I agree with you about the Accord. My wife's 2003 Accord
V6 gets nearly the same mileage with the AC on as it does with it off.
I attribute that to the V6's higher power output so that even with more
weight to carry it can run at lower rpms, unlike the Civic which needs
to rev up more to maintain the same speed, more so with its AC running.
As far as the EPA ratings--to me it's a kind of relative scale good
for comparisons but not to be taken literally. In fact, the only
vehicle we have had in recent years that actually matched its EPA rating
has been our SUV--for that one, its mileage is bad but gets almost
exactly what the EPA shows for it.

Ken

Jay A wrote:

> Well after being an '06 Civic owner for 3 months now, I can honestly say
> that the mileage in this thing is so overrated it's a shame. EPA states 30
> city 40 highway but in reality, it depends more on whether the air
> conditioning is on than anything. Yes I have gottan close to 40 (actually
> about 38 when I had no traffic at all and no AC on during the entire
> tankful...and that was only one tankful in the 3 months I have owned the
> car) but in reality, I rarely get more than 33mpg and lately with all the
> heat in SoCal, I am lucky to get 26mpg with the air on.
>
> What gets me is that the Accord I had prior to the Civic seemed to get just
> about the same mileage whether the air was on or not. MAN I miss that car. I
> am actually beginning to think about dumping the Civic and going back to the
> Accord. In addition to the poor mileage, the AM radio sounds awful, the air
> itself feels more like a heater when the car is not moving, and all in all
> I am not impressed with this vehicle one bit. The Accord is a great
> car...the Civic? You can have it!
>
>