Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!





Honda Civic Real World MPG

1131416181970

Comments

  • blufz1blufz1 Posts: 2,045
    I agree you made a very good economic choice with your civic. The person I addressed stated that he understood my meaning re first year depreciation. You are the one that inferred other possibe meanings. Sometimes you just see the trees not the forest. Buy hey, nobody's perfect. Your posts are worth reading and many times have merit. Just my .02. Have a good day.
  • ruking1ruking1 Posts: 14,907
    I understood it the same way, but I am sure you knew the discussion flow was coming! :) It was answered in that context.
  • blufz1blufz1 Posts: 2,045
    No, I didn't know any "Discussion flow" as you call it was coming. I'm a person that usually doesn't "know" what is coming. I'm just having a little fun here and am not personally invested in my posts.
  • thegraduatethegraduate Posts: 9,731
    Most new cars get better MPG with the increase of mileage - NOT HONDA - you lose MPG with more miles you put on the CIVIC from new.

    On what basis? I get a consistent 26-29 MPG in my 11 year old, 171k mile Accord. It hasn't changed since I got the car. I certainly hope you wouldn't make such a broad based statement on just one experience.
  • arebareb Posts: 1
    Actually the fine print says " Actual mileage will vary with options,driving conditions,driving habits and vehicle condition. Results reported to the EPA indicate that the Majority of vehicles with these estimates will achieve between.
    25 and 35 in the City
    34 and 46 on the Hwy

    Honda Civic EX 2206

    Im 64 yrs and drive like it, Have never got better than 25 in the city, Hwy is correct about 40 Mpg
    My other car a 1997 Jimmy V6 has EPA 17 City 22 Hwy, regularly get 16 city 24 hwy. Seems that Auto manufacturers have been fudging the # lately. ten to 15 years ago the mpg estimates were pretty close
  • ajbchoajbcho Posts: 44
    Did my regular Sunday fill-up. I fill up all our cars every Sunday to avoid stops during the week. For a change, I actually skipped last weeks fill-up, so it's been 2 weeks on the same tank (I don't drive much).
    Just for kicks, took a "Sunday" drive (hiway miles) this morning before I filled up to see if it would help with the average. Got the lowest mpg ever so far. 22.xx mpg, I usually just round up to the next number but it was a LOW 22.xx. Not happy at all. This is only 6 mpg better than my 1/2 ton V8 truck I replaced it with. Not sure what's going on, again I DON'T drive it like I stole it.
  • dtownfbdtownfb Posts: 2,915
    Johnpl: Let's get back to the low gas milege and see if we can figure out why your daughter is getting such poor gas mileage. 21.5 - 26 mpg is very low for a Civic unless you are doing all stop and go driving, short trips and below freezing temperatures.

    Please bear with me:

    What is the typical commute? stop signs? stop lights? highway (avg. speed)?
    How long is this commute?
    What is the weather like where you are?
    How many gallons of gas did she pump into the car and how miles was it between fill-ups?
    Parking brake is off?
    have your son and daughter switch cars for a tank?

    The reason i am asking these questions is to eliminate driver error and then we can concentrate on the car. She's almost due for an oil change, then you can address it with Honda at that point. They will definitely point the finger at your daughter first.
  • thegraduatethegraduate Posts: 9,731
    Seems that Auto manufacturers have been fudging the # lately. ten to 15 years ago the mpg estimates were pretty close

    The EPA sets the numbers areb, not the manufacturers. If anyone is fudging, it will be the EPA. Just pinpointing who should be blamed if anyone.
  • sandman46sandman46 Posts: 1,798
    The EPA figures are just estimates and nothing more, they are not an exact science! I never expected to see 30 mpg's in the city and I've not with my 20 miles daily stop and go commute. It varies between 25 and 28, which is on target with what the EPA sticker says. I haven't driven that much highway yet with only 5777 miles and 1 oil change.
    I don't think that Honda mislead me with their posted mileage figures, I knew they were just estimates going in. I seem to remember a few posts about class action stuff against Honda which seems totally without merit. If more folks drove under the exact conditions that the government guys did when coming up with these figures, I think the mileage numbers would be very close to those stated on the Mulruney sticker. I for one think the 1.8 liter engine is a sweet one with good torque up the power band. Not as good as our 2.3 Mazda engine but more than adequate for my commuter needs.
    This is my first Honda and definitely won't be my last. Am quite happy with my decision and after I get rid of the lame LX hubcaps & steelies (hopefully on Monday), I'll be a happier camper.

    The Sandman :)
  • ajbchoajbcho Posts: 44
    I think most of us understand the figures are estimates. In front of me is the actual sticker off my EX AT sedan. Here is what it reads on the bottom left hand corner of the fuel economy information.
    "ACTUAL MILEAGE will vary with options, driving conditions, driving habits and vehicles condition.
    Results reported to EPA indicate that the majority of vehicles with these estimates will achieve between
    25 and 35 mpg in the city and between
    34 and 26 mpg on the highway"

    I'm assuming the EPA got the 30 city mpg and 40 highway mpg from taking (25 + 35) / 2 = 30 for city and (34 + 46) / 2 = 40 for highway. Looks to me like the EPA just took the worst and best figures and gave us average of the 2.

    Now, we all know most of us (the Internet community) are getting low to mid 20's city and low to mid 30's highway.
    With 1 or 2 stating they are getting over the estimates claimed. But who's the majority that the EPA states will get that range? Apparently not us.

    Not sure about anyone else, but I'm whining like my toddler about it because the past few cars and trucks I had, I actually got or exceeded the "estimates". Same routes and during my younger days I drove more aggressively.
    I think many bought the Civic for the sole reason of high mpg. If we were on an H2 board. I'd tell the whiner to STFU if one of them complained about the mileage they're getting.
  • mth2mth2 Posts: 25
    I recently read an editorial in Car and Driver, don't have the issue anymore, so just going by memory. Basically, it says that the EPA estimates for mpg have been out of whack for many years because:

    mpg figures are based on driving norms of 1960's and 1970's. That is, they base accelerating to highway speeds 0-60 taking 16 seconds.

    Also, assume highway speeds of approximately 40 mph.

    Now, if it takes you 16 seconds to get up to highway speeds these days, you are probably in a coma because you caused a 10 car pileup and got run over by an 18-wheeler.

    Ditto if you drive 40mph on the highway at any time except rush hour(s).

    This is just by memory, so don't kill the messenger here, but I think I'm pretty close.

    The other point of the editorial was that for cars with large engines, you should reduce current EPA mpg figures by 5-10%, and for smaller, economy type engines, probably 7-15%. See if those figures jive with your real world mpg. They are probably closer in most instances, but obviously not in all cases.

    Supposedly the new EPA estimates are going on window stickers for 2008 models. Of course, different manufacturers introduce their next year models at many different times. It will be interesting to see the window sticker mpg for 2008 Civic compared to this years, assuming all else stays the same or relatively the same from 2007 to 2008 model year.
  • ruking1ruking1 Posts: 14,907
    I think what you have gleaned for practical application/s is/are pretty much on spot. There are a few things that might take some clarification.

    ..."Also, assume highway speeds of approximately 40 mph."...

    Actually the AVERAGE highway speeds have not changed all that much. Specifically it is closer to 45 but 40-45-50 mpg is more the reality. (I based this on the on board computers with GPS back up (triangulation))

    So for example, since we do a 27 mile daily one way commute, it is pretty easy to calculate the average speed during rush hour!? If some folks don't see this just ask!! Indeed the very same people who complain about too fast speeds on the freeway are the very same ones who complain about rush hour, which (oxymoronically) by definition IS a defacto speed limit!!???????????
  • rikrakrikrak Posts: 31
    I was just reading this, seems that the MPG judgement will shift in 2008. The Civic seems to still be a winner but these numbers a probably more true. I've got just about 1,000 miles, which I know is not much and I get like 28 mpg in mixed "real world" driving. I will be taking a 1200 mile jaunt all highway soon and will track that. The copy is a bit confusing but what it says is (auto) 2008 gets 26 City and 37 Highway which seems more normal.

    E.P.A. Classification: Subcompact Cars
    Mfr. Model Engine

    Honda Civic 1.8 4 Automatic (2007) MPG 30/ 40 Regular
    Honda Civic 1.8 4 Automatic (2008) MPG 26/ 37 Regular

    Best MPG: Subcompact Cars
    Mfr. Model Engine
    Size(L) # Cyl. Trans. 2007
    City 2007
    Hwy 2008
    City 2008
    Hwy Fuel
    Type
    Honda Civic 1.8 4 Automatic 30 40 26 37 Regular

    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------
  • targettuningtargettuning Posts: 1,371
    If the 2008 figures are accurate as far as what "will be" then my real life experience seems to match the new numbers within reason...24 city 36 highway.
  • ruking1ruking1 Posts: 14,907
    In terms of real life, using the vehicles you have now, there would be no changes. If anything to avoid the confusion, they should go back to (say older Honda models and apply the new standard (compared with the old) to show it graphically. Indeed the new standards are anywhere from 5-20% less than the old. Hybrids showing the higher percentage decrease.
  • ruking1ruking1 Posts: 14,907
    http://www.fueleconomy.gov/feg/calculatorSelectYear.jsp

    Cosmo on the VW TDI thread posted that what I said was a done deal. Look at your "old " car with the new EPA estimates. :)
  • bobdroidbobdroid Posts: 1
    This thread seems to have been beaten to death, but I guess I'll chime in anyway. My Civic ('07 EX Coupe) with around 2700 miles on it has been averaging around 28 MPG, with a low of about 26.5 and a high of 33. Strangely, the highest 3 tanks so far have been the only ones I've run with the A/C on :confuse:. I do about an even mix of highway/city driving here in Southern California. Seems to be in line with the new EPA figures.

    By the way, has anyone seen a significant difference in mileage when using different oil? My previous car (02 Saturn L200) used to get about 3-4 MPG higher when high quality 5W30 was used in place of 10W30.
  • blufz1blufz1 Posts: 2,045
    check your manual. I don't think your new car uses 10-w 30. I think it may use 5-20. I noticed a slight .5-1 mpg increase w/ mobil 1.
  • ruking1ruking1 Posts: 14,907
    I also believe you are correct it is a 5w20 oil Honda/Ford specifications. I have read (but do not know for sure) the Civic SI uses 5w30.
  • My two cents worth: My wife and I have been driving our 06 LX in the South this winter. It just turned 15K. Best mpg: 282 miles on six gallons, which is 47 mpg. That was steady driving north in Alabama at 62 mph cuz she was accompanying our RV. From Knoxville to OK City we drove 900 miles at 70-75 and filled up twice at 42.5 mpg. I fill until the pump stops then add a click.
    Re oil: My Maine dealer strongly advocated Honda brand, yet I had oil changed in OK City and dealer wanted to use Valvoline. He agreed to use Honda but charged a few bucks more. Weird! When the 36K warranty ends I'm using Mobil 1, which has served me well for many years. I have it now in an 03 Town Car with 131K and a 99 F-250 with 161K and both engines use almost no oil and run perfectly. I change their oil and filter once a year.
    One more thing: We got a notice re Honda speedometer error. Anyone done the math to determine how that affects mileage reports? :)
  • ruking1ruking1 Posts: 14,907
    Good for you both! My sense is that at 60 mph that what you have gotten was indeed reach able.

    I have triangulated the information off a portable GPS. The vehicles I have all happen to be dead on. Evidently the weights and measures statutes do not kick in.

    The settlement is ONLY an agreed upon (5%) percentage increase in the 36,000 mile warranty rather than the (better, for my .02 cents) specific and focused remedy: a full speedometer R/R and road test. I would have preferred a full R/R and test of a new speedometer. :) The remedy is really quite meaningless, which really might have been the over all point.

    (your Honda/Toyota, we will give our constituency a bone and spank your hand, now cry on CNBC to show the folks at home how much it hurts -6 million but 33% to the lawyers :)) Of course if you have had a catastrophic failure at 37,800 miles, you are in the money and in effect have (lost) won the lottery.

    ..."Honda has decided to settle a class-action lawsuit that alleges its odometers were racking up miles too fast. The automaker says odometers on some 6 million Hondas affected by the suit were accurate to within 3.75% on the high side. The NHTSA doesn't regulate odometer accuracy, and the only industry standard is a voluntary one set by the Society of Automotive Engineers that says odos should be within +/-4%. While the car's affected by the suit fall within that range, Honda recognized that its customers expected their odometers "would be based on zero," and they weren't.

    The settlement will lengthen the warranty mileage of affected vehicles by 5% and Honda will pay lease-mileage penalties incurred by owners, which is expected to cost the automaker around $6 million. If you own a 2002 to 2006 Honda or Acura bought between April 12, 2002 and November 7, 2006, then you're eligible for the benefits of the settlement.

    The lawsuit also prompted lawyers to test the odometer accuracy of other vehicles. It was found that on average domestic vehicles were nearly perfect in their odo accuracy, while Toyotas actually racked up fewer miles on the clock than they did in reality. Nissans, however, didn't fare as well, and a new class-action suit has been filed on behalf of Altima owners who say their odometers are counting the miles 2.5% to 3% faster than they should."...

    http://www.autoblog.com/2007/02/19/odo-uh-oh-honda-extending-warranties-on-6-mil- - - - - lion-cars/
  • aaronr121aaronr121 Posts: 91
    I would be ecstatic with 28 mpg and a SI. We have a 98 VW Beetle 2.0 (gas, non-turbo) and that averages 29-30 mpg combined. It's nearly as good as that and has a lot more power (VW, 110hp) and way more features, plus 4 doors.
  • barrnonebarrnone Posts: 21
    As one who is unhappy with the gas mileage I'm getting with my 2006 Civic EX Sedan (AT), I happened to check Consumer Reports to see what they said about expected MPG for the car. I've been averaging probably around 24 over the winter (this is in South Jersey near Philly), with around a 30/70 highway/local split (my local driving is suburbs). For the record, my highway mostly consists of 3-5 mile jaunts up and down route 295, not long stretches for the most part.

    Anyway, looking at Consumer Reports' testing results, I saw the following (this is for my model):

    Fuel economy
    CU's overall mileage, mpg 28
    CU's city/highway, mpg 18/43
    CU's 150-mile trip, mpg 34
    Annual fuel: gal./cost 535/$1175
    Cruising range, mi. 420

    For a manual transmission, here are the stats:

    Fuel economy
    CU's overall mileage, mpg 31
    CU's city/highway, mpg 22/40
    CU's 150-mile trip, mpg 37
    Annual fuel: gal./cost 490/$1080
    Cruising range, mi. 465

    Seeing the 18/43 (as opposed to the EPA's 30/40) makes a lot more sense to me, at least on the low end. My individual tanks of gas have ranged from 22 to 27 MPG, and with my type of driving, that would fall in line. I expected to get around 27 on average based on the 30/40 (knowing that's inflated).

    Just thought this was interesting. Hopefully I'll have need for a long trip one of these days to check the mileage with a full highway run.
  • eldainoeldaino Posts: 1,618
    Just thought this was interesting. Hopefully I'll have need for a long trip one of these days to check the mileage with a full highway run.

    yeah thats probably what you need to do; if its cold your mpg will take a hit, especially when you drive such short distances. Granted the civics new rating is 25/36 so that puts you just below it.
  • barrnonebarrnone Posts: 21
    True, but I'm still not happy about the situation. I consider this to be false advertising, since a major selling point of the Civic was gas mileage. I never expect to get the EPA numbers, but I do expect to be somewhat in the ballpark. To see a car listed at 30/40 and then get about 24 is unacceptable. I very well might not have bought a Civic if I had known the mileage would be what it is. Heck, my 2000 Pontiac Grand Am SE averaged around 21, and that's a 6 Cylinder engine with considerably more horsepower, not to mention I used to have a lead foot and with the Civic have been much more conservative.

    The bottom line is I bought a relatively underpowered car as a tradeoff to improve my gas mileage, and the improvement has been marginal at best. It's disappointing.
  • mth2mth2 Posts: 25
    Not sure about this but take it for what it's worth: After reading about mpg results on Edmunds over the last year or so, it seems that for the most part (though not exclusively) the car owners with the worst mpg results tend to live in the northern states. Cold weather must be a part of the equation. But something even more than cold weather: boutique gasolines. Many or all of the refineries have to make different mixes of gasolines for many of the northern states, and each area has its own requirements. My guess is that these boutique formulas cut down on mpg in a significant way. Whatever is added or taken out of the "regular" formula to "enhance" air quality must have an effect on mpg.
  • ruking1ruking1 Posts: 14,907
    Might I call your attention to a past message:

    ..."MSG 363 ..."So for example on the new car sticker; for the 2004 Honda Civic, the EPA BOLD numbers are: "29 City/38 Highway". Again if one reads the "finer" print it, goes on to say:..." ACTUAL MILEAGE ... will achieve between 24 AND ...34 mpg in the city... 32 AND 44 mpg on the highway"...

    So it seems to me, if someone is getting 24 mpg they are telling me it is within the RANGE.

    Perhaps you should read (yours) and quote it. "...

    So if you got below the lowest then I would say you might have grounds to claim false advertising.
  • ruking1ruking1 Posts: 14,907
    I would agree with your take on "boutique" fuel. CA I think is notorious (in CA and in the trade obviously for this, usually seamless to folks like you and me) for any number of "boutique" blends. To name a few, CA blend, winter fuel, summer fuel, high altitude fuel, regional fuel. Not surprisingly, the prices are usually the highest in the nation.
  • eldainoeldaino Posts: 1,618
    So if you got below the lowest then I would say you might have grounds to claim false advertising

    ruking is right; and even then its not false adverstising; honda didn't do the test; the epa did. Thats why the numbers are changing.

    If the 2004 honda civic had a rating of 29/38 and the average city was between 24 and 34, then what do you suppose the average will be for your civic, which states 25 in the city? Probably around 21-28. So that would put you spot on, actually it would put you right in the middle, so i guess you are doing pretty good.(i'm going by the new epa figures, the engine wont change for the 08 civic, its just the test.)

    I averaged anywhere from 25-28 in the city with my civic and i live in North Carolina; not nearly as cold as jersey, even when it is cold here. So a 2-3 mpg drop due to the cold seems like no biggie.
  • ruking1ruking1 Posts: 14,907
    I would be the first to say this might not seem to be related to the thread topic at hand, but let me throw it out there anyway. If it floats like a lead balloon, so be it. It most likely DOES greatly affect/have an effect on the MPG and overall running of the Honda Civic.(others also but this thread is about Civics)

    The best operation of an ICE is at durations of 1 hour or MORE at freeway speeds: etc, etc,. The net effect is the best fuel mileage, best combustion, least waste, etc, etc.
Sign In or Register to comment.