We had just bought a very nice, used CR-V. 2000 SE with 113K mi. The first full tank of fuel with about a 40/60 mix of city/hwy driving yielded 26.3 mpg. We did drive the speed limit and tried to maximize the mileage but at that point it was probably achieving at least 28 mpg on the highway. I had previously owned a 99 EX, bought new and don't remember getting more than 25 hwy. at that time. Maybe it just wasn't completely broken in. Probably needed the first 100k just to loosen up enough.
Yes to both. This one just had the major maintenance package done, including plugs. Runs extremely well and is virtually mint, other than the high mileage which hasn't seemed to affect things much. There's a little bit of rust on the inside bottoms of two of the doors which will be repaired this coming week. It was a lucky find, to say the least.
Just completed a 800 miles trip to niagara falls from New Jersey on my 2008 CR-V. While going I was doing 60 to 65 mph and got 29.7 miles per gallon. while coming back doing 70 to 75 mph. overall MPG 28.1. Satisfied with CR-V's MPG.
It is a logical fallacy to assume that just because a car is achieving mileage in-line with that of other drivers on the highway that everything must be just fine with the car in city/stop&go driving. It simply does not follow, and it ignores the many variables affecting why mileage could vary between the two scenarios (including especially computer settings that dynamically adjust as the car is operated in different ways--in fact, when the Honda tech downloads data from the car, there are specific computed numbers indicating operation under highway and stop/go driving).
Sadly, this issue has nothing to do with tire pressure, though I certainly wish it were that simple and easy to correct.
I have extensively searched the Internet, and I can find no other driver reporting the 14-17mpg that I and my unfortunate colleague from San Francisco are getting. These numbers fall outside the large range for city driving provided by Honda and processed and occasionally verified by EPA (see the Final Rule published in December 2006 governing the new test methodologies). City mileage this low could only be explained by either (1) driving uphill both ways with six passengers and tons of cargo with the A/C on and an ambient temp of 40 degrees or less and the tires half full or (2) there is something incorrectly adjusted or not operating properly in the car.
My CR-V was a 2003, but driving up and down hills would approximate to less than 18 MPG in my experience. The CR-V has "hill grade logic" that uses the transmission to hold speed downhill, which will use gas. Going uphill, especially accelerating, uses LOTS of gas. Your CR-V weighs over 3500 lbs, and it REALLY hurts MPG to accelerate, and REALLY REALLY hurts MPG to accelerated uphill. The engine is small, and it compensates by going into the HIGH RPM (and high gas useage) when extra power is needed - like going up hill.
I'm sorry for your experience, but it doesn't sound like the CR-V is broken. You have a tough driving cycle for the Honda CR-V design.
My driving was in LA, but if I pushed the CR-V it would return 18 MPG. My normal was 21 MPG, but that was very carefully accelerating, planning for stop lights, etc.
Please check my original postm and you will see that I actually am driving around the coastal plain of LA. It is very flat, and I am being very careful accelerating, planning for stop lights, stop signs, **anything** that will affect mileage. Based on this, I would expect to achieve your 21 MPG. Instead, I am still averaging about 15.8 MPG (my initial post was a reply to the poor fellow who is getting 14.5 mpg in San Francisco--seems his car is affected by the same defect as mine).
Hondas are great cars, but no enterprise of that magnitude can get 100 percent of their products perfect. My previous two cars were a 1989 Prelude Si and a 1994 Civic Si and I consistently beat the old over-inflated EPA mileage estimates in both cars (and in conditions flat, hilly, and in between).
"Please check my original postm and you will see that I actually am driving around the coastal plain of LA. It is very flat, and I am being very careful accelerating, planning for stop lights, stop signs, **anything** that will affect mileage. "
Sorry, I saw one of your subsequent posts, and thought that you were in San Francisco.
One thing I found with my 2003 was that I needed a brisk acceleration up to speed, rather than a slow acceleration. Slow acceleration used more gas. So I found that a steady acceleration was better. Try setting it to around 2000 = 2200 RPM until up to speed. THEN try and stay at speed.
All vehicles get better mileage when they are coasting, so try and plan for those stops. Speaking of which, are your trips perhaps very short (5 miles or so)? That kills MPG as well.
Another thing to try is changing brands of gasoline, and stay with a brand for several months.
The worst I ever saw was 18, and that was hot-dogging the accelerator.
Your CR-V has more gears than mine had, so you should be doing better than a 2003.
I put 2.6k miles on my new '08 CR-V LX AWD over the last 4 weeks. Honda's mpg estimates seem to be pretty accurate for the average driving style.
BTW, CR-Vs now sell for invoice or slightly below, so may be a good time to buy
I usually average 20mpg in the city and 25-26 mpg highway. If I drive feathering the gas pedal, I get 22.5 city and 27 highway, but that temps the cars behind me to use their horns. :P On the several highway trips through hilly northeast, having the criuse control at 67mph for the entire tank gave me 27.5mpg. At 74mph for the whole tank, I got around 26.2mpg . I also tried runnig at 62mph, which gave me 28.5mpg, but I could not take driving that slow for more than 95 miles.
The computer estimate of average mpg has been very accurate, but a little optimistic, showing about 0.5 - 0.8 mpg over the real figures.
I also noticed the oil quality display drops by 10% every 1200 miles or so.
SF is a town where traffic is stop and go almost everywhere, every block has either a stop light or a stop sign, and the hills are so steep that some older cars can't go up them at all.
If one were to combine that with lots of short trips where the engine is running cold as often as it is running hot, it wouldn't be surprising at all to achieve only 14.5 mpg, especially in a model with such a large 4-cylinder as the CRV has.
Your last two cars had much smaller 4-cylinder engines, so they would be bound to do a lot better if a lot of your driving is in town, especially if it is mostly short trips (5 miles or less).
2014 Mini Cooper (stick shift of course), 2016 Camry hybrid, 2009 Outback Sport 5-spd (keeping the stick alive)
Hi niteflite, I seriously doubt it. My best mileage was during the first 1,000 miles, even with switching to full synthetic and duralube additive. I'm getting about what you did with 30,000 miles now. Also listen for clicking in the rearend on turns. I was warned and, sure enough, have just had to have the clutches burnished and new fluid in the rear end, under the warrenty.
overall mpg is 23.5 with 300 of the 400 miles on highway. will it get any better
Your mileage will depend a lot on your driving style, load, terrain and traffic conditions. I consistantly get 2-4 more mpg in our 03 CR-V than my wife does, under the same conditions. .
Keep in mind that high speeds produce more wind resistance and burns more fuel, Also every time you touch the brake and the pressure and duration of that touch indicates you just did or are about to waste some fuel.
Our 08 AWD CRV LX is one year old and here is the data I've accumulated and condensed.
Before 1st Oil Change -(Regular Mineral oil) Overall - 23.7 Mpg
After First Oil Change - (Honda/Mobil 1 5w-20 Synthetic) Overall - 27 Mpg (Same driving technique, same route and same amount of miles put each day)
Overall City 19-22 Mpg Overall Highway - 29-32 Mpg
Worst observed 18.9mpg ( @ 5mph in a snow storm traffic jam) Best observed 39.8 mpg (Flat road, 55 mph, a/c on, slight tailwind)
Data collected at every fuel filling. Only additives used: Fuel system cleaner before oil change Present mileage 16000 Miles Air-conditioner on or off made no accountable difference.
Driving Style: Very light foot, low electrical demands, 2 occupants, one dog sometimes, about 130 lbs cargo load in the car at most times.
I hope the above information serves as a guide for anyone interested. If anyone can give me any tips to improve my mpg without spending $$$ - I'd appreciate that.
Your mileage record is similar to mine. I'm at 26.6 mpg overall on a '07 CR-V, with a hwy-city mix of about 60-40%.
Hwy mileage can be improved easily. Slow down. 65 mph gets you better mileage than 75, and 55 mph is even better. Most of us, though, aren't going to poke along at 55 mph and some think 75 on the open road is too slow.
I have a 2003 CRV automatic front wheel drive with 84,000 miles. I have consistently got 23 mpg on about 50-50 driving. This last tankful, I got about 16 mpg and it seems I am on track for that mileage on this latest tankful. After reading some of the posts it seems the ethanol in the gas may affect it some. Also, someone mentioned a lazy O2 sensor and the fact that it did not register on a check engine light as being bad. Probably not a bad idea to have the injectors cleaned. Considering the mileage on the vehicle, would it be worthwhile to go ahead and change this out or have the diagnostics done?
Also, it still bothers me that you cannot change the fuel filter on the 03 CRV. Supposedly it is permanent and built in to the fuel pump. I guess if the fuel filter gets clogged, you have to change the whole fuel pump.
The ethanol certainly affects mileage significantly. I have had some fill ups where my average mpg drops for no reason. The driving conditions being the same, result in the only explanation that the fuel is spurious or adulterated with more than allowed ethanol. I refuse to go back to those gas stations. Please make a note of where and when you fill your gas in a little notebook. Hold onto your gas receipts for at least a few days more so you can get back to the source of the bad fuel, for compensation should the need arise. Having a fuel log helps (I have a fuel log for all my vehicles for the past 5 years now).
I think its a great time to change the O2 sensor as it will probably start malfunctioning after 100K anyway. Besides the cost of diagnostics will just be more expenditure on the way to a new sensor.
Just before an oil change, or after a suspected consumption of poor fuel, use a proper brand name fuel system cleaner (shell, valvoline, etc) to keep the injectors clean. It helps in the long run tremendously. Check the engine bay firewall for the fuel filter as on some 03 CRV's its located there. If it is in the fuel tank, then its not too much of a problem. When you open the fuel pump location under the rear seat in a well ventilated area, make sure you have the necessary gaskets to reseal the pump after you exchange the filter. Its fairly straight forward, but new gaskets and seals will help as the old ones will be less flexible or chemically weak for further exposure. But should your fixture be a permanent one, then its fairly easy and not prohibitively expensive to put in a new pump setup especially if its a comparable re-manufactured one. To reduce the occurrence of this chore, try to never let your tank of gas fall below half mark. That way the filter won't get clogged with sediments picked up from the very bottom of the tank - there is a lot of gunk there anyway at all times. Hope this helps.
re you stated ".... To reduce the occurrence of this chore, try to never let your tank of gas fall below half mark. That way the filter won't get clogged with sediments picked up from the very bottom of the tank - there is a lot of gunk there anyway at all times...."
Does the fuel pump suck the gas from very bottom of gas tank always like the tube is fixed there no matter the tank is full or 1/4, empty OR the fuel pump suck the gas by floating at different level depending how much gas in the gas tank?
"the fuel pump suck the gas by floating at different level depending how much gas in the gas tank?"
I believe this to be true. But the chances are that when the tank is near empty or closer to it, the sediments and gunk are sloshed about more vigorously given the empty space, even though there are baffles inside the tank. The probability of dirt getting into the fuel lines is significantly increased when the fuel is at a lower level. Hence its better not to let the fuel level get low. The penalty you pay is that the mpg is lower with the added weight of fuel compared to a half tank that is. But this is the lesser of two evils as dirt in fuel lines is detrimental in the long run to the engine as well as economy. Now a large percentage of the impurities is water - due to condensation etc. So its actually a great idea to actually add some additive occasionally to hold onto the water and get rid of it through combustion in the engine. I think that most fuel system cleaners attempt to do this. Done as part of a regular regiment, the fuel system will be considerably clean and that results in longevity of the vehicles components.
"the fuel pump suck the gas by floating at different level depending how much gas in the gas tank?"
Would be very interesting to find out.
I agree, If that is true, the cleaner fuel would definitely be higher in the tank, and keeping the tank more full would be beneficial.
Down side would be WHEN the tank is eventually run low for whatever reason, the contaminate collection might overwhelm the filter/pump/injectors. :sick:
Fuel is sucked from the bottom of the tank. Take out your fuel pump and you will see where the inlet is. It definitley does not float with the fuel level.
Got an opinion on the theory about additives and worrying about the fuel getting low Blue?
I think most people should just gas and go. Most cars have fuel filters that should take care of any gunk in the tank, and I'm not inclined to fill up twice as often.
I use fuel that has additives/detergents in it (Chevron/Texaco, generally, with the occasional tank of Wal-Mart gas). No additives after the fact, for me.
I realize I'm not the one you asked, but thought I'd throw out some anecdotal evidence. I run a 1996 Accord with 185,000 on it, never had "fuel treatment" in it, just good ole Chevron 87.
I don't use them either and used to use Chevron quite a bit before switching over to grocery gas mostly.
I had some injector problems a while back, but I have since fired that mechanic and I'm not convinced it wasn't a boat payment problem the mechanic had.
The only additives I'd ever use is a complete fuel system cleaner - nothing else at all. I have had poor quality fuel at times pumped into my car and I have seen a drop in performance and mpg. I know from my own experiences that not all fuels are the same. There is certainly a difference in octane and maybe some differences in the additive package. The company that produces the fuel may have standards to set and observe. But nothing stops the fuel retail outlet from tampering and sometimes even altering the percentage of ethanol or sometimes cases of kerosene in gasoline are not uncommon in some places. Even the best gasoline in the USA may or may not match the average quality of gasoline available in Germany, France or Britain. VW and Mercedes had issues with their fuel injectors getting gummed up or clogged and had to modify the designs to be more robust for use in the US. That may be why similar sized cars sold in the US and in Europe get varying mpg (also because of the difference in measuring units!) but also because of sulphur content and other factors. You can get away with no additives at all for the life of your car. But that largely depends on the design of the components and how much torture they have been through during their life cycle. If you happen to keep filling gas fortunately at a reliable location -then you probably wouldn't need additives ever to keep the engine clean. But how would you know this? - No one knows for sure. So to stack the odds in my cars favor, I'd rather add a fuel system cleaner which is NOT a snake oil but a necessity in some locations (very different from engine oil or coolant, transmission or gear box additives - these are not recommended by manufacturers) If fuel system cleaners were optional and all fuels were equal - then all used cars would have immaculate injectors/systems. Until that is proven to be the case, I'll stick to my theory.
Got an opinion on the theory about additives and worrying about the fuel getting low Blue?
I think most people should just gas and go. Most cars have fuel filters that should take care of any gunk in the tank, and I'm not inclined to fill up twice as often.
The only damage from running the tank dry is that the fuel pump is lubricated and cooled by the fuel. If there is no fuel and it is sucking in air, it is neither lubricated nor cooled. So, now you have a tankful of fuel vapor and hot fuel pump.
I guess there is a reason why Honda set those low fuel lights at about a gallon reserve so that no one goes KA-BOOM!
I use Chevron with Techron fuel additive before each oil change. I usually fill up at whatever station has the lowest price. All the fuel here in Buffalo comes out of one refinery in Erie, PA. So, it does not matter who you get it from.
All the fuel here in Buffalo comes out of one refinery in Erie, PA. So, it does not matter who you get it from.
That's pretty common, but the distributor is supposed to add additive packs for the various tanker loads. So the tanker going to the local Chevron would have some Techron added. Or so I've heard.
I bought a 2008 CRV in March 08. Experience is similar to others 24-27mpg with 80% freeway driving. Best is @ 60mph. 2 major issues/concerns:
1. Due to getting discounts from grocery store gas stations, I tend to run my tank empty. Owner's manual says 2.3 gal left after fuel needed light comes on. That typically happens @ 25 mile to empty on my CRV. Then I will put ~ 13.5 gal before pump shuts off. I can put another 4 gallons if I throttle gas nozzle, which puts me over 17 gal in tank. Manual say tank capacity is 15.5. Have others experienced this is my CRV unique.
2. Just took in for 2nd oil change. Maint code was B16. They (Honda Service) said rear differntial fluid needed changed + many other inspections required. Total cost was over $180 with OLF + tire rotation. Did I get ripped off? This is the 1st AWD vehicle that I have owned. Is this par for the course or is has Honda set up something to the the dealers service $?.
At 18,000 miles on 08 CRV EX-L, I too got maintenance minder saying B,1,6. Is it really neccesary to change rear diff fluid already? Car is running great with no sounds from rear, thinking of waiting until 30,000 miles.
Getting 25.5 going 75 mph mostly hwy.....got 27+ going 65. But, tough to drive in the right lane on Garden State parkway, going slow. besides, gas is $1.60 here now...
1. Due to getting discounts from grocery store gas stations, I tend to run my tank empty. Owner's manual says 2.3 gal left after fuel needed light comes on. That typically happens 25 mile to empty on my CRV. Then I will put ~ 13.5 gal before pump shuts off. I can put another 4 gallons if I throttle gas nozzle, which puts me over 17 gal in tank. Manual say tank capacity is 15.5. Have others experienced this is my CRV unique.
Keep doing that and you will be looking at replacing the "charcoal canister" that is used to capture fuel vapors from the tank and directs them into the engine on start up. Keep flooding the canister with 4 gallons of fuel, and you will be paying $400 for the new canister pretty soon.
Your CR-V is not unique, Honda has been using evaporative emissions control system (charcoal canister) since the 80's if not earlier than that. Bit, it will be unique at the dealer waiting for the new canister to arrive.
Read the Owner's Manual, it should tell you specifically not to fill past the "click off" at the pump.
I bought a 2009 CR-V LX 4WD 3 weeks ago, and I think it's an amazing piece of engineering. I have managed to get fuel economy that's well above the EPA mileage of 20/26. My commute to work is all surface streets, but with fairly light traffic. I usually get 25-26 mpg according to the dashboard, and when I measure it at the pump it's usually about 2-3% below that (there's some debate as to which reading is the more accurate one - I think that gas pumps tend to err in favor of the gas station).
I just took my first highway trip, roughly 30 miles each way. In one direction I got 38.8 mpg, and in the other direction I got 37.2 mpg (cargo consisted of 2 adults and 2 kids in car seats along with a stroller and some bottles of water, so maybe about 400 pounds). Again, the fillup was within 2-3% of this value. In both cases I had the cruise set at 55 and the AC off, and starting and ending elevations were almost the same, so I have to conclude that headwinds and tailwinds can impact your fuel economy. Yes, everyone else zooms by me on the highway, yes, the trip takes a whopping 5 minutes longer than it would at 65, and yes, my wife and kids were begging for air conditioning - but the sacrifices were worth it to get nearly 40 miles per gallon in a CR-V! We could all cut our fuel consumption immensely if they lowered the national speed limit to 55 again.
Locally I've been driving at the speed limit or less, and I try to watch the timing of traffic lights so that I'm not doing much braking at intersections. I try to keep as little in the trunk as possible. AC is a real mileage killer, so that stays off unless it's absolutely necessary. I don't idle in fast food drive-thrus (frankly it takes less time to park and go inside), and I don't idle at ATMs or leave the car running in parking lots. Honestly, I think that car manufacturers should take a cue from hybrids and shut all cars off when they're standing still. Think about how much gas people waste idling, esp. in high traffic areas. I suppose I'm a hypermiler of sorts, but I don't take turns at 40 mph or shut off the car when I'm coasting or at a light (maybe if it was a light that I knew would last several minutes I'd shut it off).
Let me know if you're able to beat these mpg values, and if so, tell me how you did it!
I think the CR-V is the best car Honda has ever made. I've also got an Odyssey, and we'll typically get 20-21 around town and 27-28 on the highway in that car. I used to have a Pilot, which had way too much inertia, and got a paltry 16-17 mpg around town, and if I was lucky - 22 on the highway.
>" My commute to work is all surface streets, but with fairly light traffic. I usually get 25-26 mpg......I just took my first highway trip, roughly 30 miles each way. In one direction I got 38.8 mpg, and in the other direction I got 37.2 mpg...."
Nice report!
The "local" driving seems very do-able with careful driving and no AC. I can get near that with my wifes 03 CR-V. My wife gets 21-22 under same conditions.
Your highway part "SEEMS" real high. However, since you threw in the mileage you get with the Odyssey and got with the Pilot, believable.
Not unusual for our 03 4WD Pilot to get 29-31 mpg at 58 MPH with Cruise on and AC off on rolling hills and 2 people on an Expressway portion of a trip. But turn on the AC and increase the speed to 65 and the mileage will drop to 24+/- in a heart beat. I'm using a Scan Gauge II and have learned to trust it to be accurate.
The 03 CR-V will get 31 mpg, with AC on, at 60-65 and 2 people. Probably won't get a chance to try 55 mph, and no AC. Those conditions would bring on comments like, "Is there something wrong with the car? Why is everybody passing us. And why is it so hot in here." The wife doesn't like to be passed or to be hot!
There have been many reports that Honda's dash gauge can be optimistic as much as 10%. But even at that, your mileage would still be very good.
Please keep us informed as the the mileage at say 60 mph with AC on.
I was a bit surprised by the numbers myself. I was hoping for 32 mpg, and when it went to almost 39 I was completely amazed. I filled up the tank after that trip just to confirm those numbers. It might be a few weeks before I can test at different speeds and with AC on. I know at some point I turned on the compressor for a few seconds, and the mpg instantly dropped from around 38 to 36 (this was shortly after resetting the trip odometer). To be fair about the Pilot, I always had the climate controls set to "Auto", which basically gives it license to turn on the AC even when it's 65 out. The "auto" setting is just awful. I think if I had a scangauge hooked up, I might have realized just where the fuel economy was going. I've read that operating AC at a 50% duty cycle can reduce fuel economy as much as 10% in a conventional car (and more like 15-20% in a hybrid).
As far as the impact of speed on fuel economy, since wind resistance is proportional to the square of your velocity, your going to have twice as much wind resistance at 78 mph than at 55. According to some charts I've seen such as mpg vs. speed an increase from 55 to 65 would result in another 10% drop. So, at 65 with AC on I'd expect maybe 31-32 mpg.
Another tip is to make sure your tires are always fully inflated. I've found that my economy increases if I go a few psi over Honda's recommendations, but still stay below the max psi for the tire (remember to account for the fact that the pressure will increase as the ambient temperature increases - pV=nRT). If you fill up your tires with nitrogen, then it is less likely to leak out and you won't need to get your tires very often.
My dad bought a V6 Accord because he felt that his 4 cylinder didn't give him enough power to accelerate onto the freeway. I get better economy in my CR-V than he does with his Accord. The problem here is speed limits used to be 55, and a small fuel-sipping engine used to be enough. People have demanded bigger engines over the last 25 years to keep up with the new speed limits. People want bigger cars because they feel unsafe next to all of the huge SUVs on the road. Now everyone's in a rush to get somewhere. So, you've got a whole bunch of lemmings going 70 (and with the AC at full blast) just because the signs say they're allowed to do it. You don't need a hybrid to get high fuel economy - just drive slower and crack open your windows instead of using AC (well, unless you're driving through Newark or Coalinga, CA - then make sure you close off your outside vents!).
If you're doing mostly highway driving, you don't need a hybrid. Because of the extra weight from the batteries, a conventional car can actually get better mileage if you're not doing a lot of breaking. With cruise control on, you're not going to get a lot of heavy acceleration unless you're going uphill.
I'll get off my soapbox now. Hopefully someone will find this info useful!
I just got a 09 CRV FWD LX and couldn't be happier. It's getting 27-28 in light city use, short trips, 45-65 mph with several traffic lights, stop signs and a bridge. For comparison, my 08 Kia Spectra5 2.0 :lemon: compact car got the same 27-28 for the exact same commute and much worse on the highway. The CRV has a 5 speed transmission. It is a very solid ride and handles amazingly well. The bottom line is the CRV beats many 4 speed compact cars mpg and is an SUV. More traffic lights and fast acceleration will lower mpg. I'll post a follow up later but for now the CRV is awesome. I'm 6'3'' and have lots of room in front or back. Also good cargo space, only a tiny bit less than a 4 runner or Jeep, but just about double the mpg. I took a big loss on dumping the Kia :lemon: after a year but should made up for the loss with the CRV.
Help...I just got an 09 CR-V 4WD EX-L w/NAV. The posted MPG on the sticker is 20 City, 27 Hwy, combined 22. Now, I've only driven about 100 miles so far, of which probably 60 were city and 40 hwy, but on the screen I'm getting 14.1 mpg. I don't floor it when the light turns green, it hasn't been ungodly hot (requiring lots of A/C), and I don't have a ton of cargo. I just don't get it. I know that the 20/27 is from "ideal conditions" but I wasn't expecting the combined number to be off by a whopping 8mpg. Any thoughts? I was getting 10-12 mpg combined on my Ford Explorer and was really excited for the upgrade.
The normal mileage variation is pretty wide. Driving styles, conditions, etc. will make for a big difference. But 14 mpg! That's way too low. But you've gone only 100 miles. Did you reset the mileage meter when you started driving? If not, do that. Who knows what kind of test driving miles were put on it.
I have never reset the "B" trip meter on my 2007 CR-V, so I have a complete mileage reading for the car. It's 26.1 mpg. The meter, and you won't like this, probably reads high--1/2 to 3/4 mpg in my experience.
Check the tire pressure, although dealers usually over inflate tires. Be assured, a well-running CR-V under normal driving conditions will deliver 20+ mpg. Good luck.
Never, never count on the onboard mpg screen for a reading. Always off by a few mpg. Use the try and true method by filling up to the first click at a gas station you use on a regular basis. Then after at least 3/4 tank left fill up again at the very same station and the very same pump to the first click only. This will give you a better reading.
Driving any car a short distance without giving the engine a chance to warm up is a mpg killer. Example...
My former 2006 Civic ( 25mpg city sticker ) got about 24/25 miles per gallon on a 10/12 mile city round drive per day.
When I only drove 1/2 mile up and then later 1/2 mile back from a store or bank, my mpg was 16 to 17 miles per gallon. See the big difference when you only drive a short distance.
Long traffic lights, many traffic lights over few lights will also give you a less mpg reading.
Picked up my EXL FWD on 17 July and ran out the initial dealer supplied tank of fuel. Zeroed out the onboard mpg reading at around 275 miles, and reset Trip A to zero, then filled up using the fill till shutoff then trickle till shutoff method. Three full tanks and 894.6 miles later, here are results.
First, though, driving conditions. Suburban and rural 35 - 45 mph limits, rolling hills, stops typically 1/2 to 1 mile, 85 percent.Short interstate 65 - 70 mph 15 percent. A/C on auto, 2 occupants mostly. Tires inflated to recommended 30psi. Temps, Oklahoma typical 85 - 95.
Calculated mpg using miles/gallons fuel = 23.53mpg. Best tank was 24.72mpg (last tank), worst was 22.87mpg. Onboard mpg reading for the three tanks of fuel is 24.2mpg. Whats that, 1 percent or so off? I'll take it.
So far, I'm a happy camper. The "Cute Little Car", as my grandkids call it, is tight and responsive, fairly quiet and very handy. Lotsa stuff goes in the cargo area, which along with being a Honda is the main reason for this purchase.
On my second fill-up, my tri pcomputer actually read lower tha nmy calculated amount. I'll see if that continues. It would be a suprise because on our altima, it always comes out reading higher tha nthe calculated amount. I'm starting ot think the trip computer is more accurate than hand calculation. Hand calculation could be off by a 1/2 gallon depending and require you average 3 or 4 tanks together.
I think what will throw off the mpg indicator the most, is the gasoline itself. the energy content of the gasoline can vary slightly.. especially if ethanol is used. I think my dealer filled it with E10 when delivered (it's usually cheaper in the midwest), so I wasn't suprised when my mileage improve noticeably on the next 2 tanks... that along with more break-in.
In mixed suburban driving during the summer of '09 -- avg 21.5 mpg with low of 18 and high of 25.8
In mostly highway mileage during the same period -- avg 28.4 mpg with a high of 31. Speed in the range of 60 - 75.
Context -- G'year Assurance Comfort Tread tires at 30 psi. A/C running when SaabGirl deemed it necessary, which is anytime temp exceeds 60. Carrying two adults on trips plus couple hundred pounds of stuff. Drove with traffic flow; no special effort to squeeze out better mileage. Shell 87 -- fuel most often used.
Off-topic note: One thing I've appreciated about this very practical machine is that it still has no rattles or squeaks, even on rough pavement.
Just completed 3000 mile cross country trek in 2008 CRV EX L 2 wheel drive which had 11400 miles at srtart of trip . I averaged an astounding 31.7 MPGs most of which was at 70MPH on Cruise control. The low end MPG 23.1 up mountains in the west the best at 37.8 going down those mountains. No issues whatsoever about anything. Vehicle ran better than Secretariat in the 73 Kentucky Derby !
i have brought k an n filter ..for $43.00 and i have noticed following changes:
1.i can see increase in my accelerator and hardness on accelerator feeling when going over highway has been gone
2.i noticed millage going up(need time for exact miles up) since i brought this filter after 3 months use of car now i can see good accelerator and airflow up
3.before k and n filter..city and highway trips...24 around and i did not have long trips yet...
Engine "Performance" involves several things. Most important is longevity. Then there is fuel mileage, acceleration, and smoothness.
Yes the K&N filter allows more air flow due to the "mesh" being less restrictive. But, you could leave the filter out altogether and get even more air flow. Why not just do that? :confuse:
The K&N less restrictive "mess" has larger holes and also allows more and larger foreign particals to enter the engine. Those particals can be/are abbrasive to the internal moving parts. Resulting in increased wear inside the engine.
Many/most of us bought Hondas because of their known and proven longevity. Honda's engineers have invested many hours and dollars developing the exact amount of air flow required for the best overall performance (see above) of their engines. If more air flow was needed they would have increased the size of the air filter, not the size of the holes in the filter.
Do you really believe a $42 air cleaner is better than the one developed by Honda engineers? Keep in mind that K&N's business is selling componants. Honda's business is selling you a vehicle that will last, and last, and last!
Comments
Was your previous CR-V 4WD? Is this one?
Around town: 22 MPG
HIghway travel going 70: 31 MPG
Much better than my 2005 Pilot, which got 15-16 around town and 18-19 highway.
Sadly, this issue has nothing to do with tire pressure, though I certainly wish it were that simple and easy to correct.
I have extensively searched the Internet, and I can find no other driver reporting the 14-17mpg that I and my unfortunate colleague from San Francisco are getting. These numbers fall outside the large range for city driving provided by Honda and processed and occasionally verified by EPA (see the Final Rule published in December 2006 governing the new test methodologies). City mileage this low could only be explained by either (1) driving uphill both ways with six passengers and tons of cargo with the A/C on and an ambient temp of 40 degrees or less and the tires half full or (2) there is something incorrectly adjusted or not operating properly in the car.
Are there any other ideas out there?
There are
My CR-V was a 2003, but driving up and down hills would approximate to less than 18 MPG in my experience. The CR-V has "hill grade logic" that uses the transmission to hold speed downhill, which will use gas. Going uphill, especially accelerating, uses LOTS of gas. Your CR-V weighs over 3500 lbs, and it REALLY hurts MPG to accelerate, and REALLY REALLY hurts MPG to accelerated uphill. The engine is small, and it compensates by going into the HIGH RPM (and high gas useage) when extra power is needed - like going up hill.
I'm sorry for your experience, but it doesn't sound like the CR-V is broken. You have a tough driving cycle for the Honda CR-V design.
My driving was in LA, but if I pushed the CR-V it would return 18 MPG. My normal was 21 MPG, but that was very carefully accelerating, planning for stop lights, etc.
Hondas are great cars, but no enterprise of that magnitude can get 100 percent of their products perfect. My previous two cars were a 1989 Prelude Si and a 1994 Civic Si and I consistently beat the old over-inflated EPA mileage estimates in both cars (and in conditions flat, hilly, and in between).
Sorry, I saw one of your subsequent posts, and thought that you were in San Francisco.
One thing I found with my 2003 was that I needed a brisk acceleration up to speed, rather than a slow acceleration. Slow acceleration used more gas. So I found that a steady acceleration was better. Try setting it to around 2000 = 2200 RPM until up to speed. THEN try and stay at speed.
All vehicles get better mileage when they are coasting, so try and plan for those stops. Speaking of which, are your trips perhaps very short (5 miles or so)? That kills MPG as well.
Another thing to try is changing brands of gasoline, and stay with a brand for several months.
The worst I ever saw was 18, and that was hot-dogging the accelerator.
Your CR-V has more gears than mine had, so you should be doing better than a 2003.
BTW, CR-Vs now sell for invoice or slightly below, so may be a good time to buy
I usually average 20mpg in the city and 25-26 mpg highway. If I drive feathering the gas pedal, I get 22.5 city and 27 highway, but that temps the cars behind me to use their horns. :P
On the several highway trips through hilly northeast, having the criuse control at 67mph for the entire tank gave me 27.5mpg. At 74mph for the whole tank, I got around 26.2mpg . I also tried runnig at 62mph, which gave me 28.5mpg, but I could not take driving that slow for more than 95 miles.
The computer estimate of average mpg has been very accurate, but a little optimistic, showing about 0.5 - 0.8 mpg over the real figures.
I also noticed the oil quality display drops by 10% every 1200 miles or so.
I'll do an update when I get 10k+ on the car.
If one were to combine that with lots of short trips where the engine is running cold as often as it is running hot, it wouldn't be surprising at all to achieve only 14.5 mpg, especially in a model with such a large 4-cylinder as the CRV has.
Your last two cars had much smaller 4-cylinder engines, so they would be bound to do a lot better if a lot of your driving is in town, especially if it is mostly short trips (5 miles or less).
2014 Mini Cooper (stick shift of course), 2016 Camry hybrid, 2009 Outback Sport 5-spd (keeping the stick alive)
I seriously doubt it. My best mileage was during the first 1,000 miles, even with switching to full synthetic and duralube additive. I'm getting about what you did with 30,000 miles now. Also listen for clicking in the rearend on turns. I was warned and, sure enough, have just had to have the clutches burnished and new fluid in the rear end, under the warrenty.
Your mileage will depend a lot on your driving style, load, terrain and traffic conditions.
I consistantly get 2-4 more mpg in our 03 CR-V than my wife does, under the same conditions. .
Keep in mind that high speeds produce more wind resistance and burns more fuel, Also every time you touch the brake and the pressure and duration of that touch indicates you just did or are about to waste some fuel.
Kip
Before 1st Oil Change -(Regular Mineral oil)
Overall - 23.7 Mpg
After First Oil Change - (Honda/Mobil 1 5w-20 Synthetic)
Overall - 27 Mpg
(Same driving technique, same route and same amount of miles put each day)
Overall City 19-22 Mpg
Overall Highway - 29-32 Mpg
Worst observed 18.9mpg ( @ 5mph in a snow storm traffic jam)
Best observed 39.8 mpg (Flat road, 55 mph, a/c on, slight tailwind)
Data collected at every fuel filling.
Only additives used: Fuel system cleaner before oil change
Present mileage 16000 Miles
Air-conditioner on or off made no accountable difference.
Driving Style: Very light foot, low electrical demands, 2 occupants, one dog sometimes, about 130 lbs cargo load in the car at most times.
I hope the above information serves as a guide for anyone interested. If anyone can give me any tips to improve my mpg without spending $$$ - I'd appreciate that.
Hwy mileage can be improved easily. Slow down. 65 mph gets you better mileage than 75, and 55 mph is even better. Most of us, though, aren't going to poke along at 55 mph and some think 75 on the open road is too slow.
The trade off is time versus money.
Also, it still bothers me that you cannot change the fuel filter on the 03 CRV. Supposedly it is permanent and built in to the fuel pump. I guess if the fuel filter gets clogged, you have to change the whole fuel pump.
Any thoughts?
I think its a great time to change the O2 sensor as it will probably start malfunctioning after 100K anyway. Besides the cost of diagnostics will just be more expenditure on the way to a new sensor.
Just before an oil change, or after a suspected consumption of poor fuel, use a proper brand name fuel system cleaner (shell, valvoline, etc) to keep the injectors clean. It helps in the long run tremendously.
Check the engine bay firewall for the fuel filter as on some 03 CRV's its located there. If it is in the fuel tank, then its not too much of a problem. When you open the fuel pump location under the rear seat in a well ventilated area, make sure you have the necessary gaskets to reseal the pump after you exchange the filter. Its fairly straight forward, but new gaskets and seals will help as the old ones will be less flexible or chemically weak for further exposure.
But should your fixture be a permanent one, then its fairly easy and not prohibitively expensive to put in a new pump setup especially if its a comparable re-manufactured one.
To reduce the occurrence of this chore, try to never let your tank of gas fall below half mark. That way the filter won't get clogged with sediments picked up from the very bottom of the tank - there is a lot of gunk there anyway at all times.
Hope this helps.
re you stated ".... To reduce the occurrence of this chore, try to never let your tank of gas fall below half mark. That way the filter won't get clogged with sediments picked up from the very bottom of the tank - there is a lot of gunk there anyway at all times...."
Does the fuel pump suck the gas from very bottom of gas tank always like the tube is fixed there no matter the tank is full or 1/4, empty OR the fuel pump suck the gas by floating at different level depending how much gas in the gas tank?
I believe this to be true. But the chances are that when the tank is near empty or closer to it, the sediments and gunk are sloshed about more vigorously given the empty space, even though there are baffles inside the tank. The probability of dirt getting into the fuel lines is significantly increased when the fuel is at a lower level. Hence its better not to let the fuel level get low.
The penalty you pay is that the mpg is lower with the added weight of fuel compared to a half tank that is. But this is the lesser of two evils as dirt in fuel lines is detrimental in the long run to the engine as well as economy. Now a large percentage of the impurities is water - due to condensation etc.
So its actually a great idea to actually add some additive occasionally to hold onto the water and get rid of it through combustion in the engine. I think that most fuel system cleaners attempt to do this.
Done as part of a regular regiment, the fuel system will be considerably clean and that results in longevity of the vehicles components.
Would be very interesting to find out.
I agree, If that is true, the cleaner fuel would definitely be higher in the tank, and keeping the tank more full would be beneficial.
Down side would be WHEN the tank is eventually run low for whatever reason, the contaminate collection might overwhelm the filter/pump/injectors. :sick:
Kip
I think most people should just gas and go. Most cars have fuel filters that should take care of any gunk in the tank, and I'm not inclined to fill up twice as often.
I realize I'm not the one you asked, but thought I'd throw out some anecdotal evidence. I run a 1996 Accord with 185,000 on it, never had "fuel treatment" in it, just good ole Chevron 87.
I don't use them either and used to use Chevron quite a bit before switching over to grocery gas mostly.
I had some injector problems a while back, but I have since fired that mechanic and I'm not convinced it wasn't a boat payment problem the mechanic had.
You can get away with no additives at all for the life of your car. But that largely depends on the design of the components and how much torture they have been through during their life cycle. If you happen to keep filling gas fortunately at a reliable location -then you probably wouldn't need additives ever to keep the engine clean. But how would you know this? - No one knows for sure. So to stack the odds in my cars favor, I'd rather add a fuel system cleaner which is NOT a snake oil but a necessity in some locations (very different from engine oil or coolant, transmission or gear box additives - these are not recommended by manufacturers)
If fuel system cleaners were optional and all fuels were equal - then all used cars would have immaculate injectors/systems. Until that is proven to be the case, I'll stick to my theory.
I think most people should just gas and go. Most cars have fuel filters that should take care of any gunk in the tank, and I'm not inclined to fill up twice as often.
The only damage from running the tank dry is that the fuel pump is lubricated and cooled by the fuel. If there is no fuel and it is sucking in air, it is neither lubricated nor cooled. So, now you have a tankful of fuel vapor and hot fuel pump.
I guess there is a reason why Honda set those low fuel lights at about a gallon reserve so that no one goes KA-BOOM!
I use Chevron with Techron fuel additive before each oil change. I usually fill up at whatever station has the lowest price. All the fuel here in Buffalo comes out of one refinery in Erie, PA. So, it does not matter who you get it from.
That's pretty common, but the distributor is supposed to add additive packs for the various tanker loads. So the tanker going to the local Chevron would have some Techron added. Or so I've heard.
1. Due to getting discounts from grocery store gas stations, I tend to run my tank empty. Owner's manual says 2.3 gal left after fuel needed light comes on. That typically happens @ 25 mile to empty on my CRV. Then I will put ~ 13.5 gal before pump shuts off. I can put another 4 gallons if I throttle gas nozzle, which puts me over 17 gal in tank. Manual say tank capacity is 15.5. Have others experienced this is my CRV unique.
2. Just took in for 2nd oil change. Maint code was B16. They (Honda Service) said rear differntial fluid needed changed + many other inspections required. Total cost was over $180 with OLF + tire rotation. Did I get ripped off? This is the 1st AWD vehicle that I have owned. Is this par for the course or is has Honda set up something to the the dealers service $?.
B
1
6
Waiting until you hear noises is a bad idea. The goal is to keep everything moving smoothly, so there are no noises.
Would you wait until the engine starts knocking to change the oil? :confuse:
Kip
Keep doing that and you will be looking at replacing the "charcoal canister" that is used to capture fuel vapors from the tank and directs them into the engine on start up. Keep flooding the canister with 4 gallons of fuel, and you will be paying $400 for the new canister pretty soon.
Your CR-V is not unique, Honda has been using evaporative emissions control system (charcoal canister) since the 80's if not earlier than that. Bit, it will be unique at the dealer waiting for the new canister to arrive.
Read the Owner's Manual, it should tell you specifically not to fill past the "click off" at the pump.
I just took my first highway trip, roughly 30 miles each way. In one direction I got 38.8 mpg, and in the other direction I got 37.2 mpg (cargo consisted of 2 adults and 2 kids in car seats along with a stroller and some bottles of water, so maybe about 400 pounds). Again, the fillup was within 2-3% of this value. In both cases I had the cruise set at 55 and the AC off, and starting and ending elevations were almost the same, so I have to conclude that headwinds and tailwinds can impact your fuel economy. Yes, everyone else zooms by me on the highway, yes, the trip takes a whopping 5 minutes longer than it would at 65, and yes, my wife and kids were begging for air conditioning - but the sacrifices were worth it to get nearly 40 miles per gallon in a CR-V! We could all cut our fuel consumption immensely if they lowered the national speed limit to 55 again.
Locally I've been driving at the speed limit or less, and I try to watch the timing of traffic lights so that I'm not doing much braking at intersections. I try to keep as little in the trunk as possible. AC is a real mileage killer, so that stays off unless it's absolutely necessary. I don't idle in fast food drive-thrus (frankly it takes less time to park and go inside), and I don't idle at ATMs or leave the car running in parking lots. Honestly, I think that car manufacturers should take a cue from hybrids and shut all cars off when they're standing still. Think about how much gas people waste idling, esp. in high traffic areas. I suppose I'm a hypermiler of sorts, but I don't take turns at 40 mph or shut off the car when I'm coasting or at a light (maybe if it was a light that I knew would last several minutes I'd shut it off).
Let me know if you're able to beat these mpg values, and if so, tell me how you did it!
I think the CR-V is the best car Honda has ever made. I've also got an Odyssey, and we'll typically get 20-21 around town and 27-28 on the highway in that car. I used to have a Pilot, which had way too much inertia, and got a paltry 16-17 mpg around town, and if I was lucky - 22 on the highway.
Nice report!
The "local" driving seems very do-able with careful driving and no AC. I can get near that with my wifes 03 CR-V. My wife gets 21-22 under same conditions.
Your highway part "SEEMS" real high. However, since you threw in the mileage you get with the Odyssey and got with the Pilot, believable.
Not unusual for our 03 4WD Pilot to get 29-31 mpg at 58 MPH with Cruise on and AC off on rolling hills and 2 people on an Expressway portion of a trip. But turn on the AC and increase the speed to 65 and the mileage will drop to 24+/- in a heart beat. I'm using a Scan Gauge II and have learned to trust it to be accurate.
The 03 CR-V will get 31 mpg, with AC on, at 60-65 and 2 people. Probably won't get a chance to try 55 mph, and no AC. Those conditions would bring on comments like, "Is there something wrong with the car? Why is everybody passing us. And why is it so hot in here."
There have been many reports that Honda's dash gauge can be optimistic as much as 10%. But even at that, your mileage would still be very good.
Please keep us informed as the the mileage at say 60 mph with AC on.
Thanks,
Kip
I was a bit surprised by the numbers myself. I was hoping for 32 mpg, and when it went to almost 39 I was completely amazed. I filled up the tank after that trip just to confirm those numbers. It might be a few weeks before I can test at different speeds and with AC on. I know at some point I turned on the compressor for a few seconds, and the mpg instantly dropped from around 38 to 36 (this was shortly after resetting the trip odometer). To be fair about the Pilot, I always had the climate controls set to "Auto", which basically gives it license to turn on the AC even when it's 65 out. The "auto" setting is just awful. I think if I had a scangauge hooked up, I might have realized just where the fuel economy was going. I've read that operating AC at a 50% duty cycle can reduce fuel economy as much as 10% in a conventional car (and more like 15-20% in a hybrid).
As far as the impact of speed on fuel economy, since wind resistance is proportional to the square of your velocity, your going to have twice as much wind resistance at 78 mph than at 55. According to some charts I've seen such as mpg vs. speed an increase from 55 to 65 would result in another 10% drop. So, at 65 with AC on I'd expect maybe 31-32 mpg.
Another tip is to make sure your tires are always fully inflated. I've found that my economy increases if I go a few psi over Honda's recommendations, but still stay below the max psi for the tire (remember to account for the fact that the pressure will increase as the ambient temperature increases - pV=nRT). If you fill up your tires with nitrogen, then it is less likely to leak out and you won't need to get your tires very often.
My dad bought a V6 Accord because he felt that his 4 cylinder didn't give him enough power to accelerate onto the freeway. I get better economy in my CR-V than he does with his Accord. The problem here is speed limits used to be 55, and a small fuel-sipping engine used to be enough. People have demanded bigger engines over the last 25 years to keep up with the new speed limits. People want bigger cars because they feel unsafe next to all of the huge SUVs on the road. Now everyone's in a rush to get somewhere. So, you've got a whole bunch of lemmings going 70 (and with the AC at full blast) just because the signs say they're allowed to do it. You don't need a hybrid to get high fuel economy - just drive slower and crack open your windows instead of using AC (well, unless you're driving through Newark or Coalinga, CA - then make sure you close off your outside vents!).
Check out the Drive 55 conservation project:
If you're doing mostly highway driving, you don't need a hybrid. Because of the extra weight from the batteries, a conventional car can actually get better mileage if you're not doing a lot of breaking. With cruise control on, you're not going to get a lot of heavy acceleration unless you're going uphill.
I'll get off my soapbox now. Hopefully someone will find this info useful!
Keith
I have never reset the "B" trip meter on my 2007 CR-V, so I have a complete mileage reading for the car. It's 26.1 mpg. The meter, and you won't like this, probably reads high--1/2 to 3/4 mpg in my experience.
Check the tire pressure, although dealers usually over inflate tires. Be assured, a well-running CR-V under normal driving conditions will deliver 20+ mpg. Good luck.
Driving any car a short distance without giving the engine a chance to warm up is a mpg killer. Example...
My former 2006 Civic ( 25mpg city sticker ) got about 24/25 miles per gallon on a 10/12 mile city round drive per day.
When I only drove 1/2 mile up and then later 1/2 mile back from a store or bank, my mpg was 16 to 17 miles per gallon. See the big difference when you only drive a short distance.
Long traffic lights, many traffic lights over few lights will also give you a less mpg reading.
First, though, driving conditions. Suburban and rural 35 - 45 mph limits, rolling hills, stops typically 1/2 to 1 mile, 85 percent.Short interstate 65 - 70 mph 15 percent. A/C on auto, 2 occupants mostly. Tires inflated to recommended 30psi. Temps, Oklahoma typical 85 - 95.
Calculated mpg using miles/gallons fuel = 23.53mpg. Best tank was 24.72mpg (last tank), worst was 22.87mpg. Onboard mpg reading for the three tanks of fuel is 24.2mpg. Whats that, 1 percent or so off? I'll take it.
So far, I'm a happy camper. The "Cute Little Car", as my grandkids call it, is tight and responsive, fairly quiet and very handy. Lotsa stuff goes in the cargo area, which along with being a Honda is the main reason for this purchase.
I think what will throw off the mpg indicator the most, is the gasoline itself. the energy content of the gasoline can vary slightly.. especially if ethanol is used. I think my dealer filled it with E10 when delivered (it's usually cheaper in the midwest), so I wasn't suprised when my mileage improve noticeably on the next 2 tanks... that along with more break-in.
In mostly highway mileage during the same period -- avg 28.4 mpg with a high of 31. Speed in the range of 60 - 75.
Context -- G'year Assurance Comfort Tread tires at 30 psi. A/C running when SaabGirl deemed it necessary, which is anytime temp exceeds 60. Carrying two adults on trips plus couple hundred pounds of stuff. Drove with traffic flow; no special effort to squeeze out better mileage. Shell 87 -- fuel most often used.
Off-topic note: One thing I've appreciated about this very practical machine is that it still has no rattles or squeaks, even on rough pavement.
1.i can see increase in my accelerator and hardness on accelerator feeling when going over highway has been gone
2.i noticed millage going up(need time for exact miles up) since i brought this filter after 3 months use of car now i can see good accelerator and airflow up
3.before k and n filter..city and highway trips...24 around and i did not have long trips yet...
thanks
hp
Yes the K&N filter allows more air flow due to the "mesh" being less restrictive.
But, you could leave the filter out altogether and get even more air flow. Why not just do that? :confuse:
The K&N less restrictive "mess" has larger holes and also allows more and larger foreign particals to enter the engine. Those particals can be/are abbrasive to the internal moving parts. Resulting in increased wear inside the engine.
Many/most of us bought Hondas because of their known and proven longevity.
Honda's engineers have invested many hours and dollars developing the exact amount of air flow required for the best overall performance (see above) of their engines. If more air flow was needed they would have increased the size of the air filter, not the size of the holes in the filter.
Do you really believe a $42 air cleaner is better than the one developed by Honda engineers? Keep in mind that K&N's business is selling componants. Honda's business is selling you a vehicle that will last, and last, and last!
Kip