Howdy, Stranger!

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





Acura TSX Real World MPG Numbers

1234568

Comments

  • I haven't been in a 4 cyl. engine in many years, with many vehicles, so I can empathize. I really thought I was going to have a problem going from the '07 RDX with the 240 hp turbo to the i4, but have been pleasantly surprised. I really don't miss it and the RDX was smooth and could fly. (Independent study thought the engine was closer to 260 ponies. Sure seemed like it.) I do love the savings at the pump compared to the RDX which was on the higher side of those average MPG numbers. All you can do is test drive it and see how it feels.

    By the way, which month was the CR article in?
  • I should clarify, I haven't been in a 4 cyl. other than the RDX turbocharged. Huge engine difference, IMHO.
  • 2010 4-cyl. TSX with 1390 total miles on the vehicle. 80% hwy/20% city, running the air conditioner, hwy speeds averaging 70 mph, my hand calculated mileage was 25 mpg while the computer was 27 mpg. Will keep checking it with the next two fill ups, but there does seem to be something to what other Acura owners are experiencing with the computer being higher than actual.
  • cdnpinheadcdnpinhead Forest Lakes, AZPosts: 3,244
    Thanks for the follow-up.

    It may not have always been like this. The New Jersey fan has given us to believe that her vehicle displays what she calculates.

    Lately, I don't think that's the case -- sad. The car gets very good fuel mileage. Why cheat?

    Either way, I'll be awaiting your follow-up. I'm sure you'll enjoy the car.

    The marketing people screw things up more often than not.
  • I have an '07 and every fill up is 1-2 MPG lower compared to the computer. Sad to see that with all of the technological improvements they've made to the TSX, they still haven't fixed that glitch. That said, it's still nice to be averaging over 27.5 MPG for the 37,000+ miles I've driven so far. And that's SoCal/LA county/SF Valley traffic miles per gallon.
  • fedlawmanfedlawman Posts: 3,118
    Jeez folks, it's not like there's an in-line fuel flow impeller in the fuel line measuring real-time fuel consumption. The computer estimate of fuel economy is just that - an estimate.

    The computer has no idea how much fuel is in your tank, and neither do you at any given moment. Even after you fill up and hit the reset button, you can't assume you have the EXACT same amount of fuel every time. Every pump at every gas station has a different sensitivity for the vapor return, and even the same pump will stop at a different point depending on a zillion factors.

    I think economy estimates off by just a couple MPG are very good, considering all of the variables involved.
  • After a few months of hand calculating the mileage on my 2010 base, I find a consistent difference of 1.5-2.0 mpg lower than the computer. No big deal. I'm pretty satisfied with the mpg's I do get. With just under 5K miles I got 31.5 mpg hwy on a recent trip with flat roads, no air conditioning, two adults and a loaded trunk/back seat. As with most Acura's the mpg's should continue to increase slightly.
  • cdnpinheadcdnpinhead Forest Lakes, AZPosts: 3,244
    After a few months of hand calculating the mileage on my 2010 base, I find a consistent difference of 1.5-2.0 mpg lower than the computer.

    What you have described is normal vehicle operation. I've posted in the past on this board, so you may hve read what I've had to say. I'm a pinhead (hence my handle) and can tell you that in 2009 my TSX has read 9.004% higher than reality.

    I think they call it marketing. I agree, though -- the actual hand-calculated MPG is quite acceptable.
  • ezshift5ezshift5 West coastPosts: 854
    ....that is impressive. (Altho' circa 40 at 55 is a two-edged sword for a safety engr)

    DO YOU RECALL THE MONTH OF CU ARTICLE?

    Season's best, ez....
  • biker4biker4 Posts: 746
    On a 600 mi round trip on the East Coast (DC-NY with fully loaded car) I got about 31 MPG in my 06 TSX 6 sp. The trip computer showed 33 MPG. The more impressive number is during the daily suburban commute (18 mi round trip) - about 26 MPG.
  • cdnpinheadcdnpinhead Forest Lakes, AZPosts: 3,244
    My daily commute is ~18 miles each way, plus some running around during lunch doing errands -- averaged a little under 27.5 over a six-month period earlier this year (computer averaged 29.85 over the same period).

    On a trip to Colorado & back last summer the real average was 33.3 while the computer averaged 36.3.

    All very acceptable numbers to me. Car went from 14,300 to 28,500 miles this year, so it's completely broken in.
  • ezshift5ezshift5 West coastPosts: 854
    The 2.4L TSX gets very similar mileage to the 3.0L Honda Accord V6, which makes over 40 more horsepower, and about 50 lb-ft of torque extra, on regular gasoline no less.


    Grad, you said it first. Two and a half years ahead of this sailor.

    I've read this thread from end to end (+ the AcuraZine 40+ MPG experiment.).

    I may just spring for the $1200 (plus or minus) needed for timing belt, water pump et al vice laying out circa $33k for a 4 cylinder that (at best) is marginally more fuel efficient that my rocket ship Accord V-6 6M.

    Don't get me wrong: the TSX is a great car. Just not that great - granted IMHO - compared to my (pink slip intensive) 6M.

    Hang in there, Grad (great post!!)

    ez......
  • nj2pa2ncnj2pa2nc Posts: 813
    good to hear you love your honda accord as much as I do my 06 6MT tsx. My mom owns an 08 accord v-6 so I get to drive it when I visit her. The last time I drove it from where she lives in NJ to my home in NC I figured the MPG at 27. I prefer my tsx. Bought it new 11/06, now has 96,000+problem free miles.
  • kjnormankjnorman Posts: 243
    I have an '08 TSX and I have recorded every fill up since I have owned the car. Typically the trip computer reads 1.4 to 2 MPG over the manual calculation. Over the life of the car, the average error has been 8% over the actual mileage.
  • Thinking about a 2006 and up TSX, if most people are getting 27 plus MPG, that's good enough for me. I did test drove a 2007 Accord v6 coupe and although it was quick the nose heavy, torque steer feeling bothered me. Great car, but the handling was just too "mushy".

    As for the Sammy Hagar comment, I must agree, simply inexcusable, for shame!

    I have a saying about Sammy Hagar, "Sammy Hagar is as bad a song writer as Jack White is a good one." :)
  • ezshift5ezshift5 West coastPosts: 854
    I did test drove a 2007 Accord v6 coupe and although it was quick the nose heavy, torque steer feeling bothered me. Great car, but the handling was just too "mushy".

    Agree with all of your points.........in strait line acceleration (which is all I really do), the car is superb. Yes, the torque steer can be noticeable (I don't toss the car much), but the hard to believe fuel numbers provide a great boost for purchase revalidation.

    I like the TSX - but the fuel numbers barely surpass the 6M Accord. (We won't even address the performance differential).

    It's all good.

    best, ez..
  • picked up the car today with 23 miles on odometer and MPG was 30. no driving over 70. 4cyl auto non tech
    to early to tell if this is going to be that good or what, but I am light on the gas with all cars I drive.
  • biker4biker4 Posts: 746
    You can't really make judgments about mileage until you have driven several tankfuls under differing conditions.

    Biker, who switched to regular to see what effects, if any, that has on mileage.
  • tannistannis Posts: 9
    I really can't understand why anyone would even compare a 6 cyl. to a 4 cyl. Every post I've seen here is comparing these two engines and ALSO including performance figures.

    The TSX is designed to be "peppy" and somewhat "sporty". It does not mean it is geared toward "performance" and 0-60 times. Its purpose is economy. In that realm it is slighty lower than one would expect but still reasonable given the vehicle weight and the fact that they wanted to give the driver a feeling of some decent pedal action when pushing it. It is a rev-happy motor so no it won't get the insanely high numbers a smaller 4 cyl. would like a regular civic. It is a very nice mix of everything an economical driver would expect out of their vehicle while taking a small sacrifice on mpg.

    My '99 Cadillac Catera (worst car ever built) will get 27.8 mpg on the highway. Thats also a 3.0 V6 with 200~HP/ 210 ft/lbs tourque. Its rear drive. And it can be a blast to drive. But I wouldn't dare compare it to my 2010 TSX 4 cyl. They are two different cars designed for two different reasons.

    And you are also talking about a 6MT for crying out loud. Compare that AT LEAST with the TSX 6MT (20city 28 highway) if you are going to compare tham at all. Not a manual against an auto.

    Point being... Compare performance based vehicles with perfomance based vehicles. Compare economically based with... you guessed it, economically based vehicles. Otherwise the point of the argument is lost along with the control. The control is the reason we even compare to begin with, otherwise everyone would be driving a Prius.

    And one last little tid-bit and this absolutely grinds my gears and it follows the same concept of this post. I was on another forum reading about Mitsubishi Lancer Evolution real-world MPG, because I was curious what these beastly little turbo-motors are getting for what they are putting out. I found people trying to give advice on how to get the best mpg out of that car and others say they feather the gas pedal all the time and never push the car. EXCUSE ME?!?!?! It's has 290HP!!! ITS A SPORTS CAR! It has AWD. IT WAS BUILT TO GO FAST!!! I still can't figure out why anyone would complain about it. And this sums up my entire post. If you gear for performance, expect less. Gearing for economy? Buy a Prius.
  • ezshift5ezshift5 West coastPosts: 854
    ....And you are also talking about a 6MT for crying out loud. Compare that AT LEAST with the TSX 6MT (20city 28 highway) if you are going to compare tham at all. Not a manual against an auto.


    While I was delighted to peruse your somewhat unclear post, it's the title that gets all of my attention. What we have here is the age old performance/economy saw.

    And that is my point, Taking real numbers, the HAV6 6M has both. The little 4 cylinder - ahead of the essentially identical 6M gearbox - has almost a mirror image of the Accord V-6 fuel numbers (on the highway; I will concede somewhat on in town stop and go). The gap really is visible when looking at performance. You almost need a calendar for the Acura four. My Honda coupe has really low numbers in comparison.

    Before you shoot the messenger: Both are great cars; it's just (IMHO) the Acura ain't that great at 10 grand more than my Accord 6M.

    Time for a Crown Royal, a fire et al (somewhere the sun is over the yardarm)

    best, ez....
  • biker4biker4 Posts: 746
    For the last two tankfuls I've changed to regular to see if there's any diff - a seemingly small drop off in mileage - about 1MPG - right around 27MPG average.
  • nj2pa2ncnj2pa2nc Posts: 813
    I used premium gas in my 06 tsx for over 2 months than switched to regular. The gas mileage stayed the same and I did not feel any loss in power or performance. I do mostly highway driving but try to not speed, race up to red lights, etc. My MPg (using the old fashion way) were 30-33MPG. When I switched the original Michelin tires at 74,000 miles to Yokohama Avid 4Vs tires the MPG went down (28-32) I now have almost 99,000 problem free miles (still have the original brake pads)All the service on this car is done by acura/honda dealers
  • 1bythesea1bythesea Posts: 52
    Just got done with a 400 mile road trip, two adults, light baggage, flat interstate driving, using the air, premium gas, at an average 74 mph on my 2010 base TSX with just under 9 K miles on it. Hand calculated mpg was 32.6 which is an increase of 1 mpg since the last road journey, under the same conditions, with 3 K miles on the vehicle. Those of you who have had your TSX's a while at what point did you notice the mpg's leveling out?
  • aspicenoaspiceno Posts: 2
    I've had the 4-cyl 2010 TSX for 4 months, and have about 1900 miles on it,
    70% city, 30% highway. I'm disappointed in the gas mileage, even though I
    use premium gas (91 octane). I now understand that in order for the car to
    output high-horsepower at lower speeds, it means that gas mileage will
    suffer. This is something they don't tell you when you buy the car.
    I'm averaging 21.5 MPG.....this is the 4-cyl TSX reality.
    Other than this, I love this car.
    My previous car, the 2000 Accord 3 litre V6 returned a constant 25 MPG average.
    I've taken one step backward !
    I live in Montreal Canada.
    Any feedback?
  • ezshift5ezshift5 West coastPosts: 854
    .....regret the TSX is not performing so well in northern climes.

    It's really a nice little car - sharing the same well engineered 6M with my J30A4. But the fuel efficiency over the V-6 seems marginal at best..........

    it's getting difficult to find performance and economy as of late.

    ez
  • 1bythesea1bythesea Posts: 52
    edited July 2010
    Generally, with the same percentage of driving, my 2010 TSX 4-cyl averages 25-26 mpg (hand calculated) or 27-28 mpg (MID). A recent 300 mile trip, 98% highway driving, average speed of 73 mph, air set to 74 degrees, flat roads, two adults, some luggage the car was getting 34.5 mpg (hand calculated) or 36.5 mpg (MID) using premium fuel. The car had approximately 11,500 miles on her. I have noticed the mpg's, particularly highway, have increased since inception.

    I don't believe most people are seeing mpg's that low for your city to highway ratio. The TL (V-6) loaner was getting 21.6 (MID) under the same driving ratio. Perhaps a trip to the dealer is in order.
  • Hello, two messages back, I complained that "I'm averaging 21.5 MPG.....this is the 4-cyl TSX reality." Well, I'm going to have to correct myself.

    I have kept careful records since I purchased my 2010 4 cyl TSX on April 4, 2010.
    It appears that my original conclusion that I was getting 21.5 MPG is incorrect.

    I have gone over my records a number of times, and the facts simply do not lie:
    I am actually getting 24.9 MPG, with 70% city driving, and 30% highway driving.
    I have driven about 2000 miles to date.

    My full faith in Acura has been restored!
  • nj2pa2ncnj2pa2nc Posts: 813
    Good to hear that. With my 06 tsx 6MT I average over 30MPG with mostly highway driving. My car, bought new 11/06, now has 110,000+ problem free miles. Love it.
  • texastsxtexastsx Posts: 9
    Okay, so I wanted to know if anyone else had the same feeling about this: I feel when I use my paddle shifters to shift the gears up, my avg MPG is actually lower than when I drive normally. I have a 2010 TSX 4cyl

    I usually get around 27.5 mpg in the city (well, it's a 4 mile drive with 3 stoplights...so it's probably a little higher than most city driving) without shifting up. When I do try shifting up, I get around 25 or so. My hand calculated is pretty similar to the numbers aforementioned. I try driving the exact same way, I keep my acceleration less than 3500 rpm, didn't have to run the AC either time.

    Also, does anyone else think their car's range calculator is screwed up? One minute it says my range is 400miles and 2 miles later, it'll say 325 miles. Then, the next time i start up the car, it says my range is 380 miles...this crap happens to me all the time - should I bother the acura dealer with it?
Sign In or Register to comment.