Gareth

Good thing I didn't get them then! I was actually thinking shortly after I got it that I thought I should have.

Ignore that - use the UK list. I have a samsung now. A bit disappointed by the lack of signal and battery display.

Paul, That wasn't on a KRZR with the new software though, was it? AGeezer, Replace the phone is the only solution I could come up with :(

For me the SE-L was an easy choice - I wanted too much of the stuff on it. I was considering the sport on the diesel, but then went against that because I'm not getting this car to be sporty, and I'd miss the upgraded seats and wood. I would have liked the 250 auto, a lot, but wasn't going that way this time.

What's mileage has yours done. Mine's creeping up steadily, now to 34mpg tank average, but I'm still at under 500 miles. G

I thought that the suggestion was that there were two separate flows still where those sensors are. If not, then sod it, I'd absolutely try using just one sensor with a split signal first. If not, then yeah, reposition them in the downpipe.

If there's an O2 sensor for mixture control for both banks then I'd say to not cut any corners by putting it after the exhausts have merged.

That's what I was suggesting, yes.

I think I need to offer a strong disclaimer before I get torn to shreds, or worse someone does something that turns out to be insane. I, too, am not a mechanic, and have no qualifications. Now: As I see it, you have two O2 sensors, one of which can't possibly fit with the turbo there. First idea I had was to offer up an extended pipe, which would be bent straight away, into the thread, and attach the O2 sensor at the end of this. This was insane, I realised, since the O2 sensor needs to be in the path of the airflow. If it's in a channel coming off the exhaust pipe then the air wouldn't flow through, and you'd just get the initial air that was in their stuck from coming out because of the pressure of the exhaust air rushing past. At most you might get minor intermixing of the air that's stuck and fresh air, but probably not. Even if you did, you'd be removing some of what you need, which is a blast of exhaust to turn your turbine. The second idea was based of your original images: Why not keep those two sensor holes blanked off there. Fit the O2 sensors later down the exhaust pipe, after the turbo. The O2 mixture shouldn't (or I can't see anything that could catalyse such a change) change because of the air turning the turbine. There's obviously no introduction of new air before/after that, since that would mean a leak, making it less powerful. So re-introduce your O2 sensors in the down pipe after the turbo, and all should be well. Can someone with more experience comment on the suggestion? The practical application of it might prove quite easy, too, tbh. There's also an advantage of less barriers for your exhaust before the turbo. Just a suggestion, hope it isn't insane and I've made a wang of myself. :D Oh, and a question: Why's there two O2 sensors? Are they identical? If so, could the signal from one be split to both receivers and blank off only one of the two holes? This might not work, because surely it wouldn't have two if it didn't need them...?

Matus, Anything less than 1500 wouldn't have been able to maintain the speed... I didn't choose these rpms, they chose me ;)

I'm finding that I currently get 31mpg with frugral driving in urban conditions. When I did two motorway runs of 30 miles I got an average up to 36mpg overall, which obviously meant great economy on that trip. I did want to disagree with The Mole on something, though. Running the engine on the turbo will not definitely mean better economy. It doesn't so much "help it breathe" as it does "ram as much oxygen as it can in there", and more oxygen means more fuel. The gain in performance isn't always quite proportional to the extra fuel used, so whilst you get a 50% rise in performance you might get a 60% rise in consumption. With my car I ran it at a steady 2500rpm, with no foot fluctuations on a steady road, at 40mph, IIRC. I then changed up a gear, and ran it at ~1500rpm, same speed, no fluctuations of throttle. I found that the average consumption goes straight up 20mph, roughly. This is perfectly what I'd expect - turbos are there to give you a bigger bang. Whilst more oxygen provides for this, they are also mapped to provide more fuel as the exhaust gas runs lean, generally. I hope I'm not wrong about all this ;)

Are you saying that the diesel sport gives better economy?

Absolutely agree.

Don't be silly - we couldn't possibly find a single complaint in the giant list you generated :P

My apologies, I didn't realise you'd already posted a topic and had had no luck. I can tell you that I have a new IS 220d and I don't get any wind noise at 80mph that I have really noticed.

I'd suggest that you start a new topic for that, for several reasons: Anyone who does know about it would see the topic in RSS, but wouldn't know you were asking about it in here, so can't answer. Also People in the future will want to know the same thing, but won't find your question and the answers cos it's buried in another topic. A lot of the time Off-Topic doesn't matter, but for a case like this it kinda does. You can always prod the mole in pm to look at the topic, if he doesn't notice it. Hope you don't take offense at that. G

The Mole: Are you saying that consumption will not get better for me once the engine has had some time? I'm driving it how I would expect to have to to get mpg. I keep her below 2.5k rpm and I use slow input and patience. The engine is currently more noisy and labour-some than I hoped it would be once it's had hoped it might be after it's had some time to bed in.

Serves you right for marrying tinkerbell.

Mine's up to 170 miles now, and I'm still on 28.5mpg. The ecu remap was done before I got it. I'm hoping to see it creap up into the 40s when I get to the 1k mark

Yarr. I'm a bit disappointed with the signal, which seems to be worse frequently. Also would have liked the signal and battery to have shown in the car. G

Stats make it out to be very good. I'm not due an upgrade yet and on handset only price this is still more than I'd part with (I got the D900 for £150 on ebay)

What's the battery life like?

Yes, it will. My Motokrzr K1 didn't repair automatically with the 220d MM. It did display battery and signal, interestingly, though. I replaced it with the Samsung D900, which is very similar to the E900 - In fact I think it might be the successor. The phone repairs very quickly and everything works fine. The battery and signal do not display, unfortunately. I'd suggest that you try the D900, since I know it works. It's a bit wider than the K1, but a bit thinner to make up for it. The only problem I've had so far is battery, but I'm unsure if it was fully charged first time (I bought it new off ebay, but fear it might have been half charged first time). I also accidentally left it on bluetooth visible all day, and that might have had an impact. I normally leave bluetooth on, but not visible. I'm waiting to see how long this second charge, and I can let you know if you want. Apart from that I've found the phone to be great. A different direction for me, too, since I haven't had a slider before. (Well, the K1 was my first clamshell too)

Congratulations - Hope you like it. I actually never test drove the 250 auto, since I wasn't really interested in it, but I really should of since now I'm curious! How close to the brighton dealership are you, by the way? For me it is a real pain that they're the closest and yet still so far away!

Cracking advice, and it's a direction I'd been considering, actually. You've confirmed also that the ML does recognise DVD+-R The question is: If it's an video dvd... doesn't that mean you can't see it whilst driving? How do you choose tracks, etc? G