Honda Car Forum

"K J" <kj@killjoy.invalid> wrote in news:ggcdpg$nj3$1@news.motzarella.org:

> "Dillon Pyron" <invaliddmpyron@austin.rr.com> wrote:
>> Don't guess, measure. How many miles do you go between fill ups and
>> how many gallons does one take? Do this over several tanks.
>
> That's my intention. I only drove 2-3 tanks of gas since the timing belt
> change and figured the fewer miles driven per tank was due to colder
> weather till I heard that other guy call in the car talk show with
> similar observation. Now I am getting concerned. But because the engine
> otherwise seems to run smoothly and without loss of power,



If one of the cams was off by a tooth, you'd have a definite, and
objectionable, change in engine behavior from what you're used to.

If the engine behaves /exactly/ as it did before the service, then I would
advise attempting to more precisely determine what your mileage actually is
before panicking.



--
Tegger

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

"Tegger" <invalid@invalid.inv> wrote:
> If one of the cams was off by a tooth, you'd have a definite, and
> objectionable, change in engine behavior from what you're used to.
>
> If the engine behaves /exactly/ as it did before the service, then I
> would
> advise attempting to more precisely determine what your mileage
> actually is
> before panicking.

Following your suggestions I did measure the mileage and fuel
consumption after three fillups and I got surprisingly good fuel economy
that was consistently between 25.5 and 25.8 MPG. This is for combined
mileage for about 50-50 city (suburban) and freeway driving without
using A/C. I can hardly believe it because this is better than even the
old (higher) EPA estimate for this A/T model. Now I wonder how much was
the MPG *before* this timing belt change. Strange, but I'm not
complaining any more.

KJ

"K J" <kj@killjoy.invalid> wrote in news:gi1nga$jdh$1@news.motzarella.org:

> "Tegger" <invalid@invalid.inv> wrote:
>> If one of the cams was off by a tooth, you'd have a definite, and
>> objectionable, change in engine behavior from what you're used to.
>>
>> If the engine behaves /exactly/ as it did before the service, then I
>> would
>> advise attempting to more precisely determine what your mileage
>> actually is
>> before panicking.
>
> Following your suggestions I did measure the mileage and fuel
> consumption after three fillups and I got surprisingly good fuel economy
> that was consistently between 25.5 and 25.8 MPG. This is for combined
> mileage for about 50-50 city (suburban) and freeway driving without
> using A/C. I can hardly believe it because this is better than even the
> old (higher) EPA estimate for this A/T model. Now I wonder how much was
> the MPG *before* this timing belt change. Strange, but I'm not
> complaining any more.
>


Well there you go.

I've long contended that most people have no real idea of their car's fuel
consumption, regardless of what they claim to be getting.


--
Tegger

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

"Tegger" <invalid@invalid.inv> wrote:
> Well there you go.
>
> I've long contended that most people have no real idea of their car's
> fuel
> consumption, regardless of what they claim to be getting.

Well, that's why we keep coming to Tegger for answers. ;-) But
seriously, it appears that when the fuel guage needle is close to the E
mark, it is a pretty unreliable indication of how much fuel is still
left in the tank. That mark can also quickly change a notch after quick
braking episode. So I think that's where my mistaken perception was
coming from.

KJ