 |
 | Home | Contact Us | FAQ | Search & Site Map | Link to Us |
 | Sign In | Join | Other 45 Sites in Network |
Car Forum / Honda Cars / December 2005Honda Civic Hybrid
I bought a 2004 Civic Hybrid about a year and a half ago, and have been VERY happy with it. At this point, my average mileage, according to the panel display is 42 mpg. I use it mostly in town and avoid freeways whenever possible. Highway mileage is a bit better if I keep my speed at 65, but drops pretty precipitately at speeds over 70. I'm just wondering how this compares with the experience of other Civic Hybrid owners. After 2 years, I'm getting 33 summer 34 winter - very unhappy - dealer checked, nothing showed up. 85 percent town driving. >I bought a 2004 Civic Hybrid about a year and a half ago, and have been VERY >happy with it. At this point, my average mileage, according to the panel [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] >I'm just wondering how this compares with the experience of other Civic >Hybrid owners. > After 2 years, I'm getting 33 summer 34 winter - very unhappy - dealer > checked, nothing showed up. 85 percent town driving. Wow, you can get better than that with an 06 non-hybrid Civic. Shoot, I can get that with a 95 Corolla... > After 2 years, I'm getting 33 summer 34 winter - very unhappy - dealer > checked, nothing showed up. 85 percent town driving. Rechargeable batteries take less and less of a charge as they accumulate cycles. I very much wonder if this effect results in dropping fuel economy over time with hybrids. John >> After 2 years, I'm getting 33 summer 34 winter - very unhappy - dealer >> checked, nothing showed up. 85 percent town driving. > >Rechargeable batteries take less and less of a charge as they accumulate >cycles. I very much wonder if this effect results in dropping fuel >economy over time with hybrids. not true, certainly not anywhere near true enough to be used as a blanket statement. In many cases, its as much straight time as cycles, and in other battery types, its mainly dependant on the type of cycle. >John >>>After 2 years, I'm getting 33 summer 34 winter - very unhappy - dealer >>>checked, nothing showed up. 85 percent town driving. [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] > blanket statement. In many cases, its as much straight time as cycles, > and in other battery types, its mainly dependant on the type of cycle. Splitting hairs a bit here, aren't you? The point is that rechargeable batteries become less and less effective as they age and eventually fail to take a charge at all. John > After 2 years, I'm getting 33 summer 34 winter - very unhappy - dealer > checked, nothing showed up. 85 percent town driving. [quoted text clipped - 8 lines] >>I'm just wondering how this compares with the experience of other Civic >>Hybrid owners. I just upped my tire pressure all around from 28 psi to 40psi, and saw an IMMEDIATE improvement of 5.5 mpg in town driving--from 42 to 46.5 mpg. I expect to see an even greater improvement at 60 mpg. Max pressure for OEM tires is 55 psi. Low air pressure could account for your poor gas mileage. Have you checked around to see if such a high pressure (to me) is safe? Maybe it is, but I'd at least google. Off the top of my head, I would expect the tires to heat up while driving, and so raise the pressure, perhaps dangerously close to the design limit. > I just upped my tire pressure all around from 28 psi to 40psi, and saw an > IMMEDIATE improvement of 5.5 mpg in town driving--from 42 to 46.5 mpg. I > expect to see an even greater improvement at 60 mpg. Max pressure for OEM > tires is 55 psi. > > Low air pressure could account for your poor gas mileage. > Have you checked around to see if such a high pressure (to > me) is safe? > > Maybe it is, but I'd at least google. The very first thing to do is look for the manufacturer's recommended tire pressures, and start there. 28 sounds awfully low for a hybrid. > Have you checked around to see if such a high pressure (to > me) is safe? [quoted text clipped - 14 lines] >> >> Low air pressure could account for your poor gas mileage. As I said in my previous post, the maximum air pressure shown on the tire is 55 psi. I'd feel completely safe going to 45 psi. So far, I can't feel any bad effects in the ride--just a tad stiffer. I'd say it actually rides very well. Incidentally, running the tires on my Grand Caravan at 38psi makes for a better ride than the recommended 30. > As I said in my previous post, the maximum air pressure shown on the tire is > 55 psi. I'd feel completely safe going to 45 psi. So far, I can't feel any > bad effects in the ride--just a tad stiffer. I'd say it actually rides very > well. What does it say on the sticker inside the driver's door jamb? On my '93 Accord, the recommended pressure specified by Honda on the sticker is 29psi, and my current all season tires specify a maximum pressure of 44psi. I usually put 30-32psi in them. But one time I tried it at about 35psi, and it felt too jittery for my liking. I didn't keep it like that long enough to see how it affected my gas mileage. >>As I said in my previous post, the maximum air pressure shown on the tire is >>55 psi. I'd feel completely safe going to 45 psi. So far, I can't feel any [quoted text clipped - 8 lines] > it at about 35psi, and it felt too jittery for my liking. I didn't keep > it like that long enough to see how it affected my gas mileage. yeah, it kind of amazes me that there are so many "but it says 45 on the tire" people out there. do they also drive 120 because that's what is says on their speedo? logic dictates they should. fact is, honda, who know far more about the dynamics of their vehicles than i suspect do /any/ of us. not following their advice is going to have negative results. and /i/ can attest to that from recent experience. i have an 89 civic dx hatch, and have a set of si tires on it. what i didn't know, not /owning/ an si or the owners manual, is that the si tire pressures are lower than the dx's skinnier tires. so, having now applied the correct pressures i am pleased to report that i can happily drive a certain freeway on-ramp much faster than before because i'm not skipping and bumping as much on it's rutted broken hairpin surface! truly, correct pressures are a good thing. >> As I said in my previous post, the maximum air pressure shown on the tire >> is [quoted text clipped - 11 lines] > it at about 35psi, and it felt too jittery for my liking. I didn't keep > it like that long enough to see how it affected my gas mileage. This has been quite an issue in the Toyota Prius group in Yahoo. The tires (at least on the first generation) are max inflation of 50 psi but Toyota recommends pressures of 33 psi front and rear. At those pressures the tires show serious underinflation wear. The gurus have pretty much settled on 42 front, 40 rear. The tires still show signs of underinflation wear, but it isn't as bad. Dunno about the Civic hybrid, but the Prius is an unusually heavy car for the tire size, which means it has to have XL (IIRC) load range tires. Those load ratings are only valid at maximum inflation; there is some arcane derating system as the tire pressures decrease. Mike > This has been quite an issue in the Toyota Prius group in Yahoo. The tires > (at least on the first generation) are max inflation of 50 psi but Toyota [quoted text clipped - 9 lines] > > Mike The Prius uses every trick in the book to increase fuel economy ratings, including many which have nothing to do with hybrid technology. Few people realize that narrow, tall tires give better fuel economy than wide, squat tires. The effect isn't huge, but it is there. John >> This has been quite an issue in the Toyota Prius group in Yahoo. The >> tires (at least on the first generation) are max inflation of 50 psi but [quoted text clipped - 16 lines] > > John Tire technology has developed amazingly in recent years. The rolling resistance of today's tires is way less than it was. I don't know, but I suspect Honda has done enough homework to have tires with low rolling resistance as OEM on its cars. I think it's more than the larger contact patch that affects mileage when tires are under-inflated--a low tire has MUCH more rolling resistance than a correctly or reasonably over inflated tire. At 40-45 psi, the LAST thing I'd worry about is heat buildup: most of the heat buildup arises from internal resistance in the tire. IIRC, that's called hysteresis loss >> This has been quite an issue in the Toyota Prius group in Yahoo. The >> tires (at least on the first generation) are max inflation of 50 psi but [quoted text clipped - 16 lines] > > John Oddly, the OEM Low Rolling Resistance tires operated at the recommended pressure give almost 5% poorer fuel economy than more standard tires at proper inflation. The most popular aftermarket tires for the current generation Prius are the Michelin Hydroedge, with maximum rated inflation (I forget the numbers) in the front and 2 psi less in the rear. The "bleeding edge" in fuel economy is a marketing issue, not a design issue. The Prius was originally designed to be a 21st century car from the ground up, and the revolutionary passenger capsule and suspension designs were the first considerations. The original design outline (in November 1993) only called for 50% better fuel economy than the equivalent Corolla and there was no thought to use a hybrid power train. It was only when the fuel economy spec was increased another 50% a year later that the team turned to what was then very experimental hybrid technology. See http://www.vfaq.net/docs/Prius_that_shook_world.pdf (note: more than 1 MB file size). Mike > Oddly, the OEM Low Rolling Resistance tires operated at the recommended > pressure give almost 5% poorer fuel economy than more standard tires at > proper inflation. You don't make any sense here. The proper inflation for ANY tire is what's recommended by the manufacturer. There is no different inflation value for a replacement tire than there is for the tires that came on the car. You must be thinking that the "max inflation pressure" listed on the side of the tire is some kind of "proper" inflation amount. It's not. >> Oddly, the OEM Low Rolling Resistance tires operated at the recommended >> pressure give almost 5% poorer fuel economy than more standard tires at [quoted text clipped - 8 lines] > You must be thinking that the "max inflation pressure" listed on the > side of the tire is some kind of "proper" inflation amount. It's not. No - the proper inflation is both application dependent and tire dependent. The load rating on the tire is only applicable at the maximum rated pressure, regardless of the vehicle. Car manufacturers state an inflation with the OEM tires that produces the ride they want with adequate inflation for safety with the tires they provide, but the tire manufacturers are not bound to the car manufacturer's recommendations when they offer a tire for that car. The good news is that people usually want wider tires, which increase the margin of safety between the car manufacturer's recommendations and the minimum inflation. My partner worked at a Discount Tire when he was young and absolutely rails about the folly of putting tire pressures in the owner's manual. Tire retailers have charts that tell them the proper pressure for the tire in a given operating load range, and he got no end of grief from people who said that didn't match the owner's manual... as though the manual had any foreknowledge of the tires that were to be used. The real test of inflation (as long as it is at least the required inflation for the load and no more than the max inflation) is tread wear. I don't bother with the tape test for inflation wear because I'm lazy that way - I choose an inflation and wait until they wear out, then look at the wear pattern. I've never seen a tire show overinflation wear. Mike > My partner worked at a Discount Tire when he was young and absolutely rails > about the folly of putting tire pressures in the owner's manual. Ah. Now that I can consider the source, that your ramblings are insane at least makes sense. Discount Tire. Yep. >> My partner worked at a Discount Tire when he was young and absolutely >> rails [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > > Discount Tire. Yep. And your source is better? Mike > > Discount Tire. Yep. > > > And your source is better? Than some guy who worked at Discount Tire? It's not hard to get better than that. >> > Discount Tire. Yep. >> > [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > > It's not hard to get better than that. You are certainly free to do what you want. The numbers in the owner's manual are not going to be dangerously far off for any tire that is suited to the car, so go for it. But I'm sure you understand that I will take the advice of the tire chain that has given me first class service for decades over your advice, your prejudices notwithstanding. And the "some guy" has proven his overall competence to me many times over the years while you are a variable source of opinion, so we are separating on this one. Mike > But I'm sure you understand that I will take the advice of the tire chain > that has given me first class service for decades Discount Tire. Let me guess: you take your engine advice from Jiffy Lube. >> But I'm sure you understand that I will take the advice of the tire chain >> that has given me first class service for decades > > Discount Tire. > > Let me guess: you take your engine advice from Jiffy Lube. Very droll. As I say, no accounting for your prejudices... and still you offer no support for them. You are diminishing yourself in my eyes. Mike > > Discount Tire. > > > > Let me guess: you take your engine advice from Jiffy Lube. > > > Very droll. As I say, no accounting for your prejudices... and still you > offer no support for them. I don't have to. I know the facts. And one fact I know is, you take your advice from some guy who used to work at Discount Tire--and you claim it to be the gospel. >> Very droll. As I say, no accounting for your prejudices... and still you >> offer no support for them. [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > And one fact I know is, you take your advice from some guy who used to > work at Discount Tire--and you claim it to be the gospel. As I pointed out, that "some guy" is my partner of 5 years. I have had good advice and stellar support from various stores in the Discount Tire chain for more than 20 years. In that time, I have seen or heard no complaints I can recall regarding Discount Tire. I have had exactly one in all these years: the mechanic failed to tighten the lug nuts on a wheel after a repair. And I never presented it as gospel, just as the most reliable info I had available. I don't know what you have against Discount Tire, and you still don't say - only that you "have the facts" you don't see fit to share. You don't know my partner but you assume he is less competent than you, particularly in the field of tires, a premise I find laughable. So who would you have me go with - somebody who has earned my trust or some random anonymous guy who offers no support for his ravings? Maybe I should listen to Alex, the "Toyota kills" guy, because he has less going for him than you do. Mike I'm not finding any safety issues per se by inflating to near that which is printed on the side of the tire. The only caution is that overinflation may lead to greater wear down the middle of the tire than on the edges, so tires should be inspected more often. If wear down the middle is detected, reduce the pressure. > "Elle" <honda.lioness@earthlink.net> wrote > > Have you checked around to see if such a high pressure (to [quoted text clipped - 20 lines] > bad effects in the ride--just a tad stiffer. I'd say it actually rides very > well. Check out this website: http://www.greenhybrid.com/compare/mileage/ It allows hybrid owners to submit their actual mileage results, and pools that information to provide "typical" results for each model. Granted, different people have different driving needs (ratio of city vs. highway miles) as well as driving styles (leadfoot vs. "sipper"), but it's a start... >I bought a 2004 Civic Hybrid about a year and a half ago, and have been VERY >happy with it. At this point, my average mileage, according to the panel [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] >I'm just wondering how this compares with the experience of other Civic >Hybrid owners. Oh yeah- our 2004 Civic Hybrid (automatic) is averaging 42.7 mpg over 25,000 miles with a mix of about 50% city driving and 50% rural road/hwy driving (hwy speeds usually around 70-80 mph)... We're pretty happy with our car, although the A/C cutting off with the engine at stops can be a little annoying on hot days (I believe the 2006 model has an electric compressor that runs the A/C even when the car stops at intersections) We are seriously considering an '06 Accord Hybrid as a second car for our household, although we would be more inclined if they had mated the IMA with the 4-cylinder (even better fuel economy, and the 4-cyl does a pretty good job at moving the car on its own). Cheers! >I bought a 2004 Civic Hybrid about a year and a half ago, and have been VERY >happy with it. At this point, my average mileage, according to the panel [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] >I'm just wondering how this compares with the experience of other Civic >Hybrid owners. > Oh yeah- our 2004 Civic Hybrid (automatic) is averaging 42.7 mpg over > 25,000 miles with a mix of about 50% city driving and 50% rural > road/hwy driving (hwy speeds usually around 70-80 mph)... I get 38-39 on a 03 Civic LX 5 spd with a mix of about 75% highway and 25% urban driving. Speed 75-80. > We're pretty happy with our car, although the A/C cutting off with the > engine at stops can be a little annoying on hot days (I believe the [quoted text clipped - 16 lines] > >I'm just wondering how this compares with the experience of other Civic > >Hybrid owners. > I bought a 2004 Civic Hybrid about a year and a half ago, and have been VERY > happy with it. At this point, my average mileage, according to the panel [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > I'm just wondering how this compares with the experience of other Civic > Hybrid owners. My experience after two years with a 2003 Civic Hybrid is about the same as yours. By the panel I usually get 42 mpg. By actual calculation of miles I've gone divided by gallons used, I'm getting right at 40 mpg. The vast majority of my miles are on city streets going to and from work. That's what I got the hybrid for - an economical work car. So I'm pretty happy averaging 40 mpg in very demanding stop and go conditions. Like you, I find I get very good mileage when going at between 50 and 65 miles an hour. And it drops pretty quickly at speeds over 70. How does your (everyone who posted here) mileage compare to mileage of a gas powered (non-hybrid) Civic? And how much more does a hybrid cost? >> I bought a 2004 Civic Hybrid about a year and a half ago, and have been >> VERY [quoted text clipped - 16 lines] > Like you, I find I get very good mileage when going at between 50 and > 65 miles an hour. And it drops pretty quickly at speeds over 70. My gas 2002 Civic 5 sp gets 38 to 43 mpg depending of couse on how much more time I send on highways. > How does your (everyone who posted here) mileage compare to mileage of a > gas powered (non-hybrid) Civic? [quoted text clipped - 22 lines] >> Like you, I find I get very good mileage when going at between 50 and >> 65 miles an hour. And it drops pretty quickly at speeds over 70. Exactly. I don't see the economics of buying a hybrid. > My gas 2002 Civic 5 sp gets 38 to 43 mpg depending of couse on how much > more time I send on highways. [quoted text clipped - 26 lines] >>> Like you, I find I get very good mileage when going at between 50 and >>> 65 miles an hour. And it drops pretty quickly at speeds over 70. > How does your (everyone who posted here) mileage compare to mileage of a > gas powered (non-hybrid) Civic? > > And how much more does a hybrid cost? I didn't buy my Civic Hybrid primarily in cost. I bought to save on gas, and also because I enjoy innovative technology. No disappointment on either score. > I didn't buy my Civic Hybrid primarily in cost. I bought to save on gas, Why? So you'll spend MORE for the privilege of using a bit less gas? >> I didn't buy my Civic Hybrid primarily in cost. I bought to save on gas, > > Why? > > So you'll spend MORE for the privilege of using a bit less gas? I thought I said the technology fascinates me. It's roughly for the same reason that I bought a Mazda RX4 about 30 years ago, and a Honda CRX Si in 1990. They're all fun to drive, and I like something different. What's hard to understand about that? Ah! The "toy factor"! I admit...that's an answer I can relate to! Enjoy it. >> How does your (everyone who posted here) mileage compare to mileage of a >> gas powered (non-hybrid) Civic? [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > and also because I enjoy innovative technology. No disappointment on > either score. >I bought a 2004 Civic Hybrid about a year and a half ago, and have been VERY >happy with it. At this point, my average mileage, according to the panel [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] >I'm just wondering how this compares with the experience of other Civic >Hybrid owners. Traded in an '04 Civic that pretty much ran 10% under the EPA mileages over the 1.5 year period for an '05 Accord Hybrid w/Navi. Mulitple tank average of the Civic's mixed local and up to 900 mile round trips was always over 40. The Accord's multiple tank averages are running 31 ish. Wife could not abide the highway 'feel' of the Civic (light-weight wandering in the lane) nor the 'slipping clutch' characteristic of the CVT. I must admit, I LOVE the power of the Accord V6. Has more get up and get than the non-hybrid V6 and even my old 72 Comet GT with the 302 V8 was a wimp (stock) compared to the Hybrid. Love the 'better' gas mileage. However, it is truly only an 'ego' or 'status' purchase with no monetary advantage over a standard vehicle. The premium is too high to recover unless gas prices get over $20/gal an as for being "green" the battery disposal is not. But... you have to breath air, you can bury batteries. |
Reply to this Message |
 Sign In
 Join
 My Latest Posts My Monitored Threads My Blog My Photo Gallery My Profile My Homepage Start New Thread Enable EMail Alerts Rate this Thread
|
©2009 Advenet LLC Privacy Policy - Terms of Use
This website includes both content owned or controlled by Advenet as well as content owned or controlled by third parties.