Sign In Join 



Honda Civic Real World MPG

2058 messages,  Last post on Aug 26, 2009 at 6:19 PM

You are in the Honda Civic Forum. Your Hosts are pat & karens

What is this discussion about? Honda Civic, Fuel Efficiency (MPG)


Messages Page 137 of 206
1
...
134
135
136
137
138
139
140
...
206
Prev
Next
Last
Go To Msg #
Search This Discussion

#1360 of 2058
Re: Civic SI MPG [40beast07] by kork13
Nov 25, 2007 (10:53 am)
Reply

Replying to: 40beast07 (Nov 24, 2007 5:21 pm)

Especially with the Si, it depends greatly on how you drive... I drive mostly fairly economically, with occasional bursts into the fun that really is the Si. As for mileage, I've normally averaged about 31-32 mpg overall. I've actually been up in the mountains of Colorado for the last week, and have averaged just less than that, maybe about 29-30 mpg. That does take into account that it's been about 60/40 hwy/city driving, so it might be a little different for your conditions.
 
My one caution is that very unfortunately, the Si has a desperate lack of torque, and if I have more than 2 people in the car, I can't maintain highway speeds (60+) in 6th gear. The others are fine, but I just end up having to switch between 5th/6th somewhat often to maintain my speed. Driving is still fine, but the "higher" rpms (4k-4.5k as opposed to the 2.5k-3.5k I normally drive at) in 5th gear hurts mileage a little bit.
#1361 of 2058
Re: Civic SI MPG [kork13] by ruking1
Nov 25, 2007 (11:02 am)
Reply

Replying to: kork13 (Nov 25, 2007 10:53 am)

Yes I would agree, the only two vehicles I have been happy with ( say 3,000-7,000 feet) has been a Z06 Corvette, or VW Jetta TDI. While I can not speak from experience, it would make logical sense a gasser turbo engine would do better over a normall aspirated gasser engine.
#1362 of 2058
Re: Civic SI MPG [ruking1] by shipo
Nov 25, 2007 (11:31 am)
Reply

Replying to: ruking1 (Nov 25, 2007 11:02 am)

"While I can not speak from experience, it would make logical sense a gasser turbo engine would do better over a normall aspirated gasser engine."
 
I can speak from experience and the difference has to be experienced to be believed. The only problem I had was that the crap gasoline that they sell in the mountains is not turbo friendly and caused the electronics in the ignition system to constantly have to step in and retard the ignition timing to keep the engine from blowing up.
 
Best Regards,
Shipo
#1363 of 2058
Re: Civic SI MPG [ruking1] by kork13
Nov 25, 2007 (11:51 am)
Reply

Replying to: ruking1 (Nov 25, 2007 11:02 am)

Probably true. I can't afford a turbo for right now, so I'm going to at least be adding a cold air intake to my Si soon... I've heard that it can at least give a 5-10% increase in torque, plus an extra 10-15 horses...
#1364 of 2058
Re: Civic SI MPG [kork13] by shipo
Nov 25, 2007 (12:32 pm)
Reply

Replying to: kork13 (Nov 25, 2007 11:51 am)

Be very careful with those aftermarket CAI intakes, I've seen any number of folks who've added them and then seen drops in power and torque (via before and after dyno tests).
 
The other alarmingly common issue with CAIs is that I've read dozens of accounts where cars fitted with CAIs injested water causing a "hydrolock" condition that destroys the engine in a single revolution.
 
I'm thinking that you couldn't pay me to fit a CAI on any 8th generation Civic given all of the problems that I've read about.
 
Best Regards,
Shipo
#1365 of 2058
Re: Civic SI MPG [shipo] by ruking1
Nov 25, 2007 (1:30 pm)
Reply

Replying to: shipo (Nov 25, 2007 12:32 pm)

I also would stay FAR away from any cold air intake systems, especially one that uses mineral oil as part of the filtration media. Indeed if you are in the mountains which experience snow and snow drifts, hydro lock can indeed be an issue.
#1366 of 2058
Looks like '08 EPA numbers catch up with Honda by sebring95
Nov 30, 2007 (6:38 am)
Reply
Historically, I've always trended toward averaging the EPA numbers on my vehicles. Except the Hondas/Acuras. Not sure what the difference is, but that's been my experience anyway. Our '05 Odyssey never came close to the EPA numbers (20/28) in the same use that our Tahoe always beat its EPA numbers (14/18). Same for the Acura TL used by an employee (20-29).
 
Anyway, my '07 Civic (30-40) sits right around 35mpg when used mainly for highway traveling. I've had a couple tanks recently where I've only driven around town and have been averaging around 27mpg. My "town" driving is nothing like "city" driving as we live in a rural area. I drive 8 miles to town on a 55mph road (hilly and curvy though) and might hit two or three fairly quick traffic lights to get where I'm going.
 
Either way, it appears the '08 EPA numbers for both my Odyssey and Civic are much closer. 17/25 for the Odyssey and 25-36 for the Civic are about right on from what I can tell. So realistically it would seem I would be beating the pants off of some non-honda '08 models. The Pontiac G6 rental I had when my Jetta got hit was averaging 32mpg which was one shy of its highway rating. The '08 G6 is now rated 30mpg highway. Seems weird. Any idea why the Hondas don't seem to do better in real world? I always marked up my Odyssey as not hitting the EPA numbers because of the VCM, but really the Civic isn't much better in the scheme of things.
 
One other question (since the other Honda forums are dead here)....anyone have cold-start problems? Mine seems studder a bit on cold starts. It reminds me of starting my previous diesel when it was 0°F. It usually starts, but stutters for a few seconds before catching and idling normal. I've seen high performance engines do this so I know it can be a characteristic, but wasn't sure. Haven't had a normal gasser do anything like this, but thought I'd ask. It's not really a problem, unless it gets worse I suppose.
#1367 of 2058
Re: Looks like '08 EPA numbers catch up with Honda [sebring95] by kipk
Nov 30, 2007 (7:50 am)
Reply

Replying to: sebring95 (Nov 30, 2007 6:38 am)

Some of the Civics are getting 40 or better on road trips. Load, terrain, driving style, gas formulas all contribute to fuel mileage.
 
My wife gets 3-4 mpg less than I do in the same type driving with the same vehicle.
She doesn't speed, she simply waits a lot longer before letting her foot off the gas before an up coming stop, then having to use a lot of brake. She tends to follow closer than I do and thus has more gas, brake, gas brake...! I ease away from a stop, she jumps away from one.
 
On the road where I pass someone, she PASSES them. If cruise is not set and she discovers she is loosing some speed, she will accelerate back up to the original speed while still going up hill, where I try to stabelize the speed and gain it back going down the next or on a flat.
 
If we drive a 4 or 6 cylinder car so that we get the same seat of the pants acceleration feel as driving a V8, the mileage will suffer.
 
It is both the big and the little things that add up to poor mileage.
 
With my 4wd Pilot I've gotten 18 mpg on a trip and got 27 on the return trip the very next day with the same load and virtually the weather conditions. The difference was how the car was driven and the speed.
 
Kip
#1368 of 2058
Re: Looks like '08 EPA numbers catch up with Honda [sebring95] by will26
Nov 30, 2007 (8:08 am)
Reply

Replying to: sebring95 (Nov 30, 2007 6:38 am)

It's been in the single digits in the morning here in Wisconsin this past week and I've noticed a little stutter when starting. I was a little surprised since my last car(99 Golf) only stuttered when it was like 20 below.
 
I also noticed that as the car shifted into 2nd when it was cold it made a weird whirring noise but it hasn't happened again. Just chalked it up to all the other things that happen when it's super cold, like all the dang creaks and pops in the dash. Anyone notice that yet? Sounds so cheap.
#1369 of 2058
Re: Looks like '08 EPA numbers catch up with Honda [kipk] by sebring95
Nov 30, 2007 (9:06 am)
Reply

Replying to: kipk (Nov 30, 2007 7:50 am)

Your responses all make sense, which is why I was comparing only MY vehicles. All driven in similar conditions, roads, drivers, etc. With my typical driving, I've historically trended well toward the highway ratings on other vehicles. When doing long-range highway driving I typically exceed the highway numbers. For example, our Tahoe on long family trips (moderate loads, usually 70mph speeds) would average 20-21mpg with usually nothing more than fuel stops. That's 3mpg above the EPA highway rating. My Odyssey driven similarly has never topped 25mpg and usually averages 23-24mpg on these long highway trips. 3-4mpg BELOW the epa rating, but much closer to the now revised '08 numbers. The Acura TL will hit 27mpg on long highway trips (2mpg less than EPA rating) yet the Camry V6 it replaced would hit 30-31mpg on long trips (rated 28mpg IIRC). It just always seemed like Honda's had rather impressive EPA ratings compared to others, yet this never in my case did more than match other vehicles.

Messages Page 137 of 206
1
...
134
135
136
137
138
139
140
...
206
Prev
Next
Last
Go To Msg #
Search This Discussion
To POST a message, please Sign In.

New? Join Now!

Forum Tools

Please sign in.
Email Address:

Password:

Forgot Password?

Search Forums

Enter Keyword(s)

Advanced Search

Browse by Vehicle



View All Vehicles
Advertisement
Ask the Community
See What People Are Asking

Browse by Board

Browse by Topic


View All Topics

Today's Chats

Advertisement