Honda Car Forum

Hi,

Just wonder if a new 2004 Acura 1.7 EL Premium can really run up to 800
KM/50 Litre of gas (full tank)?

800km/50litre = 37.8 mi/gal. My 92 Integra 1.8 routinely gets 36 mi/gal
highway (avg 60 mph). Your EL is about the size of an Integra and with a
smaller and probably more efficient engine.

"nguyenn" <nghianguyen@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:2sRZc.177278$UTP.127763@twister01.bloor.is.ne t.cable.rogers.com...
> Hi,
>
> Just wonder if a new 2004 Acura 1.7 EL Premium can really run up to
800
> KM/50 Litre of gas (full tank)?
>
>

On Sun, 5 Sep 2004 20:51:07 -0400, "Batong Buhay"
<batong.buhay@comcast.net> waived the right to be silent and
professed:

>800km/50litre = 37.8 mi/gal. My 92 Integra 1.8 routinely gets 36 mi/gal
>highway (avg 60 mph). Your EL is about the size of an Integra and with a
>smaller and probably more efficient engine.
>
I get 36 MPG on the highway with my 3.2TL.

--
Nostalgia isn't what it used to be.

On 9/6/04 6:36 AM, in article 7tioj0l54b2bhqsdgic06gjot2bgm8sbao@4ax.com,
"Bruno" <insert@address.here> wrote:

> On Sun, 5 Sep 2004 20:51:07 -0400, "Batong Buhay"
> <batong.buhay@comcast.net> waived the right to be silent and
> professed:
>
>> 800km/50litre = 37.8 mi/gal. My 92 Integra 1.8 routinely gets 36 mi/gal
>> highway (avg 60 mph). Your EL is about the size of an Integra and with a
>> smaller and probably more efficient engine.
>>
> I get 36 MPG on the highway with my 3.2TL.
>
> --
> Nostalgia isn't what it used to be.

What year TL is that? 36 is pretty high for a TL unless you only drive 55
on the highway.

On Mon, 06 Sep 2004 14:18:11 GMT, "E. Meyer" <e52.meyer0SPAM@ieee.org>
waived the right to be silent and professed:

>On 9/6/04 6:36 AM, in article 7tioj0l54b2bhqsdgic06gjot2bgm8sbao@4ax.com,
>"Bruno" <insert@address.here> wrote:
>
>> On Sun, 5 Sep 2004 20:51:07 -0400, "Batong Buhay"
>> <batong.buhay@comcast.net> waived the right to be silent and
>> professed:
>>
>>> 800km/50litre = 37.8 mi/gal. My 92 Integra 1.8 routinely gets 36 mi/gal
>>> highway (avg 60 mph). Your EL is about the size of an Integra and with a
>>> smaller and probably more efficient engine.
>>>
>> I get 36 MPG on the highway with my 3.2TL.
>>
>> --
>> Nostalgia isn't what it used to be.
>
>What year TL is that? 36 is pretty high for a TL unless you only drive 55
>on the highway.

It's a 2001. Doing 120-130 kph, which is about 75-80 mph. At 120 kph,
it's at 2000 rpm.

--
Nostalgia isn't what it used to be.

On 9/6/04 4:31 PM, in article 7llpj0171mbq95h9072n2uavi9fddti82c@4ax.com,
"Bruno" <insert@address.here> wrote:

> On Mon, 06 Sep 2004 14:18:11 GMT, "E. Meyer" <e52.meyer0SPAM@ieee.org>
> waived the right to be silent and professed:
>
>> On 9/6/04 6:36 AM, in article 7tioj0l54b2bhqsdgic06gjot2bgm8sbao@4ax.com,
>> "Bruno" <insert@address.here> wrote:
>>
>>> On Sun, 5 Sep 2004 20:51:07 -0400, "Batong Buhay"
>>> <batong.buhay@comcast.net> waived the right to be silent and
>>> professed:
>>>
>>>> 800km/50litre = 37.8 mi/gal. My 92 Integra 1.8 routinely gets 36 mi/gal
>>>> highway (avg 60 mph). Your EL is about the size of an Integra and with a
>>>> smaller and probably more efficient engine.
>>>>
>>> I get 36 MPG on the highway with my 3.2TL.
>>>
>>> --
>>> Nostalgia isn't what it used to be.
>>
>> What year TL is that? 36 is pretty high for a TL unless you only drive 55
>> on the highway.
>
> It's a 2001. Doing 120-130 kph, which is about 75-80 mph. At 120 kph,
> it's at 2000 rpm.
>
> --
> Nostalgia isn't what it used to be.

The best my '00 TL has never done was 33 MPG, and that was only once and
involved driving out an entire tank of gas non-stop from fillup to empty on
the Interstate with the cruise control set at 79, the AC off and the windows
& sunroof open. Otherwise, on the highway it gets 28-30 and around town
20-23.

On Tue, 07 Sep 2004 01:21:35 GMT, "E. Meyer"
<e52.meyer0SPAM@ieee.org> wrote:
>
>The best my '00 TL has never done was 33 MPG, and that was only once and
>involved driving out an entire tank of gas non-stop from fillup to empty on
>the Interstate with the cruise control set at 79, the AC off and the windows
>& sunroof open. Otherwise, on the highway it gets 28-30 and around town
>20-23.

I agree with your best -- 33 at 78 w/o A/C. Back and forth to
work, I average between 24 and 26.

I read somewhere that, on recent model (better streamlined) vehicles, at
high speeds you may get better mileage with AC-on/windows-closed that you
would with AC off/windows-open. It explains that open windows disturbs the
streamlining greatly increasing the drag to the point that it draws greater
engine power than the AC. I haven't tried it myself - just wondering if you
folks have experienced this.


"Lee Florack" <lflorack@rochester.rr.com> wrote in message
news:bi8qj05f79t5q3i9sn1k5i8b8v57e29dvl@4ax.com...
> On Tue, 07 Sep 2004 01:21:35 GMT, "E. Meyer"
> <e52.meyer0SPAM@ieee.org> wrote:
> >
> >The best my '00 TL has never done was 33 MPG, and that was only once and
> >involved driving out an entire tank of gas non-stop from fillup to empty
on
> >the Interstate with the cruise control set at 79, the AC off and the
windows
> >& sunroof open. Otherwise, on the highway it gets 28-30 and around town
> >20-23.
>
> I agree with your best -- 33 at 78 w/o A/C. Back and forth to
> work, I average between 24 and 26.

On Tue, 7 Sep 2004 13:47:22 -0400, "Batong Buhay"
<batong.buhay@comcast.net> wrote:

>I read somewhere that, on recent model (better streamlined) vehicles, at
>high speeds you may get better mileage with AC-on/windows-closed that you
>would with AC off/windows-open. It explains that open windows disturbs the
>streamlining greatly increasing the drag to the point that it draws greater
>engine power than the AC. I haven't tried it myself - just wondering if you
>folks have experienced this.

Yes. That study is true. If I drive over 50 mph, I close the
windows to keep the car as streamline as possible. If it's too
hot, the A/C goes on -- it's still more fuel efficient than
opening the windows.

I've read that too. It doesn't seem to pan out in real life. This car has
make the same trip with the windows closed and the AC on. The result was 3
mpg worse mileage. Apparently, at least with this TL, the increased drag
from having the windows open requires less energy to overcome than the
increased load on the engine from the AC.

On 9/7/04 12:47 PM, in article t-ydnTNgRs-yaaDcRVn-rw@comcast.com, "Batong
Buhay" <batong.buhay@comcast.net> wrote:

> I read somewhere that, on recent model (better streamlined) vehicles, at
> high speeds you may get better mileage with AC-on/windows-closed that you
> would with AC off/windows-open. It explains that open windows disturbs the
> streamlining greatly increasing the drag to the point that it draws greater
> engine power than the AC. I haven't tried it myself - just wondering if you
> folks have experienced this.
>
>
> "Lee Florack" <lflorack@rochester.rr.com> wrote in message
> news:bi8qj05f79t5q3i9sn1k5i8b8v57e29dvl@4ax.com...
>> On Tue, 07 Sep 2004 01:21:35 GMT, "E. Meyer"
>> <e52.meyer0SPAM@ieee.org> wrote:
>>>
>>> The best my '00 TL has never done was 33 MPG, and that was only once and
>>> involved driving out an entire tank of gas non-stop from fillup to empty
> on
>>> the Interstate with the cruise control set at 79, the AC off and the
> windows
>>> & sunroof open. Otherwise, on the highway it gets 28-30 and around town
>>> 20-23.
>>
>> I agree with your best -- 33 at 78 w/o A/C. Back and forth to
>> work, I average between 24 and 26.
>
>