A mistake in the seller's website?
Thread Starter
Junior Member
Joined: Aug 2008
Posts: 18
Likes: 0
From: Orange County, CA, US
A mistake in the seller's website? MPG-wise
Hey guys, I notice that s2000's have different mpg for carmax.com
For example, the 2004 and 2005 models are stated as of having 17/23 MPG "based on EPA estimates".
The 2006 has 18/24 MPG "based on EPA estimates"
All other models seem to have 20/26 MPG
Is this true? I've read on many reviews and websites that the 2006 and 2007 model has 20/26 MPG, although I'm not sure on 2005 and below.
Modified by s3ngk4ng at 10:35 AM 8/23/2008
For example, the 2004 and 2005 models are stated as of having 17/23 MPG "based on EPA estimates".
The 2006 has 18/24 MPG "based on EPA estimates"
All other models seem to have 20/26 MPG
Is this true? I've read on many reviews and websites that the 2006 and 2007 model has 20/26 MPG, although I'm not sure on 2005 and below.
Modified by s3ngk4ng at 10:35 AM 8/23/2008
Honda-Tech Member
Joined: Oct 2001
Posts: 3,310
Likes: 5
From: ILM, NC
Re: A mistake in the seller's website? (s3ngk4ng)
my window sticker from my 02 says 20/26
check this site out....it is straight from the horses mouth...."Honda"
just look in the archives for the year you are interested in......
http://www.hondanews.com/
check this site out....it is straight from the horses mouth...."Honda"
just look in the archives for the year you are interested in......
http://www.hondanews.com/
Thread Starter
Junior Member
Joined: Aug 2008
Posts: 18
Likes: 0
From: Orange County, CA, US
Re: A mistake in the seller's website? (ReddotsS2K)
<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by ReddotsS2K »</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">00-03 have the same motor, motor changed in 04-05, and then 06+ have drive by wire. that prob explains the changes.</TD></TR></TABLE>
oh darn, so it might actually be true... now to aim for 07 instead of 06 T__T
<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by cmdr430 »</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">
check this site out....it is straight from the horses mouth...."Honda"
just look in the archives for the year you are interested in......
http://www.hondanews.com/</TD></TR></TABLE>
Oooh, thanks for the website, I'll take a look at it once it isn't down (or is it permanently down?
oh darn, so it might actually be true... now to aim for 07 instead of 06 T__T
<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by cmdr430 »</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">
check this site out....it is straight from the horses mouth...."Honda"
just look in the archives for the year you are interested in......
http://www.hondanews.com/</TD></TR></TABLE>
Oooh, thanks for the website, I'll take a look at it once it isn't down (or is it permanently down?
Thread Starter
Junior Member
Joined: Aug 2008
Posts: 18
Likes: 0
From: Orange County, CA, US
Re: A mistake in the seller's website? (ReddotsS2K)
oh it wasn't, that's why I'm wondering if 07 is the better deal.
The website says 06 have 18/24 and 07 is 20/26 while 08 is 18/25 or something like that for the 08 (probably because of the suspension...?)
And this is where it doesn't make sense: the 06 and 07 have a different MPG when there were almost no changes from 06 to 07.
I guess something went wrong in the mpg testing for those EPA guys.
The website says 06 have 18/24 and 07 is 20/26 while 08 is 18/25 or something like that for the 08 (probably because of the suspension...?)
And this is where it doesn't make sense: the 06 and 07 have a different MPG when there were almost no changes from 06 to 07.
I guess something went wrong in the mpg testing for those EPA guys.
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
turboteg90
Honda Civic / Del Sol (1992 - 2000)
5
Sep 4, 2008 03:09 PM
gsxryder415
All Motor / Naturally Aspirated
5
Nov 26, 2006 06:16 PM