavily—and so AC, headlights, and wipers. Speed was c.65-75 mph.

And some bonus pix from the Cincinnati Museum of Art, where admission is always free! It's one of the best art museums in this part of the country.

http://www.cincinnatiartmuseum.org/

henryn

benjaminh said:

Mpg on a trip from Louisville to Cincinnati and back in the TLX (c. 200 miles for the round trip). It was raining off and on both ways, sometimes heavily—and so AC, headlights, and wipers. Speed was c.65-75 mph.

After owning that VW Passat TDI, no one will ever again impress me with MPG numbers. Ain't gonna happen, sorry.

dino001

henryn said:

After owning that VW Passat TDI, no one will ever again impress me with MPG numbers. Ain't gonna happen, sorry.

It’s cool, as long as you don’t mind 40 times limit NOx emissions.

flightnurse

benjaminh said:

Mpg on a trip from Louisville to Cincinnati and back in the TLX (c. 200 miles for the round trip). It was raining off and on both ways, sometimes heavily—and so AC, headlights, and wipers. Speed was c.65-75 mph.

And some bonus pix from the Cincinnati Museum of Art, where admission is always free! It's one of the best art museums in this part of the country.

http://www.cincinnatiartmuseum.org/

I truly believe that for once, the EPA is underrating cars...

Beautiful Roseville, I have a couple of pieces that hard to find today.