I have converted from a '99 523iA to a '04 525iA and I am a bit disappointed by the increased fuel consumption. My drive "habits" are the same as before: I drive Monday to Friday 13 km each way to and from work. Typical speed is between 60 and 80 km/h (40 to 50 miles/h). In addition I have small trips every day or every second day 3-5 km. More small trips in the weekends.

On my 523iA I got typically 10.5 liters per 100 km (22.4 US mpg) with this kind of driving. This was what my computer told me - I never checked real consumption on the E39. On the E60 525iA the computer tells me typically 12.0 liters per 100 km (19.6 US mpg). And actually when I checked last week the real consumption was even higher (12.4 l/100km = 19.0 mpg). That's high, isn't it? :thumbsdown:

I actually thought the engines in E60 was more fuel economic than the old engines (though I read that). So, is the increased consumption normal or not? Can the reason be the extra horse power (from 170 to 192)? More likely maybe the difference in the tranmission (E39: 2. gear stopped at 120 km/h, E60: 2. gear stops at 90 km/h). This means more rpm (and thus power) where I need it (between 60 and 80 km/h), which I like , but the fuel consumption is a bit worrying

Comments anyone?

 

I must say that I am very impressed with the first 2000 miles on my machine with regards to fuel. It will only get better with time.

My recent drive from North Carolina to Hell, er, I mean, New Jersey was right at 29 MPG with heavy traffic in DC.

 

I'm getting about the same mileage in my E60 530i as my E39 540i. Must be that DC traffic

My first long trip will be this weekend. I'll be happy if I get 29mpg. I think my driving style with this engine is killing the mileage in the I6.

 

 

I noticed same thing whith my car but after the latest updated it has improved realy good

 

You will see about that - maybe better. I keep a spreadsheet - I have every fillup on there since I bought the car. My actual mileage is always between 25mpg and 27mpg. That's a mix of highway and bumper to bumper DC creep.

I have never done a full tank on the highway, but it should be in the 30 range - maybe better.

 

I do surface roads from home to Reston on 29, West Ox/Reston Pkwy (13 miles) etc. and I average 15.5-16 mpg.

On straight freeway drives on weekends, I have often averaged 25 mpg.

 

I too was very disappointed by poor Mpg compared to advertised figures. I thought there were laws against
mis-representation!. The only was to get anywhere near book mpg is to drive so carefully you will be passed by your grandmother in a Nissan Micra. My average Mpg ( combined ) is the same as urban figure in book. But I do equal town & country so the combined figure is what I would expect.
I'm looking for new car now, various brands. I learnt by my mistake & now I reset fuel computer before test to get real life Mpg. Try it & ask salesman to explain the difference, quite amusing!. A couple have been good, close to book Mpg. Worst was BMW 320D E90, just over 30 Mpg when I had it for a few days as loaner.

 

Hi Bruggern,

You did upgrade from a E39 with the M52B25 engine
(170 hp at 5500 rpm and 245Nm at 3500 rpm)
to a E60 with the M54B25 engine
(192/6000 and 245/3500).

The E60 is a about 70 kg lighter and has a six speed
trans, but I have noticed about the same.

It has to do with the Euro pollution measures demands.
In this case from Euro3 to Euro4.

Some may think, is it wise to risen to consuption for
lesser pollution?
In the short run not but in the longer run yes!

Some of us even think about the future...

Some day even the US people must save oil, but who
wants to give up hp!?

The new 3 litre N54B35 twin-turbo makes the Euro5 standards,
but only with 306 hp and 400 Nm from 1300 rpm and with a
9,5 l/100km consumption.

Br,
Ricracing

 

My car has a bad gas mileage too, 19+L/100km. I hardly do any freeway driving, that's probbaly why.