MPG vs BHP

[Deleted member 37751]

As I peruse for my next 4x4, of the 'safe' option choices, I'm finding it quite interesting that of the models/marques I'm looking at there are quite big differences between the manufacturers mpg figures vs bhp.

Those I've been looking at are;

Mercedes ML 320 3.0 V6 CDI: 224 bhp & combined mpg is 29.4, tax band L

LR Range Rover Sport 2.7 TDV6: 188bhp & combined mpg 28.3 (lol), tax band M

BMW X5 3.0d: 235bhp & combined mpg 34.9, tax band K

I understand there will be aerodynamics at play, but how do BMW get their X5 to be more frugal AND powerful AND in a lower tax band?

My friend has a 2005 X5 and he rarely gets below 30mpg and he's a stereotypical BMW driver, so the newer shapes (2007+) are looking very tempting at the minute, even more so because they are a tax band LOWER than the ML.

 

[Colin_b]

BMW are better at optimising their cars for the official tests?

 

[gIzzE]

I do think BMW tend to 'gear' their cars towards the enthusiast driver.
Sit at 80mph in the 8 speed X5 3.0d and it is doing 1800rpm and 40mpg.

Sit at 80mph in the ML350cdi or the 2.7TDV6 and you are more like 2600rpm and 30mpg, I think that is where the main differences lie.

 

[Paul/]

As peak power is at peak rpm whereas fuel consumption measurements aren't, perhaps gearing/torque profile and weight differences account for much of the apparent discrepancies between vehicles?

 

[flango]

Out of the three you mention then you know the one you want to buy lets face facts ML's are absolutely sh¤te, and X5's are driven by chav's and drug dealers and handle like a cross channel ferry with the same amount of turbo lag. I had one when i was doing site work and it rarely bettered 23mpg, so that only leaves you one and the one you want

 

[SavMan]

Out of the three you mention then you know the one you want to buy lets face facts ML's are absolutely sh¤te, and X5's are driven by chav's and drug dealers and handle like a cross channel ferry with the same amount of turbo lag. I had one when i was doing site work and it rarely bettered 23mpg, so that only leaves you one and the one you want

Must be a northern thing as all the "chav's and drug dealers" in the south east seem to prefer RR Sports

 

[Terry_]

We look after plenty of 164 ml's. I really like them, and on the whole find them good cars
Have a drive of all three and see what floats your boat?

 

[Peter DLM]

All those have girlie 6 cylinders. What gives?

 

[Deleted member 37751]

We look after plenty of 164 ml's. I really like them, and on the whole find them good cars

Have you come across any ML 420 V8 CDi's? If so, is there anything to look out for?

 

[Deleted member 37751]

All those have girlie 6 cylinders. What gives?

As I peruse for my next 4x4, of the 'safe' option choices,

I always like to have a back-up plan Pete.

I can't find a W164 V8 CDI with the spec I want and and the '63s are probably going to be just that little bit out of budget, if I'm being honest with myself.

 

[developer]

Surely RR Sport 188bhp is an oxymoron?

Stylish though - more of an "I've arrived" car than the BMW/ML.

 

[Terry_]

Very rarely them get them in the shop. They are pretty much the 642 with a couple of extra pots. What about a v6 and get a custom remap done?
You are gonna get the ips motor/ turbo issue etc. but all manufacturers suffer similar problems of their own.

 

[Deleted member 37751]

Surely RR Sport 188bhp is an oxymoron?

They do the TDV8 engine in the RRS as well (which is in budget), that's got 268bhp and combined mpg of 25.5, tax band M.

 

[SavMan]

Surely RR Sport 188bhp is an oxymoron.

Stylish though - more of an "I've arrived" car than the BMW/ML.

Damn that must mean my household is on the downward slide we are going from a Supercharged RR Sport to a W166

 

[developer]

They do the TDV8 engine in the RRS as well (which is in budget), that's got 268bhp and combined mpg of 25.5, tax band M.

I find RRS's make the full fat RR look a bit of a bus - it's a great design (except for the exposed spare wheel at the rear).

 

[Deleted member 37751]

Very rarely them get them in the shop. They are pretty much the 642 with a couple of extra pots. What about a v6 and get a custom remap done?

There's a W164 Brabus V6 chip on eBay at the minute that has got me thinking, funnily enough.

My indie has only ever had one V8 CDI and he said it 'felt' as fast as some of the supercharged '55s he looks after, but I'd assume that's down to the torque in the V8 diesel.

 

[Stratman]

Have you come across any ML 420 V8 CDi's? If so, is there anything to look out for?

Not straying too far from a fuel station?

 

[Deleted member 37751]

I find RRS's make the full fat RR look a bit of a bus

That is exactly what my wife calls the FFRR; a bus, hence they are definitely off the list.

 

[flango]

I find RRS's make the full fat RR look a bit of a bus - it's a great design (except for the exposed spare wheel at the rear).

Totally agree on the exposed spare wheel and totally unacceptable design imho, mind you if you have ever tried changing the wheel on a RR they could have left it off all together

 

[Terry_]

There's a W164 Brabus V6 chip on eBay at the minute that has got me thinking, funnily enough.

My indie has only ever had one V8 CDI and he said it 'felt' as fast as some of the supercharged '55s he looks after, but I'd assume that's down to the torque in the V8 diesel.

Yes they are very powerful low down, but very juicy as well. Having driven a couple of v6's with custom remaps I would say they have felt noticeably quicker than the plug in ones