By accessing this website, you acknowledge that Edmunds and its third party business partners may use cookies, pixels, and similar technologies to collect information about you and your interactions with the website as described in our
Privacy Statement, and you agree that your use of the website is subject to our
Visitor Agreement.
Comments
So using your example, the torque DOES tend to come on at higher revs.
Worst case: you really do not want to lug a Honda engine). Does it NEED to be taken to within a hairs thickness of max revs? NO!
On the Civic anyway, the neat thing is there is not too much difference in epa mpg between the automatic and manual. So for example on MY automatic during commute, I do not fight the automatic's shifting tendencies at given throttle inputs. This can be a tad to VERY annoying, if one is used to manual tramsmissions.
I also have a Honda Pilot 2003, I was too careless and did not keep track of mileage.
I do not know what gas the dealer put on the car the fist time. This time I put regular(87), but reading the manual says I need 93 octane rated gasoline. Next time I will fill it up with premium gas, maybe that's the reason.
Thanks.
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"...
Given some of the above quoted new car sticker, it would be hard to come to the conclusion that it is "B/S". Further as a comparison, it would be interesting for example to see what a GM product such as a Suburban/Tahoe etc etc would get under similar conditions.
While you do not consider yourself an "aggressive" driver, the conditions you drive ARE indeed highly aggressive/severe (use whatever words); as far as the machineries' point of view. Without knowing more of your conditions, 3 miles one way would as a minimum indicate incomplete combustion; as a min of 5/7 days or 71% of your weekly miles. Another is none of your fluids comes up to optimum operating temperature. Start up wear is intense.
Given some of the situations that come to mind, perhaps the other way to look at it: it is way cool that you even get 24.5 mpg.
Remember this is only your second tank of gas. If you are still getting low mileage after 2k-3k miles, then you should be concerned.
As for my family's 2007 Auto Civic(my dad's car), he drives fairly aggressively, commutes in rush hour to downtown, and averages about 31 MPG. Seems about right given that he is in stop and go City traffic for a large part of that.
In my 2.4L 5AT Accord, I average 28-29 MPG with a non-rush hour suburban commute, and mid-upper 30s to sometimes 40 MPG on trips.
I'm beginning to wonder about the numbers on Honda too... the 24/34 on my Accord's sticker seems much too low.
You are talking about the 1.8L, 140 hp Civic, right? It does NOT need 93 Octane Premium Gasoline. 87 will do the same job that 93 will, which is what your manual should state. Mind telling me what page of the manual you read that says you "need 93 Octane?" I'm not trying to pick on you, but if you can show me the page number where it says that in your Honda Civic Owner's Manual supplied by the manufacturer, I'll eat my hat. I think you are mistaken; do NOT put 93 Octane in your Civic unless you have some cash you need to get rid of.
Most dealerships these days have that policy, but it is easy to get the car to read full and save a few dollars by not filling it to full in actuality (the gauge will read full if within a gallon or two depending on the vehicle). I don't know this to be the case for you this time, but it happens.
So to others, as good as 25 mpg is, 30-35 mpg would be better or worse!?
PS: our Tahoe gets 13 in city during the winter (Minnesota) and 15 city in the summer. Highway trips its around 19.
EDIT: I just saw jay24's response, so sorry for the redundancy.
1. highway conditions
2. steady 55-65 mph
3. a minimum drive of 1 hour's duration (all systems full operating temperature, engine can burn off a core amount of byproducts)
4. litte to no, start up and stop; start up and stop
5. no A/C
6. little to no battery demand, such as: NO lights, sound system, aux battery draws
7. little to no idling
8. little to no brake use
9. good tire balance and alignment
10. "correct" and proper tire PSI
11. ideal driving and ambient weather conditions
12. as little weight in the vehicle as possible
13. no dingle berries such as Tule/Yakima roof racks, etc hanging off the air stream.
14. etc, etc, etc.
Then that would be an intentional or unintentional misreading or misunderstanding on what is says on each's new car sticker.
What Has Changed
http://autos.yahoo.com/green_center-article_153/
Not true - it is easy to exceed EPA numbers. The EPA subtracts 22% from the highway fuel economy measurement to get the number they put on the sticker. To get the actual measured number multiply by 1.28.
Honda Civic 40 mpg highway x 1.28 = 51.2 mpg. That is what you can expect if you drive a fully warmed up vehicle at a more or less steady 48 mph. Consumer reports does the only real world repeatable mpg tests and they get 43 mpg on the highway (steady 65mph with a warmed up engine) for the Civic. - pretty much in line with the EPA numbers.
..."For every two minutes a car is idling, it uses about the same amount of fuel it takes to go about one mile"...
http://www.consumerenergycenter.org/myths/idling.html
So working backwards if one gets 25 mpg that is 1/25=4% x 128 oz= 5.12 oz per minute. So now the question is how many minutes do you idle per: day, week, month, year,?
Before anyone accuses me of complaining I am fairly happy with 25 because our previous SUV got about 15 +/- on the same "commute".
Well for sure it is good that you are happy. But germane to the mpg discussion, I think we have reasonably shown that "short and sweet" commutes are harder on the vehicle than so called "longer" commutes. To use two figures 25 vs 38 mpg, for like miles, it is 34% HARDER on the machinery.
Who would ever do that? Not my reccomendation. I was stating the measurements including mpg at 65 which was also well over the EPA numbers. Not everybody drives on turnpikes or interstates all the time. There are actually some roads with 55 mph speed limits, where 65 is not at all dangerous. The point is comparing apples to apples. If somebody complains about poor fuel mileage, but drive too fast, at different speeds, and for short distances the reason is obfvious.
One real easy way to tell how smoothly (and efficiently) somebody drives is how long their brakes last. Less braking is more efficient. The front pads on my Integra lasted 180,000 miles. Why slam on the brakes at a stop light when you can coast.
As far as higher speed MPG goes for Hondas. The speed limit is 75 where I live and my Integra (stick shift) gets 32 mpg going 80. This is with an EPA highway of 28. I can't drive fast enough to only get 28 mpg.
Using 25 mpg doesn't make sense when a car idles at 650-750 rpm, with no strain on the engine.
When you're driving, the rpm's are way higher than at idle, not to mention the load on the motor. Yes, idling wastes gas, but I don't think as much as you seem to claim.
Another point of triangulation is the OLM's. I can almost guarantee you that with identical Civic's (with OLM's) that the Civic with 38 mpg will go longer between OLM directed oil changes than the Civic which gets 25 mpg.
Interesting advice. You all are complaining about 25 mpg, yet recommend a tire that gets 1-2 mpg less, for 23-24 mpg?
The other way to look at this: when folks need advice on how to get 25 mpg, when 38-42 will do; folks that actually GET 25 mpg are THE resource.
It will be interesting to see what the diesel that hits the USA will do in either a Civic or more likely Accord platform.
Had to do some stop and go during rush hour on the streets of San Francisco, after entering Frisco in FULL rush hour traffic on a FRIDAY night.
Pedestrians walk around like they are either drunk, oblivious, blind, don't care or all of the above