Want a fuel efficient car? Forget the Prius, buy a 520d instead!

E92

At least that's the conclusion one could be forgiven for thinking in today's Sunday Times test, where they drove a 520d and a Prius from London to Geneva.

The end result is that despite the Prius being a 1.5 hybrid and in theory being a whole 10 mpg better on the European Union mpg test than the big and heavy 2.0 litre 520d, the 520d worked out being around 2.5 mpg more economical than the Prius(at 47.8 mpg for the Toyota vs 50.4 mpg for the Bee-Em).

Full story here.

copacetic

E92 wrote: »

At least that's the conclusion one could be forgiven for thinking in today's Sunday Times test, where they drove a 520d and a Prius from London to Geneva.

The end result is that despite the Prius being a 1.5 hybrid and in theory being a whole 10 mpg better on the European Union mpg test than the big and heavy 2.0 litre 520d, the 520d worked out being around 2.5 mpg more economical than the Prius(at 47.8 mpg for the Toyota vs 50.4 mpg for the Bee-Em).

Full story here.

hmm, interesting I guess but hardly real life conditions, they should have used both for a commute in rush hour every day for a month and given us a valid comparison. I'd imagine the prius would win out easily then.

It's hardly 'in theory' that the prius is 10mpg better. it's a test, not a theory. and it is on the combined cycle. if they tested every car based on trips to geneva it'd be a pretty useless test!

-Chris-

Diesel is the fuel of the future - here's a review of the Audi A8 diesel against the Lexus 460h. The A8 manages to be 10mpg better on fuel economy with the same performance!!! :eek::eek::eek:

http://www.autoexpress.co.uk/carreviews/grouptests/211689/lexus_ls600h_vs_audi_a8.html

niceirishfella

and with 520d's available from just 14k sterling 2nd hand in the uk, they do represent a good buy and import.

http://search.autotrader.co.uk/es-uk/www/cars/BMW+5+SERIES/Ne-2-4-5-6-7-8-27-44-49-53-61-64-67-103-133-146,N-147-4294967178-4294967202/search.action

JHMEG

In fairness, it was a relatively high speed run, something the BMW would be more suited to. The results might be different with a combination of urban and extra urban driving.

In terms of CO2, ironically the Prius still wins (as pointed out).. it will have released 124.7 kg of CO2 whilst the BMW will have released 131.4 kg. (Based on the official figures quoted in the article, a gallon of petrol gives rise to 10,996 g of CO2, and a gallon of diesel gives rise to 12,125 g.)

Still the economy has to be commended. The partial hybridisation of diesel was always going to yield results. It was only a matter of when (and who).

Next up full hybrid diesels, and I've a feeling the French will do well, possibly even be class leaders.

-Chris-

Isn't there already a hybrid diesel Golf imminent?

Edit: Found it!!
http://blog.wired.com/cars/2008/03/vws-golf-diesel.html

JHMEG

AudiChris wrote: »

Isn't there already a hybrid diesel Golf imminent?

Edit: Found it!!
http://blog.wired.com/cars/2008/03/vws-golf-diesel.html

Fifth Gear managed to only do 47mpg out of VW's "71mpg" Polo Bluemotion, so we'll have to wait and see how the Golf fairs.

E92

In fairness they drove 20% of the time in town, 40% on rural roads, and the remaining 40% on Motorways. Only on Motorways would the 520d have had a real advantage. In any event, the 520d is less economical in the EU's extra urban driving cycle than the Prius is. And the Prius is a lot more economical in Urban driving too(56 mpg vs 43 mpg). The EU tests are roughly 36% in town and the other 64% out of town.

But at the end of the day this is some sort of proof that EfficientDynamics actually can deliver what it says on the tin, I mean whatever your opinion of BMW and hybrids might be, I don't think anyone would expect a big 2.0 saloon to be more economical than a car hailed left, right and centre for being green. Even though the BMW polluted more CO2, it wasn't a whole pile more, yet it's not entitled to rebates and this and that, I don't hear people singing the praises of BMW for environmental friendliness either.

As for diesel being the fuel of the future, I still don't think so, as JHMEG pointed out, the 520d still spat out more CO2 even though it's mpg was better, not to mention all the extra particulates that will cause cancer to humans as well as all that horrible Nitrous Oxide, on the other hand, the BMW didn't have batteries shipped halfway round the world either, and won't have all those batteries to dispose of when the time comes to scrapping the car either.

Otto combustion engines can be converted to run on hydrogen, any amount bio-ethanol, CNC, LPG etc, all you can do with diesel is get it to run on biodiesel. The new diesotto engine by Mercedes runs on....petrol, and will give diesel mpg, diesel torque, but petrol power, smoothness, quietness, noise, refinement and of course no public health risk and because it burns petrol, will produce around 11% less CO2 than a diesel engine(it gives diesel like levels of mpg).

Diesel always has been, and will continue to be a massive public health risk for the foreseeable future. Even when they do get all that stuff sorted out in 2014, apart from Honda who have got around it, and well done to them, all the rest will be using AdBlue and urea, and that means 2 tanks, and when you run out of AdBlue, you're back to smelly diesel engines again(though the AdBlue will last long enough that it only needs a fill up at a service apparently), so it's a rather crappy solution, and then there's the cost of AdBlue itself, which will eliminate some of the cost advantage of having a diesel engine. And winning Le Mans by getting the rules changed to suit diesels doesn't count for anything in my book either.

Turner

Yeah but who would want a Prius??

Beemer all the way, but the 520d is a bit underpowered.

530d suits the car much better.

JHMEG

E92 wrote: »

the BMW didn't have batteries shipped halfway round the world either, and won't have all those batteries to dispose of when the time comes to scrapping the car either.

Two things:

1. BMW will be going "full hybrid" at a later date.

2. Nickel's #1 use is in alloys, and #2 use is coinage. Based on #1, the BMW would have plenty of Nickel already. If you want to campaign about Nickel you need to address those two first, or else it's a bit like Gormley taxing cars on CO2 and doing nothing about the power stations which generate 50% of all CO2.

I commend your anti-dieselness. You have learned well, Luke. Ikuo Kajitani and Kenichi Hagahiro would be proud!;) We'll get you into a Honda eventually.

copacetic

E92 wrote: »

In fairness they drove 20% of the time in town, 40% on rural roads, and the remaining 40% on Motorways. Only on Motorways would the 520d have had a real advantage. In any event, the 520d is less economical in the EU's extra urban driving cycle than the Prius is. And the Prius is a lot more economical in Urban driving too(56 mpg vs 43 mpg). The EU tests are roughly 36% in town and the other 64% out of town.

just driving through a town doesn't count, it would have to be bad traffic for the prius to really get it's advantage. Why doesn't the 520d have the advantage on rural roads? I've driven the 'rural' roads in France and they are nearly as good as our motorways.

I'm a big fan of the BM diesels as you know but this was a pointless and silly test that anyone could have given the outcome for in advance just by looking at the stats for both cars and the route they were planning.

JHMEG

It is also true that you can set up test in such a way that you'll get certain results. Worse again is that the results can be published in influential newpapers etc and painted as defacto and accurate.

For every test that shows the Prius getting 44mpg there's one showing it getting 114mpg...

E92

copacetic wrote: »

just driving through a town doesn't count, it would have to be bad traffic for the prius to really get it's advantage. Why doesn't the 520d have the advantage on rural roads? I've driven the 'rural' roads in France and they are nearly as good as our motorways.

Have to disagree with you there. They started in London, a city noted for it's traffic, where the average speed is not even 15 km/h, and those type of conditions are ideally suited to a Prius. Incidentally, because the 520d has Auto Start Stop, it doesn't do too badly(though BMW reckons ASS reduces fuel consumption by just 3%).

The Toyota had it's aircon and radio switched off too, the BMW had the aircon and radio turned on, making the BMW's advantage all the greater(especially as unlike the Prius, the 520d uses an old fashioned engine driven aircon motor which saps power and reduces fuel consumption, the Toyota uses an electric motor which has no fuel penalty at all).

They said they were "stuck in rush hour traffic in Rennes" too, which again would have played into the hands of the Prius.

I've gone on D and N roads as they're called in France about 2 years ago(which have speed limits of only 70 and 90 respectively) and apart from being much smoother than our R and N roads respectively, are exactly the same standard as our R and N roads(it would have been in Southern France). We went to Cannes on an N road one day and there were twists and turns that you nearly wouldn't find on some of our R roads. I was actually surprised at how poor a standard the A8, which is an Autoroute i.e.Motorway in France is compared to our Dual Carriageways and Motorways.

The 520d doesn't have an advantage on rural roads because the speed limit is only 70 km/h or 90 km/h on them. Lower speeds are advantageous to all cars in terms of mpg, but especially to the Prius, where the electric motor can cut in say when braking or just cursing.

On a Motorway, where they said that the 520d actually had to hold back because the Prius doesn't have the same performance(despite Toyota's claim it has 2.0 litre performance) as the the BMW, which is also a 2.0, the Prius would have been under more pressure, so that's why I said this would have played right into the hands of the BMW.

They could have gone on Motorways, which would have been the most direct way, but they went into towns and on country roads on purpose, so as to give the Toyota as much of a chance as possible, and yet the Prius still lost. There's no BMW fanboyism there, this is a fact. You can't say they set up the test so as to disadvantage the hybrid. They went out of their way to assist the hybrid with fuel economy.

@JHMEG- I'm not anti diesel, as you know from other posts, including my "anyone who has a brain would buy a diesel in July comment from last night". I just don't think it's quite as amazing as some posters on this forum make it out to be either, but I'm certainly not diesel phobic or anything like as anti diesel as you are;)!

There are plenty of diesels that can match hybrid engines for CO2 and mpg, this test proves it, even though all the statistics and logic would dictate that the diesel BMW wouldn't have a hope. That's something worth mentioning in favour of diesels. And we know all about performance from modern diesels, and people who think they're slow and noisy are stuck in a time warp.

Sure diesel is good enough for Type-R Civics, I mean if diesel was bad, Honda wouldn't be building a Civic Type-R diesel now would they, or going to all that trouble with ammonia for Euro 6 and the US:p?

In saying that, cars that are supposed to be high revving and make a good noise, like supercars and hot hatchbacks should never run on diesel. I don't see the point of diesel rag tops or Coupés either, but for pretty much everything else diesel is a better choice IMO.

Merc's new DiesOtto engine will give diesel torque and economy, but petrol noise, power and lower CO2. That's the best of both worlds:D.

JHMEG

E92 wrote: »

I'm certainly not diesel phobic or anything like as anti diesel as you are;)!

I was being a bit tongue-in-cheek. On a more serious note I'm only anti diesel as because of the lung cancer it causes etc. It's like passive smoking.. I'm getting it from other people even tho I don't do it myself.

TJJP

E92 wrote: »

Lower speeds are advantageous to all cars in terms of mpg, but especially to the Prius, where the electric motor can cut in say when braking or just cursing.

Jees, for cursing when driving my electric motor would be in all the time, I'd save a fortune. (-:

ednwireland

JHMEG wrote: »

For every test that shows the Prius getting 44mpg there's one showing it getting 114mpg...

where i've only seen complaints abut the prius getting nowhere near the advertised mpg
http://www.consumeraffairs.com/news04/2005/hybridwatch02.html
http://www.wintonsworld.com/cars/a-cars-2004/toyota-prius-road-test.html
http://www.brianberliner.com/2007/02/27/2007-toyota-prius-mpg-actual-results/

so the times isnt the first to point out this anomaly you'd hav to be mad to buy a prius
mind you toyota are claiming 100mpg for 2009 so it should do 60 then !

unkel

Linky

Can't say I'm surprised. For anyone not interested in reading the article: Toyota Prius and BMW 520d are driven from London to Geneva. Instead of using motorways only, they divert to regional roads and city driving for most of it, to give the Prius an advantage. Airconditioning and stereo are switched off in the Prius to save fuel. Both are switched on in the BMW. Guess who is the gas-guzzler? Exactly. The car that is officially the most frugal car for sale in the USA :rolleyes:

JHMEG

E92 covered this one already, here.

BTW, it's possible for anyone to get 130mpg out of the Prius if they do it right.

unkel

JHMEG wrote: »

E92 covered this one already, here

Indeed!

Merged this thread at the bottom of E92s thread

unkel

JHMEG wrote: »

it's possible for anyone to get 130mpg out of the Prius if they do it right.

LOL right!

javaboy

If they are leaving on aircon+stereo in the Beemer and off in the Prius and picking a route to deliberately give the Prius an advantage, then it sounds like a Beemer fan set this up so that no matter what way it turned out they could say the Beemer was better.

What's the point of a comparison if you don't compare like with like? Aircon should have been off in both cars. It spoils the outcome of the comparison no matter which way it turns out.

JHMEG

unkel wrote: »

So with a bit of economic driving they might possibly get 200MPG out of a big BMW so

Nope. Unless you can prove otherwise? (Thought not:D)

unkel

javaboy wrote: »

What's the point of a comparison if you don't compare like with like? Aircon should have been off in both cars. It spoils the outcome of the comparison no matter which way it turns out.

Agreed.

unkel

JHMEG wrote: »

Nope. Unless you can prove otherwise? (Thought not:D)

Sighs. Your understanding of proof is a bit lite to be honest. Any of my huge-engined V8 petrol cars can do 100MPG or more if I set the conditions right (falling down the cliffs of Moher)

In real life, small cars with petrol-electric hybrid engines use more fuel than bigger cars with modern diesel engines

JHMEG

unkel wrote: »

In real life, small cars with petrol-electric hybrid engines use more fuel than bigger cars with modern diesel engines

That's a junk statement from someone who is unqualified to comment. I had expected better from you.

Show me a "bigger car with a modern diesel engine" that can get 70mpg in real life, as I do in my wife's Civic IMA (which incidentally is not the latest generation of hybrid).

unkel

JHMEG wrote: »

Show me a "bigger car with a modern diesel engine" that can get 70mpg in real life, as I do in my wife's Civic IMA (which incidentally is not the latest generation of hybrid).

I'm only speculating, but If you're able to do 70MPG in your wife's Honda Civic IMA, you'd easily do 100MPG in a new BMW 520d

JHMEG

unkel wrote: »

I'm only speculating, but If you're able to do 70MPG in your wife's Honda Civic IMA, you'd easily do 100MPG in a new BMW 520d

Yeah I would, with me arse out the window blowing farts for propulsion. Imagine what I could do in a hybrid!

Realistically I'd say that 520 does no more than 30mpg, big heavy yoke that it is, with an underpowered engine.

E92

Are DA6 XSi's really that fast that 0-60 in 8.3 seconds and has a top speed of 144 mph seems "underpowered":D? The Prius does 0-60 in a yawning by comparison 10.9 seconds and can't go beyond 106;)!

I remember us having a diesel Volvo V40 once and we got it up to 77.7 mpg when we drove it from Cork to Mallow(according to the trip computer, and that was driving at the 60 mph speed limit too)!

Biro

copacetic wrote: »

hmm, interesting I guess but hardly real life conditions, they should have used both for a commute in rush hour every day for a month and given us a valid comparison.

Let me guess, you're from Dublin.

copacetic

Biro wrote: »

Let me guess, you're from Dublin.

i actually meant london, where they and a large percentage of their readers are based.
understand now?

HashSlinging

Some day our cars will be powered by on board flatulance.