gas mileage...hate to brag, but it's pretty good

[Bogatyr]

So I had to work out of state the other day and drove my trusty 1996 Honda Civic LX sedan the 125 miles each way. Now, it's highway for most of the way, but in a few sections, the road is posted at 45 and 50mph.

So I get back home, fill up the tank and I have 49.37mpg for this trip. Nice. I'll usually get 38 in the city, 46 in the highway, but this is a nice bonus when gas prices climb.

Just drive steadily, not like a maniac (I was driving 65 in some 55 zones and was the slowest car on the road...many were driving over 75...) and keep the vehicle maintained...you'll be rewarded.

Bogatyr

 

[T-Keith]

45-50 is one of the best speeds for gas mileage, that's all there's to it.

I get 30-32 mpg in my $450 car with a 2.5L engine, I think that's pretty good. But my comute is 65-70 with stoplights.

And I drive fairly aggresively.

Even when abusing it around town I still get 28mpg.

-T

[ May 14, 2004, 09:23 AM: Message edited by: T-Keith ]

 

[Cutehumor]

with gas prices soaring..I bet other members will compensate by not using syn and going back to dino..just a hunch

 

[Matt_S]

That's really impressive, Bogatyr. I'll have to start tracking my wife's Civic to see what we're getting.

Regarding the switch back to dino, no way, at least not for me. We've been driving the Civic a lot more, though.

 

[Bogatyr]

If I have to cut corners, it won't be in the oil I use. This Civic has had a diet of Schaeffer 7000 for a while and it seems to be pretty happy with it. Gas costs so much more per mile than oil that I don't think it makes sense to change to dino from synth for financial reasons onless there's nothing else to cut...but seriously, you could drop your cable TV and save gobs more money than switching back to dino.

Matt_S, yeah, take some numbers, I knew the vehicle usually averaged 39 or so while my wife was driving it, still 39 isn't too bad either.

I have noticed that I've been driving the Civic a lot more than the Rover lately, but that's the difference between 15mpg and 40...

Bogatyr

 

[Digital2k2]

that's great mileage! does the LX have the same engine as the EX? everytime I look on eadmunds.com it says the ex only gets 28-35 and that the hx gets 36-44?

been really thinking about a civic... like from 93 to 95. are they pretty good cars? ex or hx engine better?

 

[quadrun1]

If I'm not mistaken, the base engine is in the LX, the fuel economy leader is the HX, and the EX has the most horsepower (excluding the sporty Si)

A few years ago, I drove with a friend in her Civic HX from Houston to Oklahoma City, pedal to the metal (mostly 90-110 mph) and it still returned 38 mpg!

The '93 to '96 Civics are great cars, and the Honda 1.6L four is a real gem! Highly recommended.

 

[Bogatyr]

Yep, Quadrun is on the money with the different engine types. The HX is the economy model, the DX and LX have the base engine and the EX gets the sporty one. I seem to recall my engine being 1.5 liters and the EX having a 1.6 liter, but I might have too many displacement numbers in the noggin at the moment...

My only caveat about Hondas of this vintage is the catalytic converter. In my year Civic and 1997 as well, I think, the cat and exhaust manifold are one peice. Honda was also the subject of a lawsuit regarding emissions for these vehicles, and they extended the emissions warranty (including the cat) up to 8 years or 150k miles. So if you end up out of the warranty, start throwing P0420 and have to replace the cat out of pocket, you're looking at about $486 or so for the part...eep.

Other than that, you can expect to see the typical Honda wheel well rust starting in these vehicles. My 1996 has no rust yet, but I live in the rust belt and expect to see in soon, no biggie.

Digital2k2,
I just bought a 1992 Civic for my brother in law with only 100k on it...changed the oil promptly and send in a sample for a UOA to see if anything is seriously wrong. A friend drives Bror Jace's old 1995 Civic and I try to keep that thing up, currently 150k on the clock. They're just good vehicles, reliable, relatively easy to work on and deliver good gas mileage. If you do find one for sale (which is rare because people often keep these things until they rust to pieces) snap it up if it hasn't been abused.

Bogatyr

 

[Bror Jace]

Yeah, when I drove that '95 Civic Coupe, I had 3 tanks in a row which turned in 45.5 mpg.

But since I drove fairly aggressively, that's the best I ever saw from that lil' dude. The wider tires (went from 13"x5" to 14" x 6") didn't help ... but the K&N cone intake and DC Sports cat-back seemed to have no effect. Mileage was down to about 38-40mpg when I sold it to Subie-Doo.

In '95, the DX had a 1.5L and the LX & EX had a 1.6. I lost track of the motors after that.

On a related note, the '03 Sentra Spec-V's mileage is picking up. I was at 28.3mpg average for the first year ... but since dumping the Red Line motor oil and filling up with Schaeffer 5W30, It's averaged 30.25.

Don't know if this is because this is the first time I've driven the car after break-in in really warm weather and/or something else like the new oil, new air filter, the ECU reflash, etc ...

--- Bror Jace

 

[andyfish]

I just filled up today, 9.8 gallons for 394 miles on a 210k 1995 Honda Civic EX Coupe. 40 MPG is a nice thought driving that uncomfortable car.

 

[timzak]

My '03 Civic EX has averaged 35.6 mpg over its 7700 mile life so far. Best tank was 39 and worst was 33ish. Honda rated this car at 32/36 city/hwy. The car spends 90% of its life in highway work commutes that total ~60 miles per day.

 

[Bror Jace]

andyfish, uncomfortable? You must be a big boy. I never was uncomfortable in my Integra nor my Civic ... and I'd taken 12 hour trips in it. I wasn't exactly "fresh" after that trip but I wouldn't have any better in any other car.

A softer, cushier car might have killed me as I fell asleep at the wheel ... or at least dulled my reflexes enough that I'd be unable to take evasive maneuvers when some careless clown cuts me off.

timzak, I've heard LOTS of people complain that the mileage in newer Honda Civics. However, I'd expect yours to improve once you have at least 10,000 miles on the car.

--- Bror Jace

 

[andyfish]

quote:

---

Originally posted by Bror Jace:
andyfish, uncomfortable? You must be a big boy. I never was uncomfortable in my Integra nor my Civic ... and I'd taken 12 hour trips in it. I wasn't exactly "fresh" after that trip but I wouldn't have any better in any other car.

A softer, cushier car might have killed me as I fell asleep at the wheel ... or at least dulled my reflexes enough that I'd be unable to take evasive maneuvers when some careless clown cuts me off.

--- Bror Jace

---

The seat cushion is not very stiff anymore and does not support very well. The noise is intrusive as you drive also. I can tolerate about 1 hour drives and then enough. I am actually relatively small 5'8 about 145 lbs.

 

[kansaisubaru]

The EX civics, along with the Si, have the VTEC engine, the other trims don't. That's the main difference. I am not sure if this holds for the mid '90s but I think it does. Definately for the new ones. Hence, the VTEC consumes more gas, but delivers more power from the same displacement. VTEC is how Honda gets 240hp from the naturally aspirated S2000's 2.0/2.2L four cycl engine.

 

[brianl703]

quote:

---

Originally posted by kansaisubaru:
Hence, the VTEC consumes more gas, but delivers more power from the same displacement.

---

Why, if the valve timing below the point at which VTEC is active is the same as a non-VTEC engine, would a VTEC engine consume more gas if VTEC isn't active? (Assuming that the engine displacement in either case is the same).

For that matter, if we ignore the effects of aerodynamic drag on fuel economy, why would it consume more gas if VTEC *IS* active?

 

[Palut]

quote:

---

Originally posted by Bror Jace:
andyfish,

A softer, cushier car might have killed me as I fell asleep at the wheel ... or at least dulled my reflexes enough that I'd be unable to take evasive maneuvers when some careless clown cuts me off.

--- Bror Jace

---

This is where the Germans have us beat with the Autobahn. I truly believe that if our rural freeways were a little better maintained so that we could have no speed limits, or limits around 90 or 100 mph, people would be much more focused on the road, and we would have fewer accidents. As an example, Montana's freeways were safer when the speed limit was "Reasonable and Prudent" than at any other time.

 

[brianl703]

quote:

---

Originally posted by Palut:
or limits around 90 or 100 mph, people would be much more focused on the road, and we would have fewer accidents.

---

If you could somehow deal with the problem of drivers who cannot or will not merge onto the 65MPH highway without making everyone slow down, this might be a good idea.

 

[2003TRD]

yes, we must kill these drivers.

 

[timzak]

quote:

---

Originally posted by Bror Jace:


timzak, I've heard LOTS of people complain that the mileage in newer Honda Civics. However, I'd expect yours to improve once you have at least 10,000 miles on the car.

--- Bror Jace

---

Actually, I wasn't complaining at all. I'm quite pleased with my gas mileage. I'm basically AVERAGING (over the 8k mile life of the car) the EPA highway estimate on the window sticker. Any improvements over time will just be a plus.

 

[Bror Jace]

"I'm basically averaging ... the EPA highway estimate on the window sticker. Any improvements over time will just be a plus."

It's funny, but I always look at the EPA numbers as a basement. Unless I'm really gettin' on it, I always do better except during the winter or when I'm stuck in catastrophic traffic.

I think my Sentra SpecV's EPA numbers were 23/29 but my last three tankfuls of mixed driving were over 30mpg.

--- Bror Jace