38 replies to this topic

[Bogatyr]

43 mpg is pretty good.
The highest I ever got in my CRX was 52, that was on a trip to WI in 1990. The highest mileage I ever got in a Honda was 54 in my old 1991 DX hatch. More recently, the daily driver (1996 Civic LX sedan) got 49mpg on a trip to CT. This vehicle will regularly get 38 in the city and 46 on the highway, 49 was just a nice treat as gas prices climb.

Bogatyr

[LargeOrangeFont]

my 86 Si hatch got 31 weather I beat in it or cruised it. It needed a tune up though.

my CRX only gets 27 or so w\ all the vac. stuff removed. Something is amiss. lol

Edited by LargeOrangeFont, 03 June 2004 - 12:54 PM.

[Condor]

I get better gas mileage in the summer with the AC on than the
windows down. It appears that urban legand is true at least
for my particular vehicle.

best milage is obviously in the winter, cold air, and no AC. (sure)

I'm really hatin it I got those 195s now.

[shadowboy]

I get better gas mileage in the summer with the AC on than the
windows down. It appears that urban legand is true at least
for my particular vehicle.

best milage is obviously in the winter, cold air, and no AC. (sure)

I'm really hatin it I got those 195s now.

silly urban legend. the drag created by having the windows open is WAY worse for gas mileage than the a/c compressor. it doesn't consume THAT much power...

[bryman10]

original brochure lists epa estimated milage for the Si as 30/32.

I would have to check later on the original window sticker,
but 30/32 or 30/33 should be correct.

This is where I got this info.:



This was the original window sticker from a guy at the Florida CRX meet this past year (October) bought the car new and kept ALL the paperwork...cool.

bryman

[Gasoline Fumes]

I wonder what kind of mileage a CRX would get if you really tried?
HF roller rocker head on a 1.3 block
HF transmission
over-inflated 155/80 13 tires
power valve, accelerator pump and secondary on carb disabled
no mirrors

Or maybe raise the rear and lower the front so it's always going downhill.

[Greg Gauper]

I remember a TV show in the mid 80's by David Horowitz ??sp?? where he would challange a product that advertised extravegant claims. I think it was called 'Fight Back' or something to that effect.

One of his challenges was when the HF's first came out and they advertised something in the area of 50-60mpg (highway). So he took one, filled it comepletely full to the filler neck (so he could measure exactly how much gas he added), drove it for 200 miles and then refilled it to the exact same level. It took like 3 - 3.5 gallons. Needless to say it passed the test.


Years ago (1989), I was caravaning up to Brainerd Int'l Raceway for a race with a fellow racer friend of mine. This was back in my younger, foolish days when I used to drive the car to the track, race, and (hopefully) drive home. My friend decided to borrow a trailer and tow vehicle. Anyway, we set out for our 8-hour trip and I decide to tuck in pretty close to get a draft, but far enough to give me some reation time, hoping that I might get a little better gas mileage. I trusted my friend and also knew that there was no way he could stop quicker than me with his trailer. We get 200 miles down the road and he signals that he needs to fill up. I look at my gauge and it isn't even down to 3/4 yet? Oh well, maybe the gauge is broken. Might as well gas up. Takes about 3.5 gallons! I was getting over 60MPG while my firend was getting about 10MPG. This continued for the whole trip. This was in my DX model 84 CRX. My normal mileage was typically 35 city, low 40's highway.....and about 12mpg on the racetrack

[tjbizzo]

I'm really hatin it I got those 195s now.

Hey Condor, you want me to take those 195's off your hands for a reasonable price? Email me with details if ya do.

[Condor]

LOL no but I appreciate it, seriously.

I can't buy another one thing right now.

I'll wait till they wear out and just replace with 185s.

I was just mentioning it cause at .99/gas 3-4 mpg
is not big deal, at 2, possibly going near 3/gallon,
it becomes a big deal.

I would like to find out if there was some lobbying effort
by whoever, the man, the big 3, to get the EPA to estimate
milage different. Because something definately did change.

I'm also gonna try to order my tires online next time
I guess when the time comes I'll be looking here for advice

[UltimX]

Greg Gauper: so a HF should get better gas milage than that correct?

[Greg Gauper]

Yes.

The HF was sold and marketed as the 'high mileage' champ. The DX and later Si were the 'performance' cars.

The HF was engineered with tradeoffs for better mileage, giving up performance.

First - it had a 1300cc motor instead of 1500cc like the DX and Si.

Second - it had taller, skinny tires for lower rolling resistance.

Third - it had a taller final drive and 4 speeds instead of 5 to reduce tranny weight and cut mechanical (friction) losses.

Fourth - it had solid front rotors and aluminum rear drums to reduce unsprung weight.

Fifth - It had a lighter rear axle, no rear sway bar and no passenger mirror to save weight and reduce aero drag.

There are probably other minor details.

[xThexHeadx]

Man, that red paint is beautiful!

Last summer I made a trip to Denver from Casper and managed to get 46 mpg. I drove slow (60-65 mpg) and was still rolling on the stock 13's. I had just purchased the car about a month earlier and didn't trust it (mechanically speaking) that's why I kept the speed down.

[gtpilot]

Man, that red paint is beautiful!

Last summer I made a trip to Denver from Casper and managed to get 46 mpg.  I drove slow (60-65 mpg) and was still rolling on the stock 13's.  I had just purchased the car about a month earlier and didn't trust it (mechanically speaking) that's why I kept the speed down.

What were you doing in Denver? (let alone Casper...)

Kirk

[shadowboy]

Yes.

The HF was sold and marketed as the 'high mileage' champ.  The DX and later Si were the 'performance' cars.

The HF was engineered with tradeoffs for better mileage, giving up performance.

First - it had a 1300cc motor instead of 1500cc like the DX and Si. 

Second - it had taller, skinny tires for lower rolling resistance.

Third - it had a taller final drive and 4 speeds instead of 5 to reduce tranny weight and cut mechanical (friction) losses.

Fourth - it had solid front rotors and aluminum rear drums to reduce unsprung weight.

Fifth - It had a lighter rear axle, no rear sway bar and no passenger mirror to save weight and reduce aero drag.

There are probably other minor details.

my 87 HF was a 1.5L with 5-speed.

and there are MANY others.

HF pistons have 2 rings (1 compression, 1 oil - lower friction).
HF has thinner, lighter rods.
HF has roller rockers.
CVCC (duh)

i am sure there are others i can't think of right now.

[UltimX]

PLastic valve cover correct? I think this stuff should be in the FAQ as far as infomation goes. I want to get a hf.... the only problem is i need to find one.