beauty (of fuel-efficient cruising) is in the eye of the beholder
 

My '01 X5 has 17's also, and cruises just great at 75-80 mph. The automatic 5L40E tranny has a .75:1 ratio in fifth gear, that really helps lower the rpms that the 4.11 final drive causes. It has been my favorite highway cruiser from the last few decades; only my '67 Dodge Monaco 500 (383 magnum V-8, 3.23 rear gear ratio) cruised better, but then, my memories of it are 50+ years-old). My wife's '14 Lexus ES350 is a smoother, softer, more fuel-efficient cruiser, but it isn't an X5 !!

Using this rpm calculator https://www.crawlpedia.com/rpm_gear_calculator.htm, it shows my 3.0i is at 2679 rpm @75 mph (compare that to the 2547 rpms that my '04 Chevy 2500HD gets, with a taller 30.5" tire and same final drive ratios). The BMW 3.0i uses less gas than the 6.0l LS V-8 that the pickup has, though (15-20 mpg for the BMW 3.0i vs 13-15 mpg "max" for the Chevy 6.0l).

I can live with that, since I formerly drove my old '66 Chevelle (before I converted it to full-race), and my '69 C-10 daily driver/tow vehicle, with 3.73 rear gears and no overdrive gearing in the transmission(s) (both had TH350 trannys at the time). Very poor fuel mileage, but theywere fun.

• The Chevelle had a 427 c.i engine, a 800 cfm Holley double-pumper carb, and 28" tires (450+ whp, 7-10? mpg, 3357 rpm@ 75mph), and
• the C-10 had a 355 c.i. engine, a 750 cfm Holley street carb, and 31" tires (380 whp, 11-13? mpg, 3032 rpm@75 mph)

You should've seen the highway rpms when I switched to 4.56 rear gears on the Chevelle, just as I was switching it to full-race status (4104 rpm @75 mph).

In its' final configuration, it had a different engine, with 14:1 compression, 441 c.i. (solid-roller-cammed), a 1053 cfm Holley 4150 double-pumper carb or a 1200 cfm Holley Dominator 4500 carb (depending on whether I was racing 1/8th mile or 1/4 mile tracks, and cool or hot weather...different intakes and tune-ups were used, also). (4392 rpm @75 mph) Very low mpg on expensive 118 octane fuel !!

Yes, autos do indeed have lower cruising RPMs - hence why they are able to do slightly better mileage on the highway.



You will still see a similar (20% ish) drop at 75-80 as you will at 60-65 though.

Those are both good MPGs, in my view. I’ve been keeping it at 70 or less on this trip and I’m averaging 15.8 on the highway. The 4.6 combo with the lift and MS tires isn’t a friendly one for efficiency.

Made it to Iowa today and got a quick hunt in before 4:30. Snowy and a bit muddy/gravel state roads proved no match for the Quaife. I even stomped on it a few times to bask in its torque transfer. I did chicken out of one approach to a hunting spot as it was really hilly and looked sloppy.

It feels so much stronger in the sloppy stuff as both wheels now get torque as needed and the car just pulls out of the hole with little or no drama. It will try to shimmy sideways, and then work back to center as the torque transfers. At some points I could feel the ABS/DSC working overtime on the front wheels, but not the back. I’m sure the Yokohama Geolanders deserve some credit too.

Not a cheap upgrade, but well worth it for peace of mind when I’m up here in the winter.

The trip computer in mine says 22.8 no matter what my speed.

Next time I'll actually log it and check for myself. I like money!

That's because it's reporting the total average MPG since it was last reset. The sum of all your driving is probably just not enough to have changed it even by one tenth of a MPG.



Logging it is the only real way to keep track. Trip computers from this era are very bad at keeping accurate track.

Yesterday, I found my PS fluid was low and after looking for the leak I noticed that one of my new boots (LF inboard) looked not quite swollen but puffy....

Well sweet baby Jesus my steering rack has lost a seal and pumped PS steering fluid out into the boot! [emoji849]

So while getting a new seal installed I had my rotors surfaced and re-greased the CV all done for 145 USD!!! [emoji106][emoji106][emoji106]http://cloud.tapatalk.com/s/659a490b...6-WA0001_1.mp4http://cloud.tapatalk.com/s/659a4913...6-WA0000_1.mp4

Sent from Embassy network using Tapatalk

Took apart the head unit for the third time. First to replace the original screen that worked but had numerous blotches. The replacement screen would not turn on. Took it apart again to verify connections and found the black wire from the screen to the board was pinched against the frame which shorted the wire to metal. Taped it up and reassembled. Still not working. Today, thinking maybe the new screen was bad or maybe fried, I put the original screen back in. Still doesn't work, so I guess I fucked up something internally, maybe the copper-colored ribbon cables. The first time I took the unit apart I couldn't figure out how to release the ribbon cables from the main unit, so I pulled them out with needlenose pliers. Only later did I realize I had to pop the ends of the connector up to release the cable. ooops! So I'm guessing I damaged one of those two ribbons, or maybe the white one that connects the screen to the board.

For now, it still works and I can stream from my phone to the bluetooth cassette adapter. But I really want this thing to work, so I might ship it to that German Audio guy in California before I go on a two-week work trip later this month. Anyone use him before?

Also installed a Rennline phone mount (without charging). Way overpriced but I hated parking the phone in the open ashtray. https://www.rennline.com/bmw-x5-e53-...t-sku-pm01-64/

thanks for sharing. it's really unfortunate they never made one for the E65/66 cause i'd buy one too.

Another cracked rim...

Welding now, cost is 160 USD [emoji849]

Sent from Embassy network using Tapatalk

You're not supposed to aim *for* the potholes!


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro