Honda Civic Real World MPG

tysalpha

Traditionally, the 2/S position in automatics is supposed to lock on second gear for exactly the conditions you mentioned -- starting up from a stop in snow/ice conditions. Back in the pre-computer controlled days they all seemed to operate this way. But newer cars -- some seem to and some don't. Glad to know the Civic does. Although I've found if an automatic has enough "creep", it works just fine to let the car start creeping and then ease on the gas.

dgecho1

Unfortunately, I only had a $10 bill [doesn't go far nowadays, eh?] so I did not get the exact full tank re-fill numbers...OTOH, the '03 civic almost always had the light on at 380-390 like clockwork and got a consistent 42-43 mpg @ 68-70 mph...so, I should have gotten in the 40 mpg plus range at least....I am guessing the 'drive to nothing' range is about 510-525 range....intersting this is the best I could get in a honda fit which could be filled up in the long neck to about 12 gal. or so...it would get 43-45 mpg over the same roads...I would think the civic at 55 mph with the 5 AT should do the same.....??

drmbb

My 2007 EX/AT Sedan has about 4400 miles on it. I can consistently get 40-42 mpg using cruise control at 70mph, as long as the terrain is not repeatedly steep hills, and regardless of A/C on or not (e.g.. I-64 east of the blue ridge, I95 north of Richmond). So that should give me a run-to-empty range of 528 to 554 miles.

BTW, I rarely let my tank get below 1/4 full. The in-tank, submerged fuel pump relies on being bathed in fuel to keep it cool, so it's best to keep some gas in the bottom of the tank between fill-ups.

I also just had my first oil change this week, so we'll see what switching out the break-in oil and putting in Mobile 1 Synthetic does for mileage (probably nothing measurable, I'd guess). I'll be putting about 1500 miles on the car over Christmas holidays. My oil life indicator was at 40% with 4326 miles, but with the long trip coming up, I didn't want to wait until after the holidays to do the first change.

ras314

"I understand, but essentially that renders your original question unanswerable."

Well, to be more specific what is important is estimating how far the civic will go before running out of gas when the "E" light comes on. I have no accurate way of telling if 13.2 gal is actually in the tank the way I fill, nor if it varies much for different pumps. Actually unless the driving conditions are unusual I can expect 400 miles between refills without problems.

Gas stations can be few and far between, but not much city driving so at over 8000 miles I am averaging over 40 mpg since new.

ruking1

So you like the more civilized version of russian roulette!?

dgecho1

I think your real world experience speaks well enough...combinig comments from other posters...I guess the safe range to refuel is 400-450 range.I will try sveral tanks and report the results......these raods are so flats.....temps are good..it should represent the upper limits of the civic mpg............

kipk

"I guess the safe range to refuel is 400-450 range"

With over 50 years of driving, I've found the safest range is when the needle gets to the 1/4 tank mark.

People have gotten stranded figuring that out!

Kip

shipo

I'm trying to figure out how you came to that conclusion. :confuse:

FWIW, even though my wife and I have only been driving for 35 years each, we've covered over a million and a half miles combined. Couple that with the fact that I used to be a professional wrench and worked on MANY cars and I think I might have some empirical observations to offer in this discussion as well.

So, what do I think about the quarter of a tank recommendation? Way too conservative. I've never seen any scientific or empirical evidence that suggests that driving a modern car (with an in-tank fuel pump) down to the "E" mark will harm anything in a car. Yes, yes, I've heard all of the arguements about picking up debris from the bottom of the tank and about needing to cool electric fuel pumps with the gasoline, however, virtually every car on the road these days has enough of a reserve capacity beyond "E" to cover those issues.

My advice? Drive the car until you show "E" and then fill'er up. The only exception to this rule that I follow is when I'm heading out on a long trip (where I fill up almost regardless of how much fuel is in the tank), or when there is a question of fuel availability (kind of a "bird in hand..." scenario).

Best Regards,
Shipo

ras314

Aye. Our two local stations don't use credit card pumps and usually open around 8 am. So I really want to know if I can make it to the next available nighttime gas which is 100 miles some directions.

For the Civic that is around 1/4 tank (it appears to read about right anywhere below 1/2 tank) to be on the safe side.

ruking1

Essentially I do what you do. While the Civic does get good fuel mileage, on the down side one can indeed get 40-42 mpg (better or worse obviously) and get ranges of 560-588 miles or so, You can STILL run out of fuel, if you are not calculating on most probable data.

Since I have a diesel, even on longer trips passing into some of America's remote deserts, it is a no brainer to let it go till the fuel lamp and buzzer goes off, as I know from several data sources there is at least 2.4 gals or app 100-142 miles to go. Depending on how one drives the range can be from 700-826 miles.

I also am mindful of the 1/4 tank metric, especially on my SUV in the snow. I have been on those snow trips that are supposed to take 3.5 hours and wind up taking 10 hours. Naturally EVERYONE else is running out of fuel as I am....Of course you line up at the only mountain fuel station for miles around and get into line and think lets head to the restroom,... which is already 43 folks deep.

Reminds me of a filling stop I made once on the way to San Diego, CA. The attendant came out of literally an old 1950's style room and insisted on pumping the gas. Since he was going to monitor the process I asked where his rest room was. He sort of hesitated and then the lights came on and pointed in the direction and said the odd house was over there. Sure enough when I went in it WAS an odd house. I was half way expecting Rod Sterling to surface and announce the next episode of the Twillight ZONE!! :shades:

dgecho1

exactly! common sense unless long-distance--to-the-next -station is a problem.....

kipk

Shipo,

I was replying to a poster that said:

"I guess the safe range to refuel is 400-450 range"

I replied with : "With over 50 years of driving, I've found the safest range is when the needle gets to the 1/4 tank mark. People have gotten stranded figuring that out!"

In other words keep an eye on that fuel gauge, not the number of miles driven.

Hopefully that will help undo your confusion!
"I'm trying to figure out how you came to that conclusion."

In my younger and more "foolish" years I got stranded for several hours at night with a wife and baby in the car because I thought I had enough gas, but didn't. That gas station that was supposed to be open wasn't!

As with you, I have also turned a few wrenches in my life, for a living. That has nothing to do with running out of fuel because we chose to let it get too low. Where the fuel gauge is located is not a concern of mine, and has nothing to do with my post.

I don't believe believe that keeping at least 1/4 tank of fuel is "Way too conservative" as you put it. I don't care to run on the ragged edge. I have no problem pulling into a station at 1/4 tank, like you have no problem pulling in when the light comes on.

Here are a couple of other things I believe.

I would much better have it and not need it, than to need it and not have it.
From the Harley Folks. "If I have to explain it, you probably won't understand".

Regards,

Kip

perlster

Between fillups in Solvang and L.A., almost the entire drive on freeways with free-flowing traffic, my MPG came out to be 33.5 :sick:

thegraduate

Average speed? Hills? Temps? A/C use? Do you pass often or stay in the right lane? Downshift much?

ruking1

Wow! Sans the various "rush" hours, Highway 101 from app Gilroy to LA is like a mini American autobahn. It of course runs right through America's "fruit and bread basket" (agricultural heart) so to speak. So on many levels, a very interesting north/south (vice versa) corridor. For 4 or so years, I have made monthly R/T 's on that corridor from the San Jose area to normally Santa Barbara. Maybe every quarter, I wind up in Santa Monica.

When I have taken the Civic, I get app 38/40 mpg. More normally, I take a Jetta TDI and depending on speed, get 48-52 mpg as a comparison. I generally go slower in the (gasser) Civic, as it is not as road worthy, nor gets as good fuel mileage as the TDI Jetta. I swag if I drove it like the Jetta I'd lose maybe 1-3 mpg. Conversely, I swag if I drove the TDI Jetta like the Civic, I'd gain anywhere from 2/3 mpg better.

sebring95

Well I broke a record. I sold the '07 Civic after two months and 6,000 miles. I really hadn't planned to sell it but the seat comfort really nagged at me on some long trips last week and the offer presented itself. Lost around $500 in two months. Cheaper than a rental.

Average mpg according to logs was 34mpg in a relatively heavy highway use at 70mph. No problems except for a buzzing in the headliner and a clanging noise in the front door (when you shut the back door.....). Dealer was performing first service at 6,400 miles (25% on OLI) and fixing the headliner buzz when the deal was struck.

The good news is I don't travel nearly as much for the next few months so I'm going to spend that time finding a formidable replacement. Most likely a very very well maintained, mint, used TDI. The bad news is whatever driving I do will be in either my gas guzzling Odyssey or Tundra. C-ya on the TDI forum Ruking1.

ruking1

Way cool! Actually your results confirm (my own) Honda research done before I bought my 2004. Got to say I am happy for you! So good luck in your up coming search!

While I do not think the new 35 mpg, 2020 standard has started to necessarily firmed up prices for THOSE vehicles that do in fact GET 35 mpg NOW, for my .02 cents it makes sense to have at least one vehicle (going forward) that does in fact get app 35 mpg.

If I was on the market for a used TDI, it would be probably for a used 2003 Jetta/New Beetle/Golf (boring I know) or some variant of the MB E320 diesel. Not to rag on VW, but I am alright with bypassing the TDI PD engine. However I am lead to believe the 2006 (TDI) had a huge jump in quality. Some say it approaches BMW quality. I have gone to the local show room to see them and watched almost in horror as the salesman climbed on to hang off an opened drivers side door, but since there was no CA TDI didnt really want to take one (gasser) out.

sebring95

Timing was everything on this deal. I bought one of the last '07 Civic's around for $300 under invoice. Then while getting serviced my salesman called in a customer that was wanting to see my color combo (tango red/ivory) as they didn't have any in stock. Guy ended up with a nearly new car for far less than an '08 model and I kicked a couple hundred to the salesman since he was losing a new car sale. Two weeks before or after and I likely would have paid a lot more for my new car.

I'm looking for a '06's. Really like the bigger car and features. Neighbor has an '05.5 manual with close to 100k and no issues. Except he got rear-ended too, but just needed a crush panel and bumper cover.

caaz

i would really be interested in knowing how many of you get 40 mpg traveling at a constant 80 mph......Also...id like to know how you rate the wind & road noise at those speeds....tyvm........ p.s. I went to the website Greenhybrid.com...saw a very interesting advertisement for a 200.00 dollar add to any car...using water turned hydrogen..... his toyota corrolla is getting 61 mpg using it....and its just water?..For that price i'm willing to try it..Would def out do a hybrid, for 200 dollars.

blufz1

Come,on. Nobody gets 40 at 80.

shipo

"...saw a very interesting advertisement for a 200.00 dollar add to any car...using water turned hydrogen..."

Cool, somebody came up with a mechanical version of Snake Oil. :P

sebring95

I think 40mpg is attainable in the 65-70mph range on long trips. I personally never hit that but never ran a full tank without at least some non-highway driving mixed in. 36mpg was my high tank and that was about 95% highway. I only put 6k miles on the car so it may not have been broken in, who knows.

Rate wind/road noise....that's a tough one. Compared to what? The Civic isn't' the quietest car by a long shot, but probably not bad compared to other economy cars. I didn't notice it being considerably more obnoxious at 80mph vs 70mph. Tire noise was a bit annoying which I'm sure could be fixed with some better tires. IMHO, the Civic is a bit jumpy at those higher speeds though. The steering is a bit over-assisted which also isn't as attractive at high speeds. 70mph felt like the sweet spot to me and that's about where I kept it. It was also rather easily effected by cross wind, again probably more obvious due to the steering feel.

IMHO, you need a heavier, more substantial vehicle to really feel secure AND quiet at 80mph.

Let us know how that $200 upgrade works out for ya.

kipk

CAAZ,

Gosh, I haven't heard that term in years. But, Shipo hit the nail on the head. "Snake Oil"!

Many moons ago, traveling salesmen would show up in small towns, with their wagons of goods. . A very popular one, especially among the men, would be selling a product in a bottle that they said would cure most anything that might be ailing you.

They said the contents were from some exotic plant or far away country and had mystical healing powers. Of course it didn't work, but people bought it on the hope that it would. The alcohol and lace of Cocaine (legal back then) would help with pain temporarily. So people kept buying it. It became known as "Snake Oil".

The practice of promising anything, we need to hear, still goes on today. It is call "advertisement", and of course Political platforms.

Don't ya think that a Gizmo that would convert water to a burnable fuel would be on every car in the world. Or that the patient would have been bought up by "BIG OIL" and never heard of again? Save your money! "Snake Oil" doesn't work!

Me thinks blufz1 is also "Dead On"! 40mpg at 80mph seems like a bit of a stretch!

Kip

mjsten

It is encouraging to hear all of the talk about mid 30 to 40 mpg. I have an 08 civic, non hybrid,,,, have 7000 miles on it 85% hiway.. High 32 MPG all hiway low 27 mpg, regular daily commute. Ave 30..
Very disappointed, passed on the 08 Accord to get the mileage and not getting the claimed mileage. Asked my service and sales people and was told that those numbers were probably pretty accurate and what I should expect. The extreme mileage claims were pretty much a stretch.

drmbb

At 80 mph? No. Driving at 70mph (cruise control setting) on fairly level interstate runs, I've consistently gotten 41 mpg (+/- 1 mpg, depending on trip - measured over runs of about 250-350 miles).

I've also seen that mileage seems to go down rapidly above the 67-70mph cruise mark. Steep or rolling hilly terrain can also make a big dent in mileage, as does frequently varying speed. Which is why I use the cruise control on the highway whenever possible - it's actually very good at maintaining 65-70mph without varying engine rpm much at all (unless large steep hills get in the way). I have a 2007 automatic EX sedan.

As for wind and road noise. The civic is not the quietest small car on the market, but it is far from the noisiest. Since it's really a pretty subjective question, I'll just say the noise in my civic does not bother me at all. The stereo amply overrides any background noise, and the options of radio, CD and my iRiver mp3 player mean I'm always listening to something I choose and not paying any attention to background noises.

sandman46

The Goodyear RS-A's seem to be a noisy tire...since I had to replace the back sneakers with Fuzion tires, I can't really comment on how quiet they are. Will have to wait until the fronts are replaced in a few months.
Why is it that Honda chose the 205/55/16 tires over the 205/60/16 or 205/65/16 size? I actually like the larger sidewall that a 65 series tire offers which seem sturdier in my opinion and also don't like the fact that the 55 series tires are also more expense than the other two sizes mentioned above?
Does anyone have a logical answer for my question? Thanks.

The Sandman :confuse:

shipo

A few points:
- The 205/55 HR16 tires will provide much more responsive handling than the other two.
- The 205/55 HR16 tires have a 24.9" tire diameter, which matches the diameter of 15" wheels that come on the DX, LX, and 17" wheels that come on the Si models (all Civics need tires of this size due to the programming of the ABS system as well as to allow correct readings on the speedometer and odometer).

- The 205/60 HR16 tires that you might prefer have an outside diameter of 25.7" which would cause your speedometer and odometer to read incorrectly.
- The 205/60 HR16 tires that you might prefer are not always "H" rated tires (your car requires at least an "H" rating).

- The 205/65 HR16 tires that you might prefer have an outside diameter of 26.5" which would cause your speedometer and odometer to read incorrectly.
- The 205/65 HR16 tires that you might prefer are NOT typically "H" rated tires until you step into the more expensive tires in this size (I only saw 4 tires on the market in that size with an "H" rating).

I hope this helps.

Best Regards,
Shipo

lfc4evr

I have just about 700 miles on my Civic. At the first fill-up I got 28 mpg (95% highway miles). I just filled up for the second time few days ago and got 32 mpg (identical route and driving conditions, i.e. 60-65 mph, no more than 2500 rpm, a lot of coasting and letting the car roll to a stop instead of using brakes). I have some hope that it's going to get better and better. My mechanic friend told me that after the piston rings get a proper fit, I'll start seeing much better mileage. Did you all start seeing 35-40 mpg straight out of the dealers lot, or did you also observe this gradual increase in mileage? BTW, I live in NJ so I warm the engine for 5-10 mins in cold weather everyday until the idle rpm drops to 1000rpm. Should I cut down on this idling to warm the engine??

shipo

Should you cut down your warm up time? Absolutely. Virtually every expert in the world will tell you that you're doing more harm than good.

Standard rule of thumb:
- Get in the car
- Start the car
- Click on your seatbelt
- Release the parking brake
- Put the car in gear
- Drive off, keeping engine RPMs and vehicle speeds conservative until the temperature gauge notches up a couple

Best Regards,
Shipo

drmbb

Of course, if you live in those parts of the NE where morning conditions are just perfect to keep your windshield completely fogged up, you get stuck waiting until the defrost air has warmed up enough to at least let you see clearly. I hate that, sitting there wasting fuel, but I'm a bit odd that way, about wanting to actually be able to see what's in front of me when I pull out (others I pass on the road, often apparently are not so concerned).

Still, seriously, yes, I agree. Normally a warmup period purely at idle is unnecessary and a waste of fuel. The car will warm up much faster if moving at moderate speed anyway. I've noticed that with the civic - it will take ages for the temp. indicator to start moving if you just sit idling. But it will rapidly warmup to operating temp. once you start driving.

sebring95

Just remember, every time you're idling you're getting exactly 0mpg. And a cold engine is burning the most fuel. The best way to heat up a vehicle is by driving it. Sometimes it sucks to be cold and I'll admit if it's approaching single digits I'll let my car idle to warm up. But yeah, it's horrible for your mpg!

tiff_c

Of course, if you live in those parts of the NE where morning conditions are just perfect to keep your windshield completely fogged up, you get stuck waiting until the defrost air has warmed up enough to at least let you see clearly. I hate that, sitting there wasting fuel, but I'm a bit odd that way, about wanting to actually be able to see what's in front of me when I pull out (others I pass on the road, often apparently are not so concerned).

I happen to agree, I have to have the windows so i can see out of them and will gladly waste the fuel to get the ice off of them. I usually start the car and remove the snow and ice then drive off. It's no good if I get into an accident at the first intersection.
Worse still are the SUV's that NEVER clean their roofs and they have 12 inches of snow almost always iced over on the top and when that comes off at highway speeds it's enough to shatter a windshield!
Having an SUV means never having to drive responsibly I guess. :sick:

shipo

In my post about starting and driving, I never meant to suggest that you should do so without first having clear windows. I'm fortunate enough to have a garage and so I don't need to deal with snow and/or frost removal in the mornings, however, it isn't at all uncommon for me to have to deal with those things when leaving work. In that case, yes, I do start the car, turn on all of the defrosters full bore, and then go to work on the glass.

I too have a "thing" about driving when I cannot see further than the dashboard.

Best Regards,
Shipo

ras314

Does the light visicoty oil make warn up time unimportant? I usually wait until closed loop operation starts, generally around 75 deg coolant temp.

ruking1

First off, you will not see real break in till app 10,000 miles.

While I did start to get 35-40 mpg from the get go (38-42 mpg daily commute now), the conditions overall have been a. consistent b. much less demanding than I perceive yours to be. c. by default, driving within the break in parameters

Secondly, gassers by design do NOT have a certain mpg for all reasons and seasons. Indeed a certain VARIANCE is the rule, NOT the exception. The problem of course is when one thinks the lack of variance should be the rule and not the exception.

If you read the fine print on YOUR new car sticker, there is a huge ( range) variance, even as they state the EPA city/highway, which in itself shows variance. So for example, mine says EPA 29 C/38 H. The fine print goes on to say: between 24-34 city and 32-44 highway. The "for comparison shopping" fine print drones on to say: COMPACT 13-48 city, 19-51 highway. So it being new, not only is the vehicle breaking in (and for my .02 cents I did make a concerted effort to break the car in correctly) ,experiencing winter conditions, YOU are getting used to the car and (maybe/maybe not) making adjustments.

So I would concentrate on break in (and your adjustments to it). Good break in can be important to longevity (my goal is app 450,000 miles) One thing I would do, oxymoronically is to rev the engine closer to red line (75% of red line if you are not comfortable with the concept) every so often when you can. I would also just start the vehicle and go as soon as possible after start up. Whether you make driving adjustments is really up to you, but it is usually the single most important factor once you understand your particular vehicle.

drmbb

I know, was just posting for fun. And, this morning was one of "those" - cold and damp enough that I could not towel the window clear and drive off. Instead I did have to wait at least 5 minutes or so before the defrost was blowing warm enough to do the trick.

Of course, the electrical rear window defrost did it's job in less then a minute, but I didn't want a stiff neck from driving backwards for the first mile or so, so I waited

ruking1

http://www.8thcivic.com/forums/civic-coupe-sedan/22302-dx-lx-ex-your-gas-mileage- - .html

To state the obvious, the overwhelming majority of participants in this poll (77.02%) get between 24 to 36 mpg. The mode (21.27%) get 27 to 30 mpg.

shipo

Of course there's that one dude that claims in excess of 53 mpg and over 700 miles on one tank. I called "wind aided" on that tank of fuel and he (and others) got upset with me. :-/

Best Regards,
Shipo

ruking1

Oh GEEZ! I hope that person isn't one of THOSE that cut off the engine, throw the car in neutral and coasst down a 2/4 mile downhill slope to boot!!!!??? OVER 700 miles on a 13.2 capacity tank is literally running the car on fumes past 689 miles. (if he is REALLY getting 53 mpg) The information really does not pass the probablility test on triangulation.

shipo

Yup, he proudly proclaimed that he was a hypermiler and would leave no stone unturned in search of that last 0.00000001 mpg. :P Geez, I'll bet that if you came out with a negative twenty "W" zero (i.e. -20W-0) oil and claimed that it would improve fuel economy at the expense of engine longevity, he'd buy a 55gal barrel in a heartbeat. :surprise:

Best Regards,
Shipo

drmbb

The range reported at www.fueleconomy.gov (in the user postings) is 21mpg to 42mpg for the 2007 with auto.

http://www.fueleconomy.gov/mpg/MPG.do?action=browseList2&make=Honda&model=Civic

ruking1

So would you care to do the analysis for the % for each range? There were 583 in the sample vs 59 for the fed quote you cited.

So really it would take far more effort to get the data in more usable form with the smaller sample than the larger sample. So in the sense it would be interesting to see if the smaller sample was indicative of the larger sample or even differences in variance.

caaz

Im about ready to get rid of mmy noisy civic, in favor of an accord, but before doing so, can anybody tell me what tires are really really quiet?...
p.s. ive been averaging about 43 mpg in my 2004 civic overall.

blufz1

Go to tirerack.com and look at the reader surveys of tires they bought. They've got a scale for quietness. Don't get a new car,just get some quieter tires. Makes more economic sense,doesn't it?

kipk

I agree with blufz1 . Quieter tires do make more economic sense.

We all have our priorities and often times will go out of our way to justify them.

Personally, my everyday scoot around car needs to be inexpensive to purchase, economical, easy to park/maneuver, and low maintenance.. However for highway trips we are more concerned with comfort and room. So we take the Pilot, which gets considerably less mileage than the scoot car.

If we only had one car and it was too noisy, we would probably consider trading for a compromise

It is about priorities!

Kip

drmbb

I was merely pointing the thread readers to another example of real world driver's experiences. Nothing more intended other then to show additional mpg reports from civic drivers.

ruking1

It was more a reaction to raw data, sort of globbed/ arranged by model year. I guess that was my (subliminal) reaction to the fed agency that actually EMPLOYS statisticians and actuarial but either can't or will not give the public data digestible forms or useful formats even if it is at taxpayer expense. There was nothing intended beyond what I said. Yet we get a more usable and digestible form by someone probably not schooled in statistics and actuarial sciences and NOT at taxpayer's expense. Par for the course or GO FIGURE!!??

Indeed just looking at the raw data, it is amazing how Congress really expects the OEMS to really put a 35 mpg AVERAGE SET of vehicles out there when one of the best current (non hybrid) ones has a hard time getting any consistency. I mean EPA of 29/38 is way good!!! Yet there is still a variance of 24%!!?? Yet on the other hand they try and succeed in banning Jetta's TDI that gets EPA 42/48 !!!?? This seems not to be really about 35 mpg. This seems to be really about significanly increasing the cost per mile driven.

ruking1

I have read good things about the GY Comfort Tred, being almost the premier quiet tire. My sense is that when you drift away from oem or known high mileage tires, you will most likely get less mpg over the life of the tire. (80,000 miles warranty) The one caveat of course is that any switch to new tires almost always experiences LESS mpg for a (conceptual) break in period.

..."What We Liked: Good ride quality and low tread noise
What We'd Improve: Road handling and wet traction
Conclusion: A quiet, comfortable tire that lives up to its name
Latest Test Rank: 2nd (June '06) "...

http://www.tirerack.com/tires/tests/TireTestServlet?tireMake=Goodyear&tireModel=- - - - - Assurance+ComforTred&tirePageLocQty=%26partnum%3D87TR4ACT%26i1_Qty%3D4&vehicleSe- - - - - arch=true&index=3

Not to rain on your parade, but is that increase in power, features, etcand almost for sure massively more $ bux., which you will probably marginally use, or have nothing to do with good fuel mileage or noise reduction: worth all those disadvantages?

ruking1

..."will not give the public data digestible forms or useful formats even if it is at taxpayer expense"...

Add:

will not give the public data IN digestible forms or useful formats even if it is at taxpayer expense

ruking1

Filled up the other night for 39.35 mpg. (420 miles/10.7 gal).