What would be the fastest?

[Ferrer]

Here's something I've been wondering lately. If you had to do a really long trip, which car would you think would be the fastest and why?

And by long I mean like from Lisbon to Moscow which would be about 4600km and would take probably at least three days.

I'll post what I think would be the fastest later.

[70cuda88]

is there no sort of speed limit or anything? i would think if you kept the speed limit, any car would work

[2ndclasscitizen]

A big HSV like a Senator or Grange. Big powerful V8, but geared for cruising which would give a decent fuel range. Holden V8's do about 8l/100km cruising 120km/h, so you'd probably be able to get about 10l/100km pushing up to 160kmh or so, which would be like a 650km range. Plus they're ridiculously comfy and can handle pretty well.

Other than that, probably a big-engined Merc or Audi.

[henk4]

a BMW 335d

[NSXType-R]

Bmw E39 M5. :d

[Turbo.Jenkens]

If you plan on observing traffic laws distance between fillups will be the deciding factor. Several companies make in-bed axillary fuel tanks for what us yanks call "pickup trucks." I think a diesel truck with a 100+ gallon aux tank would be the way to go. As long as the roads are strait they can be quite fast too. A friend of mine has an F250 with a bully dog programmer, and it can out accelerate another friends G35 and tops out just north of 225kph.

[Ferrer]

is there no sort of speed limit or anything? i would think if you kept the speed limit, any car would work
You'd go through Germany, and anyway Europeans don't exactly drive on the speed limit always.

Also you could take into consideration that a comfortable car would allow to go further everyday since you would be less tired. As has been said range would also be important.

[henk4]

Also you could take into consideration that a comfortable car would allow to go further everyday since you would be less tired. As has been said range would also be important.

you are not talking people into the new C5 Touring aren't you?

[nota]

If this includes modified vehicles then I suppose any bloody thing goes

But for more down to earth machinery of the standard kind, the sky is still the limit as far as my car choice is concerned so why not this (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:Taylor-Aerocar-III.jpg) little beauty with V-max of 216 km/h and a so-so range of 560 kms

Otherwise I'm taking the 1969 Falcon 351 GT with its standard-issue 163 litre petrol tank that gives a proven range of 1416 kms per tankful @ average speed of 76 km/h - so no delays for speeding tickets and only two-and-a-bit stops for refueling all the way from Lisbon to Moscow. And oh yeah for my secret weapon I'm also bringing a packet of no-doze, along with one of these (http://www.comforthouse.com/portableurinal.html)

[NicFromLA]

BMW 530d with speed limits, 535d without. Both are fast, comfortable and have excellent fuel economy. Even without speed limits the diesels are preferable to the much faster M5 because the M5 gets horrible gas milage and acceleration can't make up for time at pump.

[mclaren_crazy]

I want a 599:D

[clutch-monkey]

a bowler wildcat, for the lulz
plus, because you didn't say what conditions

[DFH]

you are not talking people into the new C5 Touring aren't you?

guess not

[ScionDriver]

Bentley Continental GT.

[DFH]

i'd would say to do this in a BMW 735LD they are very good cars to drive them for a very long trip and they don't make any noise because of the 100Kg of isolation material

[pimento]

Well... I used an 850R. And I'd do it again. So... I guess one of them.

[Ferrer]

you are not talking people into the new C5 Touring aren't you?
Not what I had in mind, but I guess the 2.7 HDi would be quite good.

No actually what I think would be best is the Mercedes-Benz S320 CDI. Good performance, very comfortable and a big fuel tank with reduced fuel consumption.

BMW 530d with speed limits, 535d without. Both are fast, comfortable and have excellent fuel economy. Even without speed limits the diesels are preferable to the much faster M5 because the M5 gets horrible gas milage and acceleration can't make up for time at pump.
Why 530d with speed limits and 535d without? Both do 155mph, but the single turbo uses less fuel.

a bowler wildcat, for the lulz
plus, because you didn't say what conditions
No "conditions" just the fastest car to get from Lisobn to Moscow.

[NicFromLA]

Not what I had in mind, but I guess the 2.7 HDi would be quite good.

No actually what I think would be best is the Mercedes-Benz S320 CDI. Good performance, very comfortable and a big fuel tank with reduced fuel consumption.

Why 530d with speed limits and 535d without? Both do 155mph, but the single turbo uses less fuel.

No "conditions" just the fastest car to get from Lisobn to Moscow.

The truth is with actual real world conditions a 520d would probably be the best because it has ample power and excellent fuel economy. As you said, a comfortable car that doesn't wear out the driver(s) and doesn't need to stop for gas are the two most important criteria. A MB E220 CDI probably wouldn't be bad either, I just like BMWs.

Most enjoyable: Audi A8 4.2 TDI.

BMW Diesel Beats Prius in Economy Run - TechnoRide (http://www.technoride.com/2008/03/bmw_diesel_beats_prius_in_econ.php)
I believe that says it all.

[NicFromLA]

I want a 599:D

I want a 599 too. But in terms of this question I don't think a 599 would due at all. The car isn't very comfortable for more than a few hours, it gets terrible gas milage and you're going to attract the attention of every cop along the way.

[Quiggs]

Which ever one I'm driving.

[Ferrer]

The truth is with actual real world conditions a 520d would probably be the best because it has ample power and excellent fuel economy. As you said, a comfortable car that doesn't wear out the driver(s) and doesn't need to stop for gas are the two most important criteria. A MB E220 CDI probably wouldn't be bad either, I just like BMWs.

Most enjoyable: Audi A8 4.2 TDI.

BMW Diesel Beats Prius in Economy Run - TechnoRide (http://www.technoride.com/2008/03/bmw_diesel_beats_prius_in_econ.php)
I believe that says it all.
520d would be my second choice. Amazingly low fuel consumption and 143mph is probably enough. Plus with the active seats and standards wheels and suspension it must be quite comfortable.

But the Merc is slightly faster, more comfortable and while thirstier it has a bigger tank.

PS. I 'm superised henk4 didn't choose a Citroen...

[Kultag]

Thrust SSC - 1240 km/h until fuel lasts, then roll. :p

[Dary]

well, most cars can do the job. its depended on the driver and the traffic

[coolieman1220]

If you plan on observing traffic laws distance between fillups will be the deciding factor. Several companies make in-bed axillary fuel tanks for what us yanks call "pickup trucks." I think a diesel truck with a 100+ gallon aux tank would be the way to go. As long as the roads are strait they can be quite fast too. A friend of mine has an F250 with a bully dog programmer, and it can out accelerate another friends G35 and tops out just north of 225kph.

i'd cry if i got owned by a FORD F250.....
my G35 owns all!

[2ndclasscitizen]

a bowler wildcat, for the lulz
plus, because you didn't say what conditions

Is that so you can do the trip in a straight line?

[kingofthering]

Bugatti Veyron.

Sure it's fat and drinks enough fuel to make Bush and Cheney dance a jig, but hey, it gets the job done.

[NicFromLA]

520d would be my second choice. Amazingly low fuel consumption and 143mph is probably enough. Plus with the active seats and standards wheels and suspension it must be quite comfortable.

But the Merc is slightly faster, more comfortable and while thirstier it has a bigger tank.

PS. I 'm superised henk4 didn't choose a Citroen...

The performance numbers on the 520d and the E220 CDI are very close, except the BMW gets much better fuel consumption. However the Benz does have the larger fuel tank which in this situation counts for a lot. I'm not sure which is more comfortable, but I'm sure the 5 is much more fun to drive.

If I were going to pick a Citroen, C6 2.2 HDI.

[SlickHolden]

A big HSV like a Senator or Grange. Big powerful V8, but geared for cruising which would give a decent fuel range. Holden V8's do about 8l/100km cruising 120km/h, so you'd probably be able to get about 10l/100km pushing up to 160kmh or so, which would be like a 650km range. Plus they're ridiculously comfy and can handle pretty well.

Other than that, probably a big-engined Merc or Audi.
Don't forget that these guys did a trip in a VY SV8 and got over 900km's from 1 single tank doing holdens econemy shifting.

[henk4]

PS. I 'm superised henk4 didn't choose a Citroen...

your initial question only mentioned "fastest". The word comfort came later.....now that it has been included can I take a C6 2.7HDi?
(and I mentioned a car that I thought you would choose...)

[Ferrer]

your initial question only mentioned "fastest". The word comfort came later.....now that it has been included can I take a C6 2.7HDi?
(and I mentioned a car that I thought you would choose...)
Well, when doing such a long journey if you want to arrive there early comfort is important.

Having a high performance sportscar is going to be exhausting, so you'll probably have to stop more often. And anyway you can't go 200km/h+ all the time so the performance goes to waste.

Basically I think that the best car has to be an all rounder.

[henk4]

Basically I think that the best car has to be an all rounder.

I think a C6 is still significantly more comfortable than your choice, and not significantly slower....

[Ferrer]

I think a C6 is still significantly more comfortable than your choice, and not significantly slower....
You are very probably right.

But mine uses less fuel and has an extra 18 litres in the tank. :)

[fpv_gtho]

Probably some sort of mini-bus, with enough room for a bed or two, a portable toilet and plenty of space for the co-drivers i'll take with me to do the trip non-stop.

[Kooper]

Holden Commodore/ Chev Lumina. Big engine, lots of space, not so big price.

[henk4]

You are very probably right.

But mine uses less fuel and has an extra 18 litres in the tank. :)

could well be, but be prepared that your car will be subjected "to inspection" at the Russian border.....you may have to walk the remaining distance...

[Lagonda]

The performance numbers on the 520d and the E220 CDI are very close, except the BMW gets much better fuel consumption. However the Benz does have the larger fuel tank which in this situation counts for a lot. I'm not sure which is more comfortable, but I'm sure the 5 is much more fun to drive.

If I were going to pick a Citroen, C6 2.2 HDI.
My mom currently ownes a 520d and she had a E220CDI before that. We both drive that car alot (both with a very heavy right foot) and the BMW gets about 6,6l/100km, the merc did around 7,6l/100km. According to the onboard computer the BMW would do about 100-150km more than the E220 on a full tank.

The Mercedes is MUCH more comfortable than the BMW (the merc had a "lowered" suspension since it was an Avantgarde version, the normal version should be ridiculously comfortable). The steering on the BMW is much more communicative though. Braking is somewhat the same. The BMW is more fun to drive. I'd never get a sports suspension or big wheels on it though.

As for the S-class I don't know. We used to own an S320 (petrol, previous model), which was sleep inducing. It was comfortable and quick but it felt like a big boat and was actually too comfortable for driving it yourself. The steering was completely vague. As a passenger it was great.
It was also extremely unreliable.
But then again, I haven't driven a new S-class yet.

As for top speed, who cares. You can't use it even if you're allowed to. Even 200kph is way more than enough.

All in all, I'd choose the BMW 520d as well. All it needs is the active seats and Xenon lights*

*Xenon should be mandatory on every car as far as I'm concerned. I couldn't live without it anymore. I always get frustrated in my own car that doesn't have Xenons.

[FiSK888]

there hasn't been built a car to even match veyron performances:D, at least no new model from bugatti :P

[NicFromLA]

there hasn't been built a car to even match veyron performances:D, at least no new model from bugatti :P

9ff GT9. Koenigsegg CCXR. But that's not the point; the point is while you're exhausted from keeping that car on the road and the terrible ride and you're stuck in traffic and your fuel gauge is almost empty AGAIN and know you need to pull over for fuel but you really don't know if you can bring yourself to squeeze out and squeeze in the Veyron AGAIN, I'll be sailing by in my 520d in complete comfort wondering if I'm really going to need to make three fuel stops like I planned or if I can do it on two.

[NicFromLA]

My mom currently ownes a 520d and she had a E220CDI before that. We both drive that car alot (both with a very heavy right foot) and the BMW gets about 6,6l/100km, the merc did around 7,6l/100km. According to the onboard computer the BMW would do about 100-150km more than the E220 on a full tank.

The Mercedes is MUCH more comfortable than the BMW (the merc had a "lowered" suspension since it was an Avantgarde version, the normal version should be ridiculously comfortable). The steering on the BMW is much more communicative though. Braking is somewhat the same. The BMW is more fun to drive. I'd never get a sports suspension or big wheels on it though.

As for the S-class I don't know. We used to own an S320 (petrol, previous model), which was sleep inducing. It was comfortable and quick but it felt like a big boat and was actually too comfortable for driving it yourself. The steering was completely vague. As a passenger it was great.
It was also extremely unreliable.
But then again, I haven't driven a new S-class yet.

As for top speed, who cares. You can't use it even if you're allowed to. Even 200kph is way more than enough.

All in all, I'd choose the BMW 520d as well. All it needs is the active seats and Xenon lights*

*Xenon should be mandatory on every car as far as I'm concerned. I couldn't live without it anymore. I always get frustrated in my own car that doesn't have Xenons.

Well Ferrer, I guess this solves our 5 vs. E debate.

[ruim20]

I agree with King, a Veyron, really what else? the sheer power and speed of the thing would take care of the time lost in the fuel stops.

[NicFromLA]

I agree with King, a Veyron, really what else? the sheer power and speed of the thing would take care of the time lost in the fuel stops.

Three words: "Cops" "Traffic" "Fatigue". The fact is traffic is a reality throughout Europe now and even if the road is clear, a Veyron doing 200mph is going to get noticed pretty quickly. Finally, the Veyron isn't know for its supple ride, after six hours driving that thing you're going to be exhausted.

However, if you do insist on using a car that has supercar performance you'd at least want a grandtourer. I'd suggest a 612 Scagietti or a Continental GT Speed.

[Ferrer]

Well Ferrer, I guess this solves our 5 vs. E debate.
Basically the 5er wins... :)

Another interesting candidate would be the XJ6D.

By the way with Lagonda concerning the Xenons. They are really a must for driving at night. They do really make a difference. I wonder how LEDs will be.

[NicFromLA]

Basically the 5er wins... :)

Another interesting candidate would be the XJ6D.



Not an option. Unless a Jag has an inline 6 only three kinds of people drive them: Anglophiles, old ladies and homosexuals.

XJ13 and XJ220 don't count.

[ScionDriver]

You know what? I actually might take the new Chevy Malibu; the V6 has decent power its comfortable and gets decent mileage. Motor Trend drove it across America and it did the job just fine.

[Waugh-terfall]

Mercedes ML63 AMG if fuel was no worry, otherwise an ML420 CDI.
Big, very, very comfy, the AMG is just totally bonkers and the 420 CDI will still go like the clappers when needed. Perhaps a Porsche Cayenne GTS...

[Auxin]

I think i would probably go for a cayenne turbo or a range rover sport supercharged because i know that they would both be fast on the highways but they would both also be able to handle any rough/bad condition roads you might encounter.

[h22a]

Not an option. Unless a Jag has an inline 6 only three kinds of people drive them: Anglophiles, old ladies and homosexuals.

XJ13 and XJ220 don't count.

Nic you've clearly never driven one or probably even been in one. From my experence driving all three (E,5,XJ) the XJ has the most supple, comfortable ride by such a margin its laughable. The BM and Merc have such a harsh ride in comparison, typical bland german interiors(personal pref though)no character at all plus both are dog ugly.

I'd go an XJR Super V8 Portfolio.

[fpv_gtho]

XJ would compare more directly to the S class and 7 series though.

[h22a]

XJ would compare more directly to the S class and 7 series though.

100 percent correct, yet price wise they are very similar. Obviously the outgoing Stype is comparable but again...the ride on an s-type is superior. I havnt driven the new XF yet but i can only assume from the reviews ive read its going to be a great car.

Sorry im a little biased as i sell the ****en things;)

[rev440]

C6 Z06

[jump15vc]

A Eurofighter Typhoon would get it done but if you can't find one of those probably a 530d would be most efficient. But if you really want to enjoy the journey an M5, Aston DBS, or even a 599 GTB will get you there and make you feel like God behind the wheel, plus it's easier to outrun the fuzz in them. Although you lose time at the pump you would lose more time getting pulled over in a 530d, the M5 Aston and 599 will all give you a better chance at evading the authorities since last I checked theres only one Brabus CLS cop car, and it's not in service yet so you should be ok outrunning the various Audi's Bimmers, Mercs and Opels patrolling Germany lol

[sansev]

If you don't mind the fuel consumption, I would probably use a Bentley Continental, but if you want to save the time you would lose refueling I would propose a Mercedes E280CDI. I've driven such a car and the V6 engine is low-consumption and high-power and torque engine. The car is really comfortable compared to Audi and BMW. I've driven from Madrid to Bern with friends using a E280CDI and it was great!

[LeonOfTheDead]

if you want some confort, performance (highway of course) and decent fuel consumption, Lexus LS600h.
but if you want a trip very "stylish" with heads turning around while you are passing, and even some confort but more performance, Maserati Quattroporte, in which trim level/performance package you like.
finally, you could try a Zonda, probably it's lower than the majority of the speed cameras:D, but i guess not so comfy for a 4600km trip. so go faster and save more time to take a rest;)

[NSXType-R]

if you want some confort, performance (highway of course) and decent fuel consumption, Lexus LS600h.
but if you want a trip very "stylish" with heads turning around while you are passing, and even some confort but more performance, Maserati Quattroporte, in which trim level/performance package you like.
finally, you could try a Zonda, probably it's lower than the majority of the speed cameras:D, but i guess not so comfy for a 4600km trip. so go faster and save more time to take a rest;)

Audi A8L. W12. Of course.

The LS600h is not much more fuel efficient. If I were going for V8 large sedans though, I'd choose the LS460 though. It is good bang for the buck.

[LeonOfTheDead]

Audi A8L. W12. Of course.

The LS600h is not much more fuel efficient. If I were going for V8 large sedans though, I'd choose the LS460 though. It is good bang for the buck.

for sure the 600h is more fuel efficient than the maserati. btw, i would take it mainly for the comfort, it's a really expensive car, it's no more interesting how much fuel it needs...
ok, Maserati Quattroporte. speed, class, "comfort" and a car i love.

[Ferrer]

Audi A8L. W12. Of course.

The LS600h is not much more fuel efficient. If I were going for V8 large sedans though, I'd choose the LS460 though. It is good bang for the buck.


for sure the 600h is more fuel efficient than the maserati. btw, i would take it mainly for the comfort, it's a really expensive car, it's no more interesting how much fuel it needs...
ok, Maserati Quattroporte. speed, class, "comfort" and a car i love.
If you really want fuel efficiency diesel is the only way to go.

[Rockefella]

I would do it with a Mercedes S550. Electronic amenities and comfort coupled with big power and highway crusing prowess. You could easily do 100mph+ without worry, and the gas tank on it is pretty large.

I calculated that at it's 22 mpg highway rating, and 23.8 gallon gas tank, you'd do roughly 520 miles between refueling. At 4600 km, converting to miles gives you about 2800 miles so you'd be stopping to refuel 5 times. With this length of trip, you're looking at about that many bathroom breaks.

May not be the fastest or most fuel-efficient, but that'd be my poison.

[Ingolstadt]

A Gallardo Spyder. It's along trip, I need different stuffs to keep me excited.

Roof down .... or roof up music blast ..... roof down .. .engine note .... a cigarette ..... on a long straight ... stand up and cheer and show the 'V' sign to your self ....

in a s class or bentley or whatever :" .................................................. .................................................. ............................................"

[LeonOfTheDead]

A Gallardo Spyder. It's along trip, I need different stuffs to keep me excited.

Roof down .... or roof up music blast ..... roof down .. .engine note .... a cigarette ..... on a long straight ... stand up and cheer and show the 'V' sign to your self ....

in a s class or bentley or whatever :" .................................................. .................................................. ............................................"

in the gallardo spyder with you: "........................." ;)

[kingrabbit]

My Diablo is an amazing car and makes it a better bet, better than a Mclaren F1, good turns, really smooth, extremely fast and everybody takes a look at you as you drive down the street. Driving one makes you feel like a god.
_____________________
autopartswarehouse blog (http://autopartsware.tabulas.com)

[jediali]

My Diablo is an amazing car and makes it a better bet, better than a Mclaren F1, good turns, really smooth, extremely fast and everybody takes a look at you as you drive down the street. Driving one makes you feel like a god.]



guilty until proven innocent here im afraid! (http://www.ultimatecarpage.com/forum/miscellaneous/18179-egg-nog-test.html)

PS. The engine talk in the M3 article at this blog in your signature isnt very good. Sorry.

[h22a]

i hope this guys claims are true....a diablo..... and a viper according to the hennesy viper thread.
a huge call....

[jediali]

and a toyota for winter

[VOGUE_MAN]

Range Rover, a real one, not a Sport. Why sit in a car for three days when you can sit in what's practically a comfortable arm chair?

[group c n b man]

I'd say probably a 535d or a jaguar 2.7d. Both have no problems cruising at high speeds while using very very little fuel. Only problem is... you may fall asleep because of the serenity of the ride. Especially if the cabin is warm and it's dark outside.

[Drones]

In Russia, powerful SUV with big wheels, will be faster - Audi Q7 4.2 TDI.

[twistedzonda]

Well, if you are going to stick to the speed limit, a Honda Insight hybrid - it does 83 mpg, and at legal speeds, it doesn't matter what performance you have.

Or, a Rolls-Royce Phantom SWB, if you want to have a long journey and not even know that you have even been anywhere.

[Ferrer]

Well, if you are going to stick to the speed limit, a Honda Insight hybrid - it does 83 mpg, and at legal speeds, it doesn't matter what performance you have.
Don't you think a diesel like an Ibiza Ecomotive or a 1er would be better in those circumstances?

And you'd probably pass through Germany where there are stretches of motorway with no speed limits. And anyway it's not like going to stick strictly to the limit either.

[Matra et Alpine]

^^^ Most likely.
In the 2000 odd miles in Europe recently I'm CONVINCED I had to overtake the same Skoda Fabia every time I had to pull in and fill the Mazda :( :( So not only was he as fast on average he was one HELLUVA lot cheaper ... but I contest not as much fun :)

[group c n b man]

I'd be tempted to say the new Audi A8 with either the 4.2TDI or 3.0TDI. Audi's modern TDI and FSI engines are amazing. Even more power than before but with reduced fuel consumption and fewer emissions. For example the 4.2FSI has 370bhp yet returns 30mpg and even emits less than 225g/km of C02 therefore it escapes the top tax band here in the UK. There are many cars which are much less powerful yet are far more polluting. Anyway, you could cruise across Europe in one of these at 155mph in almost complete silence.

[Ferrer]

It should be a balance between comfort, speed and fuel consumption. The A8 with its trick alumium chasis could be contender, but since the thread was started there's been a new Jag which could just do the trick.

[group c n b man]

It should be a balance between comfort, speed and fuel consumption. The A8 with its trick alumium chasis could be contender, but since the thread was started there's been a new Jag which could just do the trick.

I assume you are talking about the new XJ which is waiting in the wings. I can't wait until the Magazines make their full reviews of it. However the reason that I think the A8 would be the best is because it is 4WD. As other members have pointed out earlier, this journey across Europe would be in 'real' conditions, not some controlled environment. Yes, the 7 series, XJ may be very good normally but what happens when the snow starts to fall? They are hopeless.

[Ferrer]

I don't think an A8 with normal tires would be of much use either in the snow, despite the four wheel drive.

[LeonOfTheDead]

Just remember that the most powerful equipment in a car it's the driver.

[092326001]

I'm just guessing but a Bowler should have a massive fuel tank, no?

[Ferrer]

Just remember that the most powerful equipment in a car it's the driver.
True, but it needs good accesories... ;)

[Clivey]

I think the Alpina D3 BiTurbo would cut the best balance between pace and fuel economy. Those twin-turbo diesels really are incredible!

If you had to stick to speed limits though, the BMW 520d could potentially give you 1,000+ miles out of a tank of fuel...and you'd be comfortable doing it.

[henk4]

I think the Alpina D3 BiTurbo would cut the best balance between pace and fuel economy. Those twin-turbo diesels really are incredible!

If you had to stick to speed limits though, the BMW 520d could potentially give you 1,000+ miles out of a tank of fuel...and you'd be comfortable doing it.

Beware of the BMW ECE mileage figures. A Dutch investigation found out that they used special tyres to achieve those, which were never available to the consumer in the street. They will do everything to cock up the ECE figures and hence the CO2 emission fiigures to please the authorities.
The same research also compared actual mileage figures with officially quoted ones. It comes as no surprise that the Prius and the Honda Hybrid, but also the small cars like the Smart or the C1, scored 40-50% higher than they should. And for the record, for my car the figure was 18% above the official one (7.3 l/100km vs 6.2) while my average is 10% up, (6.8).

Also interesting, the ECE mileage for the 599GTB is 21.3l /100, observed mileage 31.....
The figures for the BMW 5-series officially hover around 6.1-6.3, and in reality they are about 7.1.-7.4, so very much comparable to what I observe for my car.

[f6fhellcat13]

What do people think is, aside from BMW cheating, the major flaw in the test that overly punishes/rewards those car?

[henk4]

What do people think is, aside from BMW cheating, the major flaw in the test that overly punishes/rewards those car?

the major flaw in the car tests is that the testers are basically male persons in the age of 25-35 with a high testosterone level, with no family and purely see the car as a single seater for the driver only.

[Ferrer]

Cheating or not, it's hard to fault a BMWs mechanical prowess.

However, apparently the more spectacular the figure is, the more it tends to stray from reality. At km77.com there's a very interesting series of articles comparing several cars fuel consumption, if anyone is interested. Only in Spanish though.

[henk4]

Cheating or not, it's hard to fault a BMWs mechanical prowess.

as in our country some car related taxes or based on the level of CO2 emissions, I don't care about the prowess, I want them to use the real figures and not the fabricated artifical ones, which cannot be reproduced, because the cars are not equipped with the means to do so.

[ruim20]

Cheating or not, it's hard to fault a BMWs mechanical prowess.

However, apparently the more spectacular the figure is, the more it tends to stray from reality. At km77.com there's a very interesting series of articles comparing several cars fuel consumption, if anyone is interested. Only in Spanish though.

Could you post the link directly to the article, i browsed around but couldn't find it, thanks! :)

[Clivey]

as in our country some car related taxes or based on the level of CO2 emissions, I don't care about the prowess, I want them to use the real figures and not the fabricated artifical ones, which cannot be reproduced, because the cars are not equipped with the means to do so.

To be honest though, I'd rather them do everything they can to reduce the CO2 emissions for the tests, because (at least in the UK) road tax is skyrocketing for most new performance cars.:( It's £435 a year to tax a 350Z, even if you're only doing 6,000 miles. That's before you pay for fuel, tyres, insurance etc. etc.

[Ferrer]

as in our country some car related taxes or based on the level of CO2 emissions, I don't care about the prowess, I want them to use the real figures and not the fabricated artifical ones, which cannot be reproduced, because the cars are not equipped with the means to do so.
Even so, it's hard to fault the BMW in real life.

Could you post the link directly to the article, i browsed around but couldn't find it, thanks! :)
There you go.

Pruebas De Consumo | Curvas enlazadas (http://blogs.km77.com/arturoandres/category/pruebas-de-consumo/)

14 cars tested so far.

[henk4]

Even so, it's hard to fault the BMW in real life.


to the contrary, it is quite easy, it has no real comfort...

[Ferrer]

to the contrary, it is quite easy, it has no real comfort...
It has other qualities, and if you stick to standard suspension and wheels it is not so bad. However, if all you care about is going comfortably from A to B, regardless of everything else; like speed, fuel consumption, handling or quality amongst other; yes there are indeed better option out there.

[henk4]

Pruebas De Consumo | Curvas enlazadas (http://blogs.km77.com/arturoandres/category/pruebas-de-consumo/)

14 cars tested so far.

That's an interesting link, but there is one flaw, they do not mention the ECE mileage, but just the part that is measured a 90 kph at constant speed, and is therefore ridiculously low. Also nice to see that the PSA diesels (Ford) are more frugal than the VAG stuff, even when fitted with this DSG gearbox.

[Ferrer]

That's an interesting link, but there is one flaw, they do not mention the ECE mileage, but just the part that is measured a 90 kph at constant speed, and is therefore ridiculously low. Also nice to see that the PSA diesels (Ford) are more frugal than the VAG stuff, even when fitted with this DSG gearbox.
Actually they use the extraurban figure (not limited to a constant speed AFAIK) because he tests the cars outside cities, on roads and motorways.

[henk4]

Actually they use the extraurban figure (not limited to a constant speed AFAIK) because he tests the cars outside cities, on roads and motorways.

with average speeds up to 108-110 kph, which is much higher than the ECE cycle AFAIK.

[Clivey]

After looking at that article, it slams home just how terminally dull most new cars are. I wouldn't pay actual money for any of those cars (unless of course I could sell them for a profit).

My solution to the "problem" of fuel economy and emissions is simple: I'm buying a house closer to where I work (2 miles rather than 12)...therefore, even if I swapped my car for something that does 10mpg (rather than circa 44 as I get now) on the journey to and from work, it'll be cheaper to fuel overall.

If the cost of insurance wasn't so ridiculous in the UK, I'd then swap my C4 for a BMW 330Ci / Mazda RX-8...then at least I'd have "something for the weekend".

[Ferrer]

with average speeds up to 108-110 kph, which is much higher than the ECE cycle AFAIK.
You are probably right, but then the journalist tries to test cars in real life conditions. In his articles he always mentions fuel consumption and overall time. It doesn't matter if you do a million miles to the gallon if you are an hour late.

So actually it's not only a fuel consumption test, but performance and handling too. For instance one of the cars that has done better so far is the Ibiza FR TDi, which I think it is technically a hot hatchback.

After looking at that article, it slams home just how terminally dull most new cars are. I wouldn't pay actual money for any of those cars (unless of course I could sell them for a profit).

My solution to the "problem" of fuel economy and emissions is simple: I'm buying a house closer to where I work (2 miles rather than 12)...therefore, even if I swapped my car for something that does 10mpg (rather than circa 44 as I get now) on the journey to and from work, it'll be cheaper to fuel overall.

If the cost of insurance wasn't so ridiculous in the UK, I'd then swap my C4 for a BMW 330Ci / Mazda RX-8...then at least I'd have "something for the weekend".
It's not all lost though. There are still some gems to be enjoyed out there, if you can be bothered looking for them. In the end though, if you are really an enthusiast, as long as you can afford it, economy is never one of your priorities.

[henk4]

You are probably right, but then the journalist tries to test cars in real life conditions. In his articles he always mentions fuel consumption and overall time. It doesn't matter if you do a million miles to the gallon if you are an hour late.


Real life conditions would also include city traffic, traffic jams etc. The point that we were discussing earlier is the deviation of OVERALL mileage from what is derived from the ECE cycle. I think your Spanish testers provide only part of that equation.
People in Holland get tax breaks or are exempt from paying road tax if their car reaches a certain level of consumption. If this level is clearly artifical and even achieved by cheating (the BMW case), then I feel, being a normal taxpayer, providing 437 Euros every 3 months just for the pleasure of driving a car for which the ECE cycle is much more realistic, then I feel like I am being stolen from.

[Ferrer]

Pieter, I think it's time you get a BMW then. :)

[henk4]

Pieter, I think it's time you get a BMW then. :)
they are not exempt from road tax....a 520d Touring would cost me 14 Euro less per quarter in road tax (and considerable more for medical costs related to backpains...)

and for 2000 Euro less in purchase price, but 30 Euro more road tax per quarter, I could also buy a C5 Touring 3.0V6 Hdi....

[Clivey]

they are not exempt from road tax....a 520d Touring would cost me 14 Euro less per quarter in road tax (and considerable more for medical costs related to backpains...)

A 5'er in 'SE' trim will definitely not give you backache...especially if it has the optional comfort seats. Even the M-Sport can be ordered on standard suspension, if you so desire.


and for 2000 Euro less in purchase price, but 30 Euro more road tax per quarter, I could also buy a C5 Touring 3.0V6 Hdi....

How do the Citroen's residual values compare with the BMWs in Holland? One of the reasons they're not very popular over here is that buyers are scared of losing 70% of what they paid for the car after 3 years. That's exactly what I took advantage of when I bought mine at a huge discount.

[henk4]

A 5'er in 'SE' trim will definitely not give you backache...especially if it has the optional comfort seats. Even the M-Sport can be ordered on standard suspension, if you so desire.



How do the Citroen's residual values compare with the BMWs in Holland? One of the reasons they're not very popular over here is that buyers are scared of losing 70% of what they paid for the car after 3 years. That's exactly what I took advantage of when I bought mine at a huge discount.

Residual values of consumption goods are zero at the end of their lifetimes.
And if you start paying far less, your depreciation is also far less....in other words initially steep depreciations curves tend to flatten out after a couple of years and then could be on par with the flatter ones.

[Clivey]

Residual values of consumption goods are zero at the end of their lifetimes.
And if you start paying far less, your depreciation is also far less....in other words initially steep depreciations curves tend to flatten out after a couple of years and then could be on par with the flatter ones.

As I said: This is exactly what I am taking advantage of. I have owned my car for almost 3 years and in that time I have lost about £2k in depreciation. That's brilliant for a 2007-model small hatch.

However, regarding the C5: Most sales of D-segment cars in the UK are to the fleet market. Resale values are important to the fleet market as they typically replace their vehicles with brand new models after 3 years. Cars with low resale values become more expensive to lease, leading to companies removing them from the choices they offer to employees.

Unfortunately, in the UK Citroen have a poor reputation for quality and reliability after the cars they sold throughout the '90's and the early '00s. From my own personal experience, their dealerships don't exactly do them any favours either. This is the main reason for their poor resale values and also means that private buyers are also reluctant to try Citroens.

[Ferrer]

they are not exempt from road tax....a 520d Touring would cost me 14 Euro less per quarter in road tax (and considerable more for medical costs related to backpains...)

and for 2000 Euro less in purchase price, but 30 Euro more road tax per quarter, I could also buy a C5 Touring 3.0V6 Hdi....
You should also take into account the fuel consumption difference. Which could make the BMW a more attractive proposition.

[henk4]

As I said: This is exactly what I am taking advantage of. I have owned my car for almost 3 years and in that time I have lost about £2k in depreciation. That's brilliant for a 2007-model small hatch.

However, regarding the C5: Most sales of D-segment cars in the UK are to the fleet market. Resale values are important to the fleet market as they typically replace their vehicles with brand new models after 3 years. Cars with low resale values become more expensive to lease, leading to companies removing them from the choices they offer to employees.

Unfortunately, in the UK Citroen have a poor reputation for quality and reliability after the cars they sold throughout the '90's and the early '00s. From my own personal experience, their dealerships don't exactly do them any favours either. This is the main reason for their poor resale values and also means that private buyers are also reluctant to try Citroens.

that is applicable to Holland as well. My car was a one year old demo car from Germany, where prices are lower anyway.

[henk4]

You should also take into account the fuel consumption difference. Which could make the BMW a more attractive proposition.

I thought the discussion was about real life consumption figures, which do not differ much between the BMW and the C5.

[Ferrer]

I thought the discussion was about real life consumption figures, which do not differ much between the BMW and the C5.
Are you sure, because everything seems to be against the Citroën. And in my experience BMWs are quite brilliant mechanically. Our 1er does use relatively little fuel even if you go for it. I can only assume this will be the same across the range.

[henk4]

Are you sure, because everything seems to be against the Citroën. And in my experience BMWs are quite brilliant mechanically. Our 1er does use relatively little fuel even if you go for it. I can only assume this will be the same across the range.

118d ECE 4.5, observed 6.2...or almost 40% more.
my C5 ECE 6.2, observed 7.3 or about 18% more...(my average is 6.8)
(I took the C5 just for the fuel comparison, in other aspects a C5 and 1-series are totally incomparable:))

[Ferrer]

118d ECE 4.5, observed 6.2...or almost 40% more.
my C5 ECE 6.2, observed 7.3 or about 18% more...(my average is 6.8)
(I took the C5 just for the fuel comparison, in other aspects a C5 and 1-series are totally incomparable:))
Observed 6,2l/100km? I'd say on average I get 6,5l/100km and that's driving fast.

Where do you get the figures from and what are the conditions?

[henk4]

Observed 6,2l/100km? I'd say on average I get 6,5l/100km and that's driving fast.

Where do you get the figures from and what are the conditions?

see post #78.
http://www.werkelijkverbruik.nl

("realmileage.nl")

[Ferrer]

Why, if I put 30,000km per year the fuel consumption drops to 6,0l/100km?

Also, I still can't see what are the conditions in which those figures are achieved.

[henk4]

Why, if I put 30,000km per year the fuel consumption drops to 6,0l/100km?

Also, I still can't see what are the conditions in which those figures are achieved.

travelcard is an organisation that issues tank passes. On that basis they are able to see what each individual car seems to be consuming. So the conditions can vary greatly, but with a large number of observations they arrive at a certain average.
Obviously drivers who do more kms per year are able to do that a more favourable rate, presumably as the greater numbers of kms you cover, the less the share of city driving becomes.
Furthermore the results have been calibrated with assistence from the major Dutch research conglomerate TNO.

But I am afraid I have to leave it here, I am off to California tomorrow, and I'll keep you posted on the mileage of the Taurus SHO that we will be using there.....

[Ferrer]

But I am afraid I have to leave it here, I am off to California tomorrow, and I'll keep you posted on the mileage of the Taurus SHO that we will be using there.....
I'm betting it'll be 6.2 as well...

Don't worry, I'll wait until you return and we can continue where we left it. :)