R50/53 Gas Mileage
6th Gear
Joined: Jul 2002
Posts: 4,293
Likes: 2
From: Cincinnati, Ohio
I drive like a maniac with shift points at about 5k, and probably 65% freeway, 35% intown miles. I generally get +/- 300 miles per tank of go juice. At 11 gallons per refill, I'm at 27.25 MPG, or about 4 MPG better than my old GTI VR6 delivered. Plus the Smile-ometer in the MINI adds extra value.
Motor On
Motor On
Thread Starter
|
Neutral
Joined: Apr 2003
Posts: 3
Likes: 0
Hi, Thread Originator again.
I'm looking for hard MPG numbers, please, specifically on the "S". My measurements are made by dividing the mileage on the odometer by the amount of fuel I put in the tank. (I have a program on my Palm Pilot that keeps track of such things.) At 1530 miles the aggregate average was 26.6.
I understand that things like tire pressure and average speed and stuff can affect fuel economy. But unless you burn rubber at every start and turn your disks cherry red at every stop, it's not going to be more that 10 or 15%.
The reason I'm looking for this info is to make a comparison with other users. If I'm getting 26.6 and the rest of the world gets 32, then I know something is wrong, and I can make a stink to the dealership. If the rest of the world is within 10 or 15% of what I'm getting, then it's just a disappointing feature of the design of the car.
Again, I would appreciate copies of responses with hard data sent to me directly at Mike@MikeAgranoff.com.
Thanks for your help.
Mike Agranoff
I'm looking for hard MPG numbers, please, specifically on the "S". My measurements are made by dividing the mileage on the odometer by the amount of fuel I put in the tank. (I have a program on my Palm Pilot that keeps track of such things.) At 1530 miles the aggregate average was 26.6.
I understand that things like tire pressure and average speed and stuff can affect fuel economy. But unless you burn rubber at every start and turn your disks cherry red at every stop, it's not going to be more that 10 or 15%.
The reason I'm looking for this info is to make a comparison with other users. If I'm getting 26.6 and the rest of the world gets 32, then I know something is wrong, and I can make a stink to the dealership. If the rest of the world is within 10 or 15% of what I'm getting, then it's just a disappointing feature of the design of the car.
Again, I would appreciate copies of responses with hard data sent to me directly at Mike@MikeAgranoff.com.
Thanks for your help.
Mike Agranoff
Thread Starter
|
Neutral
Joined: Apr 2003
Posts: 3
Likes: 0
>>I have a Cooper and am also a little disappointed with the mpg.
Regular or "S"?
>>
>>One of my disappointments relates to my prior cars. I had a 93 Acura Integra for 9 years, that got 27-30 around town and 35 highway.
Interesting. That was also my previous car (1994) with similar mileage.
Mike Agranoff
Regular or "S"?
>>
>>One of my disappointments relates to my prior cars. I had a 93 Acura Integra for 9 years, that got 27-30 around town and 35 highway.
Interesting. That was also my previous car (1994) with similar mileage.
Mike Agranoff
Banned
Joined: Mar 2003
Posts: 2,859
Likes: 0
From: Plymouth, MN
>>At 1530 miles the aggregate average was 26.6.
>>
>>But unless you burn rubber at every start and turn your disks cherry red at every stop, it's not
>>going to be more that 10 or 15%.
Mike,
A few things.
1) 26.6 is fine in an MCS. It's listed as 25-34 and you'll always get the lower-end.
2) I disagree then you will only get a 10 to 15% difference depending on driving techniques.
Here is a site that shows a 20% difference 55 MPH to 65 MPH
and a 34% difference driving West vs East on the same road. So anyway. I doubt that you
can go to the dealer and ask for anything to be changes just on your MPG values.
Fuel economy experiments
>>
>>But unless you burn rubber at every start and turn your disks cherry red at every stop, it's not
>>going to be more that 10 or 15%.
Mike,
A few things.
1) 26.6 is fine in an MCS. It's listed as 25-34 and you'll always get the lower-end.
2) I disagree then you will only get a 10 to 15% difference depending on driving techniques.
Here is a site that shows a 20% difference 55 MPH to 65 MPH
and a 34% difference driving West vs East on the same road. So anyway. I doubt that you
can go to the dealer and ask for anything to be changes just on your MPG values.
Fuel economy experiments
3rd Gear
Joined: Jan 2003
Posts: 171
Likes: 0
That 163 hp in the MCS isn't free. Once you put your foot in it that supercharger is doing it's work and forcing air and gas into the engine. The faster you drive your mpg will drop. If you drive like you would at an autocross the mile per gallon will really drop. In eight runs a couple weeks ago I could sware I went through a quarter of a tank. If you bought an MCS for economy, well...
I get about 30+ plus on the freeway and 26-28 about town which means going up and down pretty steep mountain roads.
The choice is MPG or FUN.
I get about 30+ plus on the freeway and 26-28 about town which means going up and down pretty steep mountain roads.
The choice is MPG or FUN.
1st Gear
Joined: Mar 2003
Posts: 23
Likes: 0
From: So California
Anyone who claims they are getting 35MPG or more are not calculating actual MPG.
I have only averaged over 29MPG one time with my 5 Speed Mini. This is one area which BMW has over estimated and should be called on.
They use there B.S. estimation just to get a higher average overall for all BMW cars.
If my Mini is not getting much higher than 28 MPG I am suspicous of any claims by
S owners who claim they are getting 30+ MPG. The OBC is a joke. The only thing it is good for is the outside temp reading.
Think about it, when has Chrysler ever made an Engine that gets 30 + MPG. The 4 Cylinder 2.4 PT Cruiser averages 19 MPG. The only car company that can mix performance and economy is Honda. My wifes 2003 Accord gets 28 MPG no matter how or where you drice and it is an automatic.
The weekest link to the Mini is the engine is American designed. BMW have done their best by using Sythetic Oil and premuim gas just to make it out of the warranty period. What other 4 cylinder 115 HP engine which pushes 2,500 pounds needs these requirements? Come on they use a electic power stearing pump to squeeze every HP and help save the engine.
I love my Mini, but why fool ourselves to believe it is something it is not? BMW should have used one of the Rover Engines, They have a better Reputaion than Chrysler. The 160 HP PT Cruiser runs on regular unleaded, Whats up?
I have only averaged over 29MPG one time with my 5 Speed Mini. This is one area which BMW has over estimated and should be called on.
They use there B.S. estimation just to get a higher average overall for all BMW cars.
If my Mini is not getting much higher than 28 MPG I am suspicous of any claims by
S owners who claim they are getting 30+ MPG. The OBC is a joke. The only thing it is good for is the outside temp reading.
Think about it, when has Chrysler ever made an Engine that gets 30 + MPG. The 4 Cylinder 2.4 PT Cruiser averages 19 MPG. The only car company that can mix performance and economy is Honda. My wifes 2003 Accord gets 28 MPG no matter how or where you drice and it is an automatic.
The weekest link to the Mini is the engine is American designed. BMW have done their best by using Sythetic Oil and premuim gas just to make it out of the warranty period. What other 4 cylinder 115 HP engine which pushes 2,500 pounds needs these requirements? Come on they use a electic power stearing pump to squeeze every HP and help save the engine.
I love my Mini, but why fool ourselves to believe it is something it is not? BMW should have used one of the Rover Engines, They have a better Reputaion than Chrysler. The 160 HP PT Cruiser runs on regular unleaded, Whats up?
1st Gear
Joined: Mar 2003
Posts: 23
Likes: 0
From: So California
Anyone who claims they are getting 35MPG or more are not calculating actual MPG.
I have only averaged over 29MPG one time with my 5 Speed Mini. This is one area which BMW has over estimated and should be called on.
They use some B.S. estimation system just to get a higher average overall for all BMW cars.
If my Mini is not getting much higher than 28 MPG I am suspicous of any claims by
S owners who claim they are getting 30+ MPG. The OBC is a joke. The only thing it is good for is the outside temp reading.
Think about it, when has Chrysler ever made an Engine that gets 30 + MPG. The 4 Cylinder 2.4 PT Cruiser averages 19 MPG. The only car company that can mix performance and economy is Honda. My wifes 2003 Accord gets 28 MPG no matter how or where you drice and it is an automatic.
The weekest link to the Mini is the engine is American designed. BMW have done their best by using Sythetic Oil and premuim gas just to make it out of the warranty period. What other 4 cylinder 115 HP engine which pushes 2,500 pounds needs these requirements? Come on they use a electic power stearing pump to squeeze every HP and help save the engine.
I love my Mini, but why fool ourselves to believe it is something it is not? BMW should have used one of the Rover Engines, They have a better Reputaton than Chrysler. The 160 HP PT Cruiser runs on regular unleaded, Whats up?
_________________
CHRIS
I have only averaged over 29MPG one time with my 5 Speed Mini. This is one area which BMW has over estimated and should be called on.
They use some B.S. estimation system just to get a higher average overall for all BMW cars.
If my Mini is not getting much higher than 28 MPG I am suspicous of any claims by
S owners who claim they are getting 30+ MPG. The OBC is a joke. The only thing it is good for is the outside temp reading.
Think about it, when has Chrysler ever made an Engine that gets 30 + MPG. The 4 Cylinder 2.4 PT Cruiser averages 19 MPG. The only car company that can mix performance and economy is Honda. My wifes 2003 Accord gets 28 MPG no matter how or where you drice and it is an automatic.
The weekest link to the Mini is the engine is American designed. BMW have done their best by using Sythetic Oil and premuim gas just to make it out of the warranty period. What other 4 cylinder 115 HP engine which pushes 2,500 pounds needs these requirements? Come on they use a electic power stearing pump to squeeze every HP and help save the engine.
I love my Mini, but why fool ourselves to believe it is something it is not? BMW should have used one of the Rover Engines, They have a better Reputaton than Chrysler. The 160 HP PT Cruiser runs on regular unleaded, Whats up?
_________________
CHRIS
6th Gear
Joined: Aug 2002
Posts: 7,062
Likes: 1
From: Boston, MA
>>Anyone who claims they are getting 35MPG or more are not calculating actual MPG.<<
CSP4,
I'm not sure at all that this is true. It's not possible for me to get 35 mpg in my Cooper, either, even on totally flat highway at 65 mph. I have become convinced, after reading many people's careful calculations of actual mpg on this site, that a Cooper does not equal a Cooper does not equal a Cooper when it comes to mpg. I don't know if it has to do with ECU software update versions, or what, but it seems like cars with very different numbers are rolling out of the factory. The differences are too wide to be explained by disparity in driving styles.
I have one of the less efficient ones, and it's bugging the hell out of me. Fuel economy rates extremely close to the top of my priority list when buying a car, and I bought the MINI because it had the same EPA fuel economy rating as the Civic, a car which easily averages 38-40 mpg on the highway, and gets 25-30 mpg even in real city driving. My car should be rated at 18/33, not 28/37, and I will honestly have a hard time justifying keeping it if this doesn't improve. I strongly agree that unless BMW can bring the deficient cars up to spec, they should not be able to use those numbers in calculating their overall fleet fuel economy. What an irony if buying the smallest car on the U.S. roads directly enables more X-5s with 4.6-liter engines to come trundling down the highway...
_________________
Borla, Moss intake, Magnecor
CSP4,
I'm not sure at all that this is true. It's not possible for me to get 35 mpg in my Cooper, either, even on totally flat highway at 65 mph. I have become convinced, after reading many people's careful calculations of actual mpg on this site, that a Cooper does not equal a Cooper does not equal a Cooper when it comes to mpg. I don't know if it has to do with ECU software update versions, or what, but it seems like cars with very different numbers are rolling out of the factory. The differences are too wide to be explained by disparity in driving styles.
I have one of the less efficient ones, and it's bugging the hell out of me. Fuel economy rates extremely close to the top of my priority list when buying a car, and I bought the MINI because it had the same EPA fuel economy rating as the Civic, a car which easily averages 38-40 mpg on the highway, and gets 25-30 mpg even in real city driving. My car should be rated at 18/33, not 28/37, and I will honestly have a hard time justifying keeping it if this doesn't improve. I strongly agree that unless BMW can bring the deficient cars up to spec, they should not be able to use those numbers in calculating their overall fleet fuel economy. What an irony if buying the smallest car on the U.S. roads directly enables more X-5s with 4.6-liter engines to come trundling down the highway...
_________________
Borla, Moss intake, Magnecor
6th Gear
Joined: Aug 2002
Posts: 4,241
Likes: 0
From: USA
It all depends on how you drive. I got 32 consistently
with the Cooper I had and with the S 20 to 22 was good.
I got a speeding ticket on my way to the Gap and for the
first time, on the return trip, I averaged close to 30 in the
S. Of course I was keeping it under 85 at all times.
with the Cooper I had and with the S 20 to 22 was good.
I got a speeding ticket on my way to the Gap and for the
first time, on the return trip, I averaged close to 30 in the
S. Of course I was keeping it under 85 at all times.
2nd Gear
Joined: Apr 2003
Posts: 92
Likes: 0
Mike,
I filled my '03 MCS up today and my mileage on the last tank was 27.69 mpg. That is a little lower than usual for me. My last 4 tanks have averaged 29.22 mpg. This last tank was probably lower because I was doing some mountain driving over to Santa Cruz and pushing the car hard through the corners.
On my trip to Southern California I averaged over 30 for the hwy driving portions of the trip (30.82 to be exact)
I have found that the way I drive has a tremendous effect on the gas mileage. One of my first tanks after the break-in period was less than 21 mpg, of course I was driving the car like there was no tommorrow. My more sedate self drives at about 70 on the freeways and conservatively around town. Of course my more sedate self did not prevent me from blowing the doors off a Miata last night
I would say keep track of how you drive, where you drive and compare those tanks that have similar driving conditions.
And CPS4, comparing an MCS with a Honda Accord? No offense but the cars are not even comparable. The Accord is not in any way a performance car and really doesn't belong in an mpg discussion with an S in my opinion. Compare the S to a 1.8t or a Miata, Boxster, or TT. My window sticker says that I should get between 25 and 34 mpg out of this car and that is exactly what I get. And I will bet that if I wasn't going nearly 100 down Hwy5 that I would have gotten very close to 34 instead of just under 31 on my trip.
I filled my '03 MCS up today and my mileage on the last tank was 27.69 mpg. That is a little lower than usual for me. My last 4 tanks have averaged 29.22 mpg. This last tank was probably lower because I was doing some mountain driving over to Santa Cruz and pushing the car hard through the corners.
On my trip to Southern California I averaged over 30 for the hwy driving portions of the trip (30.82 to be exact)
I have found that the way I drive has a tremendous effect on the gas mileage. One of my first tanks after the break-in period was less than 21 mpg, of course I was driving the car like there was no tommorrow. My more sedate self drives at about 70 on the freeways and conservatively around town. Of course my more sedate self did not prevent me from blowing the doors off a Miata last night
I would say keep track of how you drive, where you drive and compare those tanks that have similar driving conditions.
And CPS4, comparing an MCS with a Honda Accord? No offense but the cars are not even comparable. The Accord is not in any way a performance car and really doesn't belong in an mpg discussion with an S in my opinion. Compare the S to a 1.8t or a Miata, Boxster, or TT. My window sticker says that I should get between 25 and 34 mpg out of this car and that is exactly what I get. And I will bet that if I wasn't going nearly 100 down Hwy5 that I would have gotten very close to 34 instead of just under 31 on my trip.
5th Gear
Joined: Jun 2002
Posts: 644
Likes: 0
>>Anyone who claims they are getting 35MPG or more are not calculating actual MPG.
>>I have only averaged over 29MPG one time with my 5 Speed Mini. This is one area which BMW has over estimated and should be called on.
>>
>>They use some B.S. estimation system just to get a higher average overall for all BMW cars.
>>If my Mini is not getting much higher than 28 MPG I am suspicous of any claims by
>>S owners who claim they are getting 30+ MPG. The OBC is a joke. The only thing it is good for is the outside temp reading.
>>
>>Think about it, when has Chrysler ever made an Engine that gets 30 + MPG. The 4 Cylinder 2.4 PT Cruiser averages 19 MPG.
Well thats probably cause the PT Cruiser has the aerodynamics of a brick. A neon should get much better MPG since it is a much lighter and more aerodynamic car.
If you scroll down about 3/4 of the way you can see the results for a 1998 Intrepid and see its MPG numbers
Final Odometer Reading: 36,935
Best Fuel Economy: 30.4 mpg
Worst Fuel Economy: 10.3 mpg
Average Fuel Economy: 20.2 mpg
The only car company that can mix performance and economy is Honda. My wifes 2003 Accord gets 28 MPG no matter how or where you drice and it is an automatic.
>>
>>The weekest link to the Mini is the engine is American designed.
If there is one thing that bothers me more then anything else is people bashing an entire nation worth of cars. Yeah American cars have had their problems and some of them aren't very good but they are much better then they used to be. I think technology wise the US still has a way to go to catch up with Europe and Japan but they have closed the gap.
>> BMW have done their best by using Sythetic Oil and premuim gas just to make it out of the warranty period.
You have to use premium gas when an engine has the compression/Boost of the MINI engine. You don't have a choice it is not like they are doing it to eek out a few thousand more miles of reliablity.
>>What other 4 cylinder 115 HP engine which pushes 2,500 pounds needs these requirements?
Cause it costs money to do that and most manufacturers won't spend it. We would be better off if all manufactureres would use real synthetic oil and not the psuedo synthetic Castol oil that BMW is using.
>> Come on they use a electic power stearing pump to squeeze every HP and help save the engine.
>>
>>I love my Mini, but why fool ourselves to believe it is something it is not? BMW should have used one of the Rover Engines, They have a better Reputaton than Chrysler. The 160 HP PT Cruiser runs on regular unleaded, Whats up?
>>
How many times do people have to say that the engine was not entirely Chyrsler desinged. Do you think that BMW would have let Chrysler ruin the engine that they were going to be banking millions of dollars on?
Look at the new Turbo Charged Motor in the Neon SRT-4. Now that is a badass motor and was completly Chrysler designed. The 253 hp that goes in the Chyrysler 300M is very nice.
You wanna hear about a truly impressive engine? Gp track down a 3800 engine made by GM. These motors were made in Supercharged and NA versions and went in the 1997 and up Grand Prix's and Regals. They also went in all of the GM H-Bodied cars from 1988 till current. The H-Bodies are Pontiac Bonnevilles, Buick Park Avenues and some Oldsmobiles.
My 1989 Pontiac Bonneville with almost 130,000 miles on it has recorded MPG figures just above 40 mpg on severa occasions. I ususally get a little over 30 mpg for highway trips when I am not trying to stretch the gas. I get in the high to mid 20's for city driving.
Pretty impressive for a 3300 lbs, 15 year old, 130,000 mile, 3.8 liter powered old american bit of iron.
>>I have only averaged over 29MPG one time with my 5 Speed Mini. This is one area which BMW has over estimated and should be called on.
>>
>>They use some B.S. estimation system just to get a higher average overall for all BMW cars.
>>If my Mini is not getting much higher than 28 MPG I am suspicous of any claims by
>>S owners who claim they are getting 30+ MPG. The OBC is a joke. The only thing it is good for is the outside temp reading.
>>
>>Think about it, when has Chrysler ever made an Engine that gets 30 + MPG. The 4 Cylinder 2.4 PT Cruiser averages 19 MPG.
Well thats probably cause the PT Cruiser has the aerodynamics of a brick. A neon should get much better MPG since it is a much lighter and more aerodynamic car.
If you scroll down about 3/4 of the way you can see the results for a 1998 Intrepid and see its MPG numbers
Final Odometer Reading: 36,935
Best Fuel Economy: 30.4 mpg
Worst Fuel Economy: 10.3 mpg
Average Fuel Economy: 20.2 mpg
The only car company that can mix performance and economy is Honda. My wifes 2003 Accord gets 28 MPG no matter how or where you drice and it is an automatic.
>>
>>The weekest link to the Mini is the engine is American designed.
If there is one thing that bothers me more then anything else is people bashing an entire nation worth of cars. Yeah American cars have had their problems and some of them aren't very good but they are much better then they used to be. I think technology wise the US still has a way to go to catch up with Europe and Japan but they have closed the gap.
>> BMW have done their best by using Sythetic Oil and premuim gas just to make it out of the warranty period.
You have to use premium gas when an engine has the compression/Boost of the MINI engine. You don't have a choice it is not like they are doing it to eek out a few thousand more miles of reliablity.
>>What other 4 cylinder 115 HP engine which pushes 2,500 pounds needs these requirements?
Cause it costs money to do that and most manufacturers won't spend it. We would be better off if all manufactureres would use real synthetic oil and not the psuedo synthetic Castol oil that BMW is using.
>> Come on they use a electic power stearing pump to squeeze every HP and help save the engine.
>>
>>I love my Mini, but why fool ourselves to believe it is something it is not? BMW should have used one of the Rover Engines, They have a better Reputaton than Chrysler. The 160 HP PT Cruiser runs on regular unleaded, Whats up?
>>
How many times do people have to say that the engine was not entirely Chyrsler desinged. Do you think that BMW would have let Chrysler ruin the engine that they were going to be banking millions of dollars on?
Look at the new Turbo Charged Motor in the Neon SRT-4. Now that is a badass motor and was completly Chrysler designed. The 253 hp that goes in the Chyrysler 300M is very nice.
You wanna hear about a truly impressive engine? Gp track down a 3800 engine made by GM. These motors were made in Supercharged and NA versions and went in the 1997 and up Grand Prix's and Regals. They also went in all of the GM H-Bodied cars from 1988 till current. The H-Bodies are Pontiac Bonnevilles, Buick Park Avenues and some Oldsmobiles.
My 1989 Pontiac Bonneville with almost 130,000 miles on it has recorded MPG figures just above 40 mpg on severa occasions. I ususally get a little over 30 mpg for highway trips when I am not trying to stretch the gas. I get in the high to mid 20's for city driving.
Pretty impressive for a 3300 lbs, 15 year old, 130,000 mile, 3.8 liter powered old american bit of iron.
1st Gear
Joined: Mar 2003
Posts: 23
Likes: 0
From: So California
The 4-cyl models are peppy enough with manual transmission: Test EX coupe did 7.9 sec 0-60 mph. With automatic, 4-cyl Accords feel a little labored up long grades or in urgent freeway passing sprints; test EX-L coupe did 8.6 sec 0-60. That new 5-speed automatic lacks a manual shift gate, but is smoother and more responsive than the old 4 speed, despite occasional hesitant downshifts. V6 is energetic: test automatic-transmission coupe did 7.0 sec 0-60. V6 feels even stronger with the 6-speed manual.
The above specs are for the 2003 Honda Accord. I am sure there is not one Mini owner who would not trade his engine for the Honda 160 HP engine out of an SI Civic.
My post has caused some people to take it personal. All it is is an honest look at the truth. VW has a 1.8 L turbo engine which run on regular gas, honda has made reliable small high compression engines that run on regular gas. The problem is the timing has to be advance to get any performance out of the small Chrysler engine, this is why the higher octain is needed. The engine was designed for economy, but who wants it to take 15 seconds to go 0-60. BMW should have spent the money to design a engine for the Mini. To take a engine designed for another purpose and then try and say its a performance engine is a joke. Yes, the S could be considered a performance engine. But the standard cooper owners must accept the truth. It is a 115 HP Chrysler motor designed for another car and purpose. This is why you must down shift up hills and put your foot to the metal burning gas to move.
BMW has made 4 cylinder engines for years, they just wanted to stick the cheapest engine they could in this car and then put misleading figures about MPG. Note: No test drives in Magazines have gotten the MPG or 0-60 times that BMW claims.
Why the electric Power steering? to take the load away from the engine
_________________
CHRISnullTest EX coupe did 7.9 sec 0-60 mphtest EX-L coupe did 8.6 sec 0-60test automatic-transmission coupe did 7.0 sec 0-60The above specs are for the 2003 Honda Accord
The above specs are for the 2003 Honda Accord. I am sure there is not one Mini owner who would not trade his engine for the Honda 160 HP engine out of an SI Civic.
My post has caused some people to take it personal. All it is is an honest look at the truth. VW has a 1.8 L turbo engine which run on regular gas, honda has made reliable small high compression engines that run on regular gas. The problem is the timing has to be advance to get any performance out of the small Chrysler engine, this is why the higher octain is needed. The engine was designed for economy, but who wants it to take 15 seconds to go 0-60. BMW should have spent the money to design a engine for the Mini. To take a engine designed for another purpose and then try and say its a performance engine is a joke. Yes, the S could be considered a performance engine. But the standard cooper owners must accept the truth. It is a 115 HP Chrysler motor designed for another car and purpose. This is why you must down shift up hills and put your foot to the metal burning gas to move.
BMW has made 4 cylinder engines for years, they just wanted to stick the cheapest engine they could in this car and then put misleading figures about MPG. Note: No test drives in Magazines have gotten the MPG or 0-60 times that BMW claims.
Why the electric Power steering? to take the load away from the engine
_________________
CHRISnullTest EX coupe did 7.9 sec 0-60 mphtest EX-L coupe did 8.6 sec 0-60test automatic-transmission coupe did 7.0 sec 0-60The above specs are for the 2003 Honda Accord
OVERDRIVE - Racing Champion
Joined: Feb 2003
Posts: 15,262
Likes: 72
From: Mililani, Hawaii
Dear Mike-
Here are your Hard numbers.
I drive a mini cooper S like you do. Miles so far 2450.
I have a madness air intake. S-lite wheels with Pirelli run flat tires. AC always off, no sunroof
Best mileage with mostly highway driving at about 55 to 60 mph which is the speed limit in Hawaii-varying terrain including hills and some mountains of 2000 feet elevation: 35mpg
Best mileage in mixed driving including some rush hour traffic: 28 mpg x at least 4 separate times.
Worse mileage ever, drove mixed street and one full day in car control clinic (salom and skid pad) and track: 21 mpg.
So how did you do? I bet I can do better. These are all manually calculated on filling the tank. No computer used and no crusie control used, I don't have either. I did not drive with no spunk during these trials but I did not floor it either. Just driving normal and smoothly.
Cheers
Here are your Hard numbers.
I drive a mini cooper S like you do. Miles so far 2450.
I have a madness air intake. S-lite wheels with Pirelli run flat tires. AC always off, no sunroof
Best mileage with mostly highway driving at about 55 to 60 mph which is the speed limit in Hawaii-varying terrain including hills and some mountains of 2000 feet elevation: 35mpg
Best mileage in mixed driving including some rush hour traffic: 28 mpg x at least 4 separate times.
Worse mileage ever, drove mixed street and one full day in car control clinic (salom and skid pad) and track: 21 mpg.
So how did you do? I bet I can do better. These are all manually calculated on filling the tank. No computer used and no crusie control used, I don't have either. I did not drive with no spunk during these trials but I did not floor it either. Just driving normal and smoothly.
Cheers
OVERDRIVE
Joined: Jan 2003
Posts: 6,365
Likes: 2
From: Yinzer in Exile
<<<Anyone who claims they are getting 35MPG or more are not calculating actual MPG.>>>
Er... no.
I have an MCS and I calculate my MPG and on roadtrips I consistently get 32-37MPG (Depending on traffic scuffles). I don't use the OBC, it's always about 3MPG more generous than the actual fuel economy. I generally run highway speeds around 70-75 in sixth which keeps me right around 3000rpms. Combo highway/city driving I tend to average in the upper 20s. Pure city and I'm in the mid 20s. If I know that I'm going to kill an entire tank putting around the city then I take him out for a nice, long, weekend run. At that point its like free gas.
I had reservations about the MCS after I ordered it and heard horror stories on Roadfly about 12MPG and I almost cancelled the order. Glad I didn't, though. As it's really turned out to be fine.
For those of you who unabashadly claim to not give a rats a$$ about fuel economy, I"m glad you're enjoying your car but seriously, that's evil. "Lets sip not guzzle"
Er... no.
I have an MCS and I calculate my MPG and on roadtrips I consistently get 32-37MPG (Depending on traffic scuffles). I don't use the OBC, it's always about 3MPG more generous than the actual fuel economy. I generally run highway speeds around 70-75 in sixth which keeps me right around 3000rpms. Combo highway/city driving I tend to average in the upper 20s. Pure city and I'm in the mid 20s. If I know that I'm going to kill an entire tank putting around the city then I take him out for a nice, long, weekend run. At that point its like free gas.
I had reservations about the MCS after I ordered it and heard horror stories on Roadfly about 12MPG and I almost cancelled the order. Glad I didn't, though. As it's really turned out to be fine.
For those of you who unabashadly claim to not give a rats a$$ about fuel economy, I"m glad you're enjoying your car but seriously, that's evil. "Lets sip not guzzle"
3rd Gear
Joined: Oct 2002
Posts: 172
Likes: 0
From: Reno, NV
>>Anyone who claims they are getting 35MPG or more are not calculating actual MPG.
>>I have only averaged over 29MPG one time with my 5 Speed Mini. This is one area which BMW has over estimated and should be called on.
___________
>>CHRIS
I claim that I get over 35MPG on the highway and have done it many times! :smile:
Perhaps I'm mathematically challenged and I'm not calculating actual MPG. I'll give you the numbers and let you do the math.
Begining Odometer 3557
Ending Odometer 4546
My calculation: 989 miles
Total Gas to fill the tank (to overflowing on last fill) 25.492 Gallons
My calculation: 38.8MPG
BTW The last leg of this trip was from Las Vegas to Reno, 443 miles, on one tank of gas and I had a little over a gallon of gas left. In addition, I have a combined MPG of 35 that is about 75% highway and 25% city. The Cooper is able to give the gas milage that BMW/EPA have estimated. I'm very pleased with mine.
>>I have only averaged over 29MPG one time with my 5 Speed Mini. This is one area which BMW has over estimated and should be called on.
___________
>>CHRIS
I claim that I get over 35MPG on the highway and have done it many times! :smile:
Perhaps I'm mathematically challenged and I'm not calculating actual MPG. I'll give you the numbers and let you do the math.
Begining Odometer 3557
Ending Odometer 4546
My calculation: 989 miles
Total Gas to fill the tank (to overflowing on last fill) 25.492 Gallons
My calculation: 38.8MPG
BTW The last leg of this trip was from Las Vegas to Reno, 443 miles, on one tank of gas and I had a little over a gallon of gas left. In addition, I have a combined MPG of 35 that is about 75% highway and 25% city. The Cooper is able to give the gas milage that BMW/EPA have estimated. I'm very pleased with mine.
Banned
Joined: Mar 2003
Posts: 2,859
Likes: 0
From: Plymouth, MN
>>Perhaps I'm mathematically challenged and I'm not calculating actual MPG.
Your math looks right on.
You have a MINI Cooper right? Not an MCS?
And give us a hint of how fast you drove on the highway.
I'm thinking that this is the biggest thing that affects MPG
on the highway. Some people think that they'll get 35 MPG
at 80 MPH on the highway
Your math looks right on.
You have a MINI Cooper right? Not an MCS?
And give us a hint of how fast you drove on the highway.
I'm thinking that this is the biggest thing that affects MPG
on the highway. Some people think that they'll get 35 MPG
at 80 MPH on the highway
2nd Gear
Joined: Apr 2003
Posts: 92
Likes: 0
"This is why you must down shift up hills and put your foot to the metal burning gas to move. " CSP4, you're talking about the Cooper, right? and not the S.
I just drove this car up the Tejon Pass in southern California. It is a 6% grade from the low point in the valley to 4,100+ ft. at the top. I know there are steeper passes and higher ones, but this grade is a good test of any car. Not only was I able to keep the S in 6th, I was able to maintain a 75mph speed and the pedal was no where near the floor. The S took the pass with ease and I passed many small cars that were having a time of it.
You seem really cranked that the engine is 'Chrysler' and not BMW. Maybe its me, but I don't see any Chrysler products with the S engine. Who really cares who made the engine. This is just a guess, but I'll bet the BMW engineers looked it over pretty carefully before they put it in the car and they probably did a fair amount of testing. I hear they're a sharp bunch, but that may be only a rumor. Note also that the engine is made in Brazil, is that cause for concern? Most of what matters in an engine is reliability and for that we will just have to see what happens with these cars over time.
As far as using premium gas. Here in northern California at my Chevron station the diff in price between regular and premium is 15 cents. (1.97 vs 2.12). Let's say I drive 100,000 miles in this car and get the 29mpg that I have been averaging.
That comes out to 3,448 gallons of gas x the .15 difference in price = $517.00.
If I put 20K a year on the car that's 5 years. A 100 bucks a year is not much in my book for the power and driveability, but it may be to some. Those with engine issues should be glad to know that BMW just entered into a joint venture with Peugeot-Citroen to develope a new engine, maybe that will solve this 'problem'.
What I am really looking for is that snazzy 4-door Mini!
4-door Mini
_________________
We're just your typical two Mini family......
I just drove this car up the Tejon Pass in southern California. It is a 6% grade from the low point in the valley to 4,100+ ft. at the top. I know there are steeper passes and higher ones, but this grade is a good test of any car. Not only was I able to keep the S in 6th, I was able to maintain a 75mph speed and the pedal was no where near the floor. The S took the pass with ease and I passed many small cars that were having a time of it.
You seem really cranked that the engine is 'Chrysler' and not BMW. Maybe its me, but I don't see any Chrysler products with the S engine. Who really cares who made the engine. This is just a guess, but I'll bet the BMW engineers looked it over pretty carefully before they put it in the car and they probably did a fair amount of testing. I hear they're a sharp bunch, but that may be only a rumor. Note also that the engine is made in Brazil, is that cause for concern? Most of what matters in an engine is reliability and for that we will just have to see what happens with these cars over time.
As far as using premium gas. Here in northern California at my Chevron station the diff in price between regular and premium is 15 cents. (1.97 vs 2.12). Let's say I drive 100,000 miles in this car and get the 29mpg that I have been averaging.
That comes out to 3,448 gallons of gas x the .15 difference in price = $517.00.
If I put 20K a year on the car that's 5 years. A 100 bucks a year is not much in my book for the power and driveability, but it may be to some. Those with engine issues should be glad to know that BMW just entered into a joint venture with Peugeot-Citroen to develope a new engine, maybe that will solve this 'problem'.
What I am really looking for is that snazzy 4-door Mini!
4-door Mini
_________________
We're just your typical two Mini family......
6th Gear
Joined: Aug 2002
Posts: 7,062
Likes: 1
From: Boston, MA
>>BTW The last leg of this trip was from Las Vegas to Reno, 443 miles, on one tank of gas and I had a little over a gallon of gas left. In addition, I have a combined MPG of 35 that is about 75% highway and 25% city. The Cooper is able to give the gas milage that BMW/EPA have estimated. I'm very pleased with mine. <<
edlfrey - YOUR Cooper is able to give the gas mileage that BMW/EPA have estimated. The problem is, the fuel economy isn't consistent from car to car, and I've got one of the crap ones.
35 mpg in COMBINED driving? I can only get that if I'm on the highway, under 65 mph, with no hills and no wind.
<<edlfrey - YOUR Cooper is able to give the gas mileage that BMW/EPA have estimated. The problem is, the fuel economy isn't consistent from car to car, and I've got one of the crap ones.
35 mpg in COMBINED driving? I can only get that if I'm on the highway, under 65 mph, with no hills and no wind.
5th Gear
Joined: Jun 2002
Posts: 644
Likes: 0
>>Why the electric Power steering? to take the load away from the engine
>>
This statement right her just shows you are pretty clueluess.
Engine driven Hydralic power steering only pulls about 5 hp away from a motor.
The stress that power steering puts on the motor is almost nothing.
Electric driven Power steering will pull a little less power, will be lighter, smaller and easier to get the variable assist ability in.
In a few years you will see more and more cars using electric power assist instead of engine driven type. Electric motors are more reliable in the long run too.
>>
This statement right her just shows you are pretty clueluess.
Engine driven Hydralic power steering only pulls about 5 hp away from a motor.
The stress that power steering puts on the motor is almost nothing.
Electric driven Power steering will pull a little less power, will be lighter, smaller and easier to get the variable assist ability in.
In a few years you will see more and more cars using electric power assist instead of engine driven type. Electric motors are more reliable in the long run too.
3rd Gear
Joined: Oct 2002
Posts: 172
Likes: 0
From: Reno, NV
>>And give us a hint of how fast you drove on the highway.
>>I'm thinking that this is the biggest thing that affects MPG
>>on the highway. Some people think that they'll get 35 MPG
>>at 80 MPH on the highway
The 989mile trip to LV and back included a few miles of city driving and some reduced speeds going through the few small towns on the way. The majority of the trip was at 65MPH with cruise control, which is solid as a rock, and I averaged 60.5MPH for the entire trip.
I have found that anything over 70MPH cuts my MPG rather quickly. For that reason plus the majority of the trip was done on roads with posted speeds of 65MPH so I kept it there.
I agree with your thinking about highway speeds and mpg. I can't get 38.8mpg at 80 MPH with my Cooper and don't think the BMW/EPA milage estimates suggest that I can.
>>I'm thinking that this is the biggest thing that affects MPG
>>on the highway. Some people think that they'll get 35 MPG
>>at 80 MPH on the highway
The 989mile trip to LV and back included a few miles of city driving and some reduced speeds going through the few small towns on the way. The majority of the trip was at 65MPH with cruise control, which is solid as a rock, and I averaged 60.5MPH for the entire trip.
I have found that anything over 70MPH cuts my MPG rather quickly. For that reason plus the majority of the trip was done on roads with posted speeds of 65MPH so I kept it there.
I agree with your thinking about highway speeds and mpg. I can't get 38.8mpg at 80 MPH with my Cooper and don't think the BMW/EPA milage estimates suggest that I can.