3.0d or 3.0i

Sukh

Sukh

Sukh

Soldato
Joined
29 Jan 2007
Posts
3,596
Location
Chelsea
Now this is a hypothetical question, don't want to hear from those who think Diesel is just wrong, start a different thread.

If you drive a car like you stole it all day long, I am of the understanding that the 3.0 petrol will return high teens in mpg? What would a diesel car return, as I thought part of the "benefits" of diesel is that if you drive them hard you still get good returns.

To put in perspective the car is driven 18,000 miles per year, about 1/3 motorway and 2/3 around town, but driven by a mad man almost all the time. (90mph + on motorway and around town with fast acceleration all the time) My suggestion is diesel due to the mileage and the less detrimental effects on mpg, is this last assumption correct?


Please leave all Petrol VS Diesel (Stiring the gearbox etc at the door, this is about mpg)
 
Sorry, I was asking like what sort of mpg would i return specifically.

I know the Diesel would be more economical, it was more, what sort of damage does driving hard do in percentage terms to Petrol V Diesel mpg.
 
Sukh said:
Sorry, I was asking like what sort of mpg would i return specifically.

I know the Diesel would be more economical, it was more, what sort of damage does driving hard do in percentage terms to Petrol V Diesel mpg.
Click to expand...

What car is it? How on earth can we tell you what MPG it will return without that crucial bit of information.
 
I think it'll do 451mpg, which is a total guess and probably about as accurate as you'll get. We don't even know what car this is!
 
My (somewhat uneducated) thoughts is that the diesel would be best for MPG.

On motorways at high speed it'll be doing lower revs than a petrol, and even in town, the power band on a diesel is lower in the rev range, hence even when thrashed it'd use less fuel.

However, whats the point in talking about economy if someone is thrashing a 3 litre car around like a plank for 18k miles a year???
 
330i or 330d are the cars.

Sorry for the apparent mysteriousness, its just me being an unintentional berk.
 
I drive my 3.0D like I've just robbed a Bank.

Even when absolutely wringing it's neck I've never ever ever seen it drop below 30mpg.
 
In general even driven very hard diesels still give very good econemy.

The make and age of the engine however will make a huge differance an old diesel may easily be worse than a new petrol for example.

One other thing is these days "performance" diesel engines exist and it is very much worth noting that some of these can have surprisingly poor MPG figures.

The last point I would make is there is almost always a premium on up front price for diesels , make sure you factor that in to any argument.
 
Both are e92 (coupes?)

I argree on making the correct decision based on the cost differentials in both purchase price and fuel prices.
It is just that I'm advocating diesel for this, and he is insistent that it won't save much money in fuel terms.
 
My sisters husband did the police high speed training in a 530D and got 28MPG on the computer. He was driving everywhere in the power band, to the red line in every gear when accelerating.
 
If the only factor in the decision is cost save money and dont buy a BMW. Clearly his choice of an e92 means cost isnt the only factor. To some, the often marginal cost increase of a 3 litre petrol offers percieved non fiscal benefits the diesel does not.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom