Not really... It gets 45 miles per gallon... At $5.12 diesel (everywhere around where I live) who wants a small car like this that only gets 45 miles per gallon? (We all know it truly gets lower than that, too.)

And that if the car came out this very instant. One month ago gas here was almost $3.90 a gallon... Now it's $4.21. One month ago diesel was $4.07 a gallon... Now it's $5.12.

I'm desperate for BMW's electric car that's in the works.

↓↑report

This is no ordinary small car. It's rear-wheel-drive, nearly perfectly balanced, sweet-steering and -shifting, and a torque monster. Imagine a heavier Miata with a closed roof, and you've got a pretty good idea of the chassis dynamics.

↓↑report

If it didn't get 45 MPG, I'd puke.....

*takes another look, pukes anyway*

↓↑report

Ummmmm. Did anyone else notice the M on the steering wheel? The 123MD? sounds weird... M123D? 123DM? DM123? D123M? Nope still weird. If only that M1 Homage wasn't made.

↓↑report

I have a 120d with the same steering wheel.

It's an option here in Europe even on non-M package cars. For about 250€ you get that steering wheel, the shorter gearshift knob and the handbrake all with matching perforated leather. They are great!

↓↑report

"Only" 45 MPG? What planet do you live on?

↓↑report

45 Europe MPG is actually quite attainable. in fact, Euro MPG is a joke, it measures the gas consumption when you cursing at around 50 mile per hour with no acceleration, no traffic, no AC. (the above testing procedure is actually Chinese mpg measurement, which they copied from euro mpg measurement system.)

ya. even my 3600 lb, 3.5L engine with 300 horses can get 38 mpg in that test. go figure.

↓↑report

jgp,

I live on a planet in which people do the math. Diesel is currently 25% more expensive than gas. Constantly keep in mind that that percentage is quickly increasing.

Comparing costs per mileage, 45 mpg diesel would cost as much as 36 mpg gasoline. That's using the EU measurement with "US" gallons. That number is higher than it will truly be.

Of course there are other (good and bad) factors, too: the vehicle will handle well, accelerate faster than other 30 mpg vehicles and will be very expensive for its size.

↓↑report

jgp,

You also have to keep in mind that the interior space is very small, greatly limiting this vehicle's utility. And that reduces the utility gained from the mpg greatly.

So... In other words... When I said it "only gets 45 mpg" I truly means "considering the rising price of fuel, the high price of the vehicle, the limited utility of the vehicle, and the EU rated fuel rating, this vehicle only gets 45 mpg."

↓↑report

"in fact, Euro MPG is a joke, it measures the gas consumption when you cursing at around 50 mile per hour with no acceleration, no traffic, no AC"

Sean, you are wrong with the above statement.

The 45mpg figure is clearly stated as being the "EU combined test cycle", which includes a cold start and stop/start driving component as well as cruising.

http://www.vcacarfueldata.org.uk/information/fuel-consumption-testing-scheme.asp

"Urban cycle
The urban test cycle is carried out in a laboratory at an ambient temperature of 20°C to 30°C on a rolling road from a cold start, i.e. the engine has not run for several hours. The cycle consists of a series of accelerations, steady speeds, decelerations and idling. Maximum speed is 31 mph (50 km/h), average speed 12 mph (19 km/h) and the distance covered is 2.5 miles (4 km). The cycle is shown as Part One in the diagram below.

Extra-urban cycle
This cycle is conducted immediately following the urban cycle and consists of roughly half steady-speed driving and the remainder accelerations, decelerations, and some idling. Maximum speed is 75 mph (120 km/h), average speed is 39 mph (63 km/h) and the distance covered is 4.3 miles (7 km). The cycle is shown as Part Two in the diagram below.

Combined Fuel Consumption Figure
The combined figure presented is for the urban and the extra-urban cycle together. It is therefore an average of the two parts of the test, weighted by the distances covered in each part."

It might result in a higher figure than EPA testing (I don't know if this is true or not), but certainly not for the reasons you stated.

↓↑report

"I have their bikes, think their cars are overpriced and overhyped." That's among the most backwards comments I've heard regarding BMW. Their bikes are matched or out-gunned in nearly every market in which they compete. BMW automobiles, on the other hand, set the standard in most cases.

↓↑report

nicko, if your comparing bmw bikes to sportbikes your barking up the wrong tree.

the primary reason to own a bmw bike is abs, the secondary reasons are reliability, and ride ability. I am fond of my old school FZ as well, but I can ride a BMW sport bike seven hundred miles and not be phased by it.

Their cars are only class leaders when you don't count their price into the equation.

↓↑report

Certainly, in the sportbike market BMW isn't much of a player (at least not until 2009). But if your criticizing BMW's cars for being over-priced amongst their peers, you'd have to say the same about their bikes. I'm not bashing your choice of bike, I like 2-wheeled beemers for their combination of unique engineering and capable performance. But to to say, for example, that a 414hp V8 M3 sedan is overpriced @ $55k. I'd have to disagree, considering no other manufacturer can offer as complete an automobile at ANY price.

↓↑report

I think I'll have to chime in on the current M3 "$55k..[no better deal available..]" remark. My C63 can take it to school in almost all catagories and it has a base price of $53,000. Oop, I guess that means I win. Thanks ;o)

↓↑report

When not driven on the EPA test, many modern cars will return that kind of mileage on the highway.

For example, I got a call from my father over Memorial day weekend. In highway driving with the cruise set at 65mph his Saab gets 39mpg. Last summer we did a long highway trip where the cruise was set higher, at 85. His mileage was over 30 and that includes going through Montana and Wyoming with all their mountains. EPA says he should get 20/30. In 2000, I averaged nearly 29 mpg in my Chrysler while moving x-country with the car loaded full of stuff and going 75-80 most of the way. EPA says that should have been 26mpg. I have no idea how they get their numbers.

↓↑report