See my other post for my thoughts on fuel economy and addionally for you....don't bother with the dealer. There is nothing a service call will accomplish unless the car is running poorly in conjunction with less than normal fuel economy. Modern vehicles have no tweeks or adjustments that can be made...the whole engine/transmission is computer software controlled. Works fine...lasts a long time!!
Yes, there is a break in period. The 2004 Honda Civic owners manual makes mention and explanation of the recommendation to use the oem fill for the full OCI which can be the following; 10,000 miles normal, 5,000 miles severe or if OLM at a % of useful oil life remaning. On my first "normal" oil change or so called "break in" period there was not a radical shift in mpg.
i average about 28-31 mpg but i average less when i am coming from work. i stay in Hampton, VA and i have to go to Norfolk, VA everyday. in the morning it is good but in the evening it is really bad
Well, most car manufacturers now state that while there is no official break-in period use common sense rules: 1.no full throttle starts within x miles 2. vary your speed within that same x mile period (do not drive at a constant speed) 3. no full tilt stops to seat the brakes. Aside from those few things you may drive fairly normally Yes the factory fill oil can stay in until the first scheduled oil change. And no you will not see any great change in fuel economy after xxxx thousand miles.
Well, your "three" items remind me of that jingle, looks like a duck, flies like a duck, quacks like a duck.....
But as it applies to Honda Civic's, the fourth item, as I have said in another post, the oem made a pretty big deal about leaving in the oem fill. I happen to know why. So the question goes out to the 2005, 2006, and 2007 owners, what does YOUR oem owners' manual's say? Or why would you care? I have paraphrased what mine says.
But ultimately the break in procedures are design for is longer term reliability, durablity. Someone who will not keep the car past 3 years/36,000 miles is probably not going to care what someone who wants to go 250,000 to 300,000 miles will probably want to do.
Well, your "three" items remind me of that jingle, looks like a duck, flies like a duck, quacks like a duck..... I assume by that you mean do these common sense rules constitute a break-in of sorts. If so, yes they do but I am old enough to remember when a new vehicle break-in rules and regulations took up more than a page in the owners book. It went something like this.. For the first 500 miles do not exceed 35 mpg For mileage between 500-1000 miles speeds between 35-45 are permissible. For mileage between 100-1200 brief bursts of speed up to 55 mph are permissible.....etc etc. up to maybe two or three thousand miles. Then there were the oil change intervals during break-in.. change within the first 500 after 1200 etc etc. Then there were all the lube points to be relubed at specific intervals during and after break-in. Then there was resetting of the timing, checking the plug gap and on and on. There was a deliberate ritual during break-in in that time. By comparison manufacturers now have mere suggestions. Of course ignoring or severely cheating on the break-in proceedure back then usually produced negative results fairly soon...increased oil consumption and worse. Now with tighter engine tolerances, improved metalurgy, better oil..well, better everything you can pretty much drive normally (within reason) and the vehicle will not suffer any bad results. Anyhow, I may be off the path. I agree with you however that whatever "break-in" is used it does not seem to result in significantly better fuel economy..at least on the Civic. I have heard that Hyundai products will get better with miles though.
I do not miss the "old days". Indeed some of the items you mentioned are indeed improvements, technical and otherwise. A 500 mile to 3,000 mile OCI seems absolutely ludicrous, especially in comparison to a 10,000 mile OCI today, and an (every other oil change, 20,000 miles) oil filter change. (2004 Honda Civic) However as you might agree, this does not stop some folks from actually doing a 500 to 3000 mile oil change on the newer cars.
Some others are indeed specific and probably still apply today, however there has been a MAJOR dumbing down of the instructions (for obvious and not so obvious reasons).
The manual tells us what we need to do, yet people swap out their oil early anyways. And they always justify it. I guess some have more $ than others to just throw away so psychologically they'll feel better. I'm going to listen to my car and let the oil life monitor do its job as designed. Afterall, that's why I bought a Honda in the 1st place...great engineered cars.
basically my routes have not changed (this is a daily driver/commuter car) except for occasional highway trips (the 44.7 and 42.5 entries). the first two entries were driven over the same routes as most of the others.
best as I can figure there are a lot more intangible factors that influence mileage than the age of the engine.
Your numbers are much better than ours which typically hover around 24-25 mpg. Keep in mind this is almost all short trip use. The best I achieved was 37.7 on one trip this summer. EX sedan auto.
Is your commute mostly highway? With those numbers on a automatic Civic, it must be very limited city driving. My commute is 9.1 miles stop & go up just one road, so my speed varies between 0 & 53 or so.
I have 8K miles on my 2006 Civic LX and I check my mileage each time I fill-up. The lowest I've gotten was 36MPG and the best I've gotten was 37 MPG. It doesn't seem to matter whether I'm driving in town, on the highway at 60 MPH or 85 MPH. It's the strangest thing. I was hoping to be able to get 40 MPG but I guess I can't complain about a consistent 36-37 MPG.
Typically this is where I interject some disbelieving comment...so as not to disappoint. I can see 36-37 mpg driving all highway/interstate at some reasonable speed e.g. 70-72 mph or so BUT it is a well known fact that fuel economy gradually peaks at some speed (different for different types of vehicles but generally the numbers used are between 55-65 mph). After that the faster you go the more wind resistance you encounter and more engine power (more throttle) is required to maintain those higher speeds. So, at the very least aerodynamics would dictate you would get much better fuel economy @ 60 mph than @85 mph. Personally, we get mid 20's (24-25) in all town type driving and seldom get more. I understand virtually everyone has a "number" when fuel economy is mentioned but it should at least vary with conditions and speed....
Those who are claiming 36 - 40 mpg for all driving conditions are not calculating the mpg correctly. The mpg are inflated on the civics. How does the civics get better gas mpg ratings than the new Honda Fit which is a smaller lighter & has a smaller engine? Honda should be sewed for false advertisement. I will buy an American made car next. Not only are the foreign countries taking are jobs away from Americans but we are helping them destroy our economy. Wake up people! :mad:
I would submit that is not what is happening. For example, when I report 38-42 mpg, in the very same sentence are the conditions, i.e., 54 R/T daily commute under the worst roadway conditions in the USA as rated by transportation agencies, etc etc. I also break out highway travel and what speed etc etc. So if that is unclear or there are questions, ASK.
So if it is left out by somebody making a point, I would either make the correction or apology or read the whole of what is being said and then sculpt the point.
Chevrolet Corvette Z06!! WOO HOO !! Ops, the power plant is assembled in Ontario, Canada. Plugs from Japan, Some model years' forged wheels have actually been from Italy. The upholstery is from the same vendor/s as does Honda's. Some of the sub contracted parts are from who knows really where (not that that is a BAD thing).
Most Honda's are made from recycled American IRON !!??
I am sure the Ontario Canadians feel exactly the same way!
Having been involved in city planning activities and actually helping to put an old mustang plant back to multi level productive use, I can tell you that monies spend locally have an 8-1 multiplier effect.
While the Honda Fit is new to the U.S., it is a 2001 design to the rest of the world. The engine in the Civic is of a newer technology than that of the Fit, as well.
I'm very disappointed in the mpg I get in new 2007 Honda Civic Sedan (A/T) 30, 40, yeah right, and I'll sell you Manhattan Island for a pint of Donald Trump's hair dye.
The rough calculation I did for city driving gave me such a low number that I disregarded it (and actually forgot it). I just did a calculation between two fill-ups.
Of 170 miles driven, I'm sure that at least 80% was on freeways with wide-open traffic.
Yeah those of us who own the 06's found that out awhile back. I just found that if I stay under 3k rpms while acceleratin, I can get and average of 30 mpg, mostly traffic and city. In order to get the 30 40, I would say that you have to stay under 2500 or 2000 rpms at all times. this is just from my expierience in my 06 AT.
I just found that if I stay under 3k rpms while accelerating, I can get and average of 30 mpg, mostly traffic and city.
Well, considering that the average you are supposed to get in mostly traffic and city is 30 MPG, I don't see the problem...? Remember, that if you sit in traffic not moving for 12 minutes a day on your way to work, you are getting 0 MPG for an hour's worth of idling every week. City EPA MPG numbers assume an average of 20 MPH.
And yes, excessive revving (above 3k RPM) will lower your mileage. Accelerate moderately (making the AT shift under 3k), and you should get EPA numbers or better.
I was averaging 24 - 25 mpg before I found this out, driving normal (slow for me). I shouldnt have to sacrifice my life for mpg. I live in Orange County California, getting on the freeway at less than 65 mph is dangerous most of the time. With short on ramps, staying below 3k rpms, i barely get to 35 mph before I get on the freeway. This may work for less populated areas, but not for crowded citys.
It's called gearing and tuning. A Fit Manual transmission runs over 3,000 RPM at the same speed a Civic runs in the low 2,000 RPM range. A 1.8 Liter engine at 2,000 RPM is better on fuel than a Fit at the same road speed at 3,000 RPM. It's the same way I get 38-40 MPG on some of my road trips in my 2.4L Accord. My RPMs stay very low, but I'm in the solid part of the torque band so I never have to downshift.
If you sue anyone, you better be suing the EPA, since THEY are the ones that produce the numbers on the sticker, not Honda. You are just wanting to shoot the messenger.
I'm talking about normal acceleration, not merging on short on-ramps. Obviously, you have to do what you have to do to stay safe. Going from stoplight to stoplight on a US Highway is common in Birmingham, AL (US 280 -speed limit is 55 but numerous traffic lights stop you every mile or so). What I was suggesting is that too many people zipup to 4k or 5k RPM when they are only about to stop again. I have to merge quickly on one particular route I take, and for that, of course I rev it up because it is prudent to do so.
My father is still breaking in his new 2007 Civic EX Sedan Auto, and managed 37.4 MPG on his recent trip to the coast. No, it isn't 40 MPG, but it wasn't strictly interstate, either. He drives about 10 MPH over the limit, so figure an average of 75-80 MPH for the trip - with A/C running (A/C usually knocks fuel economy down by a good 5-10%, at least 2 MPG in a Civic). The southern heat-wave is finally over, so no more A/C use needed for awhile!
I will buy an American made car next. Not only are the foreign countries taking are jobs away from Americans but we are helping them destroy our economy. Wake up people!
Well we will see. I am heading to Northern California this weekend to see my brohter. I will report back my mpg. I wont go too fast considering going 10 more mph gets me there like 45 minutes quicker.
I rather get out and walk if I have to watch that I don't go over 2500 rpm's. :surprise: The engine revs up to 7500 rpm's - Why shift under 2500 RPM's :confuse:
I rather get out and walk if I have to watch that I don't go over 2500 rpm's. The engine revs up to 7500 rpm's - Why shift under 2500 RPM's
Last I checked, redline was under 7k. Revving to 7,500 RPM regularly will get you in the shop quickly.
As far as the question you posed - the answer is simple. Why let the transmission shift sooner? Because it improves your mileage. The higher you rev, the more gas you'll burn but the fast you'll accelerate. If you like to wind out the tach often, go for it - but people that drive like so shouldn't expect good mileage.
I'm not trying to be a bad guy - just trying to be kind of rational. People revving regularly to 4,000-6,800 RPM shouldn't expect to get EPA numbers. I drive an Accord I-4 (2006), and while I don't eye the tach constantly, I've noticed that my driving style puts my shifts under 3k RPM probably 90% of the time. That style gets me (gasp) 24 MPG in strictly city driving, and 30 MPG mixed. I've gotten 41 MPG on one very easy trip (alone in the car, no A/C, no downshifting of the Auto required, constant 72 MPH=2,400 RPM). From a 2.4L. Usually, my highway trips yield about 37-39 MPG. If I can do this, I have no trouble believing a Civic can exceed it.
The simple point I'm making - best mileage numbers comes from modest acceleration, with shifting as soon as possible without bogging the engine (if you are in an Automatic, it will do it for you).
pft.. I'm merge pretty agressive myself, regularly taking it to the 4-5k range and driving 70 on the highway. Other than that i regularly keep my shifts under 3k and still get 36-37 mpg.
Hi, I am a new Civic EX '07 owner and I drove 235 miles on my first thank. Is that too low?
I use the car mostly to get to work (5 mile drive no highway). I drove on the highway only twice for about 25 miles. I have turned the A/C on only once for about 10 minutes.
Does it have anything to do this being the fist tank?
It constantly amazes me how many people have no clue how to get EPA mpg yet expect to get it with their aggressive driving. I think because so many are pushing it all the time it makes it seem a normal way of driving these days.
Driving higher speeds cause more drag causing more fuel to be burned as well as the higher rpm factor. Besides what thegraduate said being a bit steadier with the gas pedal helps and avoiding quick acceleration helps too.
Easy on the gas pedal and slow down. Keep your tires up to correct pressure.
EPA is what a car "CAN" get. Not what it will get.
What was your actual MILEAGE? You should always use the formula :
MILES DRIVEN divided by GALLONS PUMPED
Without knowing how many gallons you used, we don't know if you got 15 MPG or closer to 30 MPG. If you pumped in 10 gallons, then you used 10 gallons over 235 miles = 23.5 mpg.
Another tidbit - dealers are known for not giving you a FULL tank of gas when they give you the car.
Yet another tidbit - driving only 5 miles means your car never gets really warmed up for long, meaning your car is running a little richer (using more gas) until it gets warmed up. Also, with only city driving, and such short trips, I'll be surprised if you ever see over 25 MPG.
The short trips are going to kill your mileage.
May I ask what you drove before you got the Civic? What mileage did you get?
It it nice if one has the RPM gauge. We do not and so am swagging we routinely go above 3k rpm during times when it is needed. (I know we do with the TDI during the same commute)
But anyway during a record cold snap (must be all this global warming), winterized fuel, record traffic congestion, massive use of heater and A/C to take the ice and inner fog off the windshield, and battery damand for radio, cd, cell phone recharge, rear defogger, etc. etc., took on 6.9 gal doing 269 miles for a 39 mpg. We get instant start up (20 degrees) with that Mobil One 0w20 synthetic oil. Gee it reminds me that real winter is hard on cars.
Going in for my 1st oil change tomorrow. Have had the car 7 months now with only 5030 miles on the odometer. I also faxed them a copy of the TSB of the Lug Bug buzzing noise which should be done also. I just hope everything is done right. Sometimes there is leakage after an oil change and the dealer is a good 20 miles from my home. They were quite confused about the TSB...claimed they've never geard about it, thus I faxed it to them. I hope the mileage will improve with the oil swap, but unfortunately, I do 90% city driving which doesn't optimize great mpg's. Am still looking in to swapping out just the 16" steelies for other Honda rims. Found some on Ebay for just the 4 rims so we will see. $-wise, probaly a foolish thing to do, but alloys do make a car look very sweet. Since I plan to keep this car for awhile, it is very tempting!
A good rule for when to shift in normal acceleration is about 13 MPH for each gear
2nd - 13 3rd - 26 4th - 39 5th - 52
That should keep you pretty sedate in the rev range (with some room for interpreation of course, that 1-2 shift may need to occur a little later if you are loaded or on a hill).
Actually, I have recommended shift points printed in the owner's manual for my 1996 Accord. They are something like:
15, 25, 40, 52.
Hope that helps a little. Sounds like you are doing great without the help!
I average 28-30 mpg whereas the SUV that it replaced under same conditions averaged 15.Here in San Diego the roads are very bad and the tight suspension feels like a buckboard so I dropped the tire pressure to 27 which feels better. I think it is recommended to be at 32 to squeeze a little more mileage out. As I got older I hate to say it but I think I prefer posh cars AKA Buick but my brain says think young.
Such low tire pressure is prone to give you blowouts and uneven tire wear. I'd definitely not go BELOW recommended pressure. If anything, i keep mine a little higher.
Mine is an automatic. But in truth, I have got a good many miles/years, so rather than rocket science, this stuff has been second nature for a very long time.
Also, if I am very new to a vehicle or going to run it for a long time, I will study it with one eye on running it in the range and sweet spot that all vehicles have and are designed.
I don't mean any disrespect by those comments, but some folks see the 2 EPA city/highway figures as locked in stone, akin to the 10 commandments.
However, all one has to do is read the gobbidy GQQK on the new car sticker (or other data sources) to find there is a HUGE range of mpg. Keep in mind also that the Honda has historically served as a platform for the boy/girl racer set and it is easy to see the wide range of the market that indeed it does serve. Indeed I read in passing that in the UK, the average age of a Civic buyer is 55 years of age!!??
Keep in mind also that the Honda has historically served as a platform for the boy/girl racer set and it is easy to see the wide range of the market that indeed it does serve. Indeed I read in passing that in the UK the average age of a Civic buyer is 55 years of age!!??
Yes, I have heard in some commentary on one of my favorite automotive TV programs (Top Gear - BBC) that Honda vehicles are more akin to be found at the Retirement Communities there - like a Buick might be here - mainly due to their practicality.
Yes I would agree with you. Lower tire pressure on an SUV works in tandem with the much longer throw suspension and at one end of the spectrum will give a much more "compliant" ride. However the Civic has WAY less throw in the suspension. So indeed proper inflation is an INTERGRAL part of the suspension. Typically in comparison to the SUV tires it has two LESS plys!!) Again if one purposely inflates the tires with "less rather than more than" the materials tends to respond with higher heat loads for longer periods.(heat is not good for tires over the long term) Yes more "compliant" ride and WAY less longevity in the tread. In WORST case scenarios, it CAN increase the chances of blow outs.
So on our Civic, I run the oem owner's manual recommendation for higher speed, i.e., 35 psi (plus) As a comparison to San Diego, this Civic is actually run on THE highway that is cited by transportion experts as one of the WORST highways in the COUNTRY (not just CA) (congestion, state of repair, etc etc.)
Yes the key point is the tires meet the same specifications, same class, etc. etc.
Actually for us the car/s were for COMMUTE. But for the 4/5 cars I got this down to, they would not deal much with the Corolla vs Civic. Civic also was far cheaper, while a lower priority, much more fun to drive. I actually liked the Mazda 3 series but the emphasis was on MPG potential.
First of all we are talking about a 4 cylinder engine with low torque and very high revving. We are not talking about a V8 here. You suggest that keeping the RPM below 2500, this could be a disaster for the engine & transmission. By switching gears below 2500 puts stress on the engine & transmission for these small 1.8 engines. These engines were made to rev. My auto switches above 2500 90% of the time. If you have a stick you can switch below 2500 but you will notice how hard the engine is working "NO GOOD". If you want to save a few dollars on gas but in the long run harm you engine & transmission then switch below 2500 rpms.
Comments
Welcome to CarSpace!
1.no full throttle starts within x miles
2. vary your speed within that same x mile period (do not drive at a constant speed)
3. no full tilt stops to seat the brakes.
Aside from those few things you may drive fairly normally
Yes the factory fill oil can stay in until the first scheduled oil change. And no you will not see any great change in fuel economy after xxxx thousand miles.
But as it applies to Honda Civic's, the fourth item, as I have said in another post, the oem made a pretty big deal about leaving in the oem fill. I happen to know why. So the question goes out to the 2005, 2006, and 2007 owners, what does YOUR oem owners' manual's say? Or why would you care? I have paraphrased what mine says.
But ultimately the break in procedures are design for is longer term reliability, durablity. Someone who will not keep the car past 3 years/36,000 miles is probably not going to care what someone who wants to go 250,000 to 300,000 miles will probably want to do.
I assume by that you mean do these common sense rules constitute a break-in of sorts. If so, yes they do but I am old enough to remember when a new vehicle break-in rules and regulations took up more than a page in the owners book. It went something like this..
For the first 500 miles do not exceed 35 mpg
For mileage between 500-1000 miles speeds between 35-45 are permissible.
For mileage between 100-1200 brief bursts of speed up to 55 mph are permissible.....etc etc. up to maybe two or three thousand miles.
Then there were the oil change intervals during break-in.. change within the first 500 after 1200 etc etc.
Then there were all the lube points to be relubed at specific intervals during and after break-in.
Then there was resetting of the timing, checking the plug gap and on and on. There was a deliberate ritual during break-in in that time. By comparison manufacturers now have mere suggestions. Of course ignoring or severely cheating on the break-in proceedure back then usually produced negative results fairly soon...increased oil consumption and worse. Now with tighter engine tolerances, improved metalurgy, better oil..well, better everything you can pretty much drive normally (within reason) and the vehicle will not suffer any bad results. Anyhow, I may be off the path. I agree with you however that whatever "break-in" is used it does not seem to result in significantly better fuel economy..at least on the Civic. I have heard that Hyundai products will get better with miles though.
Some others are indeed specific and probably still apply today, however there has been a MAJOR dumbing down of the instructions (for obvious and not so obvious reasons).
I'm going to listen to my car and let the oil life monitor do its job as designed. Afterall, that's why I bought a Honda in the 1st place...great engineered cars.
The Sandman
40.5
40.1
37.5
38.4
39
38.4
44.7
38
34.6
36.4
35.4
37.4
34.4
35.9
36.7
37
42.5
36.9
37.2
34
36.7
basically my routes have not changed (this is a daily driver/commuter car) except for occasional highway trips (the 44.7 and 42.5 entries). the first two entries were driven over the same routes as most of the others.
best as I can figure there are a lot more intangible factors that influence mileage than the age of the engine.
The Sandman
So if it is left out by somebody making a point, I would either make the correction or apology or read the whole of what is being said and then sculpt the point.
Chevrolet Corvette Z06!! WOO HOO !! Ops, the power plant is assembled in Ontario, Canada. Plugs from Japan, Some model years' forged wheels have actually been from Italy. The upholstery is from the same vendor/s as does Honda's. Some of the sub contracted parts are from who knows really where (not that that is a BAD thing).
Most Honda's are made from recycled American IRON !!??
AKA from American JUNK YARDS !!??
Having been involved in city planning activities and actually helping to put an old mustang plant back to multi level productive use, I can tell you that monies spend locally have an 8-1 multiplier effect.
The rough calculation I did for city driving gave me such a low number that I disregarded it (and actually forgot it). I just did a calculation between two fill-ups.
Of 170 miles driven, I'm sure that at least 80% was on freeways with wide-open traffic.
the true MPG I got: 32.2
Well, considering that the average you are supposed to get in mostly traffic and city is 30 MPG, I don't see the problem...? Remember, that if you sit in traffic not moving for 12 minutes a day on your way to work, you are getting 0 MPG for an hour's worth of idling every week. City EPA MPG numbers assume an average of 20 MPH.
And yes, excessive revving (above 3k RPM) will lower your mileage. Accelerate moderately (making the AT shift under 3k), and you should get EPA numbers or better.
If you sue anyone, you better be suing the EPA, since THEY are the ones that produce the numbers on the sticker, not Honda. You are just wanting to shoot the messenger.
My father is still breaking in his new 2007 Civic EX Sedan Auto, and managed 37.4 MPG on his recent trip to the coast. No, it isn't 40 MPG, but it wasn't strictly interstate, either. He drives about 10 MPH over the limit, so figure an average of 75-80 MPH for the trip - with A/C running (A/C usually knocks fuel economy down by a good 5-10%, at least 2 MPG in a Civic). The southern heat-wave is finally over, so no more A/C use needed for awhile!
Yeah, wake up an buy a Mexican-made Ford!
Nah, I'll keep my Ohio-made Honda.
Last I checked, redline was under 7k. Revving to 7,500 RPM regularly will get you in the shop quickly.
As far as the question you posed - the answer is simple. Why let the transmission shift sooner? Because it improves your mileage. The higher you rev, the more gas you'll burn but the fast you'll accelerate. If you like to wind out the tach often, go for it - but people that drive like so shouldn't expect good mileage.
I'm not trying to be a bad guy - just trying to be kind of rational. People revving regularly to 4,000-6,800 RPM shouldn't expect to get EPA numbers. I drive an Accord I-4 (2006), and while I don't eye the tach constantly, I've noticed that my driving style puts my shifts under 3k RPM probably 90% of the time. That style gets me (gasp) 24 MPG in strictly city driving, and 30 MPG mixed. I've gotten 41 MPG on one very easy trip (alone in the car, no A/C, no downshifting of the Auto required, constant 72 MPH=2,400 RPM). From a 2.4L. Usually, my highway trips yield about 37-39 MPG. If I can do this, I have no trouble believing a Civic can exceed it.
The simple point I'm making - best mileage numbers comes from modest acceleration, with shifting as soon as possible without bogging the engine (if you are in an Automatic, it will do it for you).
I use the car mostly to get to work (5 mile drive no highway). I drove on the highway only twice for about 25 miles. I have turned the A/C on only once for about 10 minutes.
Does it have anything to do this being the fist tank?
It constantly amazes me how many people have no clue how to get EPA mpg yet expect to get it with their aggressive driving. I think because so many are pushing it all the time it makes it seem a normal way of driving these days.
Driving higher speeds cause more drag causing more fuel to be burned as well as the higher rpm factor.
Besides what thegraduate said being a bit steadier with the gas pedal helps and avoiding quick acceleration helps too.
Easy on the gas pedal and slow down. Keep your tires up to correct pressure.
EPA is what a car "CAN" get. Not what it will get.
The Sandman
What was your actual MILEAGE? You should always use the formula :
MILES DRIVEN divided by GALLONS PUMPED
Without knowing how many gallons you used, we don't know if you got 15 MPG or closer to 30 MPG. If you pumped in 10 gallons, then you used 10 gallons over 235 miles = 23.5 mpg.
Another tidbit - dealers are known for not giving you a FULL tank of gas when they give you the car.
Yet another tidbit - driving only 5 miles means your car never gets really warmed up for long, meaning your car is running a little richer (using more gas) until it gets warmed up. Also, with only city driving, and such short trips, I'll be surprised if you ever see over 25 MPG.
The short trips are going to kill your mileage.
May I ask what you drove before you got the Civic? What mileage did you get?
But anyway during a record cold snap (must be all this global warming), winterized fuel, record traffic congestion, massive use of heater and A/C to take the ice and inner fog off the windshield, and battery damand for radio, cd, cell phone recharge, rear defogger, etc. etc., took on 6.9 gal doing 269 miles for a 39 mpg. We get instant start up (20 degrees) with that Mobil One 0w20 synthetic oil. Gee it reminds me that real winter is hard on cars.
(ok 38.985507 mpg
I hope the mileage will improve with the oil swap, but unfortunately, I do 90% city driving which doesn't optimize great mpg's. Am still looking in to swapping out just the 16" steelies for other Honda rims. Found some on Ebay for just the 4 rims so we will see. $-wise, probaly a foolish thing to do, but alloys do make a car look very sweet. Since I plan to keep this car for awhile, it is very tempting!
The Sandman
2nd - 13
3rd - 26
4th - 39
5th - 52
That should keep you pretty sedate in the rev range (with some room for interpreation of course, that 1-2 shift may need to occur a little later if you are loaded or on a hill).
Actually, I have recommended shift points printed in the owner's manual for my 1996 Accord. They are something like:
15, 25, 40, 52.
Hope that helps a little. Sounds like you are doing great without the help!
are very bad and the tight suspension feels like a buckboard
so I dropped the tire pressure to 27 which feels better.
I think it is recommended to be at 32 to squeeze a little more mileage out. As I got older I hate to say it but
I think I prefer posh cars AKA Buick but my brain says think young.
Be safe, and have a good week.
Thegrad
Also, if I am very new to a vehicle or going to run it for a long time, I will study it with one eye on running it in the range and sweet spot that all vehicles have and are designed.
Have a nice MLK Day.
However, all one has to do is read the gobbidy GQQK on the new car sticker (or other data sources) to find there is a HUGE range of mpg. Keep in mind also that the Honda has historically served as a platform for the boy/girl racer set and it is easy to see the wide range of the market that indeed it does serve. Indeed I read in passing that in the UK, the average age of a Civic buyer is 55 years of age!!??
Yes, I have heard in some commentary on one of my favorite automotive TV programs (Top Gear - BBC) that Honda vehicles are more akin to be found at the Retirement Communities there - like a Buick might be here - mainly due to their practicality.
Quite funny, I must say.
So on our Civic, I run the oem owner's manual recommendation for higher speed, i.e., 35 psi (plus) As a comparison to San Diego, this Civic is actually run on THE highway that is cited by transportion experts as one of the WORST highways in the COUNTRY (not just CA)
Personally, having driven a Corolla several times, it was about as exciting to drive as setting my alarm clock. ZzZzZz...
It rode particularly nicely for its size and weight however, and got similar mileage to the Civic.
Just a thought for those of you reading out there who don't like the sporty (read: firm) ride of the Civic.
Actually for us the car/s were for COMMUTE. But for the 4/5 cars I got this down to, they would not deal much with the Corolla vs Civic. Civic also was far cheaper, while a lower priority, much more fun to drive. I actually liked the Mazda 3 series but the emphasis was on MPG potential.