Just kinda throwin this out there but did anybody else notice that the new civic base models have dropped a few points on the mpg rating? Did Honda over-estimate their mpg to begin with or did they change something??

And just the other day I went to gas up a 2007 Hybrid sedan brand new. So when I did it took exactly 1.1 gallons to top it off cause it was sold. Only problem is the mileage gauge only read 29 miles on it. Hmmm.

 

I did. on their website based on the new 2008 EPA measurements all civics mpgs are down maybe 6 or 7. I remember the regular coupes and sedans were around 30 city 40 highway but now its way down to 26 and 34.

 

Damn. So my Si technically only gets 16mpg in the city and 25 on the highway. That's crap!

Still doesn't explain why the Hybrid I topped off took 1.1 gallons with only 29 miles on the odometer.

 

<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by RICO_ &raquo;</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">
Still doesn't explain why the Hybrid I topped off took 1.1 gallons with only 29 miles on the odometer. </TD></TR></TABLE>

Doesn't explain anything. Do a actual fuel consumption test and get real results. Fill up till it clicks off. Drive 60-100 miles and go back to the same pump and top off the same way. Calculate the mileage that way. I have people everyday coming in complaining of poor fuel mileage in their new Honda. Last 07 EX sedan I drove got 42mpg hwy and 35 city with the a/c running. Customer said it got 20 hwy.

People need to understand it depends on how you drive and how you do your math. It's the same car, you just suck at one or the other.

 

THey still get the same as they did before (obviously), just the way of figuring it out has changed to be more true of real world driving. It's a good thing.. but I think maybe they went over the top if the Si is rated at 16/25, because I usually get 29-31, with probably a 70/30 split of city/highway.

 

<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by elohel &raquo;</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">THey still get the same as they did before (obviously), just the way of figuring it out has changed to be more true of real world driving. It's a good thing.. but I think maybe they went over the top if the Si is rated at 16/25, because I usually get 29-31, with probably a 70/30 split of city/highway.</TD></TR></TABLE>

i'm right with you mang!!


...on a side note my mpg got extreeeeeemly better after braking in the motor. it was horrible before

 

Actually, the whole reason for this was that the EPA changed the way that vehicles calculate mileage for 2008. There is even an adjustment to all 2007 and older vehicles. The Si now only gets 29mpg highway vs. 32mpg.

http://www.fueleconomy.gov/feg/ratings2008.shtml

 

<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by nsxmatt &raquo;</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">

Doesn't explain anything. Do a actual fuel consumption test and get real results. Fill up till it clicks off. Drive 60-100 miles and go back to the same pump and top off the same way. </TD></TR></TABLE>

We do. We use the same gas station for all of our top-offs. The cars come in with a near empty tank and 0 miles on them. It goes straight to the gas station (less than 1/4 mile) and is filled up before ever being released to go on sale. And since you can't really beat on a Hybrid then 29 mpg seems a little low even for an un-broken in one.

 

<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by CRXRageD &raquo;</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">Actually, the whole reason for this was that the EPA changed the way that vehicles calculate mileage for 2008. There is even an adjustment to all 2007 and older vehicles. The Si now only gets 29mpg highway vs. 32mpg.

http://www.fueleconomy.gov/feg/ratings2008.shtml </TD></TR></TABLE>

wow this all good to know since ill be looking at SI's here in the near future. mpg was concern, but i have a hard time believing the 08' SI went down to 16.....

 

<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by RICO_ &raquo;</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">We do. We use the same gas station for all of our top-offs. The cars come in with a near empty tank and 0 miles on them. It goes straight to the gas station (less than 1/4 mile) and is filled up before ever being released to go on sale. And since you can't really beat on a Hybrid then 29 mpg seems a little low even for an un-broken in one.</TD></TR></TABLE>

All Hybrids are Japan built which means they all have at least 5-7 miles on them when they reach the dealer. You can't calculate MPG by using 1 gallon on a brand new car and you can't make a assumption as to the MPG a car gets just based on that. That is where the misinformation comes from.

 

why is everyone saying they rated the si 16mpg city when it says 20mpg city/29mpg highway.

 

<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by reaper702 &raquo;</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">why is everyone saying they rated the si 16mpg city when it says 20mpg city/29mpg highway.</TD></TR></TABLE>

wow 20 is still low....i hope itll be worth it

 

<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by iamtwan &raquo;</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">

wow 20 is still low....i hope itll be worth it </TD></TR></TABLE>

I romp around in my SI quite often and still average around 30.

 

i have a 07 with about 2500 miles on the clock and i get about 31 mpg average. as far as driving concern, i do about 50/50 city & highway, and i usually shift between 3k & 4k.

i must admit, the car got a bit better mpg after the motor has been broken in.

 

I believe the EPA started running the AC during their tests, as well as are being a little more generous with the go pedal. This is all to reflect how most Americans drive in the real world.

 

Yeah I thought EPA updated this year trying to calculate *real world mileage*...

I get the 32hwy advertised on my Si no problem if i dont drive crazy all the time (Which i do). I've done pretty well getting 26mpg mixed with all the spirited driving i do.

 

Ive actually been tracking my mileage for the past month or so and on an all highway run i hit 33mpg's with the A/C on for a good portion. Most of my driving is mixed and average around 26-28mpg's.

 

The worst mileage I have gotten on my 07 SI Sedan was 22mpg
The best was 33.5 mpg. (cruising at 70mph)

The normal city I get around 25mpg.

Gas mileage was one of the things that was pointing me to the standard Civic, now looking at the new numbers I'm glad I went with the SI!!!

 

stoopid but relivant question... does freeing up the intake system ie: CAI give you better gas mileage?

more air=more fuel or less restrictive=better MPG

 

<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by redciv &raquo;</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">stoopid but relivant question... does freeing up the intake system ie: CAI give you better gas mileage?

more air=more fuel or less restrictive=better MPG</TD></TR></TABLE>

The idea is that you're getting several things:

1) More air at a lower rpm. So you're making more power sooner, so say, if you're making enough power at 2500 rpm that you used to make at 2750 rpm, your engine is under lesser load.

2) More throttle response. The air intake is more sensitive to throttle input because there's a less restrictive path, so you 're better able to modulate the engine's power.

3) Leaner mixture. You're slightly leaning out the air/fuel ratio by introducing more air into the engine than the old intake.

 

I would think in MOST cases (maybe not all) but anything you do to your engine to increase the power output you will be decreasing the fuel mileage.

I had a 02 Mustang GT that I did catback, CAI, MAS, T/A and underdrive pullies and I went from a 19mpg city to about 15 to 17 depending on how much I was on the throttle for that tank full. Most the time it was hard to stay off the throttle because it sounded so good

 

<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by Brew1 &raquo;</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">I would think in MOST cases (maybe not all) but anything you do to your engine to increase the power output you will be decreasing the fuel mileage.

I had a 02 Mustang GT that I did catback, CAI, MAS, T/A and underdrive pullies and I went from a 19mpg city to about 15 to 17 depending on how much I was on the throttle for that tank full. Most the time it was hard to stay off the throttle because it sounded so good </TD></TR></TABLE>

Yea that's the thing- if you don't change your driving habits, you'll see a slight (some say 5%) increase in mpg, but with the fun bits attached it's hard to keep off the throttle.

 

I don't really think the new EPA system changes things much, since the engine and everything hasn't changed a bit we're all going to get around the same mileage. even if its 20/29 it gets better mileage than my 06 325i which only gets 21 at best

 

<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by po’Asian &raquo;</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">I don't really think the new EPA system changes things much, since the engine and everything hasn't changed a bit we're all going to get around the same mileage. even if its 20/29 it gets better mileage than my 06 325i which only gets 21 at best</TD></TR></TABLE>

All it is is a more realistic assessment of gas mileage. Quicker acceleration, use of A/C, etc.

I've been trying out the 2008 mileage estimates and they're pretty darn close to reality, unlike a lot of the pre '08 EPA estimates. Automakers were able to play the system with the old estimates, but it didn't necessarily translate to real world numbers.