I'm lucky if I get 24 on the highway. Usually get 18-20 in town driving - lots of stop and go. But, only have 1000 miles, and the roads are far from smooth around here so I'm hoping the numbers improve over time.
My 2007 EX-L 2WD (16K miles), typically averages 28mpg on the 252 mile trip from Humboldt County to San Francisco. This first 150 miles is mountainous, and my mileage is in the 26mpg range. Once out of the mountains, it’s getting 30+ this is at 70 mph. In local driving (there is no city driving here) I get 24-25.
I tested a CRV a week or so ago, reset the mpg and drove home, 1/2 highway, 1/2 back roads, a few lights and stop signs and got about 24.5mpg. Picking a new one up tomorrow, so I'll check it out over the next few weeks. :shades:
In making the decision on buying a diesel vs gasoline powered vehicle one must consider not only the price of the diesel fuel but also the higher fuel milage the diesel will get. For the most part diesel is about 20 to 25% higher then regular gasoline currently (21 April 2008). But if the diesel provides 30 to 40% increase in MPG then the diesel is the way to go.
If the gas CR-V is getting 27 MPG on the highway (which it might) then it is reasonable to expect the diesel to get about 37 MPG (the MD E320 diesel is rates at and gets for real 37MPG). That is a 37% increase in MPG with the diesel only costing about 20 to 25% more.
That's very true, but a lot of us who remember the 70's can't forget what happened. As gas prices rose, diesel fuel was about half as much as regular gasoline. Car makers started producing diesel engine cars more and more to capitalize on the increasing market. All of a sudden, diesel pulled even with gas prices and then went higher....don't know why, maybe due to the increased demand, supply fell and prices went up or maybe retailers saw a way to make a profit. Either way the result was that you couldn't give away a diesel car. My buddy had a mid 80's VW diesel Rabbit and he wanted to get rid of it in 1990 and called "car cash" and the guy on the other end of the phone, in his best Brooklyn accent said "it's woitless" (worthless).
Not saying that's going to happen here, but a lot of us have been bitten before.
Hi, I am glad I read your message. I totally support you in getting terrible mileage. I get 13-14mpg in the city. That is my usual mpg that drives me crazy. I took my CRV SE 2005 to several dealerships and they said that is nothing wrong with my car, they just didn't care about this problem. I have seen several people having SE model having problems with MPG as well. Thanks, Peter
>"If the gas CR-V is getting 27 MPG on the highway (which it might) then it is reasonable to expect the diesel to get about 37 MPG (the MD E320 diesel is rates at and gets for real 37MPG). That is a 37% increase in MPG with the diesel only costing about 20 to 25% more. "
On the Our 03 CR-V, 4WD, 4speed automatic generally gets 29-30 mpg with the cruise set at 2500 RPM. (68 mph). I would certainly think the newer 5 speeds would get at least that. To get 37% higher the diesel would have to get in the 40MPG range.
Civic and Corolla owners consistently report 40+ mpg on the road when driven 65-70 MPH. For a diesel to break even at 25% increased fuel cost. A diesel Civic would have to get 50+mpg just to break even on the fuel cost alone. Then the initial buying cost and maintenance figure in also.
There are also other things to consider along with the extra initial cost, maintenance and so forth. Diesel cars are having a hard time meeting the EPA requirements and there may be extra expense there also. Don't know what VW is doing right now, but they stopped their diesel sales here, a couple of years ago. Could be they are selling once again, but maybe not!
One thing you can count on. If/when diesel cars become more popular, the demand will go up for the fuel, and probably so will prices.
Here are some quotes from Edmunds when comparing the Tahoe Hybred to the E320 diesel: "But these vehicles are more reasonable when you consider that the four-wheel-drive 2008 Chevrolet Tahoe Hybrid earns an EPA rating of 20 mpg city/20 mpg highway, and the all-wheel-drive 2008 Mercedes-Benz GL320 CDI rates 18 mpg city/24 mpg highway. This works out to a combined rating of 20 mpg for both SUVs — a big achievement for a full-size sport-utility."......."Still, these measures are only good enough to certify the Benz for sale in 42 U.S. states."......."We drive at a 70-mph pace on a 130-mile loop from the coastal plain in Santa Monica to the 3,500-foot pass at the crest of the Tehachapi mountains and back, and the Tahoe averages 21.9 mpg"......."And with its combined fuel-economy average of 23.9 mpg offering a substantial margin over the Tahoe's 20.9 mpg, the Benz easily wins our fuel-economy test, too"...."Of course a comparison of fuel prices equalizes the game a little. During this test, we pay $3.579 per gallon for the Chevy's 87-octane gas, while the Benz's diesel costs us $4.179 per gallon. But because of the GL320's lower fuel consumption, we actually spent only a dollar more overall to fill its tank at the end of our test."
This is an interesting article. Their test involved gas at $3.57 and diesel at $4.17. And fuel, for the test, cost about the same for boyh cars. In our area Gas is $3.45 and diesel is $4.25. So the diesel would cost more to fuel here. Still, not enough difference to make a difference. However, what will the extra cost involve to be able to drive the E320 in all 50 states? So we do need to consider other costs.
I personally would not be the first kid on the block with a diesel Honda or anything else. There will be bugs to work out and prices to settle down.
Just got a 2008 CRV EX-L. Seem to be getting about 24MPG on commute from NJ to NYC. Alot of the driving is fast (75-80) to stay with traffic. Do you think it wll go up after it breaks in, when I change to synthetic oil, etc? Hoping for 26-27.
I have a new EX-L also, I've filled it up twice after the dealer's initial fillup. I drive 30 miles back and forth to the train station on Long Island, about 90% highway driving. The first fillup I got about 27 mpg and the second about 28.5. The indicated mpg is about .4 mpg higher than actual. All-in-all I'm VERY pleased with the mileage. I only have about 1100 miles on it now and expect the mileage to get somewhat higher as I approach 10K miles and make the switch to synthetic at 4K.
>"Just got a 2008 CRV EX-L. Seem to be getting about 24MPG on commute from NJ to NYC. Alot of the driving is fast (75-80) to stay with traffic. Do you think it wll go up after it breaks in, when I change to synthetic oil, etc? Hoping for 26-27."
The CR-V is pushing a lot of air at 80 mph. You might try running 70 as a max speed and be gentle with the throttle.
What is the non freeway traffic like?
FWIW: Our CR-V gets around 24 at 80, 27 at 70 and near 30 at 65.
2nd fillup got 25 mpg. Really held back this morning, to around 70 mph, and the display says I did about 27.5, which is great. Tough goin 70 when most are goin 80+ during the early rush hour headed to NYC. But was great to see the improvement. When it breaks in, maybe I'll do even better. Love the car, and the power that i read about being too weak is just fine. More power than the Civic i traded in.
>"Tough goin 70 when most are goin 80+ during the early rush hour headed to NYC. But was great to see the improvement. "
Congratulations! You got a good one!
Going from ( original) 24 to 27.5 mpg is about a 15% increase in mileage. Not bad at all ! ! :shades:
Looking at it another way. Say gas is $3.50 per gallon. And you are driving 70 at 27.5 mpg. At 80 and 24 mpg, you are "Effectively" paying 15% more to drive the same distance, OR $4.02 per gallon.
Even more could be saved at 65 mpg. Your increased mpg at 70 vs 80 is about the same as my CR-V. So, no reason to think you might not get that 30+ mpg at 60-65 mph.
A 30 mile drive at 70 mph will take about 25.5 minutes. At 80 mph it will take about 22.7 minutes. I personally would not care to spend "effectively" $4.02 per gallon for gas, to save 3 minutes. Something else to consider is the possibility of getting a ticket when driving 80. How much would that cost for the ticket and possibly increased insurance premiums add to the cost of driving?
Wouldn't it be nice to be able to save 15% on the cost of everything? House note, car note, food, healthcare, insurance, etc.. If we earn 15% more, the IRS gets a piece of it. If we save 15%, the savings are ours to keep.
How about this. Let's say you paid $22k for your CR-V. Would it have been worth spending 3 additional minutes to save 15% more? In that case you would have paid $18,700 instead of $22,000.
Of course we can't save 15% on everything, but we can certainly save a bunch, if we simply slow down a bit.
While I'm not stupid enough to to be a hazard and drive 50 in a 70 zone, while most are driving 80, it bothers me NOT to drive 65 to 70. I get in the RH lane and let them do battle in the rest.
I'm looking for '08 CRV now. Being an owner of '03 CRV model for two years. For a new body '08 model sticker says city 20 miles per gallon, highway - 25. How you guys getting 30 miles ? Are you talking about 4x4 version ? In addition, my old Honda was assembled in Japan having 100% Japanese parts. Model '08 has assembled in Ohio having engine made in USA. That is only two points now stopping me to trade in my Toyota RAV4, 2004 ( 100% Japanese car).
I have an '07 2WD and get 30MPG only on trips that are mostly highway, such as L.A. to Santa Barbara here in California. Speed is usually around 70MPH. Around town driving we get 20-21MPG. So far our overall avg is around 24-25MPG. We have an early '07 that was assembled in Japan. The other mfgrs, like Nissan and Toyota don't seem to have a problem with their products being built in the USA. I think it has more to do with the assembly process than whose hands are actually doing the work. If the process is detailed enough almost anyone can put together a quality product.
I bought an '08 AWD EX-L about a month ago. My driving is mostly highway, about 90%. I'm gettng mid 28 MPG with my car. I bought mine in NY and it is 100% Japanese made. I don't think there's any real difference between the US and Japanese model quality. If you drive primarily on the highway and know how to conseerve fuel, you should easily get 27 MPG. The build location is not a factor in my opinion. Get the car!
For 2008, the EPA changed the formula for estimating mileage. They've gone from over estimating mileage for most drivers to probably under estimating it for (at least) conservative drivers.
My 2008 EX-L now has 2100 miles. Mileage around 26mpg every time, 80% highway, trying to hold back speed. No complaints from me, when you can get what sticker says. maybe it will get a little better over time. Oil life still at 90%, should be dropping to 80% any day now. Thats pretty amazing. Love this vehicle. Only wish it had a third row seat option to squeeze a coulpe of extra kids in every now and then.
Me too, I'm just at 1900 miles and have been getting 28/29 MPG on 90% highway driving using criuise control at about 61 or 62 miles per hour. My oil reminder is also at 90% which kind of bothers me, I'm used to doing th intial oil change at 500 miles. But I will have patience and wail for the meter to get down to 15% or 10%.
Regarding the third row option. When I went to look for a car a couple of months ago, we were looking at the CRV and Rav4. The primarty reason I looked at the Rav4 was the 3rd row option. Well, low and behold, I found out that the 3rd row takes a lot of other stuff out of the car (leather option and all that goes with it, extra storage, etc.). But the biggest problem was that the nearest Rav4 with athe 3rd row installed (it has to be done at the factory) was still on the production line in Japan! It was a 3 month wait for one.
I am about to either buy an LX 2wd or LX 4wd. I feel like I rarely need the use of 4wd. Is there any noticable difference in gas milage between 2wd and 4wd models with the CR-V? After all, Edmunds review suggets that the 2wd performs quite well in winter any ways. I am not sure I want to pay $1k+ for 4wd especially if I have to sacrifice any gas milage. I have driven 2wd drive cars my whole life in Wisconsin and I have not had any particular problems other than getting stuck once or twice in my drive way. Any thoughts on mpg for 2wd vs 4wd? Tim
>" I am not sure I want to pay $1k+ for 4wd especially if I have to sacrifice any gas mileage."
I'm from the schools of "rather have it and not need it..." and "What if"'...!
Someone that can ring every mile from a gallon of gas will likely get 1-2 more MPG from a 2WD. Otherwise, the average driver likely won't realize any difference.
Our 03 CR-V with 4wd and outdated 4 speed automatic tranny somehow manages to get the same mileage as the "Best" I've seen posted here on the new 5 speed models, even with 2wd.
Generally speaking the 4wd will return most or all of the initial investment at resale time.
>"I feel like I rarely need the use of 4wd"
I look at 4wd as extra insurance. It just might get one of us out of a jam or even keep us from harm. The 4wd has saved us from some serious aggravation a couple of times. If it is there the few times I NEED it over the life of the car, it is worth it to me. Great deal, especially since most or all of the "premium" is returned at resale.
Being your in WI the 4WD will be easier to resell down the line. Also midwest dealerships tend to get alot more 4WD than 2WD so your choices in 2WD might be more limited. You may even find that the 4WD model can be gotten for a larger discount than the 2WD just because every dealership has a more than 1 or 2 to choose from so you can make them compeat for your business. That being said my brother in-law bought a 2WD element here in MN and he had no problems this winter.
I have an '08 CR-V 2WD EX-L now with 1500 miles on it. I am averaging 14.7 mpg in the city around Los Angeles and think this is way too low. I am driving on flat terrain, in moderate temperatures, with no A/C, proper tire pressure, no overly-rapid acceleration, and lots of coasting instead of braking. In short, I am doing everything I possibly can, and I am still getting very poor gas mileage, far short of EPA's 2008 20 mpg rating for city driving.
Note: on my one significant highway drive so far, I averaged 27mpg, which equals the EPA 2008 mpg rating for highway driving.
"I am driving on flat terrain, in moderate temperatures, with no A/C, proper tire pressure, no overly-rapid acceleration, and lots of coasting instead of braking. "
That seems REALLY low. A couple of things I did on my 2003, which went from 18 to 21 MPG in the city.
I inflated the tires to 35 PSI.
I discovered that I got better MPG by doing a brisk acceleration up to about 35 MPH, and then easing off. Doing a "granny-style" very slow acceleration actually used more fuel, because the car is more efficient at higher speeds, so the sooner you get there (at reasonable acceleration), the better. And the longer you stay at speed, the better (see below).
Plan your routes to avoid traffic and stop lights / signs.
Don't accelerate to a stop - do what you can to keep the vehicle moving, by timing lights where possible, and slowing early when you know you won't make the light.
That is too low. My wife mostly drives our '07 EX 2WD in the hilly areas of Palos Verdes and gets 19-21 MPG. Around town on flat terrain we get 22-23 MPG and on long trips we average 29-30 MPG. Your mileage is probably low enough to warrant a visit to the dealer. Could be something as simple as a clogged air filter or maybe brakes need adjustment.
I am really getting hammered buying gas lately. Getting around 25MPG consistantly on my 2008 EX-L, 80% highway. Otherwise love the car, but if they come out with a hybrid CRV, I am going to check it out. Spending over 100. a week on gas, my car alone. Don't even want to talk about my wife's Pilot!
"I am really getting hammered buying gas lately. Getting around 25MPG consistantly on my 2008 EX-L, 80% highway. Otherwise love the car, but if they come out with a hybrid CRV, I am going to check it out. "
if you are getting 25mpg and you are in a SUV, then you are doing pretty good. Quit complaining. Our neighbor is getting 21 mpg in her escape cause she's a lead foot. It 's all about how fast you drive. My husband slowed down in his Pilot and is getting 22 mpg average. Even though its a bigger engine, the RPM's are much lower. Hook up a ScanGauge to it and it will help you improve your MPG's, it did for us. google Scangauge, pay the $ 150 and you will see results.
I am not complaining, thought that what this site was for, to discuss this vehicle. Everyone knows going slower gets better mileage. Car does not need a scan gage, computer tells you what your getting as you drive.
Anyways, I was thinking the same thing as you regarding getting 2wd or 4wd. I live in an area with no snow, but the 4wd should provide additional safety on rainy days. Two friends told me to get the 4wd drive without a doubt because that is the reason for getting a crossover...to use your car's FULL potential. In addition, think of the resale value. If you plan to keep this car for more then 5 + years, get a vehicle that will keep you happy for a long time.
Sorry about that, my text didn't come across very politely. What I was trying to allude to was that it is an SUV, and we should expect MPG between 20 and 28 per the sticker. If we wanted better MPG, we all would have purchased something else. With regard to the Scangauge, there are other settings that help while driving. One of the settings is LOD (load on demand). Easy to Google to learn about it.
I purchased a 2004 EXL in Feb/08 expecting it to get MUCH better fuel economy than our '03 Pilot EXL - but that has not been the case. In the winter (Ontario) my CRV was using nearly 17 litres/100km. Now in warm weather with no a/c running, I gave a test to both vehicles for a week driving to/from work which is about 8 minutes from home. Results? CRV used 12 litres/100km, Pilot used 13 litres/100 kms. Any thoughts? We've had it checked out and nothing is "wrong" - but according to Honda stat's - it is using way too much gas. Both vehicles are automatic and we bought the CRV to save money on gas by not driving the Pilot as much but at this rate, we should be both driving Pilots! Help??!!
Currently, with inflexible US refineries - each barrel of crude produces a fixed ratio of diesel, gas and other by-products. I think it's 19 gallons of gasoline, 11 gallons of diesel, plus by products. But the demand for diesel is less elastic. Car drivers have some descretionary driving and can cut back. But in the US buses, and trucks are used more for work and are less flexible. Also emerging markets (China) have a huge percentage of new vehicles being sold are diesel. Without some change to the refining process the cost of diesel could rise faster than the cost of gasoline.
I know it has been awhile since this post, but I'm going to reply anyway - the fact that you got EPA mileage on the highway tells me nothing is wrong with your commute. Your driving obviously includes a lot of detriments to your mileage, being ALL "city." People have different ideas of what "city" driving entails, and your city driving must include lots of traffic lights, idling, and stop and go. If you get EPA ratings on the highway, your city commute is just rough on mileage, and nothing is substantially wrong with your car.
I'd double check tire pressure, REGULARLY, as this can change a lot in a small amount of time.
I purchased a 2004 EXL in Feb/08 expecting it to get MUCH better fuel economy than our '03 Pilot EXL - but that has not been the case. In the winter (Ontario) my CRV was using nearly 17 litres/100km. Now in warm weather with no a/c running, I gave a test to both vehicles for a week driving to/from work which is about 8 minutes from home. Results? CRV used 12 litres/100km, Pilot used 13 litres/100 kms. Any thoughts? We've had it checked out and nothing is "wrong" - but according to Honda stat's - it is using way too much gas. Both vehicles are automatic and we bought the CRV to save money on gas by not driving the Pilot as much but at this rate, we should be both driving Pilots! Help??!!
You have an 8 minute commute. It does not matter what you drive. You should have just kept the Pilot. Such short commute won't show difference in fuel economy.
Let me ask you this, if you have an 8 minute commute would other forms of transportation, or even a small car suffice?
I have a 4.5 mile ride to work, and even my bike, which normally gets 60 mpg is only getting 30. There is just not enough time and distance to fully warm up and get efficient.
We actually didn't sell the 03 Pilot - that's my husbands vehicle. We have dogs and so each vehicle has dog cages in it. We need the Pilot for our road trips on holidays (Luggage etc) but thought the CRV would be great for around town and for me going home to work. But I have driven both the Pilot home to work for a week and my CRV on the same route, and the Pilot used only 1 litre of gas more than the CRV. I thought with the Pilot being a V6 and much larger, that it would have been worse on gas but seemingly, it is almost identical. The information on the fuel ratings website for all vehicles, shows that the CRV should get 4 litres better/100 km of driving than the Pilot - which is why we bought it - to use it more and the Pilot less. We love the Pilot and used to drive it all the time - thought the CRV would save us gas $$ but it hasn't. Big disappointment. As for the ride to and from work - there are other routes but all have the same stop/starts. And none of them are safe for riding a bike on. I would love to ride my bicycle but it just isn't safe and you get ticketed for riding on the sidewalk. We love our Pilot and if I knew that it would get the same gas mileage, we would have two of them!
If your commute was 10 minutes longer I'd wager that your mileage difference would be more noticeable.
I used to get only 2 MPG better than our 3.5L 2000 Honda Odyssey... in my 4-cylinder Accord with only 130hp! The problem? I was commuting 2 total miles, with 9 stop signs in those 2 miles. I couldn't break 21 MPG.
Now that I commute 14 miles one-way, I average 27 MPG in that car. The Odyssey only did 22 MPG in that same commute.
The difference grew as the distance grew. I suspect it would for the CR-V as well, since it'd be warmed up and more effiecient.
I'm w/blueiedgod, why a 2ND SUV for around town??? Do you take your dogs to work and the grocery store? I'm not trying to be sarcastic, as easy as it would be. And like the other posters have mentioned, it takes a couple miles just for the car to warm up. Our CR-V is actually our primary vehicle and we used to have a large dog we took on trips so that was our reason for an SUV. Our secondary car is a Ford Focus because since it is our secondary car we rarely have our whole family (me, my wife and our two sons in their car seats). I'd advise you to think about getting a small sedan as a secondary vehicle on your next vehicle purchase unless you absolutely HAVE to have your dogs at all times.
We bought our Pilot new in 03. Needed something for the dogs and light duty occational towing. My wife had a Maxima at the time, which she truly loved, but it simply didn't work for her "Addiction" to yard sales and flea markets. So we got her an 03 CR-V. She drives the CR-V 12 miles to work one way. I drive the Pilot 6. She averages about 22 mpg and I average about 18. I truly expect that if we commuted the same distance, the MPG would be even closer. On the road, with me driving, the CR-V gets 29-30 and the Pilot gets 25-27 at 60-65 mph.
Of course on the up side, the CR-V cost $10K less and it has a slightly higher % of resale value. And to me, the CR-V is more "Fun" in local driving and scooting around. But the Pilot is more comfortable on the road.
I agree with dromedarius . A small sedan or hatch back would better fill the need for an economical commuter. The Honda Fit will likely be our next purchase for local driving. Wife will use that, and I will use the CR-V. Keep the Pilot for road trips. Honestly it will not save us a penny, by the time the purchase price, insurance and such are considered. But it is a good "Excuse" to buy a new car. And the way things are going, there may be some gas rationing in the future.
Back in the 70 when there were long lines at gas stations, I was driving a Dodge Colt, that got 40+ on the road. I kept 1-2 full gas cans at the house and 1-2 empty gas cans in the back of the car. When I saw a station with no lines I topped off the tank and filled the cans. Never had to wait in lines.
Just completed a one day, 13 hour, nearly 800 mile, trip from Yellowstone to Reno Nevada. We had 4 adults, the cargo compartment was filled with our travel stuff, probably 50% of the trip was at 80 MPH, 65-75 MPH for 40%, and 10% for cautious mountain driving, Altitude varied from 8,000 to 4,500 feet. A/C was used better than 80% of the time as temperatures got into the high nineties to 102 range, via the car temperature gauge, most of the time. Glad I've been using MOBIL-1 for the last 3 years.
The CRV ran great except for dead pan acceleration response in passing situations on 2 lane roads. It's okay, just allow for plenty of safety margin in the opposite lane and click off the A/C during those critical flat-out moments.
The CRV ran great except for dead pan acceleration response in passing situations on 2 lane roads. It's okay, just allow for plenty of safety margin in the opposite lane and click off the A/C during those critical flat-out moments.
If you push the throttle hard, the A/C compressor will cut out automatically to give you maximum power until you back off the throttle; no need to push the button.
The CRV ran great except for dead pan acceleration response in passing situations on 2 lane roads. It's okay, just allow for plenty of safety margin in the opposite lane and click off the A/C during those critical flat-out moments.
If you push the throttle hard, the A/C compressor will cut out automatically to give you maximum power until you back off the throttle; no need to push the button.
Yeap, OP was not pushing CR-V hard enough. The A/C cuts out when the engine is pushed. Don't be affraid to rev that puppy. It is made to rev.
Graduate and Blue, Thanks for tip about the automatic A/C cut out at full acceleration, I’ll try it out. Doing the manual A/C shut off in crunch passing situations is an old habit of mine that goes way back. Fangled techo-gadets Oh Yeah, I revved the heck out of it, to the floor boards, on most of those passing occasions. Reflecting back I believe the dead pan passing acceleration could be attributed to: 1. 900 pounds of passengers and baggage. 2.High altitudes. 3.85 Octane fuel dispensed in that beautiful Big Sky country.
The CR-V is the wife’s and she averages about 23 MPG year round running around town and work. It can vary a couple either way depending on seasons. Normal Highway MPG for us is in the 26-28 range with 87 Octane fuel.
Comments
And check out the MPG Ratings Will Drop Under EPA Proposal discussion for EPA info.
2008 EXL Navi CRV
Black on Black
If the gas CR-V is getting 27 MPG on the highway (which it might) then it is reasonable to expect the diesel to get about 37 MPG (the MD E320 diesel is rates at and gets for real 37MPG). That is a 37% increase in MPG with the diesel only costing about 20 to 25% more.
Not saying that's going to happen here, but a lot of us have been bitten before.
I am glad I read your message. I totally support you in getting terrible mileage.
I get 13-14mpg in the city. That is my usual mpg that drives me crazy. I took my CRV SE 2005 to several dealerships and they said that is nothing wrong with my car, they just didn't care about this problem. I have seen several people having SE model having problems with MPG as well.
Thanks,
Peter
On the Our 03 CR-V, 4WD, 4speed automatic generally gets 29-30 mpg with the cruise set at 2500 RPM. (68 mph). I would certainly think the newer 5 speeds would get at least that. To get 37% higher the diesel would have to get in the 40MPG range.
Civic and Corolla owners consistently report 40+ mpg on the road when driven 65-70 MPH. For a diesel to break even at 25% increased fuel cost. A diesel Civic would have to get 50+mpg just to break even on the fuel cost alone. Then the initial buying cost and maintenance figure in also.
There are also other things to consider along with the extra initial cost, maintenance and so forth. Diesel cars are having a hard time meeting the EPA requirements and there may be extra expense there also. Don't know what VW is doing right now, but they stopped their diesel sales here, a couple of years ago. Could be they are selling once again, but maybe not!
One thing you can count on. If/when diesel cars become more popular, the demand will go up for the fuel, and probably so will prices.
Here are some quotes from Edmunds when comparing the Tahoe Hybred to the E320 diesel: "But these vehicles are more reasonable when you consider that the four-wheel-drive 2008 Chevrolet Tahoe Hybrid earns an EPA rating of 20 mpg city/20 mpg highway, and the all-wheel-drive 2008 Mercedes-Benz GL320 CDI rates 18 mpg city/24 mpg highway. This works out to a combined rating of 20 mpg for both SUVs — a big achievement for a full-size sport-utility."......."Still, these measures are only good enough to certify the Benz for sale in 42 U.S. states."......."We drive at a 70-mph pace on a 130-mile loop from the coastal plain in Santa Monica to the 3,500-foot pass at the crest of the Tehachapi mountains and back, and the Tahoe averages 21.9 mpg"......."And with its combined fuel-economy average of 23.9 mpg offering a substantial margin over the Tahoe's 20.9 mpg, the Benz easily wins our fuel-economy test, too"...."Of course a comparison of fuel prices equalizes the game a little. During this test, we pay $3.579 per gallon for the Chevy's 87-octane gas, while the Benz's diesel costs us $4.179 per gallon. But because of the GL320's lower fuel consumption, we actually spent only a dollar more overall to fill its tank at the end of our test."
http://www.edmunds.com/apps/vdpcontainers/do/vdp/articleId=125645/pageNumber=1
This is an interesting article. Their test involved gas at $3.57 and diesel at $4.17. And fuel, for the test, cost about the same for boyh cars. In our area Gas is $3.45 and diesel is $4.25. So the diesel would cost more to fuel here. Still, not enough difference to make a difference. However, what will the extra cost involve to be able to drive the E320 in all 50 states? So we do need to consider other costs.
I personally would not be the first kid on the block with a diesel Honda or anything else. There will be bugs to work out and prices to settle down.
Kip
I can't verify your figures. Where did they come from?
Thanks,
Kip
Regards
The CR-V is pushing a lot of air at 80 mph. You might try running 70 as a max speed and be gentle with the throttle.
What is the non freeway traffic like?
FWIW: Our CR-V gets around 24 at 80, 27 at 70 and near 30 at 65.
Kip
Regards
Congratulations! You got a good one!
Going from ( original) 24 to 27.5 mpg is about a 15% increase in mileage. Not bad at all ! ! :shades:
Looking at it another way. Say gas is $3.50 per gallon. And you are driving 70 at 27.5 mpg. At 80 and 24 mpg, you are "Effectively" paying 15% more to drive the same distance, OR $4.02 per gallon.
Even more could be saved at 65 mpg. Your increased mpg at 70 vs 80 is about the same as my CR-V. So, no reason to think you might not get that 30+ mpg at 60-65 mph.
A 30 mile drive at 70 mph will take about 25.5 minutes. At 80 mph it will take about 22.7 minutes. I personally would not care to spend "effectively" $4.02 per gallon for gas, to save 3 minutes. Something else to consider is the possibility of getting a ticket when driving 80. How much would that cost for the ticket and possibly increased insurance premiums add to the cost of driving?
Wouldn't it be nice to be able to save 15% on the cost of everything? House note, car note, food, healthcare, insurance, etc.. If we earn 15% more, the IRS gets a piece of it. If we save 15%, the savings are ours to keep.
How about this. Let's say you paid $22k for your CR-V. Would it have been worth spending 3 additional minutes to save 15% more? In that case you would have paid $18,700 instead of $22,000.
Of course we can't save 15% on everything, but we can certainly save a bunch, if we simply slow down a bit.
While I'm not stupid enough to to be a hazard and drive 50 in a 70 zone, while most are driving 80, it bothers me NOT to drive 65 to 70. I get in the RH lane and let them do battle in the rest.
Kip
In addition, my old Honda was assembled in Japan having 100% Japanese parts. Model '08 has assembled in Ohio having engine made in USA. That is only two points now stopping me to trade in my Toyota RAV4, 2004 ( 100% Japanese car).
Around town driving we get 20-21MPG. So far our overall avg is around 24-25MPG.
We have an early '07 that was assembled in Japan. The other mfgrs, like Nissan and Toyota don't seem to have a problem with their products being built in the USA. I think it has more to do with the assembly process than whose hands are actually doing the work. If the process is detailed enough almost anyone can put together a quality product.
Regarding the third row option. When I went to look for a car a couple of months ago, we were looking at the CRV and Rav4. The primarty reason I looked at the Rav4 was the 3rd row option. Well, low and behold, I found out that the 3rd row takes a lot of other stuff out of the car (leather option and all that goes with it, extra storage, etc.). But the biggest problem was that the nearest Rav4 with athe 3rd row installed (it has to be done at the factory) was still on the production line in Japan! It was a 3 month wait for one.
Later that day I bought the CRV.
Is there any noticable difference in gas milage between 2wd and 4wd models with the CR-V?
After all, Edmunds review suggets that the 2wd performs quite well in winter any ways. I am not sure I want to pay $1k+ for 4wd especially if I have to sacrifice any gas milage. I have driven 2wd drive cars my whole life in Wisconsin and I have not had any particular problems other than getting stuck once or twice in my drive way.
Any thoughts on mpg for 2wd vs 4wd?
Tim
I'm from the schools of "rather have it and not need it..." and "What if"'...!
Someone that can ring every mile from a gallon of gas will likely get 1-2 more MPG from a 2WD. Otherwise, the average driver likely won't realize any difference.
Our 03 CR-V with 4wd and outdated 4 speed automatic tranny somehow manages to get the same mileage as the "Best" I've seen posted here on the new 5 speed models, even with 2wd.
Generally speaking the 4wd will return most or all of the initial investment at resale time.
>"I feel like I rarely need the use of 4wd"
I look at 4wd as extra insurance. It just might get one of us out of a jam or even keep us from harm. The 4wd has saved us from some serious aggravation a couple of times. If it is there the few times I NEED it over the life of the car, it is worth it to me. Great deal, especially since most or all of the "premium" is returned at resale.
Kip
Note: on my one significant highway drive so far, I averaged 27mpg, which equals the EPA 2008 mpg rating for highway driving.
Any thoughts?
That seems REALLY low. A couple of things I did on my 2003, which went from 18 to 21 MPG in the city.
I inflated the tires to 35 PSI.
I discovered that I got better MPG by doing a brisk acceleration up to about 35 MPH, and then easing off. Doing a "granny-style" very slow acceleration actually used more fuel, because the car is more efficient at higher speeds, so the sooner you get there (at reasonable acceleration), the better. And the longer you stay at speed, the better (see below).
Plan your routes to avoid traffic and stop lights / signs.
Don't accelerate to a stop - do what you can to keep the vehicle moving, by timing lights where possible, and slowing early when you know you won't make the light.
Your mileage is probably low enough to warrant a visit to the dealer. Could be something as simple as a clogged air filter or maybe brakes need adjustment.
If you slow down to 60 MPH, you might get 30 MPG.
Edna
I am not complaining, thought that what this site was for, to discuss this vehicle. Everyone knows going slower gets better mileage. Car does not need a scan gage, computer tells you what your getting as you drive.
http://autos.yahoo.com/newcars/model/overview.html;_ylt=Ag0B_7ZTvhNR38C04kqX6lQE- c78F;_ylv=3?modelId=5511
Anyways, I was thinking the same thing as you regarding getting 2wd or 4wd. I live in an area with no snow, but the 4wd should provide additional safety on rainy days. Two friends told me to get the 4wd drive without a doubt because that is the reason for getting a crossover...to use your car's FULL potential. In addition, think of the resale value. If you plan to keep this car for more then 5 + years, get a vehicle that will keep you happy for a long time.
Most of the money spent up front for the AWD will be recovered at resale time.
Mileage depends more on driving techniques than whether or not there is a diffreintial in the back.
Edna
I'd double check tire pressure, REGULARLY, as this can change a lot in a small amount of time.
You have an 8 minute commute. It does not matter what you drive. You should have just kept the Pilot. Such short commute won't show difference in fuel economy.
Let me ask you this, if you have an 8 minute commute would other forms of transportation, or even a small car suffice?
I have a 4.5 mile ride to work, and even my bike, which normally gets 60 mpg is only getting 30. There is just not enough time and distance to fully warm up and get efficient.
I used to get only 2 MPG better than our 3.5L 2000 Honda Odyssey... in my 4-cylinder Accord with only 130hp! The problem? I was commuting 2 total miles, with 9 stop signs in those 2 miles. I couldn't break 21 MPG.
Now that I commute 14 miles one-way, I average 27 MPG in that car. The Odyssey only did 22 MPG in that same commute.
The difference grew as the distance grew. I suspect it would for the CR-V as well, since it'd be warmed up and more effiecient.
:confuse:
Of course on the up side, the CR-V cost $10K less and it has a slightly higher % of resale value. And to me, the CR-V is more "Fun" in local driving and scooting around. But the Pilot is more comfortable on the road.
I agree with dromedarius . A small sedan or hatch back would better fill the need for an economical commuter. The Honda Fit will likely be our next purchase for local driving. Wife will use that, and I will use the CR-V. Keep the Pilot for road trips. Honestly it will not save us a penny, by the time the purchase price, insurance and such are considered. But it is a good "Excuse" to buy a new car.
And the way things are going, there may be some gas rationing in the future.
Back in the 70 when there were long lines at gas stations, I was driving a Dodge Colt, that got 40+ on the road. I kept 1-2 full gas cans at the house and 1-2 empty gas cans in the back of the car. When I saw a station with no lines I topped off the tank and filled the cans. Never had to wait in lines.
Friends with gas hogs were suffering.
Kip
Just completed a one day, 13 hour, nearly 800 mile, trip from Yellowstone to Reno Nevada. We had 4 adults, the cargo compartment was filled with our travel stuff, probably 50% of the trip was at 80 MPH, 65-75 MPH for 40%, and 10% for cautious mountain driving, Altitude varied from 8,000 to 4,500 feet. A/C was used better than 80% of the time as temperatures got into the high nineties to 102 range, via the car temperature gauge, most of the time. Glad I've been using MOBIL-1 for the last 3 years.
The CRV ran great except for dead pan acceleration response in passing situations on 2 lane roads. It's okay, just allow for plenty of safety margin in the opposite lane and click off the A/C during those critical flat-out moments.
MPG was right at 22.
Have fun,
Ted
If you push the throttle hard, the A/C compressor will cut out automatically to give you maximum power until you back off the throttle; no need to push the button.
If you push the throttle hard, the A/C compressor will cut out automatically to give you maximum power until you back off the throttle; no need to push the button.
Yeap, OP was not pushing CR-V hard enough. The A/C cuts out when the engine is pushed. Don't be affraid to rev that puppy. It is made to rev.
Thanks for tip about the automatic A/C cut out at full acceleration, I’ll try it out. Doing the manual A/C shut off in crunch passing situations is an old habit of mine that goes way back. Fangled techo-gadets
1. 900 pounds of passengers and baggage.
2.High altitudes.
3.85 Octane fuel dispensed in that beautiful Big Sky country.
The CR-V is the wife’s and she averages about 23 MPG year round running around town and work. It can vary a couple either way depending on seasons. Normal Highway MPG for us is in the 26-28 range with 87 Octane fuel.