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
Sedans Honda Civic 2009 Honda Civic
542 messages, Last post on Dec 01, 2009 at 3:33 AM
You are in the Honda Civic Forum. Your Hosts are pat & karens
|
|
|---|---|
|
Replying to: shipo (May 28, 2008 8:22 pm) A larger diameter wheel/tire will always use more fuel, I believe. They require more power to get moving (think of a bicycle in low gear vs. high gear). It'll also slow you down slightly. Just moving up one size shouldn't be too big of a deal, but I'd never go past 18" on any car, since I don't want the rough ride and expensive replacement costs.
|
|
|
Replying to: thegraduate (May 29, 2008 6:53 am)  Changing the size of the rim should have an extremely nominal effect on mileage or speed or distance traveled per revolution. Consider the following wheel/tire combinations that come from the factory on various Civics: Wheel ---- OEM Tire ---- Diameter 15x6.5 -- 195/65 R15 -- 24.98031" 16x7.0 -- 205/55 R16 -- 24.87795" 17x7.5 -- 215/45 R17 -- 24.61811" Okay, so maybe my math is hosed up, but I'm only seeing about 0.37" difference on the overall diameter between the largest diameter tire (interestingly enough on the smallest wheel) and the smallest diameter tire (mounted on the largest wheel). Thoughts? Best Regards, Shipo
|
|
|
|
|
Replying to: shipo (May 29, 2008 7:20 am) When the poster said moving up to 17", they didn't say what sidewall profile size (55, 50, 45, 40, etc). Your math is probably right (I'm not checkin' behind ya)  . I hope you see the point of my post now.  Notice I said "A larger diameter wheel/tire will always use more fuel, I believe" and didn't just say bigger rim. My point was to simply state that larger diamter tire = increased fuel use.
|
|
|
Replying to: thegraduate (May 29, 2008 7:31 am) As for your assertion that a larger diameter tire will always use more fuel, nope, not buying that one either. In fact, an argument could be made for such a change causing fuel consumption to go down. How? 1) Your argument suggesting that it take more power to launch the vehicle doesn't wash because torque converters and clutches take up the slack, and as such, the engine really won't know the difference. 2) Once rolling, and once the clutch(es) is/are engaged the vehicle travels further per revolution of the engine regardless of which gear the transmission is in. To a certain extent, the lower the final drive ratio, the better the fuel economy, and by putting larger diameter tires on any given car you are effectively shortening the final drive ratio. In the end, even if the OP was to have moved from say the OEM 205/55 R16 tires to say a 205/55 R17 (of which I can only find six tires in this size on the market), the revolutions per mile would have only dropped from 832 with the 16" set to 805 with the 17" set (roughly a 3.5% change). Best Regards, Shipo
|
|
|
|
|
Replying to: shipo (May 29, 2008 7:56 am) It takes more energy to get a larger diameter wheel rolling. I'm not sure where the engine will get the extra energy except from fuel. The Civic already has a very tall gear ratio (less than 2000 rpm at 60 mph); some would say too tall for a car with such meager torque. Want to go from 60-70 MPH sometime TODAY, well you can count on the RPMs climbing. On the highway, the Civic will be doing more unlocking of the torque converter to maintain speed, if not downshifting altogether. There's a point of maximum fuel economy, and I'd wager to bet the designers of the Civic have done enough research to find it. That being said, in theory, you are absolutely right about the larger wheel making the ratio taller. It also makes getting off the line negligibly harder. I never said anything about the difference being big, to be fair. Anyway, I stand by my comments, and you stand by yours. Since this has nothing to do with the arrival or features of the 2009 Civic, shall we move on? |
|
|
|
|
Replying to: sandman46 (May 18, 2008 1:38 pm) 1) Minor tweaks to the R18 engine to possibly increase horsepower slightly (maybe to 143 from 140 now) or widen the torque curve. We may see some minor changes to improve fuel economy, too. 2) Some minor changes to the center front dash, but the main instrument panel design used now will be retained. 3) An optional new car stereo with the ability to control iPods that use the iPod Data Connector. 4) A switch to the same headlamps and taillamps used on the JDM Civic sedan. It will be very interesting to see what kind of automatic they'll use on the 2009 Civics. Since the 5AT unit is starting to get old in design, we can't dismiss the possibility of a new 6AT unit for improved acceleration and better highway fuel economy.
|
|
|
|
|
Replying to: raychuang00 (Jun 01, 2008 7:36 pm) Yes, I think we can. I'd bet my house on the fact that Honda will put a 6-speed (or any upgraded transmission) in an Acura, or even the Accord, before the low-priced Civic. |
|
|
Replying to: raychuang00 (Jun 01, 2008 7:36 pm) Also, what is the source of your information on the 2009 Civic?
|
|
|
|
|
Replying to: backy (Jun 02, 2008 1:18 am) Tweaking the R18 engine is also possible, though unlikely. And the more I think about it, I do think Honda may not replace the 5AT unit during the MMC until the next full-model change (FMC) in 2010 for the 2011 model year. |
|
|
Look for the current design to be possibly flipped while keeping the same sized dimensions. Honda has done this numerous times before during their mid cycle freshening. Agree that the headlamps will also be swapped for a slightly different design. Cosmetic changes are usually done with the refresh, as that's really all that's needed. Any major tweaks will come with the next generation Civic. The Sandman
|
|
You are here:
Forums
Sedans Honda Civic 2009 Honda Civic
New? Join Now!
Forum Tools
Search Forums
Browse by Vehicle
2011 Honda Civic
Browse by Board
Browse by Topic
Today's Chats
