Group test: Prius vs the mighty Golf TDI

JHMEG

A pretty exhaustive test, with a variety of drivers and tracks. Level playing field.

http://www.roadandtrack.com/special_feature/hybrid-reality

Mr. Presentable

It doesn't seem to take account of where the Prius' battery energy was originally generated. In Ireland, for example, this would be from fossil fuels. Surely this would affect the actual mpg figure.

Edit: seems I'm talking tosh

JHMEG

nipplenuts wrote: »

It doesn't seem to take account of where the Prius' battery energy was originally generated.

Huh? Regenerative braking charges the battery.

Matt Simis

nipplenuts wrote: »

It doesn't seem to take account of where the Prius' battery energy was originally generated. In Ireland, for example, this would be from fossil fuels. Surely this would affect the actual mpg figure.

The Prius isnt a plug in EV..


Good article, though one quote haunts me:

The driving environment—easy suburban, suburban sprawl, urban, canyon carving, freeway cruise—obviously has profound effect. But enthusiasts needn’t worry: There’s still a lot of fun to be had at 35.5 mpg and beyond, regardless of the technology employed to get there.

If I want fun at 35mpg, its going to be in a 300bhp+ Twin Turbo Diesel, not a 1.nothing litre hatchback.
Ive never driven a Tesla for the "sports" EV comparison, but 1 gear and simulated engine noises doesnt sound fun.

samsemtex

Matt Simis wrote: »

The Prius isnt a plug in EV..


Good article, though one quote haunts me:

If I want fun at 35mpg, its going to be in a 300bhp+ Twin Turbo Diesel, not a 1.nothing litre hatchback.
Ive never driven a Tesla for the "sports" EV comparison, but 1 gear and simulated engine noises doesnt sound fun.

American MPG. Anything over 30 is fairly good. 35.5 US MPG is 42.6 MGP imperial. No twin turboed diesel with over 300bhp is going to get that.

Matt Simis

samsemtex wrote: »

American MPG. Anything over 30 is fairly good. 35.5 US MPG is 42.6 MGP imperial. No twin turboed diesel with over 300bhp is going to get that.

Mmm... the mothers pre-LCI 535d Touring gets 39mpg (Imp) on a reasonably long combined trip. The LCI model would get mid 40s on the same trip. Remapped to over 300bhp, they should get higher MPG.

Now, to clarify, Im not claiming they will get 40+mpg at the same time as outputting 300bhp. Obviously.


Also, take away my "300" bhp figure and stick in whatever the newest 530's are getting and they will easily beat the twin-turbo'ed diesels MPG while getting near 300bhp performance. To be closer to the cars tested (hatchbacks / small cars), a 123d gets well over 50mpg combined (not highway) yet outputs over 200bhp stock. Yes its a diesel and Im claiming a "fun" argument, but how possibly could a Prius be more fun than a 200bhp RWD coupe/hot hatch? From the VAG stable, dunno, the Golf TDI really didnt do as well in the test as I thought it would and the rest of the line up (A3, Scirroco etc) are basically the same lump.


For stop start and urban commutes (ie San Fran, I was there, place is full of them) Im all on for Electric Hybrids and EVs, but for driving on roads and messing about, not so much.

JHMEG

Matt Simis wrote: »

Mmm... the mothers pre-LCI 535d

Thank God for you and your family's big engined cars - the NTMA would be have a far harder task if it wasn't for your contributions!

I just had a quick look at the figures but it appears to conflict with a previous test I have seen where a 520d was tested against a prius. In that test the 520d came out on top if I remember correctly you would therefore expect the golf to do better also.

Vertakill

What a joke.

I think some people's assumptions, mixed with all the media hype of course, is that a slow boring car MUST be economical.

JHMEG wrote: »

Thank God for you and your family's big engined cars - the NTMA would be have a far harder task if it wasn't for your contributions!

Yeah, out of 5 cars in the family, 3 are paying the highest tax bracket... That's quite disturbing actually.

JHMEG

Destiny Future Newsstand wrote: »

I just had a quick look at the figures but it appears to conflict with a previous test I have seen where a 520d was tested against a prius. In that test the 520d came out on top if I remember correctly you would therefore expect the golf to do better also.

That test was done where one driver drove one car only, and the other driver drove the other car only. On that basis alone it's about as flawed a test as you can get.

That's why I like this one - level playing field as everyone drove every car on different track.

JHMEG

Matt Simis wrote: »

the Golf TDI really didnt do as well in the test as I thought it would and the rest of the line up (A3, Scirroco etc) are basically the same lump.

That doesn't surprise me as I've heard many the Passat TDI owner claiming they only get in the mid-30s and so on...

GTE

Is that US MPG? I assume so. Prius is impressive.

I dont understand how the new TDI has managed to go backwards MPG wise since the VE and PD era as per the tests MPG results.

Absurdum

is US diesel full of piss or something? any tests that I've read for diesel cars usually have really low mpg (converted to imperial mpg) compared to their Euro figures.

Zubeneschamali

I'm surprised that the Prius does so much better than the TDI at freeway speeds. In traffic, electric power helps the Prius, but in cruise control, the Prius is getting all its power from a petrol engine. So how is it so much better than the Fiesta, never mind a TDI?

samsemtex

Zubeneschamali wrote: »

I'm surprised that the Prius does so much better than the TDI at freeway speeds. In traffic, electric power helps the Prius, but in cruise control, the Prius is getting all its power from a petrol engine. So how is it so much better than the Fiesta, never mind a TDI?

Well my old 1.8 GDi engine which came out 13 years was easily capable of 40mpg plus and couple that with low drag, low rolling resistance tyres, and new technology I'd imagine it is quite easy to get those kind of figures if you really, really try.

GTE

Absurdum wrote: »

is US diesel full of piss or something? any tests that I've read for diesel cars usually have really low mpg (converted to imperial mpg) compared to their Euro figures.

Its meant to be quite different alright. It would clog up the EGR on TDI's in a very bad way but recentlyish they changed something in the mix and now it doesnt clog it anymore.

JHMEG

Zubeneschamali wrote: »

I'm surprised that the Prius does so much better than the TDI at freeway speeds.

Probably mainly aerodynamics. The Prius would be a much more efficient design than the Golf.

Matt Simis

JHMEG wrote: »

Probably mainly aerodynamics. The Prius would be a much more efficient design than the Golf.

Im not quite so sure, there have been VAG TDI engines and cars doing vastly more MPG than this, even in the US, for the last decade.
Do you ever see what Ernie Rogers, an aerospace engineer, achieved with the modified wing he made for his TDI New Beetle?


Before laughing (:D ), note that before the Wing he got around 58MPG Imperial (highway).. so already vastly more than the new Golf appeared to get.. after changing he is up at 75MPG (and even higher in a MPG challenge, which he won). In a 12year old car design with 15 year old TDI engines.
Aerodynamically, his wing brought the brick-like 0.38 Cd of the New Beetle down to a more Prius-like 0.29 Cd, but that alone was less than 10% difference, so the latest gen Prius's 0.25 Cd vs the Golf mk6 Cd 0.31 (ie still decent) doesnt explain the test results.


The other two observations that came up was:
- He found a difference of 12% in MPG purely due to the diesel fuel if sourced from Northern vs Southern state stations (north being worse).
- ULSD in the US is apparently delivering a further 10% reduction in MPG vs whatever they had before.


While I think the test was as fair as it could be, looking even at the Golf TDI in isolation to the rest, there are oddities that could be explained; the inconsistent US Diesel fuel, some sort of US emission restriction on the engine or poor running car.



PS: Yes I know it looks like $hit with the wing!

JHMEG

Maybe the simplest explanation is the right one - that the Prius is all round more efficient than the TdiddlyI

If I was looking for the pinnacle of diesel engineering currently, I wouldn't be looking to VAG for it. I probably wouldn't be looking to Germany at all.

Ironic how Ernie used a Civic Coupé for his example of a low drag car...



Maybe the young lads with the big wings were onto something! Ernie certainly seems to pay homage to them!

bmw535d

samsemtex wrote: »

American MPG. Anything over 30 is fairly good. 35.5 US MPG is 42.6 MGP imperial. No twin turboed diesel with over 300bhp is going to get that.

Remapped 535d can get 45

Matt Simis

JHMEG wrote: »

Maybe the simplest explanation is the right one - that the Prius is all round more efficient than the TdiddlyI

But by extension somehow worse all round than a comparatively (in technology terms) ancient TDI that a man in his garage improved!? Come on!

JHMEG wrote: »

If I was looking for the pinnacle of diesel engineering currently, I wouldn't be looking to VAG for it. I probably wouldn't be looking to Germany at all.

Go on then, Im baited, whats the pinnacle of Diesel tech, spirited away from its inventing nation?

JHMEG

Matt Simis wrote: »

But by extension somehow worse all round than a comparatively (in technology terms) ancient TDI that a man in his garage improved!? Come on!

I dunno why. Maybe the Beetle is lighter cos it's driven mainly by fairies?

Matt Simis wrote: »

Go on then, Im baited, whats the pinnacle of Diesel tech, spirited away from its inventing nation?

I'm not an expert on diesel as you may well know, but I am told that PSA are probably the all round leader. I also understand that aside from unreliability problems BMW diesel engines are good, but possibly because of their PSA association. I also understand that Honda's one and only diesel is leagues ahead of any VAG diesel. I'm no expert tho.

GTE

JHMEG wrote: »

Maybe the simplest explanation is the right one - that the Prius is all round more efficient than the TdiddlyI

No no no, that's missing the point. The Prius is as efficient as it is and I doubt anyone is genuinely disputing that 65mpg (imperial) is great.

The abnormality of all this is that the latest technology common rail diesel that VAG produce is somehow being out done MPG wise by my 10 year old grandfather VE TDI. That being 51(ish) for the USA TDI tested and 57 to 60 for my yoke.

GTE

bmw535d wrote: »

Remapped 535d can get 45

Id say we are better off sticking with stock configurations of engine maps since the cars tested were not remapped. Im not even going near the fact that you can aim remaps to improve MPG as well as HP or a mix of both. Stick with stock.

Matt Simis

JHMEG wrote: »

I'm not an expert on diesel as you may well know, but I am told that PSA are probably the all round leader. I also understand that aside from unreliability problems BMW diesel engines are good, but possibly because of their PSA association. I also understand that Honda's one and only diesel is leagues ahead of any VAG diesel. I'm no expert tho.

Well Im not really well up on the politics of these companies (there are those here who can fill in), but afaik PSA and BMW cooperate on Petrol engines primarily and only for the new Mini.
I dunno how you would define the "best" all round (at MPG, performance, reliability, cost etc?). But for me its the MPG (\efficiency) plus performance combination that make something the best, which is absolutely BMW and Audi's forte. There are no French engines that have ever even cropped up as alternatives.

I did a search on the 123d (1450kg, twin turbo, 265bhp remapped and 55mpg) and the amount of non-German car fans absolutely wowed by it is amusing.

PS: I dont have a diesel anymore!

bbk wrote: »

No no no, that's missing the point. The Prius is as efficient as it is and I doubt anyone is genuinely disputing that 65mpg (imperial) is great.
The abnormality of all this is that the latest technology common rail diesel that VAG produce is somehow being out done MPG wise by my 10 year old grandfather VE TDI.

Yep, this is the issue, the Prius does deservedly great, but the TDI seems to do unusually bad.

bbk wrote: »

Id say we are better off sticking with stock configurations of engine maps since the cars tested were not remapped.

Thats a shame, given that of the 3, only the TDI can actually be remapped to gain anything worthwhile. Its a nice perk of the car removed. Anyhow, "bmw535d" (please change your name!) was replying to the comment that 300bhp TT Diesels with over 40mpg dont exist. They do, just not all of them are tuned to their potential. Lets just say we are 90% there.

JHMEG

Matt Simis wrote: »

But for me its the MPG (\efficiency) plus performance combination that make something the best, which is absolutely BMW

If they were ultra reliable then I'd say BMW could have a clincher there, but I dunno. I get the impression they're prone to letting go in their underpants.

Matt Simis wrote: »

and Audi's forte.

VAG you mean. That would be the German fanboy in you . You might need to point out some good ones, as I'm not aware of any. It would have to have something undiesel like to be noteworthy, like 100+ bhp per litre, or quiet as a petrol, or...

Matt Simis wrote: »

There are no French engines that have ever even cropped up as alternatives.

That's because none of them are 3+ litre! I also gather the little Fiat 1.3 is worthy of a mention.

Matt Simis wrote: »

I did a search on the 123d (1450kg, twin turbo, 265bhp remapped and 55mpg)

Wowed by the figures, which are pretty impressive. But to me tiny power band and sometimes truly massive turbo lag make diesel engines unappealing as performance engines (yes, including Honda's).

Matt Simis

JHMEG wrote: »

If they were ultra reliable then I'd say BMW could have a clincher there, but I dunno. I get the impression they're prone to letting go in their underpants.
VAG you mean. That would be the German fanboy in you . You might need to point out some good ones, as I'm not aware of any. It would have to have something undiesel like to be noteworthy, like 100+ bhp per litre, or quiet as a petrol, or...

Putting on ye olde Diesel hat:
Well, none of them will be as quiet as a decent petrol at idle. Cruise they are quieter but again, who really cares as petrols are plenty quiet too. 100bhp per litre is an arbitary number attached to a random measurement that only Honda fans seem to care about. :P :P

Noteworthy VAG TDI engines are the 500bhp V12 TDI in the Q7 and the altogether more "normal" but excellent 4.2TDI in the A8 (sub-6sec 0-60, 326bhp and 38mpg).
I presume the 3.0V6 TDI in the Touareg and A5 deserve the regards they get, in the A5's case you would have to be seriously mentally challenged to take the 1.8T petrol version instead, bigger powerband or not.


Granted, yeah the French may make great little diesel engines.. but you know my views on such things. Let the peasants rate them.

JHMEG

Matt Simis wrote: »

100bhp per litre is an arbitary number attached to a random measurement that only Honda fans seem to care about. :P :P

That was actually in reference to the BMW 123d you mentioned. So screw you!

Matt Simis wrote: »

Noteworthy VAG TDI engines are the 500bhp V12 TDI

Not cos it's good tho, but because it's big. Like for like is there anything remarkable about it?

Matt Simis wrote: »

I presume the 3.0V6 TDI in the Touareg and A5 deserve the regards they get, in the A5's case you would have to be seriously mentally challenged to take the 1.8T petrol version instead, bigger powerband or not.

Like for like would a 3.0 petrol V6 not make for a better car? Again, and correct me if I'm wrong, but there's nothing special about the 3.0 diesel, compared to the 2.0? (The "V6" sounds cool, but in reality has no bearing on anything other than dimensions)

Matt Simis

JHMEG wrote: »

That was actually in reference to the BMW 123d you mentioned. So screw you!

Oh right yeah! But you only find it impressive cos Honda made it sound cool! :pac:

JHMEG wrote: »

Not cos it's good tho, but because it's big. Like for like is there anything remarkable about it?

Well most powerful diesel engine in the world, probably the most torque of any (car) engine of any type, highest BHP diesel engine, presumably to get all of these best in class stats its also the most advanced diesel engine and given the technology poured into diesel engines, likely one of the most advanced on-road engines on the planet of any type. There simply isnt anything like it. If I pulled it up on Google no doubt Id find it has a custom cooling system, specially designed injectors and a host of other tech features, but I didnt bother, it is what it is, a monstrous tech marvel.
There are plenty of larger diesel engines (Yank trucks with near 7litre Cummins and Bus's with 8litres), bit it does alot more with less capacity.

JHMEG wrote: »

Like for like would a 3.0 petrol V6 not make for a better car? Again, and correct me if I'm wrong, but there's nothing special about the 3.0 diesel, compared to the 2.0? (The "V6" sounds cool, but in reality has no bearing on anything other than dimensions)

Well I think an advanced 3.0TDI is a better engine than a good 3.0 NA petrol, a 3.0 FI petrol would be nicer again. But yeah, granted its nothing spectacular in its own right. Does it have be be though? I just mentioned it as its a good engine that happens to be diesel. It is a 5.9sec 0-60 car getting again near 40mpg again though, such an engine would have been impossible just 8years ago, no other fuel type delivers these types of figures, with the arguable exception of the EV's from Tesla (but far from mainstream; 3 times the price, limited range, no track record, small cars etc).

Bigus

Drove the wife's Prius from dublin to Dingle(Daingean ui cius) and back recently cruise set at 129 kmh motorway 112 on national roads and achieved computer read out of 59 mpg average over 480 miles. Drops back to 45 mpg city driving and normally works out 55 mpg country driving. 2007 model with 116000 miles but has a new set of michelin energy saver tyres which might have helped get the 59 average. warm weather helped too but air con was used a good bit.

Also going to Louth/colon last weekend diced a 2006 525d after slane and kept up much to suprise of BM driver, he acted as a handy license saver/radar blocker.

I've great time for these Prii unlike other motoring enthusiasts /

JJJJNR

Kept up with a 525D, I think you mean he was crusing and unaware of your dice..

Seriously thou dosent the prius have a 1.4 engine and weigh the earth, how would it be able to keep up with anything other than another 1.4 ?

JHMEG

Matt Simis wrote: »

Well I think an advanced 3.0TDI is a better engine than a good 3.0 NA petrol, a 3.0 FI petrol would be nicer again.

I'm enjoying this and I'd love to go talk about this ad infinitum but...

But I will say Audi's 4.2L petrol V8 with an 8k redline is one Audi engine that stands out to me. A bit late to the party but by all accounts an excellent engine.

FI means? Do you mean direct injection? The biggest engine co in the world doesn't do petrol direct injection because it generates diesel-like heavy particulates, which are bad for the lungs. That's a good enough reason for me.

bmw535d

Bigus wrote: »

Drove the wife's Prius from dublin to Dingle(Daingean ui cius) and back recently cruise set at 129 kmh motorway 112 on national roads and achieved computer read out of 59 mpg average over 480 miles. Drops back to 45 mpg city driving and normally works out 55 mpg country driving. 2007 model with 116000 miles but has a new set of michelin energy saver tyres which might have helped get the 59 average. warm weather helped too but air con was used a good bit.

Also going to Louth/colon last weekend diced a 2006 525d after slane and kept up much to suprise of BM driver, he acted as a handy license saver/radar blocker.

I've great time for these Prii unlike other motoring enthusiasts /

you may want to reword that as it is indisputably impossible.

bmw535d

JHMEG wrote: »

I'm enjoying this and I'd love to go talk about this ad infinitum but...

But I will say Audi's 4.2L petrol V8 with an 8k redline is one Audi engine that stands out to me. A bit late to the party but by all accounts an excellent engine.

FI means? Do you mean direct injection? The biggest engine co in the world doesn't do petrol direct injection because it generates diesel-like heavy particulates, which are bad for the lungs. That's a good enough reason for me.

i think he meant forced induction,as in a turbo or supercharger

JHMEG

bmw535d wrote: »

i think he meant forced induction,as in a turbo or supercharger

Thought there was a typo and he meant DI - F and D are beside each other on the kb

bmw535d

JHMEG wrote: »

Thought there was a typo and he meant DI - F and D are beside each other on the kb

i beg to differ,,he mentioned a NA 3.0 petrol and then said a FI would be even nicer, so he's defiantly talking about forced injection

JHMEG

bmw535d wrote: »

i beg to differ,,he mentioned a NA 3.0 petrol and then said a FI would be even nicer, so he's defiantly talking about forced injection

I'm not disagreeing. I'm saying I made an incorrect assumption as FI is an unusual and uncommon acronym, especially considering he said that the opposite, NA, was nice.

Matt Simis

JHMEG wrote: »

I'm not disagreeing. I'm saying I made an incorrect assumption as FI is an unusual and uncommon acronym, especially considering he said that the opposite, NA, was nice.

Yeah referring to Forced Induction compared to Natural Aspiration. What do you called Chargers in short hand then?
I said the FI 3.0 would be a nicer and better engine than the Turbo Diesel and a NA 3.0. My GF has a 530i (3.0 NA Straight 6) and honesely, really not a fan of the engine despite its accolades as one of the best "all round" NA engines ever made (M54). She finds it slow and thirsty, basically making the case for the diesel alternative. Its smooth, quiet, refined, revs well but much to our surprise none of those things in excess make a very good motor. Nice to have, but rather have efficient power with less pleasantries.

JHMEG

Matt Simis wrote: »

What do you called Chargers in short hand then?

Best avoided! I don't like turbo lag and IMHO nothing beats power by displacement or high rotational speed.

Wonder what your 3.0 NA would be like if it spun to 9,000rpm...

pajo1981

JHMEG wrote: »

Blah, blah,... petrol direct injection because it generates diesel-like heavy particulates, which are bad for the lungs. That's a good enough reason for me.

Link please!

Matt Simis

JHMEG wrote: »

Wonder what your 3.0 NA would be like if it spun to 9,000rpm...

Short lived!
Multi-turbo designs on biggish engines have, IMO, no effective lag.
Superchargers on the other hand, pending type, can generate boost from idle, so they cannot have lag by design.

JHMEG

Matt Simis wrote: »

Short lived!

Ya see, if ya had a proper engine company design and build it then it'd last a million miles and only ever need an oil change.

Matt Simis wrote: »

Superchargers on the other hand, pending type, can generate boost from idle, so they cannot have lag by design.

Have never driven a supercharged car so can't comment. But sounds plausible.

pajo1981 wrote:

Link Please!

http://www.airclim.org/factsheets/factsheet17.htm

direct-injection petrol engines can however emit almost the same level of particulates as a diesel engine.

DI petrol emissions are regulated in the latest Euro emissions standards.

colm_mcm

I find the diesel figures pretty poor there, I drove an 09 Ibiza 1.9 TDI (red I of course!) in Spain for a few weeks last year and got phenomonal economy (70mpg in some cases) The Golf can't be that much heavier.

Interesting that the Prius was running on 87 ovtane fuel as well. I find the Prius figures unbelievable even though I have experience of driving an old model Prius.

bmw535d

Matt Simis wrote: »

Yeah referring to Forced Induction compared to Natural Aspiration. What do you called Chargers in short hand then?
I said the FI 3.0 would be a nicer and better engine than the Turbo Diesel and a NA 3.0. My GF has a 530i (3.0 NA Straight 6) and honesely, really not a fan of the engine despite its accolades as one of the best "all round" NA engines ever made (M54). She finds it slow and thirsty, basically making the case for the diesel alternative. Its smooth, quiet, refined, revs well but much to our surprise none of those things in excess make a very good motor. Nice to have, but rather have efficient power with less pleasantries.

everyone calls any type of electric belt of chain super chargers or turbochargers FI as the air is forced into the engine at higher that atmospheric pressure,and how can you call, and how can you call 231bhp slow? or if its an e60 272?of course driving around at 2k rpm wondering where the power is would explain it.

Ferris

Matt Simis wrote: »

Go on then, Im baited, whats the pinnacle of Diesel tech, spirited away from its inventing nation?

Fiats probably, they invented common rail fuel injection. Problem was that they sold it to the fatherlands Bosch for comparitive pittance because they were broke.

JHMEG

Ferris wrote: »

Fiats probably, they invented common rail fuel injection. Problem was that they sold it to the fatherlands Bosch for comparitive pittance because they were broke.

No, Fiat did not. A Swiss dude developed a prototype while the first successful common rail production vehicle was a Japanese truck made by Hino which used a system by Nippon Denso.

Ferris

JHMEG wrote: »

No, Fiat did not. A Swiss dude developed a prototype while the first successful common rail production vehicle was a Japanese truck made by Hino which used a system by Nippon Denso.

Ah wikipedia, Fiat invented the first common rail system controlled by the ECU. The Hino was mechanically controlled, but you are correct.

JHMEG

Ferris wrote: »

Fiat invented the first common rail system controlled by the ECU.

I think "developed" is a better word than invented.

Back to Matt's point tho... I presume he was referring to Rudolf himeself when he was on about diesel and ze Fatherland.

Matt Simis

bmw535d wrote: »

everyone calls any type of electric belt of chain super chargers or turbochargers FI as the air is forced into the engine at higher that atmospheric pressure,and how can you call, and how can you call 231bhp slow? or if its an e60 272?of course driving around at 2k rpm wondering where the power is would explain it.

Re the FI, yeah I know, just wondering what JHMEG/others write FI as.
Re the speed: fast or slow are relative terms.
231bhp is slow on a 1800kg car. We came from a heavier, but twin turbo 310bhp Audi Allroad that felt and was a lot faster, even with power to the 4 wheels vs 2.
We dont drive everywhere "at 2k rpm", its an Auto so it does its own thing. We can easily make it "seem fast" by putting it in Sports, locking out 5th, and driving everywhere at 4k RPM.. yeah, then its fast, but thats more than a bit silly. In normal car terms (non MSport), the upper Audi's (+2.5ltre) are faster then their upper BMW competition, ignoring paper stats etc. I dont know what more to say, compared to all we had, the 231bhp 530i leaves you wanting more, its gutless before 4k (again compared to the standard we set) yet doesnt rev fast enough or high enough (6800 ish) to make that work. Also, in terms of efficiency, consider the Audi achieved 75% of the MPG while driving 100% more wheels 30% faster on a car 10% heavier.

I seem to spend inordinate amounts of time explaining why I think the M54 engine is slow to BMW fans!