|
|
|
|
|
|
BMW Garage | BMW Meets | Register | Today's Posts | Search |
|
BMW 3-Series (E90 E92) Forum
>
Procede 3.2 Beta versus JB3 1.22: The verdict
|
|
02-16-2009, 03:06 PM | #89 |
Major
37
Rep 1,084
Posts |
|
Appreciate
0
|
02-16-2009, 03:08 PM | #90 |
1804
Rep 17,960
Posts
Drives: A Lot
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: SF Bay, CA
iTrader: (0)
Garage List 2018 Ducati Panigal ... [0.00]
2016 Mazda CX5 [0.00] 2017 Aprilia Tuono ... [0.00] 2019 BMW M2 Competi ... [0.00] 2015 BMW M5 Competi ... [10.00] 2016 Ducati XDiavel S [0.00] 2016 AMG GT S [0.00] 2011 Ferrari 458 It ... [0.00] 2017 Charger Hellcat [0.00] 2015 KTM Super Duke ... [0.00] 2016 KTM RC390 [0.00] |
|
Appreciate
0
|
02-16-2009, 04:03 PM | #91 |
Major
254
Rep 1,297
Posts |
|
Appreciate
0
|
02-17-2009, 07:22 PM | #92 |
Major
24
Rep 1,040
Posts |
hey earlier in the thread is said i was doing a little fuel economy study.
results: finally ran a whole tank through the car. this was my first complete tank with the procede. as you can imagine, i didnt exactly drive it easy. stock average over the last few thousand miles for me was 20.4. i drive on twisty roads with slight elevation changes mostly. also a little bit of traffic, not much though. basically i am just trying to say that i don't drive on the highway very often. i ran 300 + miles on the prcede 3.2 maps and averaged 21.7 mpg. not a major increase but over a full 1mpg difference. factor in the point about not exactly going easy on the car as of late and i find that 1mpg impressive. i also went to the car wash twice on this tank and waited in line idling for about 17-20 minutes each time ( actually noticed my average going down as i waited there). oh and just to verify that the increased readings were not due to the altering of signals by the procede i did the math at the pump and it was on the dot 21.747 mpg(car read 21.7). |
Appreciate
0
|
02-17-2009, 07:44 PM | #93 | |
Brigadier General
133
Rep 3,049
Posts |
Quote:
|
|
Appreciate
0
|
Bookmarks |
|
|