Howdy, Stranger!

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

Honda Element Real World MPG



  • the 2008 honda element awdex automatic gets the same gas mileage as a fwdex auto and the auto awd gets better than a fwd stick shift. the sc gets better mileage than the ex because it's lower. I have the 05 and 08 brochure. The awd drive is lite compared to other awd systems. when you use awd it well affect the mpg. i drove 100 miles around 270 with my friend to compare mpg. He used 4.26 gallons and I used 4.4 gallons but he followed behind me so who knows for sure. The difference is to small for me to give up safety feature like awd.
  • 0311vn0311vn Posts: 48 store valuables such as cameras and a hand gun? Is there such a compartment built into the floor that can be secured?
  • ccirelliccirelli Posts: 22
    the 2008 honda element awdex automatic gets the same gas mileage as a fwdex auto and the auto awd gets better than a fwd stick shift.

    Well technically, the 08 awdex is 1 mpg less efficient than the fwdex, on both the highway and city side.
  • ccirelliccirelli Posts: 22 store valuables such as cameras and a hand gun? Is there such a compartment built into the floor that can be secured?

    Well, not really. For that, I picked up the Cargo Cover, so people can't peer into the area behind the back seats. But it's not really a "locking compartment", like say, the trunk on a Civic.

    If someone wants to get into your car, they will. But if you hide your stuff well and don't leave any clues as to what might be inside... you should be relatively safe. By clues I mean - no stickers advertising stuff you like - Nikon, Apple, stuff like that.

    Guns...? Not sure. But most thieves won't break into a car if they don't see anything of value right out in the open (wallet, camera, watch, computer bag, etc.).

    So the Cargo Cover should help with that. Out of sight - out of mind! :)
  • ccirelliccirelli Posts: 22
    Oh another thought - leave the spare tire at home (if you're feeling brave) and use all that space under the floor to store valuables, if you don't have the Cargo Cover. Probably a safe bet if you only do it once in a while.
  • ccirelliccirelli Posts: 22

    OK, for my 2nd tank, I used my baseline of filling the tank between $.50 and $.75 over the "click" of the gas pump handle.

    Driving conditions:

    - maybe 5% highway

    - 95% back roads, 40 to 50 mph, pulled lots of hills

    - used Sunoco fuel 87 octane

    MPG: 26.80

    An increase of 1 mpg, even more back road driving this time. Still driving slow & steady, taking it easy going up those hills. Essentially I am doing the speed limit, maybe 5 to 10 mph more here & there. Nice & light on that gas pedal.

    For my third tank I am curious to see what I get - I filled up with Sheetz fuel. I don't expect the same as Sunoco, but we'll see. And, I will be doing some more highway driving over the next few weeks. I will keep tabs on the general percentage of highway vs. back roads.
  • steverstever YooperlandPosts: 39,971
    I had several tanks in the first 3,000 miles or so on my last new car that were 10 or more mpg lower than what appeared to be the norm. No real rhyme or reason to it either. Some people seem to dial in their mpg right off the bat, but mine didn't really settle down for months.

    (so don't get too upset if the Sheetz tank is way off what the Sunoco gave you ...)

    Need help navigating? - or send a private message by clicking on my name.

  • The only possible difference in fuel economy between different types of fuels would be in the percentage of ethanol mixed into the gasoline. In other words, the energy density (amount of usable chemical energy per gallon) goes down the more ethanol is mixed into gasoline hydrocarbons. You automatically increase fuel consumption by around 2% for every 10% ethanol in there. For example, if you are running E85, you will get 8.5x2=17% higher fuel consumption. More common is E10, which is simply 10% ethanol, which is what I burn, so I routinely give up 2% fuel efficiency vs. pure gasoline hydrocarbons. The only exception is when you might run lower-octane gas in a car made for premium fuel, and the engine has a knock sensor, and the MPG drops when the lower octane fuel is used as timing gets retarded a bit. However, the Element does not have a knock sensor, so none of that octane variation really applies here.
  • I've driven my stock (except for new tires) 05 AWD EX M/T for 3 years now in various conditions and driving mixtures. I'm convinced that approximately 28 mpg is the best I can do. I just got that mpg again on a trip with about an 30/70 mix of city and hwy, AC and no-AC, uphill and downhil. The gas light comes on after about 330 miles or 12 gallons (3.9 remaining). In other cases, "good" mileage on my E is about 24.5. Average "bad" mileage is about 22. 20 mpg is about the worst I ever do, but that's fairly rare.

    The beefier new Toyo tires did seem to lower the mpg it for a while. Now it seems to be back to where it was before I replaced the stock good-years. I do agree that choice of gas does seem to cause some variance.

    I am curious about the gas saving plates from earlier, but that sounds sketchy to me. There is a lot of chatter on this list lately. I'm cuious, are folks buying Es right now downsizing from larger SUVs and trucks?
  • ccirelliccirelli Posts: 22
    I'm cuious, are folks buying Es right now downsizing from larger SUVs and trucks?

    Personally, I just traded an '07 Civic EX for my Element. Took a hit in mpg (averaged 36 mpg in the Civic) but I LOVE the room and versatility of the Element. I rescue / train / show dogs, so it is a perfect fit for me.

    Essentially it is costing me about another $80 per month to drive, but it's worth it. And now my wife - who never liked them before - totally wants one. They are contagious... :D

  • micwebmicweb Posts: 1,617
    26 mpg with awd/auto is superb
  • bigfurbigfur Posts: 649
    So far my best is about 24.5 in an 07 awd auto. Winters here in MN drop it to about 21.
  • ccirelliccirelli Posts: 22
    Better yet - today I calculated 28.01! No highway miles on that calculation, no AC either.

    Again essentially I am just feathering that gas pedal, and taking easy up hills - and coasting on the way down. Slow starts & stops, and I do right around the speed limit, 5 to 10 mph above.

  • The EPA rates the 2wd/automatic 2008 Element at 20/25 city/highway MPG. My '05 Freestyle, which weighs about 500 lbs more (3499 lb Element vs. 3959 lb Freestyle), is EPA rated at 18/25 city/highway, using the latest MPG test methods to compare. I routinely get the EPA numbers and often better, and have reached 30 MPG on a long trip with steady ~60 mph speeds. The Freestyle has a 3.0L 204 hp engine, and the Element is 500 lbs lighter with 2.4L 166 hp engine. ....Is there a gas leak in the Element? .... Maybe it can be simply accounted for by gearing alone, the Element being geared down without a good high range ratio for highway cruising. Are Element owners seeing high RPMs in highway cruising, compared to the Freestyle which does 1500 RPM at 60 MPH on flat roads?

    The Element has a conventional 5-speed automatic while the Freestyle has a CVT, so maybe the difference is there, but how does that make up for 500 lbs of mass difference?

    I like the Element and want to buy one, but am unwilling to get about the same MPG numbers as my bigger, heavier, more powerfull vehicle I have now for a 4-cylinder light Element. You'd think the Freestyle's bigger 17 inch wheels would reduce MPG to way below the Element, but thats not the case. What is going on with the Element?
  • ccirelliccirelli Posts: 22
    Well - I think we're pretty close. Regardless of what the EPA numbers are, again - I am getting between high 26 and low 28 - with less than 10% highway travel.

    I am reasonably certain that I could hit 30 on a long flat trip as well, based on what I've seen in my first three tanks.

    At 60 mph the element (awd ex auto) hovers just under 2K rpm, if I recall correctly (sorry - I've only had it for 10 days..). At 70, 2.25K rpm. Not bad at all, and right inline with my Civic.

    A lot of factors could go into why these two cars get about the same mileage, despite the weight and hp difference - the short answer is, that's just how they're engineered. Specifically, the CVT and general aerodynamics could be a big part of it as well.
  • We have a dog too. We call the car a rolling dog crate. It is the most versitle vehicle I've ever interacted with and I have a hard time thinking of a more versitle one. I'm a little worried about the future child seat and increasing mileage crunch though.
  • ccirelliccirelli Posts: 22
    Hahaha - "rolling dog crate" - perfect! :D

    Ya between my dogs and my photo gear, it so versatile. Coming from a 36+ mpg Civic, it is still worth the difference in mpg.

    I think the car will work well with your child seat, with the way the doors are designed. And it's an added safety that kids can't open the back doors without the front doors being opened first (although, to some, this is not a plus...).
  • The Freestyle should have horrible aerodynamics, just as the Element is not that good either. They are blunt boxes with only a little curviness here and there in the corners. Therefore, I don't know that aero has much to do with the fact that a heavier, faster Freestyle has about the same MPG as a lighter Element. Without other ideas about where the extra gasoline is going in the Element, I'd have to say that it must be the effects of gear ratios accounting for it. With a higher top gear, the Element should be able to reach better highway MPG.
  • stevedebistevedebi LAPosts: 3,786
    "The Freestyle should have horrible aerodynamics, just as the Element is not that good either. They are blunt boxes with only a little curviness here and there in the corners. "

    I owned a 206 FS, and I don't think the aerodynamics are nearly as bad as the Element. The Element is boxy; the Freestyle (while is has a pretty large frontal area) is much "smoother". It is based on the Ford 500.

    I think the difference between the two is the CVT in the FS. When coupled with the 3.0 engine, the computer can use the lowest possible RPM.
  • ragetsragets Posts: 63
    I cannot believe I did this great with my car. I've been averaging 23-25MPG. But on my last tank I put 300 miles on and only filled up 9.78 gallons. That means I got 30.67MPG!!!! I couldn't believe it! :D
    I use Shell Gas because it seems to run better and get better MPG's.
    I go about 75% highway, 20% dirt/gravel roads, 5%city.
    I ease off the gas pedal, brake easy, only use the A/C in spurts on the highway, use windows in town.
    I wish I would have gotten the manual transmission though. I hate how long this auto takes to shift up and down. I wish I could do it myself! :)
This discussion has been closed.