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 185 of 207
1
...
182
183
184
185
186
187
188
...
207
Prev
Next
Last
Go To Msg #
Search This Discussion

#1833 of 2058
Re: Getting BAD MPG! [sphere99] by wai
Oct 04, 2008 (3:25 pm)
Reply

Replying to: sphere99 (Sep 29, 2008 6:11 pm)

You should have 32-33 MPG if you drive mostly highway (80%) at highway speed of 65 MPH, which is what I get for my 08 EXL Auto after break-in period at 1,600 miles.
#1834 of 2058
by edgardoe
Oct 05, 2008 (4:11 am)
Reply
I have an '08 LX MT Sedan that I purchased on July 2. I got 36 mpg on the first tank, near 40 on the second tank and have seen between 41 and 43 ever since. Most of the miles I put on the car are during my 32 mile commute to work. The roads consist of 20% two lane country highways at 55 mph (with some sharp low-speed curves), 70% interstate at 60 mph (with frequent stop and go BS) and 10% surface street driving at 35 mph. I'm pretty happy with the economy I've gotten out of this little car, and am always trying to find new ways to improve it. I tend to stay in the slow lane and give myself plenty of room in front so that I can minimize the odds of having to come to a complete stop. I generally put the car in neutral and coast while going down hills or preparing to stop or go around sharp turns. Plus, I accelerate about as slowly as I can without totally annoying those around me.
#1835 of 2058
Re: Getting BAD MPG! [targettuning] by thegraduate
Oct 06, 2008 (2:37 pm)
Reply

Replying to: targettuning (Sep 30, 2008 9:57 am)

I agree with post 1825 and disagree with 1826,
#1836 of 2058
by cjhepburn
Oct 19, 2008 (4:53 am)
Reply
'08 Civic LX Auto, My commute is 59 miles each way. I'd say about 97% highway. Middle to fast lane driving at speeds of 73-80. First tank was 34MPG, Average after 4000 miles is 38MPG. If I keep the starts smooth and the speed under 75, I get 39. For my current tank, I'm checking aggressive driving mileage, I'll post when I finish the tank, After 200 miles so far, It's looking like it will be 36-37. Not a big penalty for revving it to 5000 from start.
 
Side note, I thought the automatics where supposed to get slightly better mileage than the manuals. After reading a few posts it sounds like the manuals are getting 40-41. What's up with that?
#1837 of 2058
Re: [cjhepburn] by ruking1
Oct 19, 2008 (6:18 am)
Reply

Replying to: cjhepburn (Oct 19, 2008 4:53 am)

Obviously while results WILL vary, most Honda autos get (EPA ratings) 1 mpg LESS than manuals.
 
Under the conditions that you say you drive the car, I would swag those conditions are the BEST for MPG, (least) wear, longevity, etc etc. In effect you are driving the car in the almost exact (ideal) design parameters (sweet spot). You might also want to check back to survey link I posted some time/posts ago, to see where your mpg results fall. I think you will be pleasantly surprised. Your results fall withing app 95-98%, aka not many folks get the mpg you report.
#1839 of 2058
Re: [ruking1] by dantz
Oct 20, 2008 (1:13 pm)
Reply

Replying to: ruking1 (Oct 19, 2008 6:18 am)

"Obviously while results WILL vary, most Honda autos get (EPA ratings) 1 mpg LESS than manuals."
 
Not at highway speeds. Because of it's taller 5th gear the LX auto actually gets better highway mileage than the LX manual (36 vs 34 mpg)
#1840 of 2058
Re: [dantz] by ruking1
Oct 20, 2008 (1:44 pm)
Reply

Replying to: dantz (Oct 20, 2008 1:13 pm)

Indeed 2004 that was not the case. 2009 models (constant improvement) have 36 H auto vs 34 H M. and 25 c auto vs 26 c M, so you still would be half wrong. The bottom line is there are penalties /corrections for automatics vs manuals.
 
There is an oxymoronic thing going on and that is if one does mostly to 100% highway driving, it makes more sense to get a manual as it is cheaper, lighter,with less parasitic losses, and a manual is way cheaper to repair when it/they go out. Indeed the same gearing of which you speak would amplify the M advantage.
 
However if I got 34/36 mpg in my 04 Honda, I would think something amiss. 38-42 mpg. ( in a normal commute auto) So while I have not run like models (sans A/M )side by side, there is no doubt in my mind I would get at least 1 mpg better in a M. But as I have said that is one of the penalites.
#1841 of 2058
Re: [cjhepburn] by cjhepburn
Oct 21, 2008 (5:22 pm)
Reply

Replying to: cjhepburn (Oct 19, 2008 4:53 am)

My more aggressive driving MPG turned out to be 36. Same commute, 97% hwy 59 miles each way). Speeds 75-88 depending on what the traffic allowed, a couple of runs up to 98, and stomping on it out of entrance ramps (4 each way, hwy to hwy transitions). Still not bad.
For this next tank, I'm driving like a pussy, nice and slow entering highways and keeping the speed under 72, more like 65-70. If this doesn't hit 40MPG nothing will.
I wonder what the mileage would be if gas didn't have ethanol mixed in.
#1842 of 2058
Re: [cjhepburn] by ruking1
Oct 21, 2008 (6:36 pm)
Reply

Replying to: cjhepburn (Oct 21, 2008 5:22 pm)

Yes this is an interesting design anomoly. We have taken longer road trips San Jose, CA to Santa Barbara/Los Angeles and have gotten virtually the same mpg 38-42 mpg as a shorter distance commute (28 miles each way) 70-80 mph.

Messages Page 185 of 207
1
...
182
183
184
185
186
187
188
...
207
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