Home Forums Articles How To's FAQ Register
Go Back   Xoutpost.com > BMW SAV Forums > X5 (E53) Forum
Fluid Motor Union
User Name
Password
Member List Premier Membership Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read

Xoutpost server transfer and maintenance is occurring....
Xoutpost is currently undergoing a planned server migration.... stay tuned for new developments.... sincerely, the management


Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Display Modes
  #31  
Old 08-23-2013, 07:24 PM
TerminatorX5's Avatar
Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: Stafford, VA & Harrisburg, PA - USA
Posts: 5,736
TerminatorX5 is on a distinguished road
tires are staggered... diameter for rear is measured at 28.68" (72.85cm) installed brand new, fronts are measured at 28.66" (72.80cm) installed brand new... as tires are wear (i am sure, unevenly), the numbers change.
1 mile = 1,609.34m = 1,609,340.00cm
circumference of rear tires = pi x diameter
3.14 x 72.85cm = 228.75cm
3.14 x 72.80cm = 228.60cm

rear 1,609,340.00/228.75 = 7,035.37 rotations
front 1,609,340.00/228.60 = 7,039.98 rotations

difference is 4.61 rotations

without even the tire wear, we somehow have fronts rotating 4.5 revolutions more than the rears... i can only assume that the transmission and the Xdrive somehow compensates for the difference...

however, for this argument, lets say that the tires worn down 1cm in diameter (5mm in radius)

3.14 x 71.85cm = 225.61cm
3.14 x 71.80cm = 225.45cm

rear 1,609,340.00/225.61 = 7,133.28 rotations
front 1,609,340.00/225.45 = 7,138.35 rotations

rear 97.91 extra rotations per mile
front 98.37 extra rotations per mile

say, 100 extra rotations per mile extra. to register a full mile, we need 70 real miles that will be registered as 71 miles. for a typical tankful of gas, which say would drive 350 miles (of course this number varies), the car will register 355 miles for 350 actually travelled...

the difference is 1%... if the diameter of the tire is reduced by 1 cm, the difference in registered travel vs real travel is about 1%

the MPG observed is 19MPG vs 16MPG, which roughly translates to about 1.2%

EDIT: I incorrectly took the 19/16=1.1875 and rounded to 1.2%. the correct number is 18.75% as JCL correctly noted below

so, theoretically, it is possible to have increased mileage due to the reduced diameter of a worn tire... <<<--- ignore this statement

now i need to check to see, how realistic is the 1 cm reduction in the diameter of a used tire vs new tire - i don't have that info...

Last edited by TerminatorX5; 08-24-2013 at 01:19 AM.
Reply With Quote

Sponsored Links

  #32  
Old 08-23-2013, 07:47 PM
JCL's Avatar
JCL JCL is offline
Premier Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Vancouver, Canada
Posts: 11,853
JCL will become famous soon enoughJCL will become famous soon enough
Quote:
Originally Posted by TerminatorX5 View Post
the MPG observed is 19MPG vs 16MPG, which roughly translates to about 1.2%
I was with you up to here (although I think 1 cm of wear in the diameter is high).

By my reckoning, that 3 mpg reduction is 16%, not 1.2 %.
__________________
2007 X3 3.0si, 6 MT, Premium, White

Retired:
2008 535i, 6 MT, M Sport, Premium, Space Grey
2003 X5 3.0 Steptronic, Premium, Titanium Silver

2002 325xi 5 MT, Steel Grey
2004 Z4 3.0 Premium, Sport, SMG, Maldives Blue
Reply With Quote
  #33  
Old 08-23-2013, 08:14 PM
bcredliner's Avatar
Premier Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Little Elm,Texas. (40 minutes North of Dallas)
Posts: 8,105
bcredliner is on a distinguished road
As gas prices increase, I keep checking mileage different ways until I get a number that I think justifies ownership. I inflate it if someone is asking me the mileage in case their intention this is to say the X5 is further proof I am a dipstick.

Anything I do to improve the mileage will go on the bad side of the feel good fun factor meter so it is as likely to happen as me buying a Prius. My guess is there are as many X5 drivers that would drive the way it takes to get the best mileage for more than a day or two as there are leadfoot Prius pilots pushing to keep pace. I am not going to be either.

I like 19mpg. No one would believe 20, 19 is a stretch but I'm not challenging Term--straight up guy but his latest post makes my head hurt---that could happen--time to recalculate to see if I can find a way to get there.
__________________
X5 4.6 2002 Black Sap, Black interior. 2013 X5M Melbourne Red, Bamboo interior
Dallas
Reply With Quote
  #34  
Old 08-23-2013, 08:47 PM
TerminatorX5's Avatar
Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: Stafford, VA & Harrisburg, PA - USA
Posts: 5,736
TerminatorX5 is on a distinguished road
typing and calculating on cell phone is not one of my forte...
Reply With Quote
  #35  
Old 08-23-2013, 09:13 PM
X5Ghost's Avatar
Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: In my X5
Posts: 666
X5Ghost is on a distinguished road
Back to the original thread

I get 400 mi per tank city and hwy mix drive!
__________________
Current:
2017 640Xi Convertible
2011 Acura MDX
2018 Santa Fe

Past:
2013 Honda Accord
2008 Acura TL Tech.------2004 BMW X5 4.8is----2004 Acura MDX Tech
1994 BMW 525i.----------1994 Lexus 300 GS.----1994 Acura Legend GS
1991 Acura Legend LS.----1991 Honda Accord.----1991 300ZX twin turbo
1996 Buick Regal GS.-----1984 300Z 50th anniv.--2002 BMW X5
1982 280Z
Reply With Quote
  #36  
Old 08-23-2013, 09:49 PM
admranger's Avatar
Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Las Vegas
Posts: 1,636
admranger is on a distinguished road
I try not to let my tank run that low for a couple of reasons:

1) fuel cools the pump, so keep it submerged as much as possible,

b) I never want to be low on fuel when the zombie attack. Gotta get away!
__________________
Kirk
Las Vegas
2016 X5 40e Mineral White/Black Dakota Leather, ZLL, ZCW, ZDA, ZDB, ZPP, multi contour seats, rear side window shades, HK stereo
2011 E90M3, 6-speed manual
Reply With Quote
  #37  
Old 08-24-2013, 01:13 AM
TerminatorX5's Avatar
Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: Stafford, VA & Harrisburg, PA - USA
Posts: 5,736
TerminatorX5 is on a distinguished road
Quote:
Originally Posted by JCL View Post
I was with you up to here (although I think 1 cm of wear in the diameter is high).

By my reckoning, that 3 mpg reduction is 16%, not 1.2 %.

my bad - i was looking at wrong spot after decimal... 19/16=1.1875... the difference in fuel consumption is 18.75%

in this case, a single percentage point in the tire wear probably can't easily transform into 19% MPG reading...

and yes, before i saw routinely 350 to 380 miles per tank before i would fill up, now i see routinely 430 to 455 miles before i have to put the same amount of gas...

and i agree, it is better to keep the tank always with some gas in it, and not run it dry - i learned my lesson in Panama, when going from costa Rican border, through David to Panama City without any gas stations in sight... running on fumes!!! lol...
now, since i am back to civilization, i just feel lazy and slipped back to the old ways...
Reply With Quote
  #38  
Old 08-24-2013, 10:22 AM
THE VEIN's Avatar
Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2013
Location: New York
Posts: 814
THE VEIN is on a distinguished road
I'm only getting about 12-13mpg city on my 3.0 but on the highway I get about 25mpg+ when I drive out to my friends house in jersey, I usually do 130-140 miles round trip and use about a quarter tank
Reply With Quote
  #39  
Old 08-25-2013, 03:23 AM
TerminatorX5's Avatar
Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: Stafford, VA & Harrisburg, PA - USA
Posts: 5,736
TerminatorX5 is on a distinguished road
here are some additional numbers from the car's internals -

4282 wheel sensor impulses to register 1 kilometer in odometer
4229 wheel sensor impulses to register 1 kilometer in speedometer

these are the vallues stored in the E53-HP, which is the iS model with 20" standard staggered wheels... these numbers suggest that the rolling values of the mounted tires are different from the nominal values that I got from the tire calculators - 233.53cm as per the 4282 impulses in odometer ("correct" value as opposed to optimistic 4229 impulses for the speedometer value)

these numbers do not affect the calculations of the MPG much, as we used our numbers to calculate the difference in diameter and those numbers were a percentage points of a ratio...

nevertheless, now i want to go actually measure the tire diameters on my car...
Reply With Quote
  #40  
Old 08-25-2013, 12:51 PM
bcredliner's Avatar
Premier Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Little Elm,Texas. (40 minutes North of Dallas)
Posts: 8,105
bcredliner is on a distinguished road
How much does rolling friction change over the tire wear life impact the decrease in circumference?
__________________
X5 4.6 2002 Black Sap, Black interior. 2013 X5M Melbourne Red, Bamboo interior
Dallas
Reply With Quote
Reply

Bookmarks

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On





All times are GMT -4. The time now is 08:58 PM.
vBulletin, Copyright 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd. SEO by vBSEO 3.6.0
© 2017 Xoutpost.com. All rights reserved. Xoutpost.com is a private enthusiast site not associated with BMW AG.
The BMW name, marks, M stripe logo, and Roundel logo as well as X3, X5 and X6 designations used in the pages of this Web Site are the property of BMW AG.
This web site is not sponsored or affiliated in any way with BMW AG or any of its subsidiaries.