Edmunds.com | Inside Line | Auto Observer Your Account | Help | Directory
You are here:
![[F]](http://a332.g.akamai.net/f/332/936/12h/www.edmunds.com/media/townhall/webxicons/site.gif){kind=small}
Forums
SUVs Honda CR-V Honda CR-V Real World MPG
786 messages, Last post on Nov 26, 2009 at 3:53 AM
You are in the Honda CR-V Forum. Your Hosts are steve_ & tidester
Your Community Leader is varmint.
|
In mixed suburban driving during the summer of '09 -- avg 21.5 mpg with low of 18 and high of 25.8 In mostly highway mileage during the same period -- avg 28.4 mpg with a high of 31. Speed in the range of 60 - 75. Context -- G'year Assurance Comfort Tread tires at 30 psi. A/C running when SaabGirl deemed it necessary, which is anytime temp exceeds 60. Carrying two adults on trips plus couple hundred pounds of stuff. Drove with traffic flow; no special effort to squeeze out better mileage. Shell 87 -- fuel most often used. Off-topic note: One thing I've appreciated about this very practical machine is that it still has no rattles or squeaks, even on rough pavement. |
|
|
|
| Just completed 3000 mile cross country trek in 2008 CRV EX L 2 wheel drive which had 11400 miles at srtart of trip . I averaged an astounding 31.7 MPGs most of which was at 70MPH on Cruise control. The low end MPG 23.1 up mountains in the west the best at 37.8 going down those mountains. No issues whatsoever about anything. Vehicle ran better than Secretariat in the 73 Kentucky Derby ! | |
|
i have brought k an n filter ..for $43.00 and i have noticed following changes: 1.i can see increase in my accelerator and hardness on accelerator feeling when going over highway has been gone 2.i noticed millage going up(need time for exact miles up) since i brought this filter after 3 months use of car now i can see good accelerator and airflow up 3.before k and n filter..city and highway trips...24 around and i did not have long trips yet... thanks hp
|
|
|
Replying to: hp2009 (Nov 23, 2009 2:24 pm) |
|
|
Replying to: hp2009 (Nov 23, 2009 2:24 pm) Yes the K&N filter allows more air flow due to the "mesh" being less restrictive. But, you could leave the filter out altogether and get even more air flow. Why not just do that?  The K&N less restrictive "mess" has larger holes and also allows more and larger foreign particals to enter the engine. Those particals can be/are abbrasive to the internal moving parts. Resulting in increased wear inside the engine. Many/most of us bought Hondas because of their known and proven longevity. Honda's engineers have invested many hours and dollars developing the exact amount of air flow required for the best overall performance (see above) of their engines. If more air flow was needed they would have increased the size of the air filter, not the size of the holes in the filter. Do you really believe a $42 air cleaner is better than the one developed by Honda engineers? Keep in mind that K&N's business is selling componants. Honda's business is selling you a vehicle that will last, and last, and last! Kip
|
|
|
Replying to: kipk (Nov 24, 2009 7:06 am) i have used k and n filter for yrs and i have seen changes with my cars but everybody have different view on k and n filter or other product out there... thanks for your advice hp |
|
|
Replying to: hp2009 (Nov 24, 2009 7:34 pm)  I probably came on too strong. I apologize for that. Just trying to help, and pass along lessons learned from bad decisions on my part. In days of "YORE", before fuel injection, the carburetor was king. Without getting too "involved", the carburetor was nothing more than a controlled gas leak into the engine. When the "butter fly" valve in the carb's venture was opened and air was sucked into the engine, fuel was siphoned through/from the carbs fuel jets by the rushing air. To get better performance, it was not uncommon to increase the air flow by enlarging the air cleaner, getting a "performance" air cleaner, or even removing the air cleaner. The result was a more powerful sounding engine due to the louder "ROAR" when accelerating. Actually a bit more power was produced at top RPM with the "Pedal to the Metal". For that greater air flow to work, the carb jets had to be increased in size. Down side was more fuel was burned, and more damage to the engine from foreign particles. But when I started driving, gas was commonly $0.25 per gallon, so no big deal. (1958). One day I sat down with a Car Magazine and found several/many adds for devices that claimed to increase performance and fuel mileage by 8-15%. So I could buy 10 of those items and expect 80-150% in mileage and performance. Didn't work that way. A few actually increased performance when used in conjunction with other things, but never when used by themselves. I don't recall any that helped mileage. And definitely none that improved mileage and performance. Modern fuel injected engine's fuel flow are controlled by the ECU reading various sensors and firing the injectors to maintain the proper fuel/air ratio. The more air we allow, the more gas the injectors will feed. A slight increase in power MIGHT be realized at red line. However a decrease in low end performance and mileage may result. Modern engines are a marvel at producing HP and fuel mileage, compared to engines of days gone by. They achieve this with a very careful balance of components. When we mess with the components we mess with the balance.  Kip
|
|
|
|
|
Replying to: kipk (Nov 25, 2009 3:30 am) The benefit is that computer can adjust the air fuel ratio on the fly, where the carb was limited to the jet setting. Jets can be replaced, but the adjustment would remain throughout the RPM range. I think the best explanation for K&N and a like is that if the stock filter allows 1% dirt through. Increasing the ar flow by 10% will allow 10% more dirt, if the new filter has the same filtering capacity. However, K&N and a like filters are not necessarily larger, but rather have larger opennings, which allow 10% more air, but probably 20% more contaminants. What is interesting is that K&N warranty covers the filter for 1,000,000 miles, but says nothing about covering the engine. i have brought k an n filter ..for $43.00 and i have noticed following changes: 1.i can see increase in my accelerator and hardness on accelerator feeling when going over highway has been gone 2.i noticed millage going up(need time for exact miles up) since i brought this filter after 3 months use of car now i can see good accelerator and airflow up 3.before k and n filter..city and highway trips...24 around and i did not have long trips yet... thanks hp If it is a 2005 and up CR-V, then there is no direct connection between the accelrator and the throttle. It is electronically controlled. So, any "easier movement of the accelerator" is just perceived. If OP's vehicle is automatic, his major limitng factor is the torque converter, which saps abour 30% more power than a clutch would.
|
|
|
|
|
Replying to: blueiedgod (Nov 25, 2009 10:12 am) |
|
|
Replying to: blueiedgod (Nov 25, 2009 10:12 am) Of course we had a "Cure" for that, as much as could be done in those days. THE 4 BBL CARBURETOR and multiple carbs, such as Pontiac's "Tri Power". As far as OEM stuff was concerned. There were several varieties available, but the GM "Quadrajet" (4 BBL) was a real good balance. The primary ventures were small and siphoned from small jets. These were used for everyday driving and starting "Off the line". With factory hardware, the much larger and thirstier secondary venture butterflies would FLIP open under vacumn when the throttle was on the floor and enough vacumn from the engine was available. (The secondaries were either fully open or fully closed) Of course we generally over rode the vacumn controls with mechanical linkage.  Had to be careful with the throttle though, because opening those secondaries too soon could result in too much fuel for conditions and "bogging" the engine. The Tri Power (3-2 bbl carbs) worked pretty much the same way. The center carb had very small ventures for every day use. When the front and rear carb's very large venture butterflys "Flipped" open, a lot more fuel was available. Mechanical linkage was available for that set up also. All said and done, a knowledgeable and skillful driver could get better performance from the mechanical set ups. But in reality the stock factory stuff worked just as well. Secondary jetting was sometimes increased for more fuel, but generally didn't operate as well as the stock ones, UNLESS other things were done, such as a more free flowing exhaust, and more free flowing air intake, different cam, distributor modifications, etc.. Bottom line: Most anything that was done to increase performance required modification to other components. AND Generally, fuel mileage suffered!  Modern auto mfg have this stuff down to a science. Most of us don't have the skills or the equipment to make modifications that will actually work. We need to keep in mind that aftermarket companies are in business to "Sell Product" Period! And as you said: What is interesting is that K&N warranty covers the filter for 1,000,000 miles, but says nothing about covering the engine." Kip |
|
You are here:
Forums
SUVs Honda CR-V Honda CR-V Real World MPG
New? Join Now!
Forum Tools
Search Forums
Browse by Vehicle
2010 Honda CR-V
Browse by Board
Browse by Topic
Today's Chats
