Edmunds dealer partner, Bayway Leasing, is now offering transparent lease deals via these forums. Click here to see the latest vehicles!

BMW 335d 2009+

135678

Comments

  • shiposhipo Member Posts: 9,148
    Cool, thanks for the information. So basically my choices are buy a gasoline engined car WITH a stick shift or buy a diesel engined car WITH a dip stick. They both have a single stick, unfortunately I want a car with two sticks. :p

    Between the two I'll choose a car with a stick shift over a car with a dip stick. :sick:

    Best Regards,
    Shipo
  • jlbljlbl Member Posts: 1,333
    Shipo,

    You might as well buy a 330d, a 530d or a 123d if they will eventually come to the USA: every one has two sticks to the best of my knowledge. I can say than the BMW –30 diesel engines are indeed very, very good ones.

    (And the 118d (4 cyl.) I recently drove carring on one more person and full luggage for two weeks along a 2,000 trip up and down mountain roads was amazing—especially when added performance to fuel economy!)

    Regards,
    Jose
  • cdnpinheadcdnpinhead Member Posts: 5,504
    Jose,

    I certainly hope the smaller diesels with both a proper manual transmission and a dipstick come to the U.S., if we all live long enough. I recently had to give up on rear-wheel drive to get a car with both, but would prefer a small-displacement BMW diesel. I purposely picked my most recent car to have a high resale value in 2-4 years when, if they're ever going to, the more basic BMW diesels will have arrived.

    Sadly, I believe they may never make it here, especially if diesel fuel continues to be 35% more expensive than gasoline over here, a fairly recent development.

    I'm sure you'll continue to enjoy your 335d -- for me, that 118d would probably be a perfect car, or a 320d sport wagon. Time will tell if I'll ever get the opportunity.
    '08 Acura TSX, '17 Subaru Forester
  • fphjr01fphjr01 Member Posts: 3
    What is the torque limit for the 6-spd in the 3-series? The 335d has quite a torque bump over even the 335i. I think 335i + dinan chip still doesn't have the 425 ft-lbs or so that the 335d packs -- could be why no manual is offered. With the diesel, though, I think the manual is less helpful than gas where it is good to work the rpm's -- diesel has power pretty much everywhere in the engine band. Not to say that rowing your own gears isn't fun, just that its probably not as rewarding in a diesel.

    I have a manual now, and I like it -- except in NJ traffic, which is basically everyday.

    Also I was hoping to see a little better than 32mpg, even though it was obtained at 80+ avg mph. The problem is that even with better fuel economy, the price bump of diesel over premium gas is getting close to that 30% fuel economy benefit, making it a total wash. Too bad there was no 335d about 5 years ago.
  • jlbljlbl Member Posts: 1,333
    What is the torque limit for the 6-spd in the 3-series?
    330d, stick and three pedals, 369/1750–3000 lb-ft/rpm
    (335d, auto Steptronic, 428/1750–2250 lb-ft/rpm)

    With the diesel, though, I think the manual is less helpful than gas where it is good to work the rpm's -- diesel has power pretty much everywhere in the engine band. Not to say that rowing your own gears isn't fun, just that its probably not as rewarding in a diesel.
    Yeah, with such a torque there is enough 'reprise' under your foot in almost any circumstance. However, is good to feel the grip and power that the rightly rev engine gives you when cornering and accelerating.

    Also I was hoping to see a little better than 32mpg, even though it was obtained at 80+ avg mph.
    I hope I will be able to get better mileage further ahead. On the one hand, those 32 mpg were obtained with 3 persons and their luggage within the car within hard engine break-in period. On the other hand, real break-in is longer in diesel engines. With my former 530d I obtained 34.6 in the first year, 36.2 in the second year, and 37.9 in the third and four ones (my own all-road average).
    However, it is true that increasing diesel fuel price can wash away the mileage benefit. It is still not the case over here, but it may well be in the future if diesel fuel taxation increases as in the last year.

    Regards,
    Jose
  • mr42hhmr42hh Member Posts: 9
    So according to the BMW UK website, compared to the 328i, the 335d is 0.2 seconds quicker to 62 MPH and gets 2.2 MPG better economy. The 335d is also £2,000 more expensive than the 335i.

    The £2,000 is mostly the price of the automatic gearbox, which is standard on the 335d, but not on the models you compared it to.
    So you just compared automatic/manual acceleration and fuel economy numbers. Not a good idea.
  • jlbljlbl Member Posts: 1,333
    I posted this in other Edmunds thread today:

    I have just read (Spring issue of BMW Magazine over here) that BMW is launching Advanced Diesel with BluePerformance in the USA next Fall. Reportedly they will sell 335d sedans and X5's. On BMW Magazine on-line there is already some promotional video. Interested posters may have a look at:

    link title

    It is old news to you?

    Regards,
    Jose
  • gagricegagrice Member Posts: 31,450
    I'll be waiting for that X5 for sure. I like the handling of the X5 a lot. With the diesel it would be a great vehicle.
  • nopcbsnopcbs Member Posts: 43
    The mileage improvement of the 335d vs. the 328i is, if BMW's own numbers are right, simply inadequate given that; (1) diesel here is running up to 20% higher in cost and (2) you get to pay extra for the diesel engine. BMW is also not planning to import the manual transmission (so much for BMW being run by "car guys") with the diesel.

    I think the big problem is that they don't want to hurt their image in this country by importing diesel (and manual transmission) cars that would have less than sprightly performance. This is the same stupid (sorry, it's true) mindset that stops them from importing the 1-Series hatch (with a diesel or without) and instead they import the "answer to a question no one asked" coupe. Local BMW dealer says the 1-Series coupes are a tough sell when you look at price vs. 3-Series --- and customers do. Dumb.
  • jlbljlbl Member Posts: 1,333
    Let me to take part in your conversation. :)

    There is no 335d model (Sedan, Touring, Coupe) equipped with manual transmission in Europe.

    As for consume, my 335d Coupe is averaging 32 miles per gallon on highway/road and 21 miles per gallon in town along her first 5,000 miles. Not enough distance for the engine to have being properly broken-in, however.

    But I think it is more objective to compare the 335d performance and consume not to those of 328i but 335i models.

    Regards,
    Jose
  • cctdicctdi Member Posts: 82
    For those who love the diesel engines, please keep this forum alive and updated; I got quite a few diesel cars in this passed 5 years; you have to drive a diesel car to appreciate the car; for more than 4 months, I alternately drive Touareg V10 and 335xi, to my suprise, the EPAs on both cars are just about indentical, with much bigger tank in the V10, I don't go to the gas station as often as the 335xi. I am pretty sure the EPA for the 335d will be better than the number mentioned in this forum. I am looking forward to get my hands on the car with Bimmer's diesel engine on it.
  • jlbljlbl Member Posts: 1,333
    The 3.0-liter inline six cylinder twin-turbo diesel engine develops 265 hp and, get this, 425 lb.-ft. of torque

    The 3.0-liter inline six cylinder twin-turbo diesel engine actually (and nominally) develops 286 hp and 428 lb.-ft. of torque. Also nominally all this powers the 335d from 0-62 mph in 6.1 seconds.

    Regards,
    Jose
  • gagricegagrice Member Posts: 31,450
    Sounds like the perfect engine for the BMW X5. I am glad that BMW is sticking with the inline 6 diesel. I am just not a big fan of the V6 configuration. I drove the GL320 CDI and it had plenty of power and acceleration. It is rated 0-60 MPH in 7 seconds. That is a second faster than my gas guzzling V8 Sequoia. I will wait to see if the Mercedes V6 diesel holds up well. I think the earlier inline 6 was probably better.
  • nopcbsnopcbs Member Posts: 43
    For the reasons stated, a diesel would have to offer at least 20-30% better fuel economy just to break even vs. a gas engine. The 335d that BMW is going to import here is simply not going to cut it.

    I personally would love a diesel with a manual transmission that got truly superior mileage and adequate performance (adequate means 9 sec or better 0-60 mph), but BMW does not think that is anything US buyers want. BMW is simply nuts in this regard, in my opinion.
  • gagricegagrice Member Posts: 31,450
    The larger E320 CDI gets 37+ MPG out on the highway. I would think the 335D would do as well. I saw diesel today for $4.79 per gallon. Regular at my local Shell is $4.69 and Premium that the 335xi requires was $4.89. That makes the 335D are real bargain.

    I would rather have the smaller diesel that is not so performance oriented also. However the US public are still buying cars based on that 0-60 figure. So I am sure that is what BMW is trying to do. Satisfy the hot dogs. If they sell enough they may bring over some of the high mileage models for our little 3rd world market.
  • jlbljlbl Member Posts: 1,333
    In the last 15,500 miles of her 62,000 miles (the last year of her four years), my former 2004 530d averaged 38 miles per gallon on a highway/mountain-road mixture (2-3 passengers, heavy luggage most of the time and speeds up to 96 miles per hour on the highway). (0-62 miles is nominally 7.1 secs for 2004 530d bimmers.)

    In her last year as well, that 530d got 42 miles per gallon in quieter highway cruises at 81 miles•hour (cruise-averaged) carrying 2 people with luggage.

    The yearly averaged highway/mountain-road consume of that 530d improved by 8.6% from first to fourth year (35>38 miles per gallon). Thus I expect the yearly-averaged mileage of my present 335d might well improve up to 34.5 miles per gallon in four years.

    My conclusion is that a 530d (and other mono-turbo diesel engines with equal or less displacement) is an excellent consume/performance combination for everyday purposes even with the current diesel prices. Twin-turbo -35d engines are just biased towards performance.

    At the time they decided to introduce the 335d but not other diesels, BMW USA probably thought American buyers would prefer performer diesels instead of frugal ones. Yet the current diesel prices can turn that decision into a very bad one.

    Regards,
    Jose
  • nopcbsnopcbs Member Posts: 43
    Where I live, MI, regular is $4.05 and diesel is just under $5. Your numbers are much more favorable for diesel and I agree with you that with those numbers the MB diesel (which only adds ~$1,000 to ~2,000 to the cost of an E-class) is a sensible purchase.

    I like the MB diesel. It appears to be a better engine than what BMW is importing into the US, in terms of mileage...using the numbes that BMW has released.

    Again, BMW has chosen to import a diesel model that gives marginally better mileage and costs (likely) considerably more than a comparable gas engine, and uses more expensive (by a lot, in at least some places) fuel...into a fuel-cost crisis environment.

    Someone is asleep at the wheel in Germany.
  • nopcbsnopcbs Member Posts: 43
    All we have to go by for comparison with BMW gas engines of the 335d diessel to be sold here are BMW's own numbers and they show only marginally better mileage numbers.
  • gagricegagrice Member Posts: 31,450
    According to Carpages in the UK the 335D SE gets 52.3 highway which converts to 43.55 MPG US. I think our friend in Spain could get close to that if he was driving at a lower speed. By comparison the 335i SE gets 33.64 MPG US out on the Highway. That is about a 25% increase in mileage. The EPA only rates the 335i at 26 MPG highway. Until diesel production catches up with demand in the USA it will be a tough sell. I know when I bought my Passat TDI, diesel fuel was more than regular and I got the car under Invoice. When I sold it diesel was less than regular. So I made $3 grand. Typical American knee jerk reaction.
  • jlbljlbl Member Posts: 1,333
    driving a lower speed

    Yup, I'm far of being a hypermiler, but my wife is even farther. :blush:

    Regards,
    Jose
  • gagricegagrice Member Posts: 31,450
    Jose,
    Your time to you is worth more than the price of diesel. I can understand that. We have people here that would pass laws to make everyone drive a sleepy 55 MPH. It would be nice to have the option to open her up and see how well she runs at 100 MPH. That is just a trip to jail here in the land of the free :sick:
  • circlewcirclew Member Posts: 8,666
    Jose, correct as usual...now MB is fighting back. Perhaps BMW will be at their side.

    link title

    Regards,
    OW
  • gagricegagrice Member Posts: 31,450
    “For the customer, if they experience the advantages of diesel, they will stay with diesel anyway,” he insisted.

    “The technology is 20 to 30 percent more efficient than gasoline and has more torque at lower rpm and that’s what most buyers actually use.”

    Those are the two main reasons I like to drive a diesel vehicle. The price will not deter me until diesel is 30% higher than gas. At the worst it was about 15% higher here in San Diego. Right now it is about 7% more for diesel than Regular unleaded.
  • circlewcirclew Member Posts: 8,666
    I agree it's the way to go. Sooner or later the price will moderate.

    Here is the current averages for CA. 2% higher (vs. PU) is not that bad but you can see the difference from last year when it was 9.7% lower!!

    Regular Mid Premium Diesel
    Current Avg. $4.603 $4.900 $4.980 $5.125
    Yesterday Avg. $4.600 $4.897 $4.977 $5.127
    Month Ago Avg. $3.963 $4.218 $4.288 $4.805
    Year Ago Avg. $3.239 $3.448 $3.505 $3.161

    Regards,
    OW
  • jlbljlbl Member Posts: 1,333
    Regular Mid Premium Diesel
    Current Avg. $4.603 $4.900 $4.980 $5.125

    Right now diesel in Spain is 5.5% more expensive than 95 ON unleaded gasoline but 4.8% cheaper than 98 ON unleaded gasoline. Over here we keep buying diesel cars if the expected mileage is over 15,000 miles per year. Diesel engine durability and car resale value help to our addiction.

    I am very satisfied with my 335d coupe now I am getting used to her automatic transmission. The combination of power, torque and sport suspension is a joy. My driving pleasure makes up for the higher consume I'm paying (as compared to the former 530d one).

    Regards,
    Jose
  • nopcbsnopcbs Member Posts: 43
    Hope you are right, but do not count on it. Fact is that our refinery's in the US are designed to favor gasoline production over diesel and in Europe it is exactly the opposite. Converting to a diesel slant is not easy or inexpensive and not liklely to happen. More diesel cars coming on market plus continuing to grow demand by over-the-road trucks means supply is likely to remain tight. I wish it were otherwise as I am a fan of low-end torque with a manual gear box and am not into rev-happy gas engines.
  • circlewcirclew Member Posts: 8,666
    Jose, thanks for the info...always good to know pricing comparisons. Here in the US, the Diesel market will now be tarnished just at the start in 2009. I am sure there will be takers but the price premium on both sides of the buying equation is a big hill to climb. We will see.

    Regards,
    OW
  • blueguydotcomblueguydotcom Member Posts: 6,249
    Depends on the area. Around us, diesel is now only 20 cents more expensive than premium (which all BMWs require). So for 30% more efficiency we pay 4% more for the fuel? easy decision...
  • circlewcirclew Member Posts: 8,666
    Depends on the price premium of the car itself vs. the ICE version also. I assume we can not make that conclusion in the US until the Fall.

    Regards,
    OW
  • blueguydotcomblueguydotcom Member Posts: 6,249
    Seems to be 2k with low end cars like VWs. Strangely MB's are almost exactly the same price from V6 to diesel V6 - it might be $900 or so more for the diesel. Still the gulf is small.

    15k miles / 23 mg combined with 328i * 4.90 = 3200

    15k miles /28 mpg combine with 335d * 5.10 = 2732

    If it's 2k, then that's a 4 year break-even at today's prices in San Diego. Of course as prices go up, the gulf will grow. The ROI is much better with the VW TDI (compared to the 2.0T) than it seems the BMW 335d. VW owners report combined over 40 mpg. Hopefully BMW or the EPA are being pessimistic and the 335d returns somewhere closer to 30 mpgs.
  • blueguydotcomblueguydotcom Member Posts: 6,249
    Just found out the Jetta TDI sportwagen will start at:
    http://www.autoblog.com/2008/06/18/volkswagen-prices-jetta-tdi-from-21-990/

    $23600. Sadly the feature content varies from 2.5 to TDI to 2.0T so it's tough to tell exactly what you're getting for the money.

    The 2.0T Jetta Sportwagen manual starts at 26k.
    http://www.vw.com/jettasportwagen/pricelist/en/us/#/overview

    Yes, that's right, the TDI is cheaper than the 2.0T by several k.

    Regardless, here's the interesting part:

    It has since hired an independent, third-party certifier, AMCI, to ascertain what it refers to as the Jetta's "true fuel economy". AMCI came back with a better rating (surprise!) of 38 mpg city and 44 mpg highway.

    Wow, that's much better than the 30-40 the EPA lists.
  • nopcbsnopcbs Member Posts: 43
    BMW's do NOT require Premium. They run fine on regular, you just sacrifice a few hp under hard acceleration. My 330i enjoys regular all the time. No complaints - the wonders of knock sensors.

    Spo that's another 20 cents in the spread.
  • nopcbsnopcbs Member Posts: 43
    Let's see. VW hires a consultant and the consultant comes up with the answer VW wanted.

    Hmmm.

    Uh, just a coincidence, I'm sure.
  • blueguydotcomblueguydotcom Member Posts: 6,249
    BMW's do NOT require Premium. They run fine on regular, you just sacrifice a few hp under hard acceleration. My 330i enjoys regular all the time. No complaints - the wonders of knock sensors.

    Yes to save $3 on a fillup that normally costs $78 I'm going to surrender HP and damage MPGs. What are you really saving? If you knock 1 MPG off your average using regular is it worth it?

    500 mile drive - 22 mpg @ 4.70 = 106.81
    500 mile drive - 23 mpg @ 4.90 = 106.52

    Where's the savings? Right, you have less HP and you're retarding your performance engine. Why bother buying a BMW if you're gonna throttle its performance? Even if MPGs are only hurt 1/2 mpg, you're still only saving $2 over 500 miles and the engine lags.
  • gagricegagrice Member Posts: 31,450
    Let's see. VW hires a consultant and the consultant comes up with the answer VW wanted

    We spent several days on the EPA estimates over in Diesels in the News. If you want to see just how far from reality the EPA estimate on a diesel vehicle is. Go to the EPA site and take a look at the 2009 VW Jetta Sportwagon TDI automatic. The EPA gives it a 33 MPG combined. The one owner giving a REAL world mileage claims 46 MPG. That is about 30% lower than reality. That is pretty much the norm for EPA estimates on diesel cars. Our friend from Spain owns the 335D and driving at high speed gets way over the EPA estimated mileage. I think that AMCI is probably a much better source for mileage than the EPA.

    http://www.fueleconomy.gov/feg/findacar.htm
  • circlewcirclew Member Posts: 8,666
    Actually, Jose reports close to EPA in RWD.

    As for consume, my 335d Coupe is averaging 32 miles per gallon on highway/road and 21 miles per gallon in town along her first 5,000 miles. Not enough distance for the engine to have being properly broken-in, however.


    The 335d price will probably closer to $4K difference. Too early to tell difference but so far hybrids DO NOT return $$$$ vs. ICE counterparts.

    Looks the The VW D will change the landscape if you want efficiency.

    My take is 3 more years for real performance with combined efficiency for the price.

    Regards,
    OW
  • circlewcirclew Member Posts: 8,666
    Well, welll, well....

    Demand for high-octane fuel is at its lowest in nearly a quarter of a century and is now primarily consumed by a core group of luxury vehicle owners -- and even some of them are putting lower-grade fuel into their tanks to save money.

    link title

    Count me out. Premium only for me...I was wondering why I was passing everyone so effortlessly!!

    Regards,
    OW
  • nopcbsnopcbs Member Posts: 43
    Anecdotal mileage numbers are NOT standardized and not comparable. The value of the EPA numbers is that they allow comparison among different cars and so you see the value of different technologies. The EPA numbers for the 335d and 335 should give you a very good idea of the % difference between their real world mileages. Same goes for the numbers that Consumer Reports comes up with...standardized testing is the key. CR always comes up with city numbers way below EPA city because the test mode is different, but you still get comparable numbers.

    Again, non-standardized anecdotal is just not worth anything for comparison purposes.

    My 330i gets 19 city and 35 mpg highway, by the way. So the 335d numbers are not all that impressive to me, even on an anecdodate basis.

    The 2009 VW Jetta TDI Wagon is an interesting car, though. Will have to see what CR gets with it. If it really can manage upper 30's city...
  • gagricegagrice Member Posts: 31,450
    My 330i gets 19 city and 35 mpg highway, by the way.

    As you have said, anecdotal evidence is meaningless. The 2005 330i mileage according to the EPA is 18 city, 27 highway for a combined 21 MPG. If you have the manual transmission. The 5 speed auto is lower than that. That is 27% below what you are getting out on the highway. If the EPA is that far off on your model, where is the 335D going to be?
  • shiposhipo Member Posts: 9,148
    The problem is that the EPA numbers aren't even remotely consistent with what other "standardized" tests are showing. If you look at the various European agencies that publish this stuff, the Jetta TDI and the Mercedes CDI models fare much better compared to their gasoline powered siblings than they do according to the EPA numbers.

    WIth that in mind, your statment that said, "The EPA numbers for the 335d and 335 should give you a very good idea of the % difference between their real world mileages." is most likely inaccurate as the EPA test does in fact seem to be stacked against diesel engined vehicles.

    http://www.fuel-economy.co.uk/

    Best Regards,
    Shipo
  • blueguydotcomblueguydotcom Member Posts: 6,249
    It's mindblowing to me that someone would buy a BMW or an Infiniti or Lexus and then cheap out on the gas to save only $3 a tank. And as I have pointed out, possibly not even save if it impacts gas mileage by 1 mpg.

    Really will that extra $150 a year break the owners? If so, maybe they were reaching when they got the car that requires premium?
  • circlewcirclew Member Posts: 8,666
    Exactly! You can't save if you want performance by choosing lower grade fuel. In fact, give me 102 octane to make it even easier to get the best out of these cars.

    If you want to save, drive less. I always wonder on how you can buy a sport car and not drive the heck out of it every chance you get.

    If one wants a sport commuter, you simply need to add the costs into the equation up front.

    Regards,
    OW
  • shiposhipo Member Posts: 9,148
    The thing is, if you were able to find 102UL, it wouldn't do you any good as there's no way your car is optimized for fuel with that much detonation resistance. One of the weird things about engines is that as you deviate from the manufacturers fuel grade recommendations, your power and your mileage suffers, regardless of whether you're buying fuel that carries a higher AKI rating or a lower one.

    Best Regards,
    Shipo
  • circlewcirclew Member Posts: 8,666
    Shipo, of course you are correct. I overemphasized the need for proper fuel grade.

    94 is perfect.

    Regards,
    OW
  • nopcbsnopcbs Member Posts: 43
    Sigh. Unless the EPA test cycle is truly strange is some way that would favor a gas engine over a diesel, it does not really matter what the actual numbers are, it is the % difference that is really important and allows one to make choices. The EPA and EU cycle and CR cycle are not the same, you should not expect similar results, but the % differences should hold up.

    Might just go do the research and see.

    Again, I want the diesel numbers to be really good vs. gas, I just don't think you can wish something into being.
  • nopcbsnopcbs Member Posts: 43
    OK, here is what Consumers Report got for a 2008 MB E350 vs. an E320 BluTec

    E350: 14/29/25 mpg city/highway/150 mile standardized road trip

    E320 BluTec 24/35/31 " "

    The city number improvement is HUGE while the highway improvement is modest and would likely be wiped out (cost wise) by the 20% higher cost of diesel in some markets.

    EPA numbers:

    E350 17/24 city/highway

    E320 BluTec 23/32 " "

    The CR and EPA city numbers are 14/24 and 17/23, respectively, gas/diesel.

    The CR and EPA highway numbers are 29/35 and 24/32 gas/diesel, respectively.

    The EPA diesel numbers closely match (10%) CR real world testing and so I call them accurate. I see no reason to believe that the Jetta diesel case will be any different. The CR and EPA gas numbers differ significantly, however about 20% worse for CR in city cyle and 20% for CR in highway cycle.

    Conclusion, you can complain about anti-diesel bias in EPA mileage numbers, but the CR vs. CU comparison shows none. You could argue that EPA highway gas numbers are pessimistic while their city numbers are optimistic vs. CR. If anything, there is a big anti-gas bias for highway use. (I think CR's city cycle is a very tough one, tougher than the EPA's as the CR city numbers are very easy to beat by most folks.)

    The MD diesel does a great job in terms of city numbers for such a big car, but is less impressive at highway cruise.

    Sorry, folks, no evidence here of anti-diesel EPA bias...although I like a good conspiracy theory as much as the next man.
  • roadburnerroadburner Member Posts: 17,354
    Really will that extra $150 a year break the owners? If so, maybe they were reaching when they got the car that requires premium?

    My thoughts exactly.

    Mine: 1995 318ti Club Sport; 2020 C43; 2021 Sahara 4xe 1996 Speed Triple Challenge Cup Replica Wife's: 2015 X1 xDrive28i Son's: 2009 328i; 2018 330i xDrive

  • blueguydotcomblueguydotcom Member Posts: 6,249
    When it comes to car reviews, I wouldn't trust CR to tell me if a light is green or red. They're that worthless...and this goes for all magazines, publications and media that review cars. CR shows a startling bias toward the mundane and bland.
  • gagricegagrice Member Posts: 31,450
    CR shows a startling bias toward the mundane and bland.

    I agree 100%.

    For those that think the diesel cars are not worth the price, they should go ahead and join the throngs buying a Honda Civic. They get decent mileage and don't stand out in the crowd for the cops to prey on. That also leaves more diesel for those of us that know the difference. I would take Jose's experience with the 335D over the non tested EPA guess at mileage any day of the week...
  • Mr_ShiftrightMr_Shiftright Member Posts: 64,481
    Seems like both Jose's and EPA then are "anecdotal", in the strict definition of the term anecdotal, which merely means "not subjected to rigorous scientific testing".

    The reports I like are either:

    1. An auto magazines MPG results from a 25K-50K longterm test. This kind of testing for instance, revealed the TRUE MPG of the Toyota Prius, which is about 41-44 mpg.

    2. The combined annual MPG reports through owners' surveys, from at least a couple hundred sources.

    Without either of those, I don't think one can place a sure bet on what one will achieve in the new diesels.
Sign In or Register to comment.

Helpful Tools

Most popular vehicles