XBimmers X1   XBimmers X1
  XBimmers X1

Go Back   XBimmers | BMW X1 Forum > BMW X1 Forums > General BMW X1 (E84) Forum

Post Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
      10-22-2012, 10:50 PM   #1
conceyted
Private
conceyted's Avatar
2
Rep
80
Posts

 
Drives: 2013 X1
Join Date: Oct 2012
Location: New Orleans, LA

iTrader: (0)

So the 28i EPA estimates are off. What can be done?

Well, by now I am sure many of you have read the numerous complaints from X1 drivers stating that their 28i's aren't coming close to EPA estimates. I think we all understand that these are estimates, but if a car is stated to get 33-34 mpg highway and only gets 27-28 mpg highway, then the word estimate is really a major stretch. BMW's track record for getting facts straight has not be good lately with the paddle shifter fiasco, the mention of standard iDrive, and the numerous other issues many have encountered. What I wonder, though, is what exactly owners of the X1 28i can do?

I for one would have more strongly considered my options had I realized that the EPA estimates were so far off. At the very least, I would have more strongly considered the option of going for the 35i, as the majority of my reason for going 28i was the increase in fuel economy. It now would appear that these two models might end up getting the same real-world fuel economy. Has anyone here even achieved over 30 mpg in their X1 28i? My wife's e90 did this yesterday on the interstate. As a matter of fact, it has an EPA rating of 18/28, yet consistently pulls in better figures (around 21/30). I am trying to get an idea of what to expect with my X1.

What can owners of the X1 28i do? Do we have to just accept that we were/are being misled by these grossly overestimated EPA numbers? Is there any responsibility BMW should be forced to take over this? I know of an issue where Honda had to settle a class action suit against a bad fuel economy estimate, but drivers ended up receiving a measly $200 USD for their troubles. If auto makers can make wild claims for EPA estimates with very little recourse then what stops them from making an 80 mpg 5.0L next year?

Edit: Oh, and here is another good one for you guys. The 2013 BMW X3 28i with the same N20 engine and 8 spd transmission as the X1 28i has been given EPA estimates of 21/28. Coincidentally this also seems to be close to what the X1 28i is seeing in real world figures. Just how much of a coincidence is this? Perhaps we will see the EPA estimates on the X1 revised to read something more along the lines of the X3 at some point.

Last edited by conceyted; 10-22-2012 at 10:58 PM.
Appreciate 0
      10-23-2012, 07:33 AM   #2
bmwx1rider
Registered
0
Rep
2
Posts

 
Drives: 2013 BMW X1
Join Date: Oct 2012
Location: United States

iTrader: (0)

One of the primary reasons I purchased the X1 was because of the MPG. I would hope to be somewhere around 30mpg considering 99% of my drive is on the highway with very little stopping.
Appreciate 0
      10-23-2012, 09:34 AM   #3
Lucky13
Lucky13
United_States
16
Rep
1,226
Posts

 
Drives: 2014 M235 manual
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Columbia, S.C.

iTrader: (0)

Our mileage so far has sucked. sDrive with 1,400 miles and my best is the current tank at 22.3. Granted this is what would be considered city with no hwy but it is still bad since overall since purchase were around 21 mpg. If you compare the S drive to the F30 the EPA estimate makes sense since it weighs pretty close to the same amount. How could the vehicles with the same engine, transmission, similar in weight be so far off in mpg? I'm only getting about 2.5 mpg better than my 2007 E93 manual but it is heavier and I drive it hard.
__________________
1995 325i, 1996 328ci, 1997 528i, 1997 Z3 2.8,2001 X5 3.0, 2001 330i Convertible, 2002 M3 Convertible, 2003 M3 Coupe, 2004 M3 Coupe, 2004 Z4 3.0, 2004 X3 3.0,
2007 X3 3.0, 2007 335i Convertible, 2013 X1 28 sdrive,
2014 M235 manual
Appreciate 0
      10-23-2012, 11:03 AM   #4
Monterra
Captain
Monterra's Avatar
8
Rep
617
Posts

 
Drives: 09 128i 6MT
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: HVNY

iTrader: (0)

Yup, I knew there was no way in hell a heavier AWD X1 was going to get 33 when the lighter, slipperier RWD F30 gets the same after the revision. 30 sounds about right in ideal conditions, 31 with a slight tailwind. This is why for now I'm sold on the 35i although I'd prefer the big numbers the 20d will no doubt put up and likely beat real world.
__________________
6MT-Montego/Terra 128i ZSP
Save the manuals, bring the diesels BMW!
Appreciate 0
      10-23-2012, 11:26 AM   #5
BMWrules7
Major
20
Rep
1,070
Posts

 
Drives: 2011 750Li, Alpine White
Join Date: Mar 2011
Location: Boston Area

iTrader: (0)

Quote:
Originally Posted by conceyted
Well, by now I am sure many of you have read the numerous complaints from X1 drivers stating that their 28i's aren't coming close to EPA estimates. I think we all understand that these are estimates, but if a car is stated to get 33-34 mpg highway and only gets 27-28 mpg highway, then the word estimate is really a major stretch. BMW's track record for getting facts straight has not be good lately with the paddle shifter fiasco, the mention of standard iDrive, and the numerous other issues many have encountered. What I wonder, though, is what exactly owners of the X1 28i can do?

I for one would have more strongly considered my options had I realized that the EPA estimates were so far off. At the very least, I would have more strongly considered the option of going for the 35i, as the majority of my reason for going 28i was the increase in fuel economy. It now would appear that these two models might end up getting the same real-world fuel economy. Has anyone here even achieved over 30 mpg in their X1 28i? My wife's e90 did this yesterday on the interstate. As a matter of fact, it has an EPA rating of 18/28, yet consistently pulls in better figures (around 21/30). I am trying to get an idea of what to expect with my X1.

What can owners of the X1 28i do? Do we have to just accept that we were/are being misled by these grossly overestimated EPA numbers? Is there any responsibility BMW should be forced to take over this? I know of an issue where Honda had to settle a class action suit against a bad fuel economy estimate, but drivers ended up receiving a measly $200 USD for their troubles. If auto makers can make wild claims for EPA estimates with very little recourse then what stops them from making an 80 mpg 5.0L next year?

Edit: Oh, and here is another good one for you guys. The 2013 BMW X3 28i with the same N20 engine and 8 spd transmission as the X1 28i has been given EPA estimates of 21/28. Coincidentally this also seems to be close to what the X1 28i is seeing in real world figures. Just how much of a coincidence is this? Perhaps we will see the EPA estimates on the X1 revised to read something more along the lines of the X3 at some point.
Well, maybe this is why BMW surprisingly threw in the 8 speed on the 2.8 and not the larger engine.

Did BMW discover its mpg error and attempt to mitigate the problem by tossing in the 8 speed tranny?

I have been equally concerned about gas milage. My 750li Xdrive gets 400 miles per tank. My wife's x1 2.8 gets about 365 miles per tank. Yes, the tank on my 7 is 5 or so gallons larger.

But, it comes down to convenience. It is annoying to fill up your tank all the time. So, I wish the 2.8 got better gas milage so I would only fill her once a week instead of neatly twice per week.

Now, I have found that BMWs don't get the best gas mileage until the motor hits 10,000 or 20,000 miles. So, lets give it some more time.
Appreciate 0
      10-23-2012, 11:53 AM   #6
Red Bread
Brigadier General
United_States
45
Rep
4,364
Posts

 
Drives: My wife's car
Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: Dallas, TX

iTrader: (0)

Garage List
Haha, our 3.5i got 27 mpg on the last 700 mile trip we took, looks like that 6s isn't so bad.

Don't forget that the F30 got severely handicapped from the EPA, it was initially rated at 36 mpg hwy.
Appreciate 0
      10-23-2012, 12:24 PM   #7
e84PeyC
New Member
0
Rep
8
Posts

 
Drives: 2013 X1 xDrive28
Join Date: Sep 2012
Location: East Coast, USA

iTrader: (0)

It depends on how to drive, friends! Turn on ECO Pro and I got city/highway avg of 28 for the past 1400 miles i have driven
Appreciate 0
      10-23-2012, 12:47 PM   #8
Red Bread
Brigadier General
United_States
45
Rep
4,364
Posts

 
Drives: My wife's car
Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: Dallas, TX

iTrader: (0)

Garage List
Quote:
Originally Posted by e84PeyC View Post
It depends on how to drive, friends! Turn on ECO Pro and I got city/highway avg of 28 for the past 1400 miles i have driven
Hopefully it does more on the 28i, I drove with it on for about 200 miles and got to a shocking 5 miles of gas saved! I haven't touched it since.
Appreciate 0
      10-23-2012, 01:01 PM   #9
Lucky13
Lucky13
United_States
16
Rep
1,226
Posts

 
Drives: 2014 M235 manual
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Columbia, S.C.

iTrader: (0)

We only use Eco Pro at we are at 21 since purchase. I'm thinking Eco Pro is a waste of time since it wants to put you in such a higher gear that if you need to kick it it jumps down several gears and rips you a new one.
__________________
1995 325i, 1996 328ci, 1997 528i, 1997 Z3 2.8,2001 X5 3.0, 2001 330i Convertible, 2002 M3 Convertible, 2003 M3 Coupe, 2004 M3 Coupe, 2004 Z4 3.0, 2004 X3 3.0,
2007 X3 3.0, 2007 335i Convertible, 2013 X1 28 sdrive,
2014 M235 manual
Appreciate 0
      10-23-2012, 01:42 PM   #10
MikeRR
Second Lieutenant
Switzerland
3
Rep
240
Posts

 
Drives: 435i F33
Join Date: Apr 2012
Location: Switzerland

iTrader: (0)

Quote:
Originally Posted by BMWrules7 View Post
Now, I have found that BMWs don't get the best gas mileage until the motor hits 10,000 or 20,000 miles. So, lets give it some more time.
__________________
My Garage:435i F33 - Estoril Blue / black leather
Corvette C6 Z06 black / black // X1 25d M Sport - mineral white / cloth-alcantara black
Appreciate 0
      10-23-2012, 03:44 PM   #11
mabrahams
Second Lieutenant
5
Rep
202
Posts

 
Drives: X1 M-Sport 28i
Join Date: Dec 2010
Location: Fl

iTrader: (0)

On the way home from SC to FL, I was averaged 30 MPG. I had ECO-PRO on as well. This was about a 580 mile trip.

There are a lot of factors out there that effect MPG.... other than the car it self.
Appreciate 0
      10-23-2012, 06:56 PM   #12
Transfer
Lieutenant Colonel
Transfer's Avatar
United_States
24
Rep
1,689
Posts

 
Drives: SQ5, X1
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: Seattle, WA

iTrader: (0)

If you're not using Eco Pro mode exclusively and driving like granny, don't be surprised if you get less than expected mpg.
Appreciate 0
      10-23-2012, 08:20 PM   #13
popopine
Private
United_States
4
Rep
77
Posts

 
Drives: Black X1 X-line
Join Date: Aug 2012
Location: North East US

iTrader: (0)

If i drive 65 on the highway i get low 30s. If i drive 80 i get 27. As stated above, i think this will improve over time. Fingers crossed.
Appreciate 0
      10-23-2012, 08:20 PM   #14
Jabloomf1230
New Member
0
Rep
11
Posts

 
Drives: 72 3.0CS, 05 330xi, 13 X1 x28i
Join Date: Jul 2012
Location: Upstate NY

iTrader: (0)

There must be reason for the low mileages being reported, but I have been getting consistently 31 mpg highway (100% highway driving, 65 mph cruise control, with some terrain) and 26 combined. I'm guessing from that, that the city number must be about 21 based on my driving mix. This is not doing any kind of "fun" driving on my part, which probably would reduce the mileage drastically. This is approximately 4-5 mpg more than my 2005 330xi, driven the same way.

I also have observed that Eco-Pro saves only a few miles a tankful. For people with low highway values, have any of you tried resetting the mpg logger and then driving 20 or 30 miles of 100% 65 mph CC highway driving? I'm just curious what you get that way.
Appreciate 0
      10-23-2012, 08:24 PM   #15
popopine
Private
United_States
4
Rep
77
Posts

 
Drives: Black X1 X-line
Join Date: Aug 2012
Location: North East US

iTrader: (0)

Quote:
Originally Posted by Jabloomf1230 View Post
There must be reason for the low mileages being reported, but I have been getting consistently 31 mpg highway (100% highway driving, 65 mph cruise control, with some terrain) and 26 combined. I'm guessing from that, that the city number must be about 21 based on my driving mix. This is not doing any kind of "fun" driving on my part, which probably would reduce the mileage drastically. This is approximately 4-5 mpg more than my 2005 330xi, driven the same way.

I also have observed that Eco-Pro saves only a few miles a tankful. For people with low highway values, have any of you tried resetting the mpg logger and then driving 20 or 30 miles of 100% 65 mph CC highway driving? I'm just curious what you get that way.
Same post, same time. That's weird!!!
Appreciate 0
      10-23-2012, 08:48 PM   #16
Grovsnus
Flight Lieutenant ≛
No_Country
8
Rep
860
Posts

 
Drives: Le Mans blue X1 35i
Join Date: Sep 2012
Location: CT

iTrader: (0)

You guys are in the Northeast (like me). Keep in mind that the winter blend fuel has already arrived, and with higher emissions allowed and cheaper quality gas also comes worse mileage. My old 302-based clunker dropped a couple of mpg over the last two weeks despite driving with a feather foot.
I'm pretty sure this is due to the low quality winter blend gas.
In other words, come spring, your mileage may improve again.
YMMV
Appreciate 0
      10-23-2012, 09:03 PM   #17
Lucky13
Lucky13
United_States
16
Rep
1,226
Posts

 
Drives: 2014 M235 manual
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Columbia, S.C.

iTrader: (0)

I only use 76 brand gas and 93 octane and live in the Southeast. It has 10% Ethanol or up to 10% but I think that only equates to maybe 3% less gas mileage. I've never owned a BMW that got the mileage from the EPA sticker, it always runs below it because who really drives the way cars are tested for EPA.
__________________
1995 325i, 1996 328ci, 1997 528i, 1997 Z3 2.8,2001 X5 3.0, 2001 330i Convertible, 2002 M3 Convertible, 2003 M3 Coupe, 2004 M3 Coupe, 2004 Z4 3.0, 2004 X3 3.0,
2007 X3 3.0, 2007 335i Convertible, 2013 X1 28 sdrive,
2014 M235 manual
Appreciate 0
      10-23-2012, 09:33 PM   #18
jbc77
Enlisted Member
0
Rep
35
Posts

 
Drives: 2012 X3 35i, 2013 X1 s28i
Join Date: Jun 2012
Location: Houston, Texas USA

iTrader: (0)

My X1 sDrive 28i is getting over 30 mpg on freeway driving. I only have 1100 miles on my car.

My wife's X3 35i gets 26-28 mpg on highway driving.
Appreciate 0
      10-23-2012, 11:06 PM   #19
Grovsnus
Flight Lieutenant ≛
No_Country
8
Rep
860
Posts

 
Drives: Le Mans blue X1 35i
Join Date: Sep 2012
Location: CT

iTrader: (0)

Quote:
Originally Posted by Lucky13 View Post
I only use 76 brand gas and 93 octane and live in the Southeast. It has 10% Ethanol or up to 10% but I think that only equates to maybe 3% less gas mileage
It's not the ethanol that's the problem[*]. The problem is that the vapor emission changes with the seasons, location and latitude. In hot weather, the gas blend has to evaporate less easily to meet the pollution standards, while during winter, and especially in the north, evaporation isn't the problem - starting bad engines is. So up North you get a lower energy and cheaper fuel that ignites easier during winter, which reduces mileage. In lowlands you also get denser less compressible air during winter, and you easily get 2 mpg less for a gas guzzler, up to 6 mpg less for a frugal car.
In the South, the gas blend is not so much of a problem, because the gas has to be blended for hot weather all year round. So your mileage shouldn't vary as much as ours.

[*]: Except for phase separation, where the ethanol sucks up water vapor from the air, and forms a sludge at the bottom of your (or the gas station's) tank. If you usually refill at half tank and only once in a blue moon on a cold day run it all the way towards empty, it can be disastrous. Sure, water injection can give bursts of extra torque, but not when done that way!
If you run on E10, draining the tank yearly can be a good idea.

Disclaimer: I work with gas metering and tank equipment.
Appreciate 0
      10-24-2012, 01:35 AM   #20
AusX1
Private First Class
4
Rep
112
Posts

 
Drives: X1 2.0D Sport
Join Date: Mar 2011
Location: Australia

iTrader: (0)

You should find the cars use less once you're up to 5-10K km's so it might be premature to worry.
For comparison my 2.0D SDrive has done 15K km's and now sits on 56MPG highway @110kph flat road (no hills) and "hoon" driving around town at worst 39MPG.
Appreciate 0
      10-24-2012, 03:24 AM   #21
jnm
Second Lieutenant
jnm's Avatar
4
Rep
242
Posts

 
Drives: fast, but could be faster
Join Date: Feb 2011
Location: CA

iTrader: (0)

Eco pro seems to prevent you from doing things that would really damage your economy (for example by dulling throttle response). So if you are already driving in a very economical manner (for example at constant 65 mph on the cruise control) then enabling Eco pro will probably not save you any extra gas.
Appreciate 0
      10-24-2012, 03:26 AM   #22
jnm
Second Lieutenant
jnm's Avatar
4
Rep
242
Posts

 
Drives: fast, but could be faster
Join Date: Feb 2011
Location: CA

iTrader: (0)

As for official estimates I think they are unrealistic anyways (e.g. Measured on a rolling road where there is no air resistance !) and I never expect to achieve them in real life. I think all they are useful for is comparing one car's estimate with another, that's all.
Appreciate 0
Post Reply

Bookmarks

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 04:58 PM.




xbimmers
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.7.0
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
1Addicts.com, BIMMERPOST.com, E90Post.com, F30Post.com, M3Post.com, ZPost.com, 5Post.com, 6Post.com, 7Post.com, XBimmers.com logo and trademark are properties of BIMMERPOST