Honda Car Forum

Honda's web site says the 2006 Civic gets EPA
38 mpg with the manual transmission and 40 mpg
with the automatic.

What's "wrong" here?

A. Smith wrote:
> Honda's web site says the 2006 Civic gets EPA
> 38 mpg with the manual transmission and 40 mpg
> with the automatic.
>
> What's "wrong" here?

nothing. the system's been programmed to shift for economy - after all,
the ecu /does/ know how much gas is being injected. pretty simple.

jim beam wrote:
> A. Smith wrote:
> > Honda's web site says the 2006 Civic gets EPA
> > 38 mpg with the manual transmission and 40 mpg
> > with the automatic.
> >
> > What's "wrong" here?
>
> nothing. the system's been programmed to shift for economy - after all,
> the ecu /does/ know how much gas is being injected. pretty simple.

Right! I think you'll have a hard time getting lower mileage/gallon
with a stick than an automatic on any of the new cars.

Remco

"Remco" <whybcuz@yahoo.com> wrote
> jim beam wrote:
> > A. Smith wrote:
> > > Honda's web site says the 2006 Civic gets EPA
> > > 38 mpg with the manual transmission and 40 mpg
> > > with the automatic.
> > >
> > > What's "wrong" here?
> >
> > nothing. the system's been programmed to shift for economy - after all,
> > the ecu /does/ know how much gas is being injected. pretty simple.
>
> Right! I think you'll have a hard time getting lower mileage/gallon
> with a stick than an automatic on any of the new cars.

One more voice: In fact, this trend has been going on for several years.
Many automatics have been trumping manual transmission cars for fuel
economy, back to the mid/late 1990s or so, IIRC. "Variable Valve Timing and
Lift Electronic Control" (VTEC) has been a big factor in this, IIRC.

Yes, I noticed this same thing with the mpg on my 05 CRV.

"Elle" <elle_navorski@nospam.earthlink.net> wrote in message
news:RlhWe.106$Gg1.66@newsread3.news.pas.earthlink .net...
> "Remco" <whybcuz@yahoo.com> wrote
>> jim beam wrote:
>> > A. Smith wrote:
>> > > Honda's web site says the 2006 Civic gets EPA
>> > > 38 mpg with the manual transmission and 40 mpg
>> > > with the automatic.
>> > >
>> > > What's "wrong" here?
>> >
>> > nothing. the system's been programmed to shift for economy - after
>> > all,
>> > the ecu /does/ know how much gas is being injected. pretty simple.
>>
>> Right! I think you'll have a hard time getting lower mileage/gallon
>> with a stick than an automatic on any of the new cars.
>
> One more voice: In fact, this trend has been going on for several years.
> Many automatics have been trumping manual transmission cars for fuel
> economy, back to the mid/late 1990s or so, IIRC. "Variable Valve Timing
> and
> Lift Electronic Control" (VTEC) has been a big factor in this, IIRC.
>
>

"A. Smith" <ecarecar@yahoo.com> wrote in
news:11iipt7ddi5mq62@corp.supernews.com:

> Honda's web site says the 2006 Civic gets EPA
> 38 mpg with the manual transmission and 40 mpg
> with the automatic.
>
> What's "wrong" here?
>


Nothing at all.

Modern automatics are astonishingly efficient. Manuals are subject to user
ineptness.

I'd say about 99.999% of manual transmission users cannot shift as well as
a modern computer-controlled automatic. And that includes me.

--
TeGGeR®

The Unofficial Honda/Acura FAQ
www.tegger.com/hondafaq/

"Elle" <elle_navorski@nospam.earthlink.net> wrote in
news:RlhWe.106$Gg1.66@newsread3.news.pas.earthlink .net:

> "Remco" <whybcuz@yahoo.com> wrote
>> jim beam wrote:
>> > A. Smith wrote:
>> > > Honda's web site says the 2006 Civic gets EPA
>> > > 38 mpg with the manual transmission and 40 mpg
>> > > with the automatic.
>> > >
>> > > What's "wrong" here?
>> >
>> > nothing. the system's been programmed to shift for economy - after
>> > all, the ecu /does/ know how much gas is being injected. pretty
>> > simple.
>>
>> Right! I think you'll have a hard time getting lower mileage/gallon
>> with a stick than an automatic on any of the new cars.
>
> One more voice: In fact, this trend has been going on for several
> years. Many automatics have been trumping manual transmission cars for
> fuel economy, back to the mid/late 1990s or so, IIRC. "Variable Valve
> Timing and Lift Electronic Control" (VTEC) has been a big factor in
> this, IIRC.
>
>
>


Automatics are far better than manuals all around these days. Computerized
electronic controls trump human brains and muscles hands down.

--
TeGGeR®

The Unofficial Honda/Acura FAQ
www.tegger.com/hondafaq/

"TeGGeR®" <tegger@tegger.c0m> wrote in message
news:Xns96D2DDE579871tegger@207.14.113.17...
> "A. Smith" <ecarecar@yahoo.com> wrote in
> news:11iipt7ddi5mq62@corp.supernews.com:
>
>> Honda's web site says the 2006 Civic gets EPA
>> 38 mpg with the manual transmission and 40 mpg
>> with the automatic.
>>
>> What's "wrong" here?
>>
>
>
> Nothing at all.
>
> Modern automatics are astonishingly efficient. Manuals are subject to user
> ineptness.
>
> I'd say about 99.999% of manual transmission users cannot shift as well as
> a modern computer-controlled automatic. And that includes me.
>
> --
> TeGGeR®
>
> The Unofficial Honda/Acura FAQ
> www.tegger.com/hondafaq/

I noticed some automatics were getting better mpg than a manual - sometimes
only for city or highway. Can't remember which.

They both have their good and bad points. I love the control and "fun
factor" of the stick, as long as I'm not in heavy traffic. ie - D.C. or
Manhattan. That only happens sometimes for me when I drive there. Still
bought a '05 Accord LX 5-speed and love the 5-speed. It'll be a pain to
sell later, I know - but don't plan to sell any time soon. Been averaging
27 mpg w/mostly city and some highway. Got over 34mpg round trip between
Baltimore County and NYC last week. The trip was mostly 65-80 mph with the
a/c on during most of the trip.

-Dave

On Thu, 15 Sep 2005 08:23:00 -0400, "A. Smith" <ecarecar@yahoo.com>
wrote:

>Honda's web site says the 2006 Civic gets EPA
>38 mpg with the manual transmission and 40 mpg
>with the automatic.
>
>What's "wrong" here?

nothing. in a contrived and non-realistic test one gets better figures
than another. Its a lot easier to program a computer to shift at
different times, than it is to get a person to shift at the optimum
times for these STATIC tests.

"Dave L" <davelieuREMOVE@MEyahoo.com> wrote in
news:Hqidna9x7q1mqbbeRVn-vg@comcast.com:

>
> "TeGGeR®" <tegger@tegger.c0m> wrote in message
> news:Xns96D2DDE579871tegger@207.14.113.17...
>> "A. Smith" <ecarecar@yahoo.com> wrote in
>> news:11iipt7ddi5mq62@corp.supernews.com:
>>
>>> Honda's web site says the 2006 Civic gets EPA
>>> 38 mpg with the manual transmission and 40 mpg
>>> with the automatic.
>>>
>>> What's "wrong" here?
>>>
>>
>>
>> Nothing at all.
>>
>> Modern automatics are astonishingly efficient. Manuals are subject to
>> user ineptness.
>>
>> I'd say about 99.999% of manual transmission users cannot shift as
>> well as a modern computer-controlled automatic. And that includes me.
>>
>
> I noticed some automatics were getting better mpg than a manual -
> sometimes only for city or highway. Can't remember which.
>
> They both have their good and bad points. I love the control and "fun
> factor" of the stick, as long as I'm not in heavy traffic.


I like my manual in any case. Just today I spent a half-hour blipping
forwards a few feet at a time on the freeway to get past an accident.
Better that than lose control the rest of the time with an automatic. Don't
like trannies that change gear all by themselves...


> ie - D.C.
> or Manhattan.


Or the 405 in LA at rush hour(s)...




--
TeGGeR®

The Unofficial Honda/Acura FAQ
www.tegger.com/hondafaq/