You are here: Forums Sedans Honda Civic Honda Civic Real World MPG

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 206 1 ... 182 183 184 185 186 187 188 ... 206 Prev Next Last

Go To Msg # Search This Discussion

#1840 of 2058 Re: [dantz] by ruking1 Oct 20, 2008 (1:44 pm)
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)
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. Replies to this message: ruking1 (Oct 21, 2008 6:36 pm) cjhepburn (Oct 27, 2008 4:32 am) kipk (Oct 28, 2008 3:18 am)
#1842 of 2058 Re: [cjhepburn] by ruking1 Oct 21, 2008 (6:36 pm)
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.
#1843 of 2058 1995 Honda Civic EX MPG by baccus49 Oct 24, 2008 (2:14 pm)
My 1995 Honda Civic EX 1.6L DOHC VTEC Automatic is rated for 29 MPG combined on the old ratings and 26 MPG on the new 2008 ratings. I achieve a 33 MPG on a 90 day average. MPG is tracked on 4 different sites and I would consider myself a conservative hypermiler. Tire pressure is at max sidewell. I typically drive the speed limit which is 65 MPH or sometimes 55-60 depending on traffic. I've hit 40 MPG on 4 occasions and have had several tanks above 35. If you're not getting the MPG on the new 2008 ratings you're doing something wrong. Newer Civics than mine get better gas mileage so you should be beating my MPG. The older civics such as the Civic VX gets 40+ MPG.
#1844 of 2058 by kenlw Oct 24, 2008 (5:10 pm)
i believe the newer civic automatics have a torque converter lockup that eliminates TC slip at steady speeds. This will have a significant impact on highway mileage on an auto.   Then, if the gearing is actually taller (i think it is) than the manual, the auto's highway mileage could easily be better.
#1845 of 2058 Right in the middle by ruking1 Oct 25, 2008 (7:26 am)
Commute mpg range has for the life of the car (74,000 miles) been between 38-42 mph. In the same commute and NOW with two people (instead of one) it has settled into 40 mpg. (middle of the range: 38,39,40 41,42.) Researching msg # 1416, current conditions put (1.24,+2.11)=3.35% folks reporting better mpg. I would swag the Civic is doing the job for which it was designed (and our intended use: plain jane commute) pretty well. While we drive (hopefully safely) for the conditions, we do no real fuel hypermileage techniques. (unless you can call poor rush hour traffic a hyper mileage situation)
#1846 of 2058 Re: [cjhepburn] by hammer00 Oct 26, 2008 (5:00 am)
Replying to: cjhepburn (Oct 19, 2008 4:53 am) Transmissions 5-Speed Manual Transmission Gear Ratios  1st: 3.143  2nd: 1.870  3rd: 1.235  4th: 0.949  5th: 0.727  Reverse: 3.308  Final Drive: 4.290   Compact 5-Speed Automatic Transmission Gear Ratios  1st: 2.666  2nd: 1.534  3rd: 1.022  4th: 0.721  5th: 0.525  Reverse: 1.957  Final Drive: 4.440 Replies to this message: ruking1 (Oct 26, 2008 6:38 am) ruking1 (Oct 26, 2008 9:04 am)
#1847 of 2058 Re: [hammer00] by ruking1 Oct 26, 2008 (6:38 am)
Replying to: hammer00 (Oct 26, 2008 5:00 am) The thing that really goes unsaid in this comparison is the greater parasitic drag using the automatic transmission. I would swag that not many folks put their Civics (auto vs manual) on dyno machines to really quantify the difference. While this may or may not be true for this particular model, on Corvette web sites, parasitic drag percentages are 11% manual/ 20% automatic or app 9% greater drag. (less mpg would be one result) Replies to this message: ruking1 (Oct 26, 2008 9:04 am)
#1848 of 2058 Re: [ruking1] by ruking1 Oct 26, 2008 (9:04 am)
Replying to: ruking1 (Oct 26, 2008 6:38 am) I should probably put in the most germane portion. The greater parasitic drag (11%-20%=)9% (aka auto vs manual) results in app 1-3 mpg differences.   The 6 speed manual Z06 which has 10% more aggressive gearing (than other 6 speed manual Corvettes) has been estimated and EPA rated)loses app 1-2 mpg.   (differences on stated gears are 1st gear 17.9% ,2nd gear 22% ,3 rd gear 21% ,4 th gear 32% ,5th gear 39%,   (over other Corvette manual transmission gearing, the stable variable being parasitic drag on 6 speed vs 6 speed is app the same)   So for example all my MPG results are with with a 4 speed auto. (5 speed manual was available) This 4 speed automatic has an interesting time deciding what gear it wants to upshift down shift to/ in. I had to overcome this situation by just letting it decide. If you press the accelerator to overcome it, you will lose 1-2 mpg , but I digress. So if you are all not totally glazed over by now:   "Transmission 5-Speed Manual Transmission Gear Ratios  1st: 3.462  2nd: 1.870  3rd: 1.241  4th: 0.970  5th: 0.711  Reverse: 3.231  Final Drive: 4.111   4-Speed Automatic Transmission Gear Ratios  1st: 2.722  2nd: 1.516  3rd: 0.975  4th: 0.674  Reverse: 1.955  Final Drive: 4.067 "      One can do the math and see it takes almost MASSIVE gearing differences to over come the inherent GREATER parasitic drag of the automatic (not to mention the extra (5th) gear.   So while this may or may not matter, acceleration and so called performance might be way more sluggish with the automatic.
#1849 of 2058 Re: [cjhepburn] by cjhepburn Oct 27, 2008 (4:32 am)
Replying to: cjhepburn (Oct 21, 2008 5:22 pm) I just finished my relaxed and more efficient driving style test. I drove 465.2 miles and filled with 11.589 Gallons for 40.142 MPG. Keep in mind that even Prius drivers were passing me. At the start of the tank I was driving 65-72 and toward the end of the tank I slowed to 63-68. I think it will do better after the first oil change. Replies to this message: kipk (Oct 28, 2008 3:18 am)

Messages Page 185 of 206 1 ... 182 183 184 185 186 187 188 ... 206 Prev Next Last

Go To Msg # Search This Discussion

You are here: Forums Sedans Honda Civic Honda Civic Real World MPG