If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#11
|
|||
|
|||
"GRL" > wrote in message >...
> Ever hear of a G35? The Bimmer is better, but it is not better by anywhere > near the price difference. No - I've not heard of it. At least, it doesn't appear to be sold anywhere but North America. I guess if a "G35" (or any other number of anodyne V6-powered Japanese/American products) were really world-class, they would be sold all over the world. |
Ads |
#12
|
|||
|
|||
Jimmy G wrote:
> I agree. The difference is great, however I still chose my 530 as I > couldn't get over that lousy gas mileage & insurance hit. > > I get 28mpg on a regular basis on the highway & at speeds over 75mph. > > I find the performance fine, but sure would opt for the sport package if I > had to do it over again. > > I get better than 24 mpg (US gallons) in my E34 540i. I'm sure the insurance is no different from the 6 cylinder because of the age (1994). Heck I don't even carry collision coverage on the car (liability only). -Fred W |
#13
|
|||
|
|||
"Jimmy G" > wrote in message news:jrRjd.37444$SW3.29466@fed1read01... > I've OWNED a couple of those Japanese V-6's. Perhaps they could "Take" my > '03 530 in a straight line, but the larger rice-burners can't hold a > candle to my BMW with RWD. FWD is the main reason I dumped my Maxima > (Lousy dealer was the next). I won't argue your point. None of them come close to bimmer quality handling. But the fact remains that most spur of the moment races are run over straight lines for short distances until one driver's point (or the other's) is made. R / John |
#14
|
|||
|
|||
"Fred W" > wrote in message ... > Jimmy G wrote: >> I agree. The difference is great, however I still chose my 530 as I >> couldn't get over that lousy gas mileage & insurance hit. >> >> I get 28mpg on a regular basis on the highway & at speeds over 75mph. >> >> I find the performance fine, but sure would opt for the sport package if >> I had to do it over again. > > I get better than 24 mpg (US gallons) in my E34 540i. I'm sure the > insurance is no different from the 6 cylinder because of the age (1994). > Heck I don't even carry collision coverage on the car (liability only). But not in town. I've never gotten as low as 24MPG with the six (don't drive in NYC though). When you start increasing the urban / suburban mileage on the V8, you start looking at mpg in the teens. R / John |
#15
|
|||
|
|||
"pete" > wrote in message ... > > Mine does 21.5 according to the computer and I have never done better > than 21.9 which is a begger because when I picked it up it was showing > 22.5;-) > pete Don't know about the 5 series, but the fuel consumption OBC readings in my E46 & Z4 are 6% to 9% high. Roadspeed seems to be spot on, though. Tom |
#16
|
|||
|
|||
In article >,
Tom Korth > wrote: > Roadspeed seems to be spot on, though. That's a first for BMW, then. ;-) -- *To be intoxicated is to feel sophisticated, but not be able to say it. Dave Plowman London SW To e-mail, change noise into sound. |
#17
|
|||
|
|||
> > Roadspeed seems to be spot on, though.
> > That's a first for BMW, then. ;-) Just passed a roadside radar display this morning. Speedo read 53, while the radar says 49 mph. Must be designed to reduce tickets?!? Matthew 00 528i Sport |
#18
|
|||
|
|||
In article >,
maxima1 > wrote: > > > Roadspeed seems to be spot on, though. > > > > That's a first for BMW, then. ;-) > Just passed a roadside radar display this morning. Speedo read 53, > while the radar says 49 mph. Must be designed to reduce tickets?!? I dunno. Since I know my speedo over-reads, I just make allowances when passing a speed camera. -- *Always borrow money from pessimists - they don't expect it back * Dave Plowman London SW To e-mail, change noise into sound. |
#19
|
|||
|
|||
"Tom Korth" > wrote in message ... > > "pete" > wrote in message > ... >> >> Mine does 21.5 according to the computer and I have never done better >> than 21.9 which is a begger because when I picked it up it was showing >> 22.5;-) >> pete > > Don't know about the 5 series, but the fuel consumption OBC readings in my > E46 & Z4 are 6% to 9% high. Roadspeed seems to be spot on, though. Two E39's that both had an optimistic speedometer (by BMW design as it turns out, to comply with German law) giving almost exactly 75mph @ 80mph indicated. The earlier car's OBC speed was dead on, the current one is identical to the instrument panel (i.e.: identical error). I felt I could trust the older car's odometer ... not so sure now although I guess I could try an extended calibration run against mile markers. The MPG reading is usually a bit optimistic (29.0 is really closer to 28.7 or 28.8 ... between 1 and 2 %). There's a way of tweaking that in the OBC service menu, but I'm reluctant to mess around there (although perhaps when under warrantee is the precise time to do so). R / John |
#20
|
|||
|
|||
In article >,
John Carrier > wrote: > Two E39's that both had an optimistic speedometer (by BMW design as it > turns out, to comply with German law) Don't know German law, but I doubt it. In the UK a speedo may be either accurate or over-read by up to 10% at 30 mph. It must not read low. This reg dates back to the days of mechanical devices where such a tolerance may have been necessary. Not so today. Of course many makers made use of this loophole - it makes the car appear faster to the gullible. But several had speedos which were as near as dammit accurate - even in the days of eddy current types. Jaguar, Rover and Rolls Royce are but a few. -- *How much deeper would the oceans be without sponges? * Dave Plowman London SW To e-mail, change noise into sound. |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|