Last post on Oct 21, 2013 at 11:49 AM
You are in the Honda Pilot
What is this discussion about?
Honda Pilot, Fuel Efficiency (MPG), SUV
#1031 of 1186 Re: Octane and Compression [thegraduate]
Mar 29, 2010 (5:17 pm)
yes sir thats correct. I am the only driver in the car. 95% highway driving. I am very easy on gas, and never exceed 65 or 70 mph.
On my 2006 toyota camry v6 3.0L, I average 29.0 mpg, best 30.9 mpg, 5345 total miles.. ( all winter season during 2010). using chevron 87 octane.
2010 honda pilot. 4wd. average 20.0 mpg, best mpg 21.1, 3052 total miles driven.. using chevron or shell 91 octane..
I only have about 5000 miles on my pilot. oil life is still 50%.... The way I drive, I probably have to do first oil change at 10,000 miles..
I will try 87 octane, after I do my first oil change..
#1032 of 1186 Honda Pilot 0 to 60
Mar 29, 2010 (8:20 pm)
hello I have a question.. according to the carsdirect 2009/2010/2011 honda pilot 0 to 60 acceleration is 7.1 seconds.. and according to insideline, they report 9.7 seconds..
I wonder if anything have to do with the brand of the gas, octane level, manual gear change, tire psi, temperature.. if anyone know, please share. thank
#1033 of 1186 Re: Honda Pilot 0 to 60 [kingfans1]
Mar 30, 2010 (4:38 am)
Likely has most to do with traction available and the method used to launch.
Some car mags use brake-torquing, or do whatever possible to get the best possible time (even if hard on the drivetrain), where others simply pin the throttle and go.
That said, I've NEVER seen a time in the low 7s for a Pilot. Best time I've seen from a consistent source was in the 8s. Not slow, but not fast by today's standards, either; slightly slower than my 4-cylinder Accord.
#1034 of 1186 Re: Honda Pilot 0 to 60 [thegraduate]
Mar 30, 2010 (5:00 am)
>"That said, I've NEVER seen a time in the low 7s for a Pilot. Best time I've seen from a consistent source was in the 8s."
Yep! 8.6 - 9.1 seems to be average for most articles I've read.
#1035 of 1186 Re: Octane and Compression [kingfans1]
Mar 30, 2010 (5:44 am)
>"yes sir thats correct. I am the only driver in the car. 95% highway driving. I am very easy on gas, and never exceed 65 or 70 mph.......
..........2010 honda pilot. 4wd. average 20.0 mpg, best mpg 21.1, 3052 total miles driven.. using chevron or shell 91 octane.. "
When I traded the 03 Pilot for the 09 Ridgeline I was told to not expect the same fuel mileage, because the RL is geared, and tuned to perform more truck like duties. The transmission also stays in gear much longer (forever ) before shifting up. Service manager said to expect 17 or so in local driving in our area, as that is what he gets. And he was spot on at first..
Now I'm averaging closer to 18 mpg. But the Pilot was getting 20. On the road at 60 mph the RL gets more in the 24 range and the Pilot got 27-28. At 65 the RL drops to 22 and the Pilot dropped to 25-26+. At 70 the RL drops to 20 and the Pilot dropped to 23-24. These figures are/were hand calculated.
The Pilot mileage reflected about 7 years and 40K miles. The RL only has about 2500 miles on the clock so far. Don't know if it will improve or not. Mileage did improve on the Pilot when I switched from bargain brands to Shell 87. I've only used Shell 87 in the RL.
Your mileage considering 95% highway and 65-70 doesn't seem to be spectacular.
Actually your mileage is about the same or slightly lower than my RL, and the Pilot is rated higher. I'm thinking you to be a fuel mileage conscious driver. So.. It is entirely possible that the Premium fuel is costing you mileage.
#1036 of 1186 Re: Octane and Compression [kipk]
Mar 30, 2010 (4:48 pm)
yea RL epa rate 15/20. so far you are getting 2 mpg less.. same thing with my pilot. epa rate 16/22. I am getting 20 mpg , 2 mpg less.
It doesn't matter how I drive, I am still getting 20 range.. Honda VCM is a joke.. without vcm is better for pilot. if you look up fuelly.com a few RL owners get 20.. mostly 17 18 19 range..
hopefully mpg will get better.. how do you like your RL.
#1037 of 1186 Re: Octane and Compression [kingfans1]
Mar 30, 2010 (6:00 pm)
It doesn't matter how I drive,
Untrue statement right there. How you drive is the biggest factor in MPGs.
#1038 of 1186 Re: Octane and Compression [kingfans1]
Mar 31, 2010 (2:07 am)
>"yea RL epa rate 15/20. so far you are getting 2 mpg less.. "
Actually the RL is beating the EPA by 3 mpg city as it has been averaging 18 lately. It matches the EPA Highway of 20 at 70 mph. And beats it by 4 at 60 mph.
It gets less mileage (by 10-12%) than the 4wd Pilot did, under the same driving conditions. When the EPA re-did their ratings the revised 03 Pilot ratings became 15 city/21 highway. Same city as the RL and only 1 better Highway than the RL. Yet Pilot delivered much better across the board than the Ridgeline.
The '09 and '10 4WD Pilots are rated at 16/22. Point I'm striving to make is that this RL is getting equal to better highway mileage than your Pilot, at the same speeds, even though the Pilot is rated 2mpg higher. I'm thinking it could be the Premium Fuel is costing you mileage.
It can't hurt anything to try a few tanks of 87 Shell and see if anything changes. I truly believe the mileage with "87" will be the same at worse and maybe improve at best.
Mileages above reflect North-Central Georgia rolling hills, and cruise control on when possible.
#1039 of 1186 Re: Octane and Compression [kingfans1]
Mar 31, 2010 (3:06 am)
"how do you like your RL."
Mixed bag of emotions with the RL, as I have to compare it to the 03 Pilot we had for 7 years. Newer Pilots are probably much improved.
-Pilot got better fuel mileage.
-Pilot ride was softer.
-Pilot seats more comfortable.
-Pilot had more room for 2nd row seat passengers. (Never used the 3rd row seats)
-Pilot 2nd row seat backs would recline, where the RL seat backs are fixed.
-Pilot engine and exhaust noise quieter inside the cabin.
-Pilot transmission would shift positive at 2200 RPM. RL preferrs to wait until 3000 RPM or the shifts will be mushy and unsure if that is what it really wants to do.
-RL seems to corner better.
-RL has less road noise. Although I understand the newer Pilots have less road noise than the 03 did.
-RL engine seems more responsive.
-RL tranny will up shift when conditions and speed are right, going up hill or down, where as the Pilot would not, no matter what I tried with the throttle. Example: If the Pilot downshifted, it would stay in that gear until reaching the top or bottom of the hill. RL will shift back up when conditions are right, while on the hill.
-RL will lock the torque converter at 42 mph while the Pilot waited until 50.
-RL 2nd row seat bottoms will tilt up for more floor srorage.
-RL has storage under 2nd row seat.
-Rl has more storage and cubby holes for the front seat occupants.
-RL has 7 Pin Electrical connector, tows more and better tranny cooling than the Pilot did.
-RL bed is convenient for trips to Home depot, fuel cans, hay, and such. So I don't have to hassel with the trailer as often.
-RL has a unique look, and I get a lot of questions and favorable comments on it. Although some folks don't like the looks at all!
So...! For family stuff, people hauling, and driving comfort, the Pilot wins. For the utility that I need, the RidgeLine wins.
#1040 of 1186 Re: Octane and Compression [kipk]
Apr 03, 2010 (4:40 pm)
Thanks. Since I got my windows tinted, I have to downgrade the octane from preminum to regular..
chevron 87. 20.6 mpg ( method by hands). 40% driven in heavy snow).
mpg is about the same as using 91 octane.