[ovekvam]

I have been testing the Eco Pro mode now and then on trips. Sometimes I run the entire trip in Comfort Mode, and other times in Eco Pro. The consumption seems to be the same. Still the Eco Pro mode reports that I have saved a lot of kilometers. So then I wonder, compared to what?

My conclusion is that that it doesn't save any fuel, but it has a soft throttle pedal mapping that is useful for driving on ice. I should rename the button from Eco Pro to Ice Pro.

[Ozolz]

Well the official statement from BMW is that Eco Pro saves u 10% fuel compared to not driving in Eco Pro. Personally I think the 10% bonus is lost once u put your foot down on the throttle hard.

[ovekvam]

I have also tried switching between Comfort and Eco Pro while keeping a steady pace on flat ground (also tested uphill), and the momentary consumption seems to be the same. When going uphill, you need significantly more throttle to keep the pace in Eco Pro, since the pedal mapping is very different.

Maybe the gain is supposed to come from the driver thinking more about driving fuel friendly when looking at those blue bonus kilometers?

[theotherjohn]

There's certainly an enormous delay with kickdown in EcoPro - almost as if the coumpter wants to put up a "are you really sure" window

[papertiger]

interesting. have not had the chance to test it out yet (my car is delivered in 4 weeks..), but I have read a bit about the different driving programs, and the first thing I thought about the Eco Pro mapping was that it should be very useful when driving on slippery conditions (=ice). Have you tested Sport vs. Comfort?

[ovekvam]

Originally Posted by papertiger

interesting. have not had the chance to test it out yet (my car is delivered in 4 weeks..), but I have read a bit about the different driving programs, and the first thing I thought about the Eco Pro mapping was that it should be very useful when driving on slippery conditions (=ice). Have you tested Sport vs. Comfort?

Yes, Sport mode seems to be somewhat more thirsty.

[tawia]

IMO Eco pro will only show it's true worth in city/town driving, wont save you much worth talking about on the motorway apart from reducing electrical load if your burning heated seats etc

[fuzzer]

The most I've seen out of running Eco pro on a tank is 46 miles. That was on 500 miles of motorway sitting around 70 with the cruise set and the air con part of it disabled as I don't like it.

I've never been able to replicate it again and I agree that I don't see much difference between Eco pro and comfort apart from the dull throttle .

[AusF20/F48]

Eco Pro will only give you marginally better figures than 'comfort' when used at moderate speed up to 90 kmh on flat roads without the AC, using very linear pedel pressure and when the stop / start is used.
It is reliant on constant revs in the sweet zone <2200rpm> plus or minus and in the gear offering the lowest loading to reduce consumption.

It is designed so that the car has excelent fuel consumption figures and emissions when the manufacturer does their tests.

In the real world, you should just leave the selector in 'Comfort' for your Eco driving and select Sport or Sport+ when you realise you are driving a BMW.

[AusF20/F48]

Eco Pro will only give you marginally better figures than 'comfort' when used at moderate speed up to 90 kmh on flat roads without the AC, using very linear pedel pressure and when the stop / start is used.
It is reliant on constant revs in the sweet zone <2200rpm> plus or minus and in the gear offering the lowest loading to reduce consumption.

It is designed so that the car has excelent fuel consumption figures and emissions when the manufacturer does their tests.

In the real world, you should just leave the selector in 'Comfort' for your Eco driving and select Sport or Sport+ when you realise you are driving a BMW.

[AusF20/F48]

Eco Pro will only give you marginally better figures than 'comfort' when used at moderate speed up to 90 kmh on flat roads without the AC, using very linear pedal pressure and when the stop / start is used.
It is reliant on constant revs in the sweet zone <2200rpm> plus or minus and in the gear offering the lowest loading to reduce consumption.

It is designed so that the car has excellent fuel consumption figures and emissions when the manufacturer does their tests.

In the real world, you should just leave the selector in 'Comfort' for your Eco driving and select Sport or Sport+ when you realise you are driving a BMW.

[tawia]

We heard you the first time lol

[ovekvam]

Originally Posted by AusF20

Eco Pro will only give you marginally better figures than 'comfort' when used at moderate speed up to 90 kmh on flat roads without the AC, using very linear pedal pressure and when the stop / start is used.
It is reliant on constant revs in the sweet zone <2200rpm> plus or minus and in the gear offering the lowest loading to reduce consumption.

The 116i seems to get the best mileage in the speed range from 50-70 km/h, running in tall gears with rather high load, around 1500 RPM. My best figure from a trip is 4.9 liters / 100 km in Comfort mode, and 5.2 liters / 100 km in Eco Pro.

[AusF20/F48]

Sorry all
Damn maintenance glitch

[Fanis]

I see a difference in consumption, when I use the Eco Pro mode in my daily commute which is mainly in the City (heavy traffic) and a bit of open road. My avg. speed is something like 40 kms/h. In any other condition (i.e. highway, twisty roads etc.) the Eco Pro makes not difference. So, I have concluded to use Eco Pro when I drive in the city and Comfort or Sport in all other conditions.

[tawia]

Originally Posted by Fanis

I see a difference in consumption, when I use the Eco Pro mode in my daily commute which is mainly in the City (heavy traffic) and a bit of open road. My avg. speed is something like 40 kms/h. In any other condition (i.e. highway, twisty roads etc.) the Eco Pro makes not difference. So, I have concluded to use Eco Pro when I drive in the city and Comfort or Sport in all other conditions.

Totally agree. This is how I will use EcoPro

[blabley]

I've been using Eco Pro all the time, just because it tells me i've added so much more to the tank! Last week was in Belfast, Dublin and Cork 800+ km and it told me i'd added an extra 150+ km!. About 90% motorway, i notice the difference in acceleration.

...but i just want the best mpg out of it as i'm not getting what i was hoping for. Any suggestions on getting better mpg?

I've done long trips in Eco Pro at 100/110 or 130ish , I get;
49mpg @ avg speed 114
48mpg @ 100
55mpg @ 95

Any extra thoughts to add from the above?

[ovekvam]

Lower the average speed to around 60, and you will get really nice figures. When you drive fast, too much energy goes to waste in moving air around. Remember that power is force times velocity, and the force from drag is proportional to velocity squared. That means the necessary power to keep the car going will be proportional to velocity qubed!

[tawia]

I take it those figure are KPH not MPH?

[blabley]

Originally Posted by tawia

I take it those figure are KPH not MPH?

Yeah, sorry. Sure you know it's confused down here... KPH but MPG!

[blabley]

Originally Posted by ovekvam

Lower the average speed to around 60, and you will get really nice figures. When you drive fast, too much energy goes to waste in moving air around. Remember that power is force times velocity, and the force from drag is proportional to velocity squared. That means the necessary power to keep the car going will be proportional to velocity qubed!

Yeah, sure if i drive at 90kph (limit for trucks in Europe) it'll be better

[Diesel130]

Originally Posted by blabley

... Any suggestions on getting better mpg?

Get a 120d, so it's less laboured? Seem to be getting 58mpg from mine on a long trip recently