pattyrat, your city mileage is about on par for stop-'n-go urban crawl, but was that by any chance a typo for 23 mpg highway over 300 miles at 65 mph? Seems to me those numbers are in the wrong order. If your highway numbers were accurately reported, I'd suggest you or your dealership check your automatic transmission's fluid level. (The instructions are in your owner's manual.) Something's not right. You're not a left-foot braker are you? It's not uncommon for left-foot brakers to "ride" the brake pedal with the consequence of excessive fuel consumption and frequent brake pad replacements. There's also the possibility that you have one or more defective brake calipers that are dragging.
I am averaging a steady 26.7 mpg. I drive 15 highway miles to and from work driving 70 miles per hour and do very little city driving. The best mpg I've had was 28.5. I questioned the mpg with the dealership shop manager but he told me 26 mpg average was good. I'm really disappointed with this mpg but guess I'll have to live with it.
Well, try the easy things first: Check the automatic transmission fluid level. (car parked on level ground, engine fully warmed and shut off for Honda automatic trannies) Make sure the tires are properly inflated. And, review the owner's manual on where the 4th gear overdrive lockout button is located to verify someone didn't inadvertently disengage it so that you never progress past 3rd gear. (4th gear is actually overdrive) If your Honda is ULEV or ULEV II rated, they do suck a bit more gas. (Ironic that we have to burn more fossil fuel in the push toward cleaner air . . .)
And you would be absolutely right on just about any other make automatic transmission! Honda's automatic transmissions are a breed apart*, though. (Soichiro Honda got filthy rich marching to the beat of a different drummer.) Even in neutral, Hondamatics are always turning gears that slosh the fluid enough to prevent an acurate fluid level reading. Check the automatic transmission fluid level check instructions in your Accord's owner's manual.
*Think hydraulically controlled manual transmission (mainshaft, secondary shaft, yolk actuated sliding transfer gears, and real synchronizers) with a torque converter instead of a manual clutch, and you've just conceptually summarized Honda's automatic transmission design philosophy. When several American auto manufacturers in the '30s began playing around with the notion of semi-automatic and automatic transmissions, they all tried the approach that Honda uses, but couldn't get it to work reliably. GM tried something different. They dusted off the old Ford Model T dual range planetary gearset transmission (two levers controlling internal brake bands and the clutch only had to be used to get the tin-lizzy off from a dead stop - "Any damned fool can drive a Model T" went one advertsing slogan.), added a third range for four speeds forward, and bolted a fluid coupling to it in place of a manual clutch. That's how the Hydramatic transmission was born. (Well, that and a lot of development blood, sweat, and tears . . .) After WW-II, other makers substituted a torque converter for addded efficiency (dropping at least one gear range in the process for simplicity and cost savings) and that's where the majority of automatics worldwide stand to this day, though now the minimum number of forward gears is back to at least four or more, and some Mercedes automatic transmissions go to seven.
...So I'll ask again, what I asked before (and got no response) ---- What's the advantage in having a Honda transmission? I'd like to get the "Idiot's Guide" version to this question....
I do know what's the DISADVANTAGE.... Hard shifting, and more jerky driving.
Baffles me, too. Hondamatics are neither the best nor the worst designs regarding durability and efficiency currently available. The only thing I can say (and did) is that they are different from mainstream designs. I do agree with you about Hondamatics' pre-2003 model year shift quality based on my experience with my '96 Accord. The car mags generally qualified the '03 and later Hondamatics as improved in shift quality, though I haven't driven any myself.
I get 34.3 mpg in a semi rural county using 44 psi in my tires and with 3 to 12 mile (one way) trips. Maybe 36 or 37 freeway, but not carefully measured. 176,000 miles and wondering how the current accords fare.
Having both a '95 (with only 77k) and an '05, both V6 EX, I'll admit that the '05 is a lot smoother shifting.
I was just wondering, what is the significance in the way Honda has been building its own transmissions, what's the practical advantage for us, drivers, or what is Honda claiming it to be -- longer lasting (doesn't seem so), smoother (not)... What, then?
The tires, Bridgestone B381, say max inflation pressure is 44 psi. That is of course the cold inflation value. The B381 is a quiet, low rolling resistance tire and high pressures don't matter as much, but the tire wear is less at high pressure. Ordinary tires at standard B post sticker inflation values of 29 psi yield about 30 mpg. See What Wayne Gerdes on greenhybrid.com has to say about tire inflation. http://greenhybrid.com/discuss/showthread.php?s=8c085c633ac308933102dea3f36b5b60&t=639
The ride is barely affected, and the quietness of these particular tires is impressive. My wife happily drives the Honda mostly because it uses less fuel than her Subaru Forester. 34 mpg vs. 23 mpg. And her tires are running at 40 psi; its the FWD that gets her low FE.
I know there are a lot of variables, but with some vehicles there are obvious problems. Does anyone have mpg numbers while towing a light trailer? I am looking at towing about 800lbs.
Hard shifting...? Better take your Honda to the dealer. my 2005 Accord auto tranny shifts smooth as silk...smoother than any other transmission I have ever owned. By the way, the hard shifting Honda transmissions went out some years ago...no hard feelings!
I wish our 05 Accord EX Sedan, I4, 5AT had a harder shift like the old hondamatics. It shifts like a slush box GM tranny. I wont waiste money on a Honda slush box again. $800 bucks for a power robbing GM feeling I did do a complete flush and changed the filter. ( yes there is a filter ) Put M1 automatic fluid in it. Its still GM'ish at low speeds and lite throttle. But it firmed it up just a hair when your on it. But no matter how you cut it the %AT screams blue hair. We are going to buy another Honda soon. Im waiting for Si to get here and then I will choose either the Si, Civic Coupe 5MT or a Accord Sedan LX se 5MT.
We are ave. 33 mpg 75% hwy 25% city. I get good mileage in it no matter how I drive the car. Wife gets in and just ruins mpg. I have given up on her and will buy my own Civic or Accord. Its just horrible to know that Im pushing 35mpg or better and then she drops it to 25mpg in the snap of a foot.
While it is rated to tow 1000 lbs, can the Accord handle a 1500-1900 pound small boat, with trailer brakes, on flat terrain, would probably be going 15 miles or less per trip ?
I have 1,270 miles on it, am on tank number four. I have had runs from 25.7 mpg to 30.3 mpg, but no long trips or highway drives. Mainly interstate commutes of less than 10 miles, so I go 0-75-0-75 a lot, b/c it is rush hour.
While it is rated to tow 1000 lbs, can the Accord handle a 1500-1900 pound small boat, with trailer brakes, on flat terrain, would probably be going 15 miles or less per trip ?
Tow ratings are given partly due to the way the engine and transmission can handle pulling said weight. Another problem you need to consider is frame damage...the unibody Honda Pilot has more horsepower than the Explorer or old Blazer, yet is only able to tow 3,500 pounds, versus 5,000 + lbs for the body on frame trucks. The Accord's unibody frame is not made to handle such stresses under towing, even if the engine could handle it. This is why you used to see old "body on frame" Crown Vic and Vista Cruiser station wagons with big trailers. It isn't due to the engine as much as how the frame of the car is designed. Most cars today (exception of Crown Vic/Town Car/Grand Marquis and the like) are unibody cars, like the Pilot, and cannot tow such heavy things without causing problems. It won't be safe to do so in ANY unibody car with a tow rating of 1,000 pounds. Hope this info finds good ears!
I have an 03 Accord EX PZEV with 43K on it. I mostly get 26.2 MPG according to the trip computer in the Nav in mixed traffic. Like you 0-70-0 for 12 miles one way. My wife can get it up to 28 MPG when she drives it. :confuse: I think the MPG would be higher on my commute if we didn't have as many hills and valleys here in San Diego. The best I have achieved is on the drive to Vegas from here and it was 32.8 MPG running 75-80 mph most of the way with cruise with it being 98-105 outside.
The tires have 40PSI in them. I still have the original tires on the car as well. I haven't had tires last so long on my prior vehicles. Has anyone else experienced this?
Is this not a danger, exceeding the maximum reccomended pressure at such a high margin (15 PSI)? I have run my old Accords at 38 before, but reduced it in the summer (high 90s are common in an Alabama summer!) because tire pressure increases 1 PSI for every ten degrees above the original inflation temperature. Also, tires' PSI rises 7-9 PSI with moderate driving for 15+ minutes. IF you inflate to 50 PSI at 50 degrees, drive in 80 degree weather for 15 minutes, you could be looking at a PSI approaching the mid-sixties if you aren't careful. Aren't blowouts a concern with 50+ psi?
........"About the OEM Michelin’s. I run at 50 #’s and still have 7 - 8/32 left after 33K miles........"
..seriously now, isn't your ride quality - at 50 PSIG - pretty much degraded? To my way of thinking, you must be a foamer....using TP like that.........
No, I hate riding around on sand. I have shorter stopping distances, longer tire life with a superior wear pattern, and better turn in. I have a harsher ride but I am generally riding on Interstates, local arterials, and local roads through subdivisions. She does not get taken off road.
It’s only gasoline. How you want to consume it is up to you
Absurd. Tire pressure that high is dangerous and can cause all sorts of problems. At the very least, the increased vibration can loosen every screw in the vehicle.
___Since you have no idea and have never been there, leave it up to those that have hundreds of thousands of miles at 20% above MAX sidewall to tell you differently. Is it worth 2 - 3 mpg’s? It is to me but obviously not to you. After all, it’s only gasoline from crude, CO2 or GHG emissions let alone more NOx, HC, CO, and PM
05 EX I-4cyl auto with just over 10,000 on odo. Mileage has decreased to 27.4 with mixed driving (2 lane 45-55 MPH 4 stop signs, 8 traffic lights on average commute one way) Cold weather playing a role. Mileage is down from 30. I run front tires at Honda spec of 32psi front and 30 rear. Interesting comments about the high tire pressures.
Ridiculous. Here is the proof, for all to see, that the internet is a fount of misinformation from self-styled "experts".
What???
BTW, you are obviously not aware that the Accord is a low emissions vehicle.
Is that why I picked up my PZEV based Accord (only LX/EX I4 Auto’s from the 5 Clean and some bordering) from MA. vs. the std. LEV-II that was available at the Honda dealership just 1.5 miles down the street here in IL.? Did you know the PZEV based Accord’s and HCH-I’s are Tier II/Bin 2 rated vs. Tier II/Bin 3 and 4 for most other PZEV’s? I must not have known about this before I purchased the cleanest smog emissions based, non-EV automobile on the continent
You don’t want to know what her lifetime FE is as that would scare you
..at this juncture, calling attention to my AcDuTra AZ trip earlier this year (Post#111 refers), hopefully will sort of re-define my awe for the fuel efficiency potential of the standard VTEC V-6.........
..seasons best (to foamers/non-foamers alike) ..ez..
Just went from Sacramento to Orange County and back. 38.7 from Sacramento to Bakersfield averaging 69MPH. Reset the trip computer as I hit LA and got 45.1 from there to Irvine (65 miles). Overall average was 34.9 from Sacramento to Irvine, which included a day of city driving (trip computer said 35.1). The Grapevine pretty much killed my good average :-)
Trip back was disastrous... horrible headwind all the way back... and I was driving 80 instead of 70... average was 31.5.
So... looks like highway mileage could vary from 31 to 45... WOW
Well Ramida, your mileage pretty much mimics that of my other half. She drives the 4cyl AT EX to work every day and it's probably 75% freeway with no traffic. I can never figure out why her mileage is so different than mine. Having run a few economy runs, I can share a few secrets. #1 and most important, keep your foot absolutely STILL on the accelerator. DON'T use cruise control, since it's actually moving the accelerator up and down constantly to maintain a steady speed. I've demonstrated this to lots of people, the most memorable was to a friend of mine with a motorhome with a 454. I went to Sturgis with him a couple years ago and he's lazy, and rich, and it's his motorhome, so he drives with the cruise control. He got 8 MPG with it and when I drove, I got 12 MPG. Another thing I noticed with the Accord... keep it under 70 MPH. It's a pretty slippery car, but wind resistance becomes exponential as you go faster.
If your 06 Accord is anything like my 03 Odyssey and most new vehicles from other manufacturers as well, vehicles tend to increase mileage during their break-in period. my guess is: 1). you will see improvement up through 2500 or perhaps more, 2). you are potentially seeing some effects of winter fuel composition/formulation, 3). if you are in a cold climate, you're using more fuel - this is natural i believe for a internal combustion engine, 4). check your tire inflation pressure, 5). observe your max speed... MPG ratings are generally done under controlled conditions closer to 45 or 55MPH, than 70-80 and at constant speed.
EPA MPG ratings are done on a dynomometer, not actual driving - they're only estimates based on lab results. ramida's engine is still running-in and will continue to do so through the first 5,000 miles before meaningful fuel mileage results are obtained. To a progressively lesser degree, mileage will continue to improve on out through 18,000+ miles. The 60% city and hilly terrain will definitely impact fuel usage. People refuse to take that into consideration. Mileage stats should be done over flat terrain and two tankfuls measured: urban driving on one and highway driving on the other. Mixed driving tell us NOTHING. It would've been nice had ramida indicated whether he/she purchased a model with the 4 or 6 cylinder engine, too. In short, ramida's report mixed too many variables, with too little information. No conclusions can be drawn about the health of the engine, though I suspect everything's fine.
haefr, I disagree with your assessment that Accord mileage results are not meaningful for the first 5000 miles. I have kept records of the 128 times I have filled the tank of my 2003 Accord V6 AT coupe. I will include a link to the mileage chart. All miles driven in Seattle area with a consistent driving pattern. I can conclude that any 'break-in' effect is only 1 mpg. That effect is dwarfed by all the other factors affecting mileage. These factors are: - ambient temperature/seasonal factors /winter gas formula - average trip length (% of miles driven on cold engine) - Traffic situation (highway/city, stop and go/light traffic) - Driving style / heavy acceleration, driving 70 mph or more - vehicle maintenance / tires / gross vehicle weight
Comments
-------- I always thought and practiced checking the transmission fluid level with the engine always ON, no?....
*Think hydraulically controlled manual transmission (mainshaft, secondary shaft, yolk actuated sliding transfer gears, and real synchronizers) with a torque converter instead of a manual clutch, and you've just conceptually summarized Honda's automatic transmission design philosophy. When several American auto manufacturers in the '30s began playing around with the notion of semi-automatic and automatic transmissions, they all tried the approach that Honda uses, but couldn't get it to work reliably. GM tried something different. They dusted off the old Ford Model T dual range planetary gearset transmission (two levers controlling internal brake bands and the clutch only had to be used to get the tin-lizzy off from a dead stop - "Any damned fool can drive a Model T" went one advertsing slogan.), added a third range for four speeds forward, and bolted a fluid coupling to it in place of a manual clutch. That's how the Hydramatic transmission was born. (Well, that and a lot of development blood, sweat, and tears . . .) After WW-II, other makers substituted a torque converter for addded efficiency (dropping at least one gear range in the process for simplicity and cost savings) and that's where the majority of automatics worldwide stand to this day, though now the minimum number of forward gears is back to at least four or more, and some Mercedes automatic transmissions go to seven.
I do know what's the DISADVANTAGE.... Hard shifting, and more jerky driving.
..circa 27 consistently in/around the state capital.......
..best ever was just over 39: big-time flat-[non-permissible content removed] Arizona desert: 2200 rpm(65), cruise, 6th gear overdrive, fuel stops adjacent I-8 - - - Gila Bend to Yuma last month.
..at odo 5500, I regret not buying Honda sooner (two prior Toyotas)
all the best, ez........
I was just wondering, what is the significance in the way Honda has been building its own transmissions, what's the practical advantage for us, drivers, or what is Honda claiming it to be -- longer lasting (doesn't seem so), smoother (not)... What, then?
I really have to check into it. Problem is, the one who rides the new car is my wife... I drive the 10 years old car.
Isn't life beautiful (for the wife or sucker husband)?
29 miles to a gallon 60%highway 40%city
Tow ratings are given partly due to the way the engine and transmission can handle pulling said weight. Another problem you need to consider is frame damage...the unibody Honda Pilot has more horsepower than the Explorer or old Blazer, yet is only able to tow 3,500 pounds, versus 5,000 + lbs for the body on frame trucks. The Accord's unibody frame is not made to handle such stresses under towing, even if the engine could handle it. This is why you used to see old "body on frame" Crown Vic and Vista Cruiser station wagons with big trailers. It isn't due to the engine as much as how the frame of the car is designed. Most cars today (exception of Crown Vic/Town Car/Grand Marquis and the like) are unibody cars, like the Pilot, and cannot tow such heavy things without causing problems.
It won't be safe to do so in ANY unibody car with a tow rating of 1,000 pounds.
Hope this info finds good ears!
thegrad
The tires have 40PSI in them. I still have the original tires on the car as well. I haven't had tires last so long on my prior vehicles. Has anyone else experienced this?
I am sure I could help you improve on the mileage front a bit but you have to want to change your driving habits. There is no free lunch unfortunately
About the OEM Michelin’s. I run at 50 #’s and still have 7 - 8/32 left after 33K miles on an 05 EX-L w/ NAVI.
Good Luck
Wayne R. Gerdes
the grad
The simple answer is no. Burst pressure for today’s 44 #’s max sidewall tires are in the 125 + psi range.
Good Luck
Wayne R. Gerdes
..seriously now, isn't your ride quality - at 50 PSIG - pretty much degraded? To my way of thinking, you must be a foamer....using TP like that.........
..but your posts ARE interesting....
..ez..
:P
No, I hate riding around on sand. I have shorter stopping distances, longer tire life with a superior wear pattern, and better turn in. I have a harsher ride but I am generally riding on Interstates, local arterials, and local roads through subdivisions. She does not get taken off road.
It’s only gasoline. How you want to consume it is up to you
Good Luck
Wayne R. Gerdes
___Since you have no idea and have never been there, leave it up to those that have hundreds of thousands of miles at 20% above MAX sidewall to tell you differently. Is it worth 2 - 3 mpg’s? It is to me but obviously not to you. After all, it’s only gasoline from crude, CO2 or GHG emissions let alone more NOx, HC, CO, and PM
___Good Luck
___Wayne R. Gerdes
BTW, you are obviously not aware that the Accord is a low emissions vehicle.
Ridiculous. Here is the proof, for all to see, that the internet is a fount of misinformation from self-styled "experts".
What???
BTW, you are obviously not aware that the Accord is a low emissions vehicle.
Is that why I picked up my PZEV based Accord (only LX/EX I4 Auto’s from the 5 Clean and some bordering) from MA. vs. the std. LEV-II that was available at the Honda dealership just 1.5 miles down the street here in IL.? Did you know the PZEV based Accord’s and HCH-I’s are Tier II/Bin 2 rated vs. Tier II/Bin 3 and 4 for most other PZEV’s? I must not have known about this before I purchased the cleanest smog emissions based, non-EV automobile on the continent
You don’t want to know what her lifetime FE is as that would scare you
Good Luck
Wayne R. Gerdes
...I think you get my drift. Let it go, Joe.
..best, ez..
Another reason your FE will always languish by comparison. Unwilling or the inability to learn
Good Luck
Wayne R. Gerdes
..seasons best (to foamers/non-foamers alike) ..ez..
:P
Happy holidays...good will towards men...and all that stuff.
Trip back was disastrous... horrible headwind all the way back... and I was driving 80 instead of 70... average was 31.5.
So... looks like highway mileage could vary from 31 to 45... WOW
Excellent stats and nice job!
Good Luck
Wayne R. Gerdes
Driving condition: 60%-40% mixed city-highway driving; 70% flat, 30% mildly hilly terrain
1st full tank:
MPG -- 23.9
2nd full tank:
MPG -- 24.3
Disappointed, ramida
I can conclude that any 'break-in' effect is only 1 mpg. That effect is dwarfed by all the other factors affecting mileage.
These factors are:
- ambient temperature/seasonal factors /winter gas formula
- average trip length (% of miles driven on cold engine)
- Traffic situation (highway/city, stop and go/light traffic)
- Driving style / heavy acceleration, driving 70 mph or more
- vehicle maintenance / tires / gross vehicle weight
http://home.comcast.net/~icepax/Isblog/Graphics/AccordMileage50K.gif
Here is another chart from a 2004 V6 M6 over the first year showing the seasonal variation in Michigan totally dominating any break-in factor.
http://home.comcast.net/~icepax/Isblog/Graphics/Michigan_Accord.gif
Ramida, I would believe that the mileage you computed from the 2 tanks is representative of the mileage you get under the conditions.