Preview:Lexus CT200h Concept First Audi A3, BMW 1 Series Fighter Additional Images Surface

Only valid when LEXUS dial in less UNDERSTEER.
BTW, this concept is even more ugly than 1 series.

— dlin (View Profile)

Posted on 9/8/2009 3:17:39 PM | | Votes: 1   

Bumper is fine, the sides are just too plain as if they forgot about it.

— Badgewhore (View Profile)

Posted on 9/7/2009 9:54:11 PM | | Votes: 0   

— validus00

> [...] until the 123d beats the crap out of it. the 123d has [...]
> fuel efficiency it's got an official combined-cycle figure
> of 54.3mpg

Let me reeducate you a bit.


BMW 123d diesel has real life observed fuel economy of 7.27 l/100km=32.35 mpg US. 62+ drivers of this car acknowledge this fact.

Source: http://www.spritmonitor.de/de/uebersicht/6-BMW/36-1er.html?fueltype=1&constyear_e=2009&power_s=145&power_e=155


Because diesel has 12% more energy per gallon (it requires more crude oil to produce), this 32.35 diesel mpg US is an equivalent of 32.35/1.12=28.8 gasoline mpg US


Let's repeat.

BMW 123d diesel efficiency = 28.8 mpg US of gasoline energy equivalent.


28 mpg US is what you get from 200HP Honda Civic Si

Source: http://fueleconomy.gov/mpg/MPG.do?action=mpgData&vehicleID=25085&browser=true&details=on


This makes diesel a choice for the dummies. All these expensive and fragile turbochargers, expensive injection system, particulate filters, pricey engine block... and what you end up with is fuel efficiency of a sporty 200HP simple gasoline Civic SI.


How does the Lexus new hybrid stack up?

I don't know. What I do know though is that the Camry Hybrid returns steady 37 mpg.

Source: http://fueleconomy.gov/mpg/MPG.do?action=browseList2&make=Toyota&model=Camry%20Hybrid

And this Lexus will be smaller, lighter and more aerodynamic...

— downtoearth (View Profile)

Posted on 9/7/2009 4:40:07 PM | | Votes: -5   

BMW 123d diesel has real life observed fuel economy of 7.27 l/100km=32.35 mpg US. 62+ drivers of this car acknowledge this fact.


WRONG

BMW.DE 6.5 l/100km
BMW UK reports 54.3 mpg = 45.2 U.S.

You didn’t use your source for the Civic, so you comparison is meaning less.

http://www.bmw.de/de/de/newvehicles/1series/coupe/2007/overview.html

http://www.bmw.co.uk/bmwuk/pricesandspecifications/0,,1156___bs-MQ%3D%3D%40bb-Q1A%3D%40sit-bmwuk,00.html

Because diesel has 12% more energy per gallon (it requires more crude oil to produce), this 32.35 diesel mpg US is an equivalent of 32.35/1.12=28.8 gasoline mpg US

WRONG, WAY WRONG

“Diesel engines often achieve greater fuel efficiency than petrol (gasoline) engines. Diesel engines have energy efficiency of 45% and petrol engines of 30%.[3] That is one of the reasons why diesels have better fuel efficiency than equivalent petrol cars. A common margin is 40% more miles per gallon for an efficient turbodiesel.:” -

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fuel_efficiency


28 mpg US is what you get from 200HP Honda Civic Si,


Honda EPA reports combined Fuel economy of 24mpg

The same U.S site reports the BMW 128i gets 27.3. Do you really think that the 123d is just barely more efficient than the 123d, and what Honda doing wrong when they can only pull 1mpg better out of a 198 bhp car vs. a 230 6 cylinder car.

But lets not even compare a 1 series with a Honda civic, a part from having two doors a radio and sunroof the have absolutely nothing in common. Mention the two in comparison tells me on thing: you’ve never driven a 1er

http://fueleconomy.gov/mpg/MPG.do?action=mpgData&vehicleID=25085&browser=true&details=on


All these expensive and fragile turbochargers, expensive injection system, particulate filters, pricey engine block

WRONG AGAIN

“The much higher compression ratio means diesel engines have to be heavier and more robust. This means they are more expensive to build, but the higher cost is offset by much longer lifetimes. For instance, we’ve seen Mercedes-Benz diesels with 350,000 or more miles on the odometer running great on the original engine.” -Greener Car


http://www.greencar.com/articles/difference-between-diesel-gasoline-engines.php

— theoptimisticpessimist (View Profile)

Posted on 9/7/2009 8:06:43 PM | | Votes: 4   

i'm sure the 123d is more than capable of achieving higher mpg than those reported by that site, where most of the reporting drivers were likely constant pedal mashers. professional reviews are constantly reporting 36-54mpg. they just did a test showing that the 335d had similar mpg of the new lexus hs250h hybrid, but with a lot more performance.

actually every single one of those turbos count. that's what helps this engine achieve the figures of more than 100hp/l output. bmw didn't win international engine of the year awards in many categories year after year because they didn't know how to design engines.

you can't simply say that just because diesel has more energy per liter, it takes more crude oil to make. diesel oil actually uses less crude oil to make than petrol, because of the refinement process to get petroleum and diesel oil from a barrel of crude oil. from a refinement standpoint, petroleum is less efficient than diesel to make. a barrel of crude has no useable octane in the petrol weight fraction immediately after fractionation. they currently have to crack heavier fractions just to make more petroleum, making the petroleum refining process less efficient than diesel. the reason why a barrel of crude oil is currently producing more petroleum than diesel is because there is more demand for it.
http://www.petrolprices.com/why-diesel-costs-more-than-petrol.html
in fact, they're coming up with processes that doesn't even depend on crude oil to make diesel oil anymore. they can now refine clean diesel oil from natural gas.
http://www.nytimes.com/2006/01/18/business/worldbusiness/18diesel.html

after seeing how well the heavier 335d fairs against the hs250h, i won't be surprised to see how well the 123d matches against this hatch in countries that will have both cars to compare.

— validus00 (View Profile)

Posted on 9/7/2009 9:57:05 PM | | Votes: 6   

— validus00:

> i'm sure the 123d is more than capable of achieving higher mpg than
> those reported by that site, where most of the reporting drivers were
> likely constant pedal mashers.

So are Honda Civic Si drivers, usually being boy racers. Yet they report the same fuel efficiency.



> professional reviews are constantly reporting 36-54mpg.

Stop your scam and FUD. The official test reported 7,9 l/100km = 29,7 mpg US for the BMW 123d diesel (25,9 mpg US of gas equivalent).

Source: http://www.auto-motor-und-sport.de/vergleichstest/vw-gti-gegen-bmw-123d-sonder-druck-752267.html



> diesel oil actually uses less crude oil to make than petrol

"One barrel of crude oil, when refined, produces about 19 gallons of finished motor gasoline, and 9 gallons of diesel, as well as other petroleum products."

Source: http://www.eia.doe.gov/kids/energyfacts/sources/non-renewable/oil.html#Howused

This is what scientists say. They make you look, well,...



> they currently have to crack heavier fractions just
> to make more petroleum, making the petroleum refining process
> less efficient than diesel.

The difference is about 1% of total energy content in a gallon of fuel. In Europe, producing diesel takes more energy than gasoline

Source: http://ies.jrc.ec.europa.eu/uploads/media/WTW_Report_010307.pdf



> the reason why a barrel of crude oil is currently producing more
> petroleum than diesel is because there is more demand for it.

Europe demands more diesel than gasoline and they:
- have to import diesel (proves what you write is FUD)
- loose energy by producing diesel (source: http://ies.jrc.ec.europa.eu/uploads/media/WTW_Report_010307.pdf)



============================================

— theoptimisticpessimist

> WRONG
> BMW.DE 6.5 l/100km
> BMW UK reports 54.3 mpg = 45.2 U.S.

Dear scammer, why are you quoting manufacturer's estimates based on European driving cycle, which inflates mpg by some 20%?

Do you also think writing in capitals will make your fake data look better?



> You didn’t use your source for the Civic, so you
> comparison is meaning less.

You're very desperate and frustrated, pretending the source for Civic Si is not there. It is. From EPA "Your shared MPG".



>> Because diesel has 12% more energy per gallon (it requires
>> more crude oil to produce)

> WRONG, WAY WRONG

Gasoline: US gallon = 115,000 Btu
Petro-diesel = 130,500 Btu/gallon

Source: http://bioenergy.ornl.gov/papers/misc/energy_conv.html

Looks like your lack of basic education and FUD spewing have lost again. Shouting in capitals didn't help. By the way, Btu stands for British thermal unit, a measure of energy. Just for you to know.


> The same U.S site reports the BMW 128i gets 27.3.

Single driver reports this which is pretty meaningless. Not 62+ as in my source.

BMW 130i (same engine as in 128i) mpg is 10,57

— downtoearth (View Profile)

Posted on 9/8/2009 2:36:22 AM | | Votes: -6   

> The same U.S site reports the BMW 128i gets 27.3.

Single driver reports this which is pretty meaningless. Not 62+ as in my source.

BMW 130i (same engine as in 128i) mpg is 10,57 l/100km = 22,2 mpg US (33+ drivers)

Source: http://www.spritmonitor.de/de/uebersicht/6-BMW/36-1er.html?fueltype=2&power_s=190&power_e=200



> But lets not even compare a 1 series with a Honda civic

You're trying to escape from the lost ground now.

Both are compact sports cars with 200HP. Same size, same power. Perfectly comparable in terms of fuel efficiency.

— downtoearth (View Profile)

Posted on 9/8/2009 2:37:30 AM | | Votes: -4   

Why are we comparing a Honda Civic to a BMW 1 series? FWD vs RWD. Mainstream vs premium. The Japanese fanboys will stop at anything to make a BMW look bad. Is it me or is this constant BMW bashing by Huu76 and downtoearth just an act of jealousy?

— Willis (View Profile)

Posted on 9/8/2009 6:15:47 AM | | Votes: 7   

funny how ucs's calculation is based off a 2003 source that has not been confirmed by other groups or organizations. "25% more oil" sounds pretty exaggerated to say the least. you do know that diesel has higher well-to-tank efficiency for a reason?

don't even get started on the old prius vs jetta. 50% less oil? do you even know what you're talking about? multiple comparisons from different sources show that the jetta and the prius have similar mileage. the jetta wins with higher performance and lower first 8 year ownership costs.
http://www.edmunds.com/insideline/do/Drives/Comparos/articleId=141626

you can't name one lexus that outperforms its bmw counterpart, can you? badly made wheels? pleeeeeez. sounds a bad case of jealousy.

— validus00 (View Profile)

Posted on 9/8/2009 1:54:11 AM | | Votes: 7   

> prius vs jetta. 50% less oil?

Yes.

Toyota Prius: 6.9 barrels of crude oil for 15k miles
VW Jetta TDI: 11.6 barrels of crude oil for 15k miles

11.6 - 6.9 / 6.9 * 100 ~= 68%

Jetta TDI drivers consume some 68% more crude oil that Toyota Prius drivers.

Sources - energy impact scores:
http://www.fueleconomy.gov/feg/compx2008f.jsp?year=2010&make=Toyota&model=Prius&hiddenField=Findacar
http://www.fueleconomy.gov/feg/2008car1tablef.jsp?id=29408


> the jetta wins with higher performance

Performance is virtually similar, with Jetta TDI being 68% less efficient.


> and lower first 8 year ownership costs.

Real life observed (not predicted) total ownership costs for 5 years are:
2004 Toyota Prius: $27,390
2004 VW Jetta TDI: $31,496

Sources:
http://www.edmunds.com/used/2004/toyota/prius/100326481/cto.html?setzip=10009&vdp=off
http://www.edmunds.com/used/2004/volkswagen/jetta/100352548/cto.html?setzip=10009&vdp=off

So the Jetta TDI looses twice. It's by a mile less efficient and costs more to own (even despite having an ordinary manual gearbox).

— downtoearth (View Profile)

Posted on 9/8/2009 2:48:18 AM | | Votes: -5   

Should I dig up the article where it's been proven that a Toyota Prius uses more fuel and pollutes more in a year than a Ferrari? It's because of the respective miles they are driven per year, the latter of which are low mileage cars which are driven rarely - the Prius is an everyday car.

— Willis (View Profile)

Posted on 9/8/2009 6:18:40 AM | | Votes: 6   

"make cleaner gasoline from [crude oil]" instead of garbage fuel, aka, diesel fuel? heh, this is the same "garbage fuel" that's more efficient well-to-wheel than petrol fuel. the same garbage fuel that fuels some european lexus cars. no wonder lexus sell like crap over there.

you must have forgotten that toyota still makes more diesel cars than hybrid cars worldwide. garbage cars drink garbage fuel i guess?

btw, when was the last time lexus won an award for a concept design? lol.

— validus00 (View Profile)

Posted on 9/8/2009 7:30:21 PM | | Votes: 2