Greener BMW 3-Series coming to UK this year

This autumn, BMW will launch a green-friendly BMW 3-Series in Britain that improves fuel economy and CO2 emissions by 15 percent. The car will be a part of BMW’s new EfficientDynamics program, which is BMW’s new term for their green strategy. Being called ‘mild-hybrids’, the car imroves efficiencey of the diesel engine found in the BMW 320d.

Four key EffiecientDynamics techonolgies that BMW incorporates in the newly launched 118d are the integrated starter motor-alternator, a computerised alternator control, an auto stop-start and electronic power steering. These features allow the 1.8 liter diesel engine to improve combined fuel economy from 50 mpg to 60 mpg.

According to AutoCar, if the same technologies are carried over to the 320d, it will have a combined fuel economy of 57 mpg (up from 50 mpg) and just 132g/km of CO2

BMW’s current EfficientDynamics strategy, outlined by Reithofer, includes the new BMW 118i which consumes 5.9 liters of fuel per 60 miles, the current BMW 320i which consumes 23 percent less fuel than the 1983 model, the current 525i model which consumes 33 percent less fuel than its 1982 model and the new MINI Cooper D.
Read Article

daytonaviolet - 5/4/2007 3:46:44 PM

+1 Boost

Go BMW! Bring us the 320d please

Rupert - 5/4/2007 5:37:41 PM

+3 Boost

Just to say, 132g/km CO2 is only 28g more than a Prius. It compares very favourably with small superminis like the Clio. Good job BMW.

LexusNumberOne4ever - 5/4/2007 11:04:20 PM

0 Boost

Does this 3er have regenerative braking?

indoctrin8ed - 5/4/2007 11:29:21 PM

-1 Boost

Give a $3000 tax credit (not a tax deduction, I'm talking CREDIT), and throw in tax free gas at the pumpt for first two years of ownership to anyone who buys a 45+ MPG car and watch them "fly off the shelves". This will further incent two year old owners, who can afford it, to sell their 50+ MPG car to get another one because after two years of "loving the savings at the pump", they'll be itching to get back into that program. Ban sales tax on 45 MPG cars as well on used ones. Make it VERY EASY to get into these cars. No sales tax on tires for your 45+ MPG car either.

And move that 45 MPG mark up 1 MPG per year to keep the benchmark moving forward.

Watch the R&D money POUR INTO THIS STUFF.

Government is too greedy to do this, so it will never happen, unfortunately.

mp2dtw - 5/5/2007 12:35:57 AM

-3 Boost

BMW has exquisite diesels. Too bad that Americans would be too dumb to buy them if BMW tried to sell them here. During the oil price surge in the early-mid 80s, when gas was even a little more costly than now (adjusted for inflation) there were Oldsmobile diesels, Escort diesels, Volvo diesels... Nobody bought them. The Escort diesel was such a failure that it didn't last 2 years, which was pretty much the case across the board except VW & Mercedes. And don't try to say that VW diesels are more reliable than Ford or GM. Volkswagen/Audi (along with Daimler Chrysler) is Ford and GM's insurance policy to avoid the headline "GM [or Ford] worst in reliablity survey".

Just remember that the US gallon is 4/5 of an Imperial gallon so that 57 mpg turns into 45-46 mpg, which still kicks Prius & Civic hybrid in the derriere.

My question is: Aren't there harsh pollutants other than co2 where diesels are far worse than gas engines? Isn't that why Mercedes and others can't sell diesels in New York, New England and California?

Rupert - 5/5/2007 5:53:42 PM

+2 Boost

Diesel is taxed MORE in Britain!
I live there, diesel is about 2-5 pence more!
Yet we still buy over 50% of cars with diesel engines!
Because they're better!

123456 - 5/5/2007 3:07:10 PM

+6 Boost

huu76 = Idiot

indoctrin8ed - 5/5/2007 4:24:07 PM

-1 Boost

huu76 < idiot

Rupert - 5/5/2007 5:52:11 PM

+3 Boost

oh let's get him banned.
please mr agent 001?
he makes me want to leave autospies and never return.

Bill - 5/6/2007 12:35:25 PM

+6 Boost

I agree. Huu76 is probably one of the biggest idiots on this site.

Let's see. Huu76 is:

1) BIASED

2) TALKS TRASH

3) MAKES UP STUFF TO SUIT HIS NEEDS (and make Toyota look good)

4) MUCH MUCH MORE

An idiot, I agree.

indoctrin8ed - 5/6/2007 4:34:01 PM

+4 Boost

Calling Huu76 an idiot is a disservice to idiots everywhere.

Bill - 5/6/2007 12:36:35 PM

+3 Boost

Good post, Sailor.

Awaiting the response of Huu76 (which won't come since he got owned and knows it).

indoctrin8ed - 5/6/2007 4:44:51 PM

+3 Boost

Another long crap post by Huu76.
->"judgement"
-->Do you mean "judgment"? Ironic how you can't spell that word.

->"nothing to write home about"
-->Do you mean "Nothing to ride home about"?

->"thereby they are subsidizing it"
-->do you mean "therefore they are subsidizing it"?

->"Look to N.America if you want to see how diesel will fair when taxed equally."
-->Diesel is not taxed the same as gasoline in the US. Check your facts.

Your grammar, spelling, and content all have serious and consistent flaws, and your credibility is about zilch.

Is there a "huu76" filter we can turn on?

Matthew1 - 5/6/2007 8:14:23 PM

+1 Boost

Guys,

The Ford Interceptor concept. Quite nice, right? Finally Ford stepping up to the design plate.

Well huu76 said he would rather drive this:

http://www.cardata.com/images/2007/Mercury%20Grand%20Marquis.jpg

But what else would you expect from some crazy Canadian with 'issues'.

S4cabriofoxone - 5/7/2007 9:59:18 PM

+1 Boost

Ha!

Matthew1 - 5/6/2007 9:35:02 PM

+1 Boost

I DID know that, but since when did you need such a durable chassis for day-to-day driving?

And you lose on everything else. It handles like crap, its the oldest-looking 'new' car you can buy, you know that underneath that ugly body is thirty-year-old technology, and it's as common as a New York taxi!

It's probably the worst new car you can buy.

indoctrin8ed - 5/7/2007 5:52:05 PM

+1 Boost

huu76, if you renamed your name to huh76, that would suit you much better.

Now go back to school and learn how to write.

Ouch!!

indoctrin8ed - 5/7/2007 6:21:13 PM

+1 Boost

And by the way, huh76, the Interceptor is NOT based upon the Mustang.

You manage to make two mistakes in one sentence.

Ouch!! Burn!!

The Mustange is NOT a "a civilian ride built for comfort". It is a "civilian ride", but comfort is not a primary, or even secondary design objective of the Mustang. Certainly it is designed to Not be uncomfortable, but comfort is not a standout design goal of any Mustang.

If you are speaking of the Fox platform that is used in both the Mustang and the Ford LTD Crown Vic, from 83 to 91, then to say that the Interceptor is based upon the Mustang, is flawwed. First came the fox platform, then came several cars to be used with that platform, like the Tbird/Cougar, Capri/Mustang, Fairmont, Mustang, Granada, Continental, LTD, Mark, etc.

Welcome to Burnsville. Population: You.

S4cabriofoxone - 5/7/2007 11:37:37 PM

+2 Boost

Wow, huu, you seem pretty insecure. You simply must reply to everyone who contradicts you with "facts."

Matthew1 - 5/8/2007 4:28:13 AM

+2 Boost

It's still a heap.

:)

indoctrin8ed - 5/9/2007 8:13:30 PM

+2 Boost

huh76 writes: "Compared to a hybrid, diesel needlessly expends more BTU while getting no better mileage for it."

What a crock.

Fuel does not EXPEND BTUs. It *releases* BTUs. BTUs are units of energy. The energy is not expended by the fuel.

Fuel never "needlessly expends" BTUs. That's about as scholastic as saying "Huh76 needlessly breathes oxygen". Oh, wait, that's actually true. You get the point.