Comments on: BMW UK releases most fuel efficient 3 Series

By: mariam

mariam — Mon, 29 Jun 2009 09:12:56 +0000

this sounds like goodnews!i’d say itz awesome.

By: Golfschwein

Golfschwein — Thu, 25 Jun 2009 12:26:29 +0000

It would, wouldn’t it, Figjam? It is! That’s the point! BMW have a large choice from elsewhere in their range for those chasing 0-100 km/h times.

By: figjam

figjam — Thu, 25 Jun 2009 11:30:07 +0000

0-100KM/H IN 10.9SEC? what a slug!it would want to be good on fuel!

By: Shak

Shak — Thu, 25 Jun 2009 10:46:05 +0000

no slouch yeah rite. My Honda Accord 09 does the sprint in 9.6 proven. C’mon this isnt the type of performance we’d expect from the ultimate driving machine.

By: Frontman

Frontman — Thu, 25 Jun 2009 06:49:45 +0000

Things in Europe are getting very impressive indeed, Mondeo Econetic returning 4.33 litres per 100km (City) and 3.66 litres per 100km (Highway), and the Bluemotion Programme offering similar figures soon now with BMW doing this I reckon the Hybrid brigade will be getting a little nervouse.

By: Alex

Alex — Thu, 25 Jun 2009 05:10:49 +0000

Tony, it’s not a 1.6, it’s a 2.0.

Impressive numbers and I don’t think that that should quite be classed as slow but I don’t know why BMW doesn’t just bring out smaller engines. We already had the 318d, was this really necessary?

By: Will

Will — Thu, 25 Jun 2009 04:21:24 +0000

Mitch,
Citroen is re-inventing the Goddess. The DS will be built on C4 and C5 platforms and will offer a diesel electric power plant. There are already renderings. Pending price this may be my next drive.

By: Mitch

Mitch — Thu, 25 Jun 2009 04:08:36 +0000

Whens a hybrid Diesel coming out?

By: Tony

Tony — Thu, 25 Jun 2009 02:46:05 +0000

impressive output from a 1.6 litre especially since it’s pushing around 1.4 tons

i suppose dinan or one of those will have a CHIP for it soon

for me i don’t think i’d ever want more than 9 sec 0-100 and say 16 sec 0-400m meters in such a sedan

nice going… probably no so nice going in AU where it’s around $57k? makes more sense where it’s a cheapish sedan in Europe.

By: Golfschwein

Golfschwein — Thu, 25 Jun 2009 02:24:32 +0000

Brilliant figures from BMW. And it’s true: my Golf diesel’s official 11.1 second 0-100 km/h is also tawdry, but an in-town prod on the accelerator pedal in second gear still satisfies.

By: S

Thu, 25 Jun 2009 01:26:15 +0000

Hey TSI, 10.4 secs is pretty slow too. I would expect a lot more performance for a car that I would be paying nearly $60,000 drive away. That’s without any added options…

By: Mr T

Mr T — Thu, 25 Jun 2009 00:45:08 +0000

10.9s isn’t at all fast, but with 260Nm of low-down torque, it will probably be a lot more driveable in traffic than its 0-100 time would suggest (like most modern turbo diesels).

By: Howie-R31

Howie-R31 — Thu, 25 Jun 2009 00:28:29 +0000

I agree with S. 10.9 is pretty slow, but for something of that size that sips fuel so well, its a great feat. I’d take it over the mini cooper, although I would assume the price would be much higher.

By: TSI

TSI — Thu, 25 Jun 2009 00:16:43 +0000

Hey S
BMW 320i Executive 0-100km take 10.4 sec already. it needs 8.0/100kms..So 316d is not slow..

By: S

Thu, 25 Jun 2009 00:00:46 +0000

Great economy. But not what I would be looking at a BMW for. 0-100 in 10.9 sec… Thats very slow for a car these days…

By: TSI

TSI — Wed, 24 Jun 2009 23:57:21 +0000

very impressive…. BMW.
toyota take note….

By: Will

Will — Wed, 24 Jun 2009 23:52:06 +0000

Think I would go the Mini Diesel.
As is, am satisfied with my Skoda 2L TDI.