Assuming the computer is perfect, that means you are filling you tank consitantly to within 1/10 of a gallon of the same level each time and the gas pumps you use all exceed normal legal accuracy requirements.
Honda Civic Si
- Thread starter Winston
- Start date
- Status
^
but his car's computer calculations has nothing to do with his filling up at the gas pump.
but his car's computer calculations has nothing to do with his filling up at the gas pump.
How do you think he's double checking it?
Just to point out that most any engine is just as efficient as another. It's the stop-n-go driving of the mass of the vehicle that will kill mpg. If you have a massive car to support a massive engine, you WILL get a mpg hit that is accordingly massive. Is the Vette good on the hwy where it's mass is irrelavent? Yes, and it's a good thing for the owners. The good aerodyanamics of it helps, but if it matches a smaller car mpg on the hwy, DO NOT expect it to do so in brisk suburban stop-n-go, it won't happen.
I guess that must explain lighter cars with less power that get considerably poorer fuel economy.
The two cars are not comparable especially on sticker price.
However if you carry four passengers as a Civic SI can in a pinch, you need three Corvette's to do the same. So mileage on the Corvette 32/3 = 10.xx not so hot.
Corvette mileage computer vs Civic SI EPA = Apples vs Oranges comparison. You would have to a full tank comparison on pure highway to figure it out.
Still the mileage is decent on Corvette.
Measure a Civic SI on a similar highway cycle before you can agree
However if you carry four passengers as a Civic SI can in a pinch, you need three Corvette's to do the same. So mileage on the Corvette 32/3 = 10.xx not so hot.
Corvette mileage computer vs Civic SI EPA = Apples vs Oranges comparison. You would have to a full tank comparison on pure highway to figure it out.
Still the mileage is decent on Corvette.
Measure a Civic SI on a similar highway cycle before you can agree
Or you can grab your buddy with the LS1 camaro who also gets 29-30 that can take 4 people, and you will get better mileage than the Si would because the camaro will take less throttle response to move the vehicle the same amount because it has more power on tap.
Maybe I am incorrect in my assumption, but if you think that 30 mpg with 375 hp is decent, does that make the Si pathetic, or only 1/3 pathetic, because it has two more seats?
Compare a Corvette to an SI? What got this going anyway? Comparing an estimated $45,000 to a $20,000 car? Compare a Corvette and the SI to something in its’ own class. Even if the Corvette gets better gas mileage, I can buy a lot of gas for $25,000 difference. When I was making the decision it was between SI and similar cars. I opted for the Honda because of reported reliability. A Corvette never came to mind (Even though they are very cool cars; they're just out of my price range). I imagine it's a similar decision for those buying a Corvette. I doubt if they losing sleep at night thinking "Should I buy a Corvette or should I buy an SI."
Patman
Staff member
It's my fault for getting this off topic. I merely mentioned that I get the same highway mileage from my Corvette as this 4 cylinder SI does, and mine goes a heck of a lot quicker in the quarter mile too.
But it really isn't a fair comparison considering a new SI is a lot less than a new Corvette.
But it really isn't a fair comparison considering a new SI is a lot less than a new Corvette.
I agree. The whole thing on poor mileage is silly. Its a ~$20k car that goes decently fast AND handles well and reliable. What do you expect.
I spent $23k on each of my last two cars 2004 WRX wagon & 2005 Subaru Legacy GT Wagon. This was my limit for essentially a disposable thing that looses value. At least they last 10 years and return a small amount and provide a smile occasionally driving them.
I spent $23k on each of my last two cars 2004 WRX wagon & 2005 Subaru Legacy GT Wagon. This was my limit for essentially a disposable thing that looses value. At least they last 10 years and return a small amount and provide a smile occasionally driving them.
Did I say that or did you fail to read the post with a necessary degree of comprehension?
Still confused?
That was an sardonic response to your first sentence.
I read your post with the necessary degree of comprehension and found it wanting.
Care to cite any data showing how various examples of modern ICE engines vary greatly in their thermal efficientcy? Diesel/Petrol/Turbine would be the main categories. Procede.
There is -some- (but not a lot) of validity to what you say when you compare well developed examples of various types of engines at their point of maximum efficiency.
In the real world engines are run at speeds and loads drastically differant than their optimum efficiencey condition. How efficient engines are when run well off their peak BSFC conditions varies all over the map. You're the one that made the nonsensical statement, so it's up to you to back it up.
The ability of some engines, the Chevy LS2 being but one, to develop high BSFC numbers at less tha 1/3 it's peak torque RPM and relatively light throttle openings is truely remarkable compared to most engines. They do it without any claptrap like displacement on demand or variable valve timing hung on the engine, so there is still room for improvement.
[ July 02, 2006, 10:55 PM: Message edited by: XS650 ]
The thermal efficiency of different engines must vary. In addition, you have the thermal efficiency at different percent loads. I am sure that the tuning for every engine for mass produced cars is a balancing act to get the best; mpg, hp, low end torque, etc. The G35 is another example of a smaller car that gets croppy mileage. I also agree about the Aveo. bleh! and only 35mpg.
Seems like turbochargers should be getting more and more popular. They increase the efficiency of the engine along with allowing a small displacement motor to provide high hp.
Seems like turbochargers should be getting more and more popular. They increase the efficiency of the engine along with allowing a small displacement motor to provide high hp.
Are turbocharged engines usually MORE efficient? I thought it was the opposite since denser air requires a greater volume of fuel. The other factor is the driver, who will tend to drive harder.
A turbo lets you use a smaller engine for the same total power. So, when you cruising down the highway or around town, you are using a smaller engine than if you used a naturally aspirated engine with the same power.
A turbo lets you use a smaller engine for the same total power. So, when you cruising down the highway or around town, you are using a smaller engine than if you used a naturally aspirated engine with the same power.
- Status