Mine has averaged 24 mpg without any track time over 32K miles.

That seems to be the justification for M drivers.

The mileage should improve dramatically on the new turbo F10 M5.

 

I don't mean to be rude or arrogant, but what you do to average 24 MPG in a car like that? Coast downhill most of the time in neutral or with the engine off, and then feather-foot the engine at 1500 RPM in high gear?

 

10 to 12 MPG for the E60 M5 is very typical for a 60/40 mix of highway/city driving. Quite a few of our neighbors own E60 M5s and that's the type of mileage they get.

Bear in mind these are 50+ year old people. 50 isn't really old; the point, however, is that these aren't your usual "boy racer" types in their daddy's M5 trying to race everybody and their grandma on the road. They will certainly have some fun once in a while (WOT) but generally speaking they drive pretty conservatively on the streets.

I shudder to think what their mileage would be if they drove with a lead foot all the time.

 

no doubt, using sedan would eliminate some questions, but then all the questions are from lexus people j/k. fwiw i also think it makes sense to use the e90, but oh well, at least we know real world, e90 is pretty much the same car. just look at all the numbers out there between sedan and coupe, it's not one sided at all

that's the reality isn't it, no matter how the test is, who test it, and where it is, it will never be done "right". you got a wishful thinking that pretty much will never materialize, so maybe we can all try to settle for the next best thing (if at all). to me if it's bunch of people in the same performance league driving the cars seriously on a track, that's results i give a tad more credits to.

i surely hope the f10 is better. but looking at the 335, the gas mileage is in general better than m3 but not drastically imho. i sort of expect more

umm... on the isf actually i think it's doable. if someone is not driving the car like a mad man all the time, very capable.

lol no kidding. but then again, those who can really own these cars, 10mpg, they can surely afford it my friend (young, early 30s) with the e60 m5, i will just say his avg mileage is single digit

 

True, I'm quite certain money is no object for these people. Nevertheless, it's got to be quite a hassle having to fill up so (relatively) often.

Though, maybe the M5 has some enormous fuel tank capacity. Actually I just looked it up, the e60 m5's tank capacity is 15.8 gallons. I'd imagine that would (safely) get you 120-140 miles per full tank, possibly 160-180+ if it's mostly highway miles.

Then again, I'm sure all of this trivial nonsense about gas mileage and fuel capacities goes out the window once you step on that accelerator and unleash the wrath of 500 horses.

 

correction, it's 18.5 gallon tank, not 15.8 usually the IS/3 are about 16g, GS/5 are around 19g, and LS/7 are around 22g. mb equivalent are a bit more

 

I get 20.5 city/28+ highway, and coast often. Prior to owning one, I was surprised by some members claims in the F, but sure enough, mine matches or exceeds my previous 350.

 

Yeah, the V8 is happier above 7000RPM range. Something that IS-F owners would understand.


I KeeeeD!

 

I think you meant "wouldn't" understand.

'Course that's 'cause we're all ready getting sucked into our seats with all the torque and can't hear anything except the brutally loud exhaust noise.

'Course that's something M3 owners wouldn't understand.

j/k

 

So Lance claims 22.3 mpg with track time and my 24 seems unreasonable with mostly highway miles and no track time?

I don't stop light race....but have run multiple(GTR, C5 Vette, SRT8 Challenger/Charger, Camaro SS, etc) fast cars on the highway....and have seen north of 163 mph once...150 mph a few times....and 125 mph regularly.

 

Sure you are. hahah

It's all good. I would most def. have gotten the IS-F if I didn't have the IS350 at that times. Love the F.

 

With a car like that, both 22 and 24 seem like a stretch to me. But I guess you guys obviously know what you measured at the pump. One issue, though.....did you re-fill the tank on a level surface? That's important for getting an accurate fill-up with the tank-level.

Case in point..........I had an IS300, with barely half of the HP (215) that the IS-F runs (416). Even with steady, moderate driving (though I had it on few long trips), I was hard-pressed to do any better than about 19-20, averaging 17-18 most of the time, with less than that in winter stop-and-go driving.

 

No disrespect Mike, but this is just one reason why you should be reconsidering your opinion on the increased number of gears in the modern day trannys.

There is a reason that the F gets such great mileage, especially when compared to a C63 or M3 and it has everything to do with the 8 speed slushbox.

Gears 7 and 8 never get used when performance matters. But, when the car is being driven gently as a dd, gears 7 and 8 kick in as low as 40 mph.

I also notice the same thing on our ML vs X5. One extra gear in the ML and it gets significantly superior gas mileage (ie. approx. 2 mpg....granted the X5 does have more power).

 

err... is300? you used a terrible car for reference man.... that drivetrain setup was never ever been "good" on gas mileage, it's avg at best at its time among other cars, let alone all the new technologies nowadays. the car was rated what, 18/24? even the v8 (4L) setup was rated 18/23. i had the is300 as well, and honestly, its gas mileage was never impressive, it's the same as my gs400 and sc430.

my ls460l and gs350 both blew away the is300 on gas mileage, and both cars have a lot more power.

like CDNROCKIES said, the 7th and 8th gears help the isf a lot on normal driving. 2000rpm at 80mph is something (on your is300 it would have been about 3000rpm. yes, i am pretty sure).

edit: i just noticed this has turned into a gas mileage thread? sorry about that. please everyone get back on track to what this thread is about

 

Okay, BOT... I've driven the IS-F, M3, Shelby GT500, Cayman S, Boxster Spyder, and 911 all in the last week as kind of a refresh for some, intial drive on others.

For the $ and what it can do... the M3 is the most complete package in terms of on-street, everyday driving with refinement, space, looks, and durability. At Road America, as previously mentioned, mechanics time and time again mention to me without my prompted how if they could have any car they would live with day-to-day with an occasional track day (or not), M3 gets brought up again and again. IS-F doesn't get much response because there's not the history of performance (yet).

You cannot go wrong with any of the cars in this thread, including C63 AMG or S5 thrown in the mix.

But M3 vs IS-F... M3 for me, after back-to-back drives, I'm a true believer