I have just over 1000 miles on my 2007 CR-V EX and I am averaging about the same. 25.2 MPG overall on the last tank with A/C on. I averaged around 31 on my way into work this morning (mix of freeway and local). So far when I compare traditional measurements at the gas pump to on-board computer, the computer is slightly more conservative but pretty much the same number. The RPMs at 65MPH are right around 2K which is remarkable.
Seems a lot of things concerning the 07s are "Remarkable"!
I've not driven one yet, but from what I'm reading, when compared my 03:
A. The 07 has more a more refined interior.
B. The cabin is quieter.
C. Slightly better ride and handling.
D. Better performance from 6 additional HP and 5 speed automatic vs my 4 speed.
E. Safer, due to Stability control.
F. Spare tire is OFF the door.
G. I genuinely like the outside appearance. Grill and all!
Some have said the side rear quarter windows restrict vision. I don't understand how that would present a problem, other than possibly when backing. But, I haven't driven one!
Seems a lot of things concerning the 07s are "Remarkable"!
I've not driven one yet, but from what I'm reading, when compared my 03:
A. The 07 has more a more refined interior.
B. The cabin is quieter.
C. Slightly better ride and handling.
D. Better performance from 6 additional HP and 5 speed automatic vs my 4 speed.
E. Safer, due to Stability control.
F. Spare tire is OFF the door.
G. I genuinely like the outside appearance. Grill and all!
Some have said the side rear quarter windows restrict vision. I don't understand how that would present a problem, other than possibly when backing. But, I haven't driven one!
Really has me thinking about trading!
Kip
Except one, there is no manual transmission option. Driving Honda VTEC engine with automatic is like giving blind a flashlight. Makes no sense.
Gotta say - bought my 06 (MT) when I knew the 07 would be a redesign, and for me I think it was the right move.
Love the MT, will keep buying em until they don't make em.
NEED the rear view vision. Even added the backup sensors as we seem to back into stuff (love the sensors.)
I know on paper that the 07 has "more" space in the back. I haven't packed one but it seems to me that the 06 will handle more of our stuff. Haven't packed an 07 for a weeklong ski trip, but looks more square in the back of the 06? Not sure.
Both have VSC which is good. Would pi$$ me off if you couldn't turn it off like some toyotas.
I'm getting 29+mpg highway without a roof box 26+ with one. Seems decent.
Seems like enough power to me, but then I had a 98.
I can't get over the style over function approach to the back off the 07. For my taste why not make the window match the roof line.
6% of the US population drives a manual. The auto industry is a business, a competitive business. Honda chose to produce vehicles for this market that the majority of the car buying public buys. What a crazy idea.
You constantly say anyone who doesn't drive a manual isn't a "real" driver. I for one find that insulting. You should start your own car company, build only manuals (for you and the other "real" drivers) and then go out of business. Or even easier and less expensive, move to a country where the manual tranny predominates.
Chicken or egg really. Part of the reason manuals don't sell here is because they are not marketed. If more people knew that they could have a 4-cyl manual that offers nearly the performance of a V-6 automatic (as is often the case) while giving better gas mileage than the automatic 4-cyl and costing less money, then more people would buy them.
The thing is auto makers never promote the base model. Look at an Accord brochure every picture is of a an EX-L. More profit in the loaded models.
For years you could only get Jeeps with a manual, that did not hurt sales. Same with Miata and many other sporty cars.
In many countries automatics are very rare. Since we are all human and basically built the same the difference must be marketing - unless the U.S. is just plain lazy, but I don't think that is the case.
As far as being a real driver goes - if you can't drive a car with the transmssion that most of the world prefers, that speaks for itself. Choosing not to drive a manual (but being able to drive one) is a different matter. The dark side has prevailed.
Anyway - sad to see the manual CRV go, one more vehicle to cross off the list.
Highway speed is at a constant 64 mph with cruise control. While the dynamic mpg indicator shows over 30 mpg on the highway, I can only see less than 20 mpg durin city driving. Overall, its not bad at all. My current mileage is 1700 miles.
"As far as being a real driver goes - if you can't drive a car with the transmission that most of the world prefers, that speaks for itself. Choosing not to drive a manual (but being able to drive one) is a different matter. The dark side has prevailed."
Couldn't give me an automatic until I got married. The new Wife couldn't/wouldn't drive a "Stick".
Traded the 2 year old '64 GTO for a New '66 Ford Fairlane 390GTA (Automatic). Really needed 2 cars, so while we were there I bought a used 61 (I think) Fairlane, 170 cubic inch 6 cylinder with 2 speed auto tranny for about $600.
Even though the '61 had a power factor of practically nothing, averaged about 16 MPG, wasn't as "FUN" to drive, and was butt ugly, there was something to be said very positive about driving that auto in heavy traffic, which was the norm.
Of the 60+ vehicles I've had, more than half have been "Stick" shifts. Last one was sold in 1996.
Now, even the "Dixon" ZTR lawn mower and Mid size Kubota farm tractor are hydrostatic drive. Don't feel like I'm any less of a man because of it, and certainly not lazy. Just shiftless! :shades:
The only V8 still hanging around is a 78 Chevy G20 van.
For many years most manual transmissions had 5 forward speeds, while automatics had only 4. The advantage here clearly went to the manual, particularly with 4-cyl engines when they produced around 100 hp.
But none of that is true today. Automatics are more efficient, offer 5-speeds and more, and of course 4-cyl engines now produce 150 hp and up.
Also different is the mileage advantage manuals once had. It's all but disappeared in most cars, and vanished completely in some.
If one likes to shift, OK. But let's recognize that in most cars this is little more than a preference.
I just gave up a manual Honda Accord for a new CR-V and I guess I should concede one advantage to the manual I hadn't realized. It requires one to pay more attention to his driving. It's less easy with a manual to let the audio system, cell phone, etc, to draw your attention away from driving.
Other than that, it's easy to see why the trend is the direction it is.
6% of the US population drives a manual. The auto industry is a business, a competitive business. Honda chose to produce vehicles for this market that the majority of the car buying public buys. What a crazy idea.
You constantly say anyone who doesn't drive a manual isn't a "real" driver. I for one find that insulting. You should start your own car company, build only manuals (for you and the other "real" drivers) and then go out of business. Or even easier and less expensive, move to a country where the manual tranny predominates.
We maybethe minority, but we ARE the car guys. Honda made a similar mistake with the 1st gen, by not offering manual in the first year and lsot sales to Subaru. Honda made the same mistake by not offering Accord V6 sedan with manual and lost sales to Mazda...
From what I see on the roads, where majority are automatic drivers, they are not driving. They are just moving. I can spot an auto driver from miles away.
Auto drivers, generally:
1) Inattentive, has no clue about his/her surroundings.
2) Distracted, does other things, such as chatting on the phone without an ear piece, drinking coffee/tea, eating, reading a book, writing a paper...
3) Has no clue that there are cars that roll backon inclines (pull up right up my behind at lights).
4) In traffic, instead of pacing and continually remain in motion would speed up and then slam on his/her brakes only to start moving again.
5) Generally has no clue ahout things automotive.
6) Has no ability to downshift before entering the turn, then to power out of a turn. All you see if a sea of brake lights as people turn. (Lesson No. 1 in driving, NEVER EVER apply brakes in the corners).
7) There are some converts that used to drive stick and switched to auto for one reason or another, but their skills are quickly fading away...
That was a lot of generalization about 95% of the population. I drive a stick because I like it. I don't think it makes me a better person or anything like that. You could ride a bike if convenience or laziness aren't factors.
That was a lot of generalization about 95% of the population. I drive a stick because I like it. I don't think it makes me a better person or anything like that. You could ride a bike if convenience or laziness aren't factors.
a) If it were not for being lazy, we would not become the most obese nation in the world.
b) I have a co-worker who is an avid cyclist. He rides his bike to work 80% of the time, except for the days when we get more than a foot of snow. Which is not rare in Buffalo. His bike is about 40 years old, has one of those 3-speed transmissions in the rear hub.
I ride my motocycle in the spring-summer-fall. He calls my ride "bike for handicapped" and calls me lazy. I don't resent that remark. Compared to him, I AM LAZY. But I am not affraid to say it out loud and admit that I am too lazy to pedal for 10 miles. (He has about the same commute). He jokes that I ride my "bike for handicapped" to the gym, which is indeed funny, as I could have skipped the gym altogether if I rode to and from work everyday.
Now, you get the AUTO drivers to admit that they are lazy.
From what I see on the roads, where majority are automatic drivers, they are not driving. They are just moving. I can spot an auto driver from miles away.
Auto drivers, generally:
1) Inattentive, has no clue about his/her surroundings. Manual or Automatic - both have their fair share of inattentive drivers
2) Distracted, does other things, such as chatting on the phone without an ear piece, drinking coffee/tea, eating, reading a book, writing a paper... Manual Drivers do the same things - and they are more of a danger to other drivers.
3) Has no clue that there are cars that roll backon inclines (pull up right up my behind at lights). A skilled driver can easily pull away without rolling back - there are many techniques for this, even a newbie manual driver can handle this situation with the hand brake. An experienced driver can handle the situation without the hand brake in all but the most extreme of situations.
4) In traffic, instead of pacing and continually remain in motion would speed up and then slam on his/her brakes only to start moving again. Jack-rabbit starts and last minute braking is hardly limited to drivers with automatics.
5) Generally has no clue about things automotive. A lot of people are clueless about automotive things - the fact that you can use a clutch hardly makes you an automotive expert.
6) Has no ability to downshift before entering the turn, then to power out of a turn. All you see if a sea of brake lights as people turn. (Lesson No. 1 in driving, NEVER EVER apply brakes in the corners). So you believe you should fly into turns, downshift, then powerslide through the turn - you my friend are a danger to others on the road. We're talking about public roads Mario, not a track.
7) There are some converts that used to drive stick and switched to auto for one reason or another, but their skills are quickly fading away... I've driven sticks off and on since I learned to drive, 34 years later I'm still quite capable with a stick. It's like riding a bike - the skill hardly fades away - the mind will fade first.
Have fun with your slush box! You obviously have no understanding of modern automatics.
Now back to the discussion on real world mileage - sorry for the interruption.
Why do you even bother to leave your house with all those "distracted" drivers who have no clue about "things automotive" and all the other foibles you mention sharing the road with you? After all you are the superior driver.
As I said since you live in a country with fake drivers, why not move to the UK or India or any of the other countries where the manual predominates and share the road with "real" drivers?
Oh and I know you are aware that not having a manual hasn't seemed to hurt the CR-Vs sales. Last time I checked it was in the top ten of all vehicles sold with sales up >30% over last year. And it gets GREAT MILEAGE.
I don't know how you guys get that good of the MPG. My daily commute is 18 miles city only and I barely get 17 MPG (no AC yet). BTW AC is pretty pathetic.
My wife recently registered a NEW MPG high for our 2005 SE! 29.5 MPG! I was impressed! It seems like the more we drive our CRV, the better the mileage gets.
As for the manual vs. automatic discussion, I don't buy into a LOT of generalizations being bantied about. I'd like to see more people learn to drive manuals, and I think it can help one to become a better driver, but bad drivers come in all forms and transmission types. For instance, my mother-in-law thinks she's a great driver because she doesn't speed and goes around corners slow, but she's hit three deer and counting and wears the brakes out on her minivan every 25,000 to 30,000 miles. (I'd never say this to her face, but one of my nicknames for her is Brake Dust.)
:P
The bottom line is, MOST people think they are great drivers, and these are the very same people who don't use their turn signals, don't turn on their headlights in the proper conditions, consistently jackrabbit start and stop, etc., etc. We just have to live with them.
LOL, Good humor... I may get a lot of flak for this but I think I am a good driver, but will admit I am guilty of many of these same things you mentioned. :surprise:
I've got an 06 and the same is happening to me. Getting closer to 30 with careful driving and no roof rack. It's kinda the holy grail to get 30 in a "SUV." It's fun to shoot for.
Cruise on 68, bursts to 72 to pass. Stay off the brakes. Use the clutch.
Just got a new CRV AWD and mpg monitor says 22 steady state at 65 on freeway which is on the low side of rating.I also have a Toyota Highlander 2wd with V6 and it registers the same MPG.Probably because a new engine is tight but one with 50K miles is broke in.The next 4 years will tell which is the better car.
With cruise control set to 70,and no air conditioner on,I got 26.4 on my display. On the way back, I had some stop and go freeway, and got 25.5. Mine is a 07 2wd EX-L. I found the display helpful as I can try different driving techniques to save gas and see how they work out. I decided against the AWD because it is heavier and after having traded my Audi A4 Quattro in, I decided I didn't really need it in California.
It's definitely nice if you can go without 4WD. We lived in Minnesota when we bought ours (we now in live in South Dakota), and while we could have gotten by without it 4WD, we've had the system engage and help us in MANY situations. My brother was completely amazed by our little car's traction, particularly during a blizzard this past spring in which he drove it. He now buys into 4WD, traction control, anti-lock, stability control, etc., etc.
My wife wanted AWD because my son lives in the mountains and once a year it snows and she does not want to have any reason to not visit grandkids.Any how my insurance went down compared to the 06 Civic I traded because CRV is safer.
I went from a 2002 Civic Si to 2005 CR-V EX (both manual) and my insurance dropped by more than $200/year.
I attributed that to lower Hp/lbs rating, since both the Si and CR-V are rated at 160 HP, but the Si only weighed in at 2700 lbs, while CR-V tips the scales at 3200 lbs.
I'm in my sixth week of ownership of my 2007 CRV EX. I recently went to N.O. from B.R. and traveled 70-80 mph and my high mpg was 31.9. I am so excited. By the way, I absolutely had the a/c on! Here in town, back and forth to work, I'm averaging 23.6. Love it. I have about 1700 miles on it now. I couldn't have picked a better SUV without the help of this board. Thanks so much.
talking about insurance, I did a quote test with Geico. I found that for my case, the price is CR-V LX 4WD < Accord SE < Nissan Altima 2.5 w/ ABS < Mazda 3 HB sTouring << Sonata GLS...
425 miles in one day, AC on 75%, 80mph on h-ways, the 1.5 hrs traffic jam getting into Chicago, heavy loaded with 3 adults, 1baby & ALL his stuffs in the trunk...at the end of the day filling 16 gal gas in the tank. this makes an avrg of 26.5 mi/gal. Exactlly as much as I filled in the morning when I reset the travel meter. Very pleased!!
In the last three weeks I've driven about 95% highway. On three fill-ups, I got 20.3, 24.1 & 24.2 MPG. My new average has moved up to a whopping 17.738! (3500 miles on it now)
I'm getting closer to hitting the 300 mile mark before needing to fill up (267 on the last one), but I'm just not there yet. I only put in 11 gallons, but the gas was inexpensive and I didn't know when I'd get my next chance to get gas. I'm not going to run out of gas just to see 300 miles.
When/if I EVER hit the 300 mile mark, I will take a pic of the tripometer (which I reset each time I fill up), and post it here. I will also try to get someone to take a pic of me jumping up and down for joy (as promised).
Please keep your numbers coming, as I am always curious to see others' statistics.
He must be going FAST to get those numbers. At 68-72 I'm getting close to 30 without anything on the roof, 26-27 in ski season. And I've got a stick which is supposed to be worse highway than the auto I think.
I usually go with the flow of the traffic and occasionally accelerate to pass slower drivers. I'd say my average speed is around 75. I'm not 100% sure about the RPM, but I think it's between 1500 & 2000. I can't swear by that. I will pay more attention to it in the future. Currently, I really only pay attention to it when I accelerate to make sure it's not outrageous.
On the first highway trip (20.3 MPG) my car was relatively empty. On the second trip I had two suitcases. On the third trip I had two suitcases plus a lot of other odds and ends. The extra weight seems to be improving the MPG...odd.
Just recorded about 27.5. A traffic jam that made a 5 hour trip six hours.
I'm convince that the true cost of an extended jam is the speeding you do once you are clear of it. Oddly the jam itself doesn't hurt my mileage as much as I would think.
Picked up my new EX-L 2WD on Monday and did my first "fill-up" this morning. With about 50-50 city, suburban driving I got 25.2. I am very pleasantly surprised. My highway speeds were around 70mph.
I just got home. My first tank on my trip was as reported 27.5. My intermediate 1/2 tank - mountainous driving, lot of revs in 2 and 3rd gear came in at 24.5.
On the way back - pure highway - but I took the "old road" instead of the interstate to avoid an anticipated traffic jam - I measured 30.5 - first time ever at or above 30.
Interstate speeds 68-72, occasional up to 80. On the "old road" - 55-60 with the occassional double clutch downshift into 4th (or 3rd) to tap into the power to pass.
Comments
I've not driven one yet, but from what I'm reading, when compared my 03:
A. The 07 has more a more refined interior.
B. The cabin is quieter.
C. Slightly better ride and handling.
D. Better performance from 6 additional HP and 5 speed automatic vs my 4 speed.
E. Safer, due to Stability control.
F. Spare tire is OFF the door.
G. I genuinely like the outside appearance. Grill and all!
Some have said the side rear quarter windows restrict vision. I don't understand how that would present a problem, other than possibly when backing. But, I haven't driven one!
Really has me thinking about trading!
Kip
I've not driven one yet, but from what I'm reading, when compared my 03:
A. The 07 has more a more refined interior.
B. The cabin is quieter.
C. Slightly better ride and handling.
D. Better performance from 6 additional HP and 5 speed automatic vs my 4 speed.
E. Safer, due to Stability control.
F. Spare tire is OFF the door.
G. I genuinely like the outside appearance. Grill and all!
Some have said the side rear quarter windows restrict vision. I don't understand how that would present a problem, other than possibly when backing. But, I haven't driven one!
Really has me thinking about trading!
Kip
Except one, there is no manual transmission option. Driving Honda VTEC engine with automatic is like giving blind a flashlight. Makes no sense.
Love the MT, will keep buying em until they don't make em.
NEED the rear view vision. Even added the backup sensors as we seem to back into stuff (love the sensors.)
I know on paper that the 07 has "more" space in the back. I haven't packed one but it seems to me that the 06 will handle more of our stuff. Haven't packed an 07 for a weeklong ski trip, but looks more square in the back of the 06? Not sure.
Both have VSC which is good. Would pi$$ me off if you couldn't turn it off like some toyotas.
I'm getting 29+mpg highway without a roof box 26+ with one. Seems decent.
Seems like enough power to me, but then I had a 98.
I can't get over the style over function approach to the back off the 07. For my taste why not make the window match the roof line.
my two cents.
Mark
You constantly say anyone who doesn't drive a manual isn't a "real" driver. I for one find that insulting. You should start your own car company, build only manuals (for you and the other "real" drivers) and then go out of business. Or even easier and less expensive, move to a country where the manual tranny predominates.
The thing is auto makers never promote the base model. Look at an Accord brochure every picture is of a an EX-L. More profit in the loaded models.
For years you could only get Jeeps with a manual, that did not hurt sales. Same with Miata and many other sporty cars.
In many countries automatics are very rare. Since we are all human and basically built the same the difference must be marketing - unless the U.S. is just plain lazy, but I don't think that is the case.
As far as being a real driver goes - if you can't drive a car with the transmssion that most of the world prefers, that speaks for itself. Choosing not to drive a manual (but being able to drive one) is a different matter. The dark side has prevailed.
Anyway - sad to see the manual CRV go, one more vehicle to cross off the list.
Anyone else got mpg to report?
Couldn't give me an automatic until I got married. The new Wife couldn't/wouldn't drive a "Stick".
Traded the 2 year old '64 GTO for a New '66 Ford Fairlane 390GTA (Automatic). Really needed 2 cars, so while we were there I bought a used 61 (I think) Fairlane, 170 cubic inch 6 cylinder with 2 speed auto tranny for about $600.
Even though the '61 had a power factor of practically nothing, averaged about 16 MPG, wasn't as "FUN" to drive, and was butt ugly, there was something to be said very positive about driving that auto in heavy traffic, which was the norm.
Of the 60+ vehicles I've had, more than half have been "Stick" shifts. Last one was sold in 1996.
Now, even the "Dixon" ZTR lawn mower and Mid size Kubota farm tractor are hydrostatic drive. Don't feel like I'm any less of a man because of it, and certainly not lazy. Just shiftless! :shades:
The only V8 still hanging around is a 78 Chevy G20 van.
Priorities change.
Kip
But none of that is true today. Automatics are more efficient, offer 5-speeds and more, and of course 4-cyl engines now produce 150 hp and up.
Also different is the mileage advantage manuals once had. It's all but disappeared in most cars, and vanished completely in some.
If one likes to shift, OK. But let's recognize that in most cars this is little more than a preference.
I just gave up a manual Honda Accord for a new CR-V and I guess I should concede one advantage to the manual I hadn't realized. It requires one to pay more attention to his driving. It's less easy with a manual to let the audio system, cell phone, etc, to draw your attention away from driving.
Other than that, it's easy to see why the trend is the direction it is.
You constantly say anyone who doesn't drive a manual isn't a "real" driver. I for one find that insulting. You should start your own car company, build only manuals (for you and the other "real" drivers) and then go out of business. Or even easier and less expensive, move to a country where the manual tranny predominates.
We maybethe minority, but we ARE the car guys. Honda made a similar mistake with the 1st gen, by not offering manual in the first year and lsot sales to Subaru. Honda made the same mistake by not offering Accord V6 sedan with manual and lost sales to Mazda...
From what I see on the roads, where majority are automatic drivers, they are not driving. They are just moving. I can spot an auto driver from miles away.
Auto drivers, generally:
1) Inattentive, has no clue about his/her surroundings.
2) Distracted, does other things, such as chatting on the phone without an ear piece, drinking coffee/tea, eating, reading a book, writing a paper...
3) Has no clue that there are cars that roll backon inclines (pull up right up my behind at lights).
4) In traffic, instead of pacing and continually remain in motion would speed up and then slam on his/her brakes only to start moving again.
5) Generally has no clue ahout things automotive.
6) Has no ability to downshift before entering the turn, then to power out of a turn. All you see if a sea of brake lights as people turn. (Lesson No. 1 in driving, NEVER EVER apply brakes in the corners).
7) There are some converts that used to drive stick and switched to auto for one reason or another, but their skills are quickly fading away...
Have fun with your slush box!
BINGO. They just cover it up with excuses such as traffic and conviniences...
a) If it were not for being lazy, we would not become the most obese nation in the world.
b) I have a co-worker who is an avid cyclist. He rides his bike to work 80% of the time, except for the days when we get more than a foot of snow. Which is not rare in Buffalo. His bike is about 40 years old, has one of those 3-speed transmissions in the rear hub.
I ride my motocycle in the spring-summer-fall. He calls my ride "bike for handicapped" and calls me lazy. I don't resent that remark. Compared to him, I AM LAZY. But I am not affraid to say it out loud and admit that I am too lazy to pedal for 10 miles. (He has about the same commute). He jokes that I ride my "bike for handicapped" to the gym, which is indeed funny, as I could have skipped the gym altogether if I rode to and from work everyday.
Now, you get the AUTO drivers to admit that they are lazy.
Auto drivers, generally:
1) Inattentive, has no clue about his/her surroundings.
Manual or Automatic - both have their fair share of inattentive drivers
2) Distracted, does other things, such as chatting on the phone without an ear piece, drinking coffee/tea, eating, reading a book, writing a paper...
Manual Drivers do the same things - and they are more of a danger to other drivers.
3) Has no clue that there are cars that roll backon inclines (pull up right up my behind at lights).
A skilled driver can easily pull away without rolling back - there are many techniques for this, even a newbie manual driver can handle this situation with the hand brake. An experienced driver can handle the situation without the hand brake in all but the most extreme of situations.
4) In traffic, instead of pacing and continually remain in motion would speed up and then slam on his/her brakes only to start moving again.
Jack-rabbit starts and last minute braking is hardly limited to drivers with automatics.
5) Generally has no clue about things automotive.
A lot of people are clueless about automotive things - the fact that you can use a clutch hardly makes you an automotive expert.
6) Has no ability to downshift before entering the turn, then to power out of a turn. All you see if a sea of brake lights as people turn. (Lesson No. 1 in driving, NEVER EVER apply brakes in the corners).
So you believe you should fly into turns, downshift, then powerslide through the turn - you my friend are a danger to others on the road. We're talking about public roads Mario, not a track.
7) There are some converts that used to drive stick and switched to auto for one reason or another, but their skills are quickly fading away...
I've driven sticks off and on since I learned to drive, 34 years later I'm still quite capable with a stick. It's like riding a bike - the skill hardly fades away - the mind will fade first.
Have fun with your slush box!
You obviously have no understanding of modern automatics.
Now back to the discussion on real world mileage - sorry for the interruption.
As I said since you live in a country with fake drivers, why not move to the UK or India or any of the other countries where the manual predominates and share the road with "real" drivers?
Oh and I know you are aware that not having a manual hasn't seemed to hurt the CR-Vs sales. Last time I checked it was in the top ten of all vehicles sold with sales up >30% over last year. And it gets GREAT MILEAGE.
You're not making much progress on the CR-V or the 07 CR-V forum. Might want to expand some more!
Kip
Like my friend with the Miata. He enjoys an occasional blast along the back roads, shifting gears, and as he says, "I must be impressing somebody".
I asked him if he ever drives it into Atlanta! He gave me that deer in the head light look and said, "What? Are you nuts?" :sick:
Kip
BTW AC is pretty pathetic.
Thanks for getting the topic back on track Bhw77.
Anyone else got mpg to report?
As for the manual vs. automatic discussion, I don't buy into a LOT of generalizations being bantied about. I'd like to see more people learn to drive manuals, and I think it can help one to become a better driver, but bad drivers come in all forms and transmission types. For instance, my mother-in-law thinks she's a great driver because she doesn't speed and goes around corners slow, but she's hit three deer and counting and wears the brakes out on her minivan every 25,000 to 30,000 miles. (I'd never say this to her face, but one of my nicknames for her is Brake Dust.)
:P
The bottom line is, MOST people think they are great drivers, and these are the very same people who don't use their turn signals, don't turn on their headlights in the proper conditions, consistently jackrabbit start and stop, etc., etc. We just have to live with them.
:sick:
Cruise on 68, bursts to 72 to pass. Stay off the brakes. Use the clutch.
Harv
have a Toyota Highlander 2wd with V6 and it registers the same MPG.Probably because a new engine is tight but one with 50K miles is broke in.The next 4 years will tell
which is the better car.
:shades:
and once a year it snows and she does not want to have any reason to not visit grandkids.Any how my insurance went
down compared to the 06 Civic I traded because CRV is safer.
That's just us.
I attributed that to lower Hp/lbs rating, since both the Si and CR-V are rated at 160 HP, but the Si only weighed in at 2700 lbs, while CR-V tips the scales at 3200 lbs.
local traffic under stop and go condition, avg speed <10mph, mpg is 17.5.
All the numbers are from the mpg estimator in the dashboard. I'm pretty happy.
Car's displayed MPG was right on with the math I do for each tank.
Watching that little MPG bar slide back and forth has definitely altered my driving habits....for the better.
You must devide the miles by the # of gallons. Price or cost does not reflect mileage.
In the last three weeks I've driven about 95% highway. On three fill-ups, I got 20.3, 24.1 & 24.2 MPG. My new average has moved up to a whopping 17.738! (3500 miles on it now)
I'm getting closer to hitting the 300 mile mark before needing to fill up (267 on the last one), but I'm just not there yet. I only put in 11 gallons, but the gas was inexpensive and I didn't know when I'd get my next chance to get gas. I'm not going to run out of gas just to see 300 miles.
When/if I EVER hit the 300 mile mark, I will take a pic of the tripometer (which I reset each time I fill up), and post it here. I will also try to get someone to take a pic of me jumping up and down for joy (as promised).
Please keep your numbers coming, as I am always curious to see others' statistics.
Kip
On the first highway trip (20.3 MPG) my car was relatively empty. On the second trip I had two suitcases. On the third trip I had two suitcases plus a lot of other odds and ends. The extra weight seems to be improving the MPG...odd.
I'm convince that the true cost of an extended jam is the speeding you do once you are clear of it. Oddly the jam itself doesn't hurt my mileage as much as I would think.
2006 EX MT.
On the way back - pure highway - but I took the "old road" instead of the interstate to avoid an anticipated traffic jam - I measured 30.5 - first time ever at or above 30.
Interstate speeds 68-72, occasional up to 80. On the "old road" - 55-60 with the occassional double clutch downshift into 4th (or 3rd) to tap into the power to pass.
Nice.
2006 EX MT - 16,000 miles.