Honda Car Forum

Just got back from a Tennessee-Minnesota roundtrip.

2006 Honda Civic LX, MT, now with ~4500 miles on it. Almost all
driving with A/C.

Highest mpg: 42.09 -- Freeway + some town driving, avg 60mph.

Lowest: 37.37 -- Freeway, avg 70-75 mph. Ethanol "enhanced" gas. The
next tankfull was without ethanol: 39.51mpg.


I'm very happy with this. The car is still pretty new; when does the
mpg usually top out?

--Nan

"nblomgren" <nblom@mindspring.com> wrote in message
news:ba10a250hc3svas9g516q54hpno9pai1al@4ax.com...
>
> Just got back from a Tennessee-Minnesota roundtrip.
>
> 2006 Honda Civic LX, MT, now with ~4500 miles on it. Almost all
> driving with A/C.
>
> Highest mpg: 42.09 -- Freeway + some town driving, avg 60mph.
>
> Lowest: 37.37 -- Freeway, avg 70-75 mph. Ethanol "enhanced" gas. The
> next tankfull was without ethanol: 39.51mpg.
>
>
> I'm very happy with this. The car is still pretty new; when does the
> mpg usually top out?
>
> --Nan

Break in varies from 5,000 to 10,000 miles. I'd say that you're not going
to drop below 37 mpg (mixed driving) until the first scheduled tune up
(100,000 miles ?). You've got a better car than the tornado blew away and
it should serve you well with minimal care.

I had a 1996 Ex Coupe 5 speed manual that averaged 31.1 mpg over 57k miles,
mostly in and around Madison and round trips to Brentwood (70+ mph on I65) 5
days per week. The low was 28.6 mpg (mostly Inglewood/Madison), the high
was 33.4 (trip to Ft Payne, AL, 3 people on board and luggage, mostly 75 mph
with A/C blasting).

Stay away from the ethanol blends. They generally cost more and are not as
efficient as the "real" stuff. Ethanol blends may be good for the farmers
and may stretch the supply, but they do nothing for YOUR pocketbook and are
not as good for the automobile.


--
Kent Finnell
From the Music City USA

On Mon, 26 Jun 2006 12:46:24 -0500, "Kent Finnell"
<kentfinn@bellsouth.net> wrote:

>"nblomgren" <nblom@mindspring.com> wrote in message
>news:ba10a250hc3svas9g516q54hpno9pai1al@4ax.com.. .
>>
>> Just got back from a Tennessee-Minnesota roundtrip.
>>
>> 2006 Honda Civic LX, MT, now with ~4500 miles on it. Almost all
>> driving with A/C.
>>
>> Highest mpg: 42.09 -- Freeway + some town driving, avg 60mph.
>>
>> Lowest: 37.37 -- Freeway, avg 70-75 mph. Ethanol "enhanced" gas. The
>> next tankfull was without ethanol: 39.51mpg.
>>
>>
>> I'm very happy with this. The car is still pretty new; when does the
>> mpg usually top out?
>>
>> --Nan
>
>Break in varies from 5,000 to 10,000 miles. I'd say that you're not going
>to drop below 37 mpg (mixed driving) until the first scheduled tune up
>(100,000 miles ?). You've got a better car than the tornado blew away and
>it should serve you well with minimal care.

It's a huge step up from the old car. Though the first two Saturns
were reliable and _cheap_, Saturn's moved away from those ideals.

The Civic wasn't cheap, but definitely worth the price. And now that
I'm a grownup and a professional (and have been for a LONG time), I'm
finally comfortable with the idea that it's okay to have something
nice

And reliable. And efficient.



There will be a drop in mpg after the first tuneup? Why does that
happen?

>I had a 1996 Ex Coupe 5 speed manual that averaged 31.1 mpg over 57k miles,
>mostly in and around Madison and round trips to Brentwood (70+ mph on I65) 5
>days per week. The low was 28.6 mpg (mostly Inglewood/Madison), the high
>was 33.4 (trip to Ft Payne, AL, 3 people on board and luggage, mostly 75 mph
>with A/C blasting).
>
>Stay away from the ethanol blends. They generally cost more and are not as
>efficient as the "real" stuff. Ethanol blends may be good for the farmers
>and may stretch the supply, but they do nothing for YOUR pocketbook and are
>not as good for the automobile.

In Minnesota it's impossible to find gas _without_ ethanol -- a
minimum of 10% is required by state law.

But it's not something I'd choose if given the option.

--Nan

nblomgren wrote:
>
> It's a huge step up from the old car. Though the first two Saturns
> were reliable and _cheap_, Saturn's moved away from those ideals.

id say the saturn ion still qualifies. its just more of the same, though
and seems to have gotten lost in the GM marketing shuffle.

"nblomgren" <nblom@mindspring.com> wrote in message
news:0go2a2l9p519p9lgiuo314p30kmb1jeb60@4ax.com...
> On Mon, 26 Jun 2006 12:46:24 -0500, "Kent Finnell"
> <kentfinn@bellsouth.net> wrote:
>
>>"nblomgren" <nblom@mindspring.com> wrote in message
>>news:ba10a250hc3svas9g516q54hpno9pai1al@4ax.com. ..
>>>
>>> Just got back from a Tennessee-Minnesota roundtrip.
>>>
>>> 2006 Honda Civic LX, MT, now with ~4500 miles on it. Almost all
>>> driving with A/C.
>>>
>>> Highest mpg: 42.09 -- Freeway + some town driving, avg 60mph.
>>>
>>> Lowest: 37.37 -- Freeway, avg 70-75 mph. Ethanol "enhanced" gas. The
>>> next tankfull was without ethanol: 39.51mpg.
>>>
>>>
>>> I'm very happy with this. The car is still pretty new; when does the
>>> mpg usually top out?
>>>
>>> --Nan
>>
>>Break in varies from 5,000 to 10,000 miles. I'd say that you're not going
>>to drop below 37 mpg (mixed driving) until the first scheduled tune up
>>(100,000 miles ?). You've got a better car than the tornado blew away and
>>it should serve you well with minimal care.
>
> It's a huge step up from the old car. Though the first two Saturns
> were reliable and _cheap_, Saturn's moved away from those ideals.
>
> The Civic wasn't cheap, but definitely worth the price. And now that
> I'm a grownup and a professional (and have been for a LONG time), I'm
> finally comfortable with the idea that it's okay to have something
> nice
>
> And reliable. And efficient.
>
>
>
> There will be a drop in mpg after the first tuneup? Why does that
> happen?
>
Sorry, I didn't mean to leave that impression. There MIGHT be a slight drop
BEFORE that major tune up. With the scheduled oil changes, the mileage
should remain consistent. I kept Excel spreadsheets on both my Hondas (1996
EX and 2000 Si). Both were remarkably consistent and A/C always on.


--
Kent Finnell
From the Music City USA

On Tue, 27 Jun 2006 15:47:46 -0700, SoCalMike
<Mikein562athotmail@hotmail.com> wrote:

>nblomgren wrote:
>>
>> It's a huge step up from the old car. Though the first two Saturns
>> were reliable and _cheap_, Saturn's moved away from those ideals.
>
>id say the saturn ion still qualifies. its just more of the same, though
>and seems to have gotten lost in the GM marketing shuffle.

I tried the Ion out, but it seemed kind of, well, chintzy inside. The
seats were like sitting on a thinly padded bench, the layout wasn't
intuitive, and everything seemed plastic-y, and so the price was high
considering the quality.

And the Ion's going away after (I think) this year.

Finally settled on a used SL2 with 24K on it. Got a great deal, since
they don't hold their value very well

And that's the one the tornado took.

--Nan