my display = 6.3/100k. hybrid,auto,big wheels,air con,blah blah..
Printable View
my display = 6.3/100k. hybrid,auto,big wheels,air con,blah blah..
Quote:
Originally Posted by threesix
got you covered with The FD1 Auto i had as wee as with my current CU2 auto (not hybrid not diesel) Indicated 6.0/100km, but we all know the figure displayed & the true figure are not the same.
the auto should consume more than the manual. i dont have heavy foot. i have tried my best not to rev the car and drive as smooth as possible. 3 to 4 refills still around 450 - 470 kms......
How big is a FD1 tank?
50Litres
Modern automatic transmissions can be more economical than a manual of the same model. generally they run a much lower final drive ratio which works in there favour.Quote:
Originally Posted by Zimp13
mines dropped to 5.2/100k...
**** a normal auto. 1 consant gear FTW! lol
Something must be wrong as my FN2R using BP 98 for city driving with plenty of VTEC - I get a minimum of about 440+km with 460 - 480 being the average. Oddly, my trip computer lists my consumption as 9.x most of the time though.
And the FN2R has the same tank size it would seem.
??
I consistently got 600+km between refils with my FD1 auto & managed to get well beyond 700km on a few occasions.
ive gotta do a FULL tank test to see how many k's i get.....
i never fill the car up all the way casue the rear wheels scrap. haha (stig knows this! lol)
lol that's lame.Quote:
Originally Posted by threesix
Dunno how you would put up with it. You'd have to fill up more often.
fashion never fuction baby. **** it.
im getting liek 300km per tank..with aircon..can i get it retuned or something? do they do this at servicing? ta
duude try dumping all the dead bodies in trunk, filling the tank properly, and driving slower.
managed to pull 9.6/100 A/T with 1,400 odo-reading, mostly city driving..
you guys get worse fuel consumption with your Civics than I do with my current model Euro Automatic
lol pretty ironic ayQuote:
Originally Posted by buddah51au
i used to get like 550-600 (40L tank) kms out of my old AE92 rolla which was carby and had a leaking fuel pump....
I keep a spread sheet on fuel consumption & servicing on my cars:-
2006 FD1 Auto - 59848kms - 4059.03 lts - average = 6.78L/100, best recorded was 5.8
2008 Euro Auto - 25058kms - 1773.24 lts - average = 7.08L/100, best recorded so far is 6.03
spread sheets are available to anyone.
To prove my point here are some pictures i took on a recent trip in my 08 Euro. Bear in mind the Euro is a much bigger, heavier car, tank capacity is 65 Litres in comparison with the FD1/2 which has a capacity of 50 litres. So an extra 15 litres, yet it has a range of over 1000km on the highway.
http://i388.photobucket.com/albums/o.../SydTrip09.jpg
http://i388.photobucket.com/albums/o...SydTrip092.jpg
lol...450KM out of a 50L tank and you are still complaining? I was lucky to get 400KM out of a 50L when I had my Evo and it was brand new too.
^yeh but we r talking about NA, no-performance civics here, and a factory spec of 6.9L/100km - that only one person can get :S
Never listen to what the manufacturer claims, I rekon they must have done the fuel consumption test on a down hill in neutral. Mistubishi claims a fuel consumption of 11L/100KM for a Evo 9, yet I dont think anyone on the planet has got even close to that figure.Quote:
Originally Posted by curtis265
dude isnt the post from march?
but anyway my question is, its it still doing 450km on the 50L of petrol after the initial 6 months?
is your car the auto or manual ? (cus manual consumes less fuel compared to auto)
and if your car is manual how do you normally drive? do you push your car often (5-6k rev)? but anyway if you get time to go on a road trip via a free way see how far your car takes you on a full tank :D
but yeah im quite sure the Honda people test their cars in circuits and with the Honda fuels, lubes, oils and tires :D so cant say they are completely lying to you about the fuel consumptions of their cars.
btw I'm a bit of a FOTB sorry for any typos and if any thing which don't make sense.
i proved that statement wrong in my above postQuote:
Originally Posted by bigbaby0223
FD1 Quotes 7.2, I averaged 6.78 over 2 1/2 years.
CU2 Euro Quotes 8.9, I have an average so far of 7.08 after 25,000km.
My DC2R last time i recorded was about 480-490km before filling up. And the petrol indicator light was flashing crazy. So I guess that seems reasonable. But i remember when my parents first got there car, the car drank petrol like an asian with a slab of VB.
lolololol asian with a slab of VB
my cars done 10,000 km's and there will be no bars when my car has done 350kms, refilling at station shows 42km. City driving and aircon on the odd occasion ( not very frequent ); could there be something wron gwith my O2 sensor? do honda check this for me for free? its 09 civic vti , city driving, generally have to fill up every single week
well if city driving all the time thats abt rite i guess....Quote:
Originally Posted by Jackee
i got average 450km city and highway......
seriously fd1 drinks a bit.... how many here only manage to get 450km for one full tank???? all of us heavy foot??? perhaps should ask honda to check the car out....
Bah.. trade it in and buy a CTR.. better fuel economy and more fun. :)
hmm my one does 450km before the fuel lights on..mixed highway/city....its only 4 months old FD1...never pass 3krpm..
hmmz...my 06 sport does around there...but for ur 1.8 i was expecting more actually...
mine is getting 5.7 to 6.2/100ks depending on what fuel i use.
95ron seems to be the best... hmmm.
that doesn't seem too off, similiar to what I get revving it here and there. remember when the light goes on theres still plenty of fuel left. when theres only 1/2 blocks theres still actually about 10 litres of fuel left.Quote:
Originally Posted by fitme
^ when the fuel lights on..it has 10ltrs left
so lets say im getting 9kms/ltr..so aprox 540kms on a full tank
threesix, you're getting that from a hybrid...?!
Man u must drive like a granny...Quote:
Originally Posted by buddah51au
I have a CL9 manual and it still drinks.. The lowest i ever got was 7.6l/100... and that was pussy footing it.
yeah man. guess the big wheels have something to do with it.Quote:
Originally Posted by curtis265
im sure the IMA is saving me petrol though.:thumbsup:
Those figures were achieved on a recent 1400km trip to sydney, Cruise control set 5 kph above posted speed limit. I wouldn't consider that Granny driving, nor would i consider it hard driving. Also Remember the trip computer IS NOT 100% accurate. I actually filled up to the neck after 989km, 61.63 lts, so the true figure was 6.23.Quote:
Originally Posted by Xplodin
Personally I never judge economy by 1 tank, I prefer to average out over several thousand km as this gives a true indication. As of my last refill I had traveled 26,735kms & used 1894.07 lts. This equates to an overall average of 7.084L/100km since I have owned the car.
I have detailed spread sheets for the 2 1/2 yrs I owned an FD1 Auto & for the 14 months I have had the CU2.
whats the best petrol for a fd1? I read around and guides said theres a recomended octane level, and we should just stick to it?
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jackee
I only ever used standard 91 unleaded in mine. I did try 95 for a few tanks & it made no difference to economy. The extra 10 cents a litre is a total waste of money on an FD1 so just stick with 91. STEER CLEAR OF ETHONAL FUEL.
yeah likewise I only use standard unleaded on my FD2. Agreed that the extra 10c or more a litre is a waste. Only ever tried ethanol once (10% one from Shell). It went fine but I'm reluctant to use Ethanol fuel on a regular basis.
i thought with the 98 ron compared to 91 ron, u get better response from the 98 ron.... not just the slight extra milaege.....
^^ thats what i was thinking...
its like eating healthy compaired to eating maccas 24/7 lol
(maccas ftw)
if it was tuned for 91 ron you would see little difference when using 98. I'd say use 95 ron at most, I've just started using 95 ron because i noticed the motor pings a little bit.
then thats easy.... if u gonna use 98 ron all the time, u can advance the timing a bit to gain more power........Quote:
Originally Posted by FDBenni
How come the salesperson in Honda is telling me that it's better to use ethanol? I just got my MY10 last week, I was supposed to refuel using ethanol but I was in a hurry to look for Shell station so I decided to just pump 95 RON.Quote:
Originally Posted by Muzzy
What's with ethanol? Can somebody please clarify? THanks
There is nothing wrong with using ethonal fuel as the engine is designed to run on it. Just do your search on ethonal fuels. As a general rule you will loose about 10% of power & fuel consumption will increase by around 10%. Therefore it is uneconomical to use it as it will cost you more $$$$$ to travel the same distance.
It is the same with using premium fuel. If my memory serves me correctly I would get an extra 10 to 20km per tank on an FD1 Auto, therefore it is not worth the extra 10 cents per litre.
yeah but using 95 or 98ron petrol will be better for your engine in the long run???
if u put 95 ron, might as well add another 4c for the 98 ron... really not much difference in the dollar value already....
anyway, fuel consumption for fd sux.....
Could you please clarify as to how 95 or 98 RON fuel will be better for the engine?Quote:
Originally Posted by threesix
As previously posted I tried 4 or 5 tanks of 95 RON while I had my FD! auto and it made no noticeable difference to either performance or economy. Averaging 6.78L/100km over the 2 1/2 years I had the car with a best recorded of 5.8 tells me it is more than suited to using standard 91RON. It would be hard to find a more economical car.
why the **** would i put '???' at the end of the sentence if i knew. jesus.
Maybe it could be better for keeping the injectors cleaner for the long-term..
[QUOTE=95331140;2655875]Maybe it could be better for keeping the injectors cleaner for the long-term..[/QUOTE
I don't believe it would make a lot of difference to the injectors. That being said all injectors will eventually need cleaning & new "O" rings fitted, usually after well over 100,000km. I believe a lot will depend on driving style as well - a car that has been babied will carbon up the injectors sooner than an engine that is given a good workout from time to time.
i really dont know y u guys are getting 95 when its like 5c more to get 98 octant fuel. (some how i seem to have always though vpower was 99 octant)
anyway the vpower and ultimate cleans your engine :D isnt that 5c(X 40L :D) well spent.
I totally agreeQuote:
Originally Posted by kawai
hmmm.. good idea.. i might go for it as well.. is there a particular "brand"??Quote:
Originally Posted by ganj3
or is there something in particular? i just had been to a petrol station twice. i forgot the first one (lol) and quix last tue..
sorry if it's a stupid question.. just a newbie..
I am afraid I can't see the point of running either 95 or 98 on a car designed to run on 91, unless of course you have money to burn which is in fact what you would be doing.
:eek:hmmm.. i'm really torn about what's a better thing to do now :) lolQuote:
Originally Posted by buddah51au
Just try them and see which one you like better
Guys, I think were really need to use the KIS method - Keep it simple....I have run a company commodore on 91, and accidently 98 one day, and I couldn't not tell the difference in running/km on the engine...fact is 91 is a better quality than the Yanks get, as there regular fuel starts at 89.....and the fact that 95% of cars all round australia run on 91, with no probs everyday!
When I pick mine car up, she'll be running on normal unleaded, not less there is a proven cost benefit for me to upgrade to 95/98, and to date, there is absoutly no evidents which proves the latter....
Save the extra cents per litre for next fill up! :)
Cheers Steve
I put this in another thread about petrol ages back.
I'm not sure about the other brands, but my old man ran a major project for BP with Ultimate Petrol before it came into circulation in NZ around 2004 and was used to for test results based on fuel production, and was being used for BP HQ in London, and has what used to push for Ultimate 102 in England.
The tests did prove bp ultimate 98 to be considerably better for your car than 91 or 95.
to recap on the other post. they took 3 new cars from a range of dealers, corolla, maxima, ss commodore, base model wrx, 3 series bmw etc. they would fill up each car and label them, car 91, car 95, car 98 to do with octane. they even did some motor bikes as well.
each car had 2 designated drivers a day that would perform a 300km circa loop around a part of the north island in NZ. 2 loops a day.
this was done to each car for around 2 weeks or so.
each car had a gps system hooked up, odometers verified and only ran on a certain type of petrol for the 10000 or so km's
as well as this they went to the car market and found a bunch of used cars and they did some work to the engines to run i think half the cyclinders on 91, and half on 98.
that may not be right as i'm not a mechanic minded person, but they were able to split the same engine into 2 fuel fed compartments.
they measured the carbon build up in all car engines with a barometer before the engines were split up, and had some verified car specialist brought out from UK that was involved in respected car projects, expert in field that can verify findings.
after 2 weeks doing these loops, they checked all the engines. every 91 and 95 car had carbon build up, the 98 cars had very little. the used cars actually dropped carbon build up on the 98 section of the car, and the 91 section had gone up.
remember all these cars ran the same loop together so the weather conditions driving conditions, driver behaviour was all calculated similarly and all new cars, same production lines, even same colours.
after 2 weeks they also took the cars to a race track in the north island called manfield, and did a bunch of professional laps by a local track guru and 0-100 times.
in all cases the 98 cars were faster, some considerably, some by only a slight amount say i dunno, wrx 6.1seconds on 98, 6.2seconds on 91. but, one in particular was a v6 maxima at the time. on 91 gas it say ran 8.7 0-100, on 98 it ran 7.6.
since then i always ran my cars on 98. i even had an old h22a bb4 prelude that had over 220k on the clock, nearly all the vtecs out there in NZ had issues over 180k, i had my car from 120k, always ran ultimate, always ran it hard. the engine was awesome, no issues what so ever.
so i think if you put the cleaner gas in your car one off you probably won't see much difference, probably nothing. but if you run it all the time you will have benefits and for the small price difference, $4 a fill or whatever, your car is getting better treatment.
just got my 2010 vti last week and filled it full last wed to the top. its done 500kms now and still have 4 bars left. running V-power. i think i can manage to get 600kms out of it :D.
U have in excess of 100km left once your low fuel light comes on, & it won't be on with 4 bars left.Quote:
Originally Posted by kawai
:D its on now with 2 bars @550
today i ran it down even more later in the day and was scared it was going to run out of fuel, so drove it to about 574km (should still be able to do abou 70km until end of the tank) and ended filling it 44L. so ruffly 7.6L/100km for my first full tank, this was for peak hour and highway driving for 1 week.
My 2cents..
07 FD2 Sport auto, never really bothered to record the fuel consumption before however on my last tank (91 ULP) I got 9.1 L/100Klm and that was full city driving, and I mean bumper to bumper peak hour Melbourne traffic where about 10% of the tank would have been freeway driving.
Quite impressed with that as I didn't really try and drive that economically..I try to fill her up with BP Ultimate every 3-4 tanks.
One of my key concerns when choosing the Civic (I was keen in a Mark V Golf GTI DSG) was the fact that it took regular unleaded and running costs compared to the VW were quite low.. Have a friend who purchased a GTI a few weeks after I got the Sport (and yeh its quicker but so what) but the list of problems he has had is ridiculous..DSG megatronic unit needs replacing, air con faulty, drivers door would not shut properly, stuck sunroof and that's in the first 6 months of ownership..
I'm coming up to the 30k service and have had nothing but joy from the Civic I'm loving it. My first Honda and definitely not my last. So much more value that the Euro equivalents and better build quality (yes even the Thai built ones!)
Sorry, I have rambled on in the fuel economy thread
i filled my tank almost all the way up of 95ron and got 670k's out of it. city driving. well canberra city driving lol
threesix please do a L/100km and see what you are getting and look at the fuel consumption that Honda is stating. BTW i think every one know in the forum you drive a hybrid :D. with nice wheels and comfy seats ;)
If you look at the price premium (around 13K compared to the VTI Auto) you have to pay to get the Hybrid it will take around 10 years to recoup the difference in fuel savings. That's providing you don't need to replace the Nickel Metal Hydride Battery or have any repairs to the electric motor.
If you look at the advertised economy of the Hybrid it would have saved me around 2L/100km over the 70,000km I had my FD1 Auto, so at $1.30 per liter it would have saved me around $1820.00 over that period. While I personally have nothing against the Hybrid I can't see how the price premium can be justified, just my thoughts.
i never intended to by a hybrid. never.
i loved the shape of the FD and thought it might look dope with some 17's.
got a good deal on the car i bought. one onwner, hella low k's.
saw someone on here selling some SSR's in 18's and thought.. yup.
after having the car for a while now im so happy i bought it. as i dont care about going fast anymore. been there done that. plus im old :)
so dumping it and putting heavy wheels on i get 6l/100k.mostly better than people with stock FD's.
^Crap for a hybrid, but oh well.
When will honda make a diesel?
I really couldn't fault my FD1 Auto in the 2 1/2 years I owned it, not 1 problem or warranty claim in 70,000km. As a cheap Vehicle by todays standards I don't believe there is anything that can match it for value. It was only after a female decided that it was parked in the wrong place & modified the shape of it that I decided to update to a Euro ( it took a lot to convince the Mrs to do this).Quote:
Originally Posted by curtis265
I regard it as the best move I made as the base model Euro is in a different class all round in comparison to the Civic, add to that, the difference in economy is less than 1/2L/100km after 27,000km (7.08L/100km Euro - 6.78L/100km FD1) so I have lost very little in running expenses.
For those who buy new cars the base model Euro is around the same price as an FD2 & cheaper than a Hybrid by a fair margin & you get a lot more car for your money. Once again, just my opinion
For those who buy second hand cars it is a different story. I would also like to add that i think I had a bit to do in helping Denot decide to update from his FD2 into a Euro & he now shares my thoughts.
factory fuel claims arent true to most cars are they?? :thumbdwn:Quote:
Originally Posted by curtis265
how many k's do you get from your car? you got any current pics of your beast??
im averaging around 11L/100km atm... fml LOL
you must be redlining your face off! lol
[QUOTE=buddah51au;2698844]I really couldn't fault my FD1 Auto in the 2 1/2 years I owned it, not 1 problem or warranty claim in 70,000km. As a cheap Vehicle by todays standards I don't believe there is anything that can match it for value. It was only after a female decided that it was parked in the wrong place & modified the shape of it that I decided to update to a Euro ( it took a lot to convince the Mrs to do this).
I regard it as the best move I made as the base model Euro is in a different class all round in comparison to the Civic, add to that, the difference in economy is less than 1/2L/100km after 27,000km (7.08L/100km Euro - 6.78L/100km FD1) so I have lost very little in running expenses.
QUOTE]
was your FD1 stock? stock rims?
Buddah, how the heck to you average 7.08 L/100KM in yoru euro? What type of driving do you do?Quote:
Originally Posted by buddah51au
i think his girlfriend is behind the car pushing.
that is amazing economy its got me stumped! unless its all freeway
[QUOTE=threesix;2698969]I fitted factory 16" alloys to it, other than that it was standard. my best recorded consumption was 5.8L/100, my worst was 7.9L/100. FD1 Auto. I still have the spreadsheet on all fuel used.Quote:
Originally Posted by buddah51au
http://i388.photobucket.com/albums/o...Picture001.jpg
surely those spotties cut your aerodynamic efficiency therefore you would have recorded better figures without!