Has anyone compared true fuel consumption (that is calculating actual fuel used against distance travelled) against what the cars readout says? My CL9 is the standard, so no readout. I suspect the cars readout would be optimistic.
Printable View
Has anyone compared true fuel consumption (that is calculating actual fuel used against distance travelled) against what the cars readout says? My CL9 is the standard, so no readout. I suspect the cars readout would be optimistic.
Have not done that before (because I never fill up the car) but remember reading in a review that it was a bit optimistic (like on most cars)Quote:
Originally Posted by ROBERT
On the CU2 the readout is generally 0.3 to 0.4 below the true figure when you work it out with a calculator. example - indicated 6.4 is 6.7 to 6.8 true.
I decided to do another comparison between E10 and 95. After running a few full tanks of 95 to reset the ECU, this is the economy I got (calculated using the trip meter and the litres displayed on the petrol station pump after filling):
E10 - 7.65L/100km
95 - 7.62L/100km
Driving style was the same on both fuels - approx 80% highway, 20% city.
I'll be changing back to E10 again. Waste of money paying extra for 95. It's no smoother, gives no power increase (at least not enough to be noticeable by a human), and gives identical economy.
You should probably average over a few tanks of fuel to get a better idea me thinks.
Ollie
E10 what exactly? The coles/woolworthes e10? Dear God I'm hoping you're not doing that. You'll kill your engine REAL quick with e10 93 or 91's. Scientific fact remains, e10 contains less energy compared to full petrol.Quote:
Originally Posted by seanneko
And which 95 were you using, just remember not all 95's are 95's...
And your feel economy will almost always improe when you reset ecu. The only way or you to do a proper comparison is on a racetrack or provig ground with identical cars.
[QUOTE=opilot87;3021740]You should probably average over a few tanks of fuel to get a better idea me thinks.
I agree, you should definitely average each fuel over a minimum of 3 tanks. eg - my last 3 tanks driving the same roads with same driving style = 6.53, 6.79, 6.95. A negligible difference I know, but fuel consumption needs to be averaged over several tanks to get a true indication. The best way is to make a spread sheet & update it each time you fill up, in my case 37,537km / 2655.37 lts. It is so easy to get a long term accurate average.
The only E10 in Darwin is United and supposedly 95 RON. I didn't know it came in lower RON. Honda advises that E10 is OK for Euro. But, having said that, I don't use it.Quote:
Originally Posted by Fredoops
Shell E10, which according to the pump is 94 RON, and Shell 95.Quote:
Originally Posted by Fredoops
I did run through 3 or 4 full tanks, and noticed no difference between any of them. After the final tank I got a figure which was 0.03L/100km less than what I initially got on E10, which is probably nothing to do with the fuel anyway, and simply because the driving conditions can never be 100% identical.
You shouldn't be using anything less than 95 in the euro anyway. it voids warranty pretty much instantly.
Keep running e10 and see how much corrosion damage can be done in a year, while the knock sensor of the euro will prevent immediate damage to the engine (blown gasket etc), over a longer period... It will speed up wear/tear/corrosion of engine parts. And all ethanol fuel contanl 4-5% water. Because pure distillation isn't possible.
Sooo, for a 60 ltr tank filled with e10, you have 360ml of water in your fuel.
The performance deficiency is compensated by resetting the ecu, because engines buns much leaner when you reset ecu, it takes a long while for ecu to 'settle down'
Why would E10 cause any corrosion damage at all, especially when Honda Australia specifically states that all Accord Euros (as well as most Hondas in general) can safely use E10:Quote:
Originally Posted by Fredoops
http://www.honda.com.au/cars_for-owners_ethanol.aspx
The only condition is that it needs to be 95 RON minimum, but there's really not much difference between 94 and 95 RON, especially in a stock Euro.
I'd like to see some actual proof that using less than 95 RON in a Euro (specifically CL9 - I know that some CU2 models would ping on certain fuels) will cause damage. One thing I've noticed about the Honda community is that there are so many myths with no actual facts behind them. Another which comes to mind is that you must use genuine Honda auto transmission fluid, but nobody is able to explain why this is the case, or what will happen if you don't.
Honda Australia advises E10 fuel with a RON of 95 or above is safe to use in all Euros. The fact that there is less energy per joule of ethanol than octane has nothing to do with it damaging your engine so long as it has an ECU... it just means you need to burn more fuel to get the same amount of power.Quote:
Originally Posted by Fredoops
91 fuel is a no-no as a rule but in a pinch you can get away with it.
EDIT: 360mL of water in 60L = 0.6% water. Negligible considering that exhaust gas is 31% water by weight...and the intake air is not going to be at 0% humidity...
Also 95 fuel is required in order to meet ADR standards for emissions and so forth, as well as meeting advertised performance, and then of course to minimise engine knock. As for genuine fluids...Honda mechanical engineers designed their components and when they did that they made assumptions about the chemical and physical properties of the lubricating fluids. So then they said to the Honda chemical engineers, "make us a fluid that has these properties". So they did, then they sold it.
They don't recommend using anything else because they can't be sure it will do exactly everything it has to.
Honda ATF is DEX 6 or something made by Newmarket, so it is cross compatible. Honda OEM PS fluid however, has a unique anti frothing agent, to prevent damage.Quote:
Originally Posted by seanneko
The problem with testing fuel, is it's long term, so I guess your car will be our test bed on the effects of long term ethanol use.
Of course Honda will allow you to use E10 because the damage won't occur within the warranty term, any issues after than you'll be buying Homda replacement parts, more money to them.
Remember shell e10 is a mix of 91 ULP + 10% ethanol (of which 6% is water), the 94 ron comes from the octane boosting effect of ethanol.
The knock sensor may prevent pinging, but remember your ECU is still tuned for 95ron +
Not necessarily. Honda specified a power steering hose that could fail under normal operating conditions. They are now paying dealers all over Australia money out of the company bank account in order to replace the components, even on vehicles that are well out of warranty.
If they say you can use E10, and you do, and it damages the car, then they have to replace your parts free of charge. Or at least, a decent lawyer could successfully argue that case.
The ps hose is another matter. the anti frothing agent is to prevent damage to the steering rack, a different part altogether.Quote:
Originally Posted by chuboy
Honda says you can use 95ron plus e10, not 94ron which is below the bare minnium fuel rating, e10 or not.
What I don't understand is how the 200kW V6 Aurion I've been driving regularly of late gets under 9 l/100km but my CL9 only gets 11.5l/100km at best. Same driver. Same roads. Same driving. And in the USA, the V6 version of the CU2 is listed as having better fuel economy than the I4.
Neither, especially because I have read from some American magazines that the TSX gets good fuel economy (I4)Quote:
Originally Posted by SPQR
Top Gear drove a Prius at top speed through their racecourse and got a BMW M5 (I think) to follow behind it, matching pace.
The Prius used way more fuel than the BMW despite the BMW having a thirstier engine. Smaller engines have to work harder to acheive the same performance.
That is true. Saw that as well (was an M3) but I don't drive with a heavy foot (whereas the Prius was flooring it the whole time). Out of curiousity, what sort of fuel consumption do you get on your 06 euro?Quote:
Originally Posted by chuboy
Generally, a bigger engine does not have to be worked as hard as a smaller engine to achieve the same performance, therefore less fuel is used. I say generally as my FD1 civic Auto averaged 6.83L/100km over 60,000km, yet my CU2 Auto is averaging 7.07L/100km over 37,500km. That is only a difference of 0.24L/100km. Figure that one out, I can't.
Generally between 7.0 and 9.5 L/100km depending on the ratio of highway to city I've been doing (I usually reset the counter every tank).Quote:
Originally Posted by Kevl
Just for reference, i just got back from a long trip to mackay and back.
Fueled up before i left (BP Ultimate) and went there and back on 1 tank. The fuel light turned on after i had done 780kms (just when i got home)
So it would be safe to say that for a full tank of ultimate i could get easily over 800kms to a tank!!!!
Is this normal for everyones Euro????
You should be able to do better than that, I have no trouble getting 900+km with my CU2 Auto
mines a cl9
same size fuel tank,almost the same engine, lighter car & driving the Bruce Goat Track
I fueled up this morning back to full again. 53 litres. So 770kms to 53 litres. There was many spirited overtaking involved, and I spent a couple of days cruising around mackay traffic. All in all i think thats excellent for the Honda :)
Thats an average of 6.8L/100kms with traffic driving incorporated! I dont know what other people are getting but i think that is so good :)
Sure beats the patrol, it gets 500kms to 150L!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
I drove from Brisbane to Mackay on nearly one tank. 40 psi in the tyres. Had the fuel light on for 20kms or so before topping up. Had spare fuel just in case in a Jerry tank. Wanted to see how far I could get. Stuck to the speed limit the whole way. Not much overtaking and not much traffic. Had to add 10L and got there without the light coming back on.
Here's the rough figures: 980KMS, 70L, 7.14L\100kms. The trip computer was telling me I was doing about 6.5L\100KMS.
06 CL9 Mostly urban driving, I rarely use the freeway.
Usually average between 10.5-11L\100km, pretty disappointed with the fuel consumption of the Euro to be honest coming from a V6 that got the same economy on the same run with only regular unleaded :/
That seems a little high, I usually average 10.0 absolute tops for medium-lead foot urban driving. Perhaps you are trying to match V6 performance with an I4? ;)
My b16a2 (ek civic) is using 8.3l per 100klms :D
Mine even worse, 2010 cu2 caltex 95, average 12.5 - 13.5/100km. Totaly urban driving, school zone and my max speed probably 50km/hours, average speed 20km/hours according to the computer trip.Quote:
Originally Posted by aroy7
I've only been getting ~550-600km/full tank =X with bp ultimate
my car must be munted......LOL
i struggle to get like 400km out of a full tank.....HAHAHAHA
its the same whether i use 98 octy from BP, Shell, Mobil/7-11.
I dont win.
Though, i dont drive long distances, all like 10-15min trips. Mostly peak hour start stop traffic where it feels like school zone sesh all the time.
But seeing everyone elses figure got me jelly and all..... /sadfacey
You need to buy a hybrid or catch the bus? Driving is not profitable for you at the moment XD and those kind of trips are not going to be good for your car in the long run...
Well I had a 2003 Laguna before this and I never took it past 4000rpm because I was too afraid something would go wrong with the engine due to the fact that every other bit of the car had developed a problem!Quote:
Originally Posted by chuboy
So I basically drive the same in the Euro out of habit and always use BP ultimate, but even when I try to be as frugal as possible (air con off, windows up, keeping it under 3k rpm etc), I can NEVER get it below 10l/100km with a mix of suburban and highway driving. If I go on the freeway and coast then it hovers around 9L/100km.
The thing about euro and drive by wire is that rpm is not a good indicator on how much fuel your car is drinking..... If the cr is more than 5 yo I might suggest anEFi system flush/clean.
And tr reset your eCU... That'd probably help
Cheers for the tip, couple of questions:Quote:
Originally Posted by Fredoops
How much on average does an EFI system flush\clean cost? and,
I tried to reset the ECU recently, disconnected the negative terminal for 10 or so minutes. It cleared the fuel consumption figures but not the distance traveled in each of the trips, A and B, in the trip computer.....would that still be considered reset?
It's about $110 odd, And yes, that was a reset
i have a cl9, all city driving. getting about 11-12l/100km. worst fuel consumption ever for this type of car im guessing...
I get about 10 ish. Does anyone know how far the car can go from when the light comes on till it runs out of juice?
Pretty hard to say.. It would depend on how you drive I suppose? Like how hard you step on the accelerator etc etc? For me, I can still get another 50-70km probably? Haven't actually tried it out myself to the point where the car doesn't run anymore lol.Quote:
Originally Posted by dee-y
I find that car always has at least 6 or 7 litres of fuel left in when I fill up after the fuel light comes on. So I suppose driving averagely you could get up to 80 kms. Would be a good experiment, but only if you had a jerry can of fuel for when you did run out.
Just passed the half way mark @ 350km so better than before...weird
thats nice man.....for me 350kmh is just about to have the fuel light kick in.....LOL.....crap car i have....hahahaQuote:
Originally Posted by Lazarus
I blame bodykit and them rims lolQuote:
Originally Posted by TRaNz
hahaha, but but but but, they're genuine and rare....probably the only one in Aust to rock them =DQuote:
Originally Posted by Fredoops
Guys ,
if your car is lowered with eibach springs does it effect fuel economy ? also if you change wheels from 17' to 18'
Yes, but how much difference depends on the setup, width/weight of rims etc etc etcQuote:
Originally Posted by liberty68
I remember someone said each kg gained on the wheels is the equivalent of 4 or 5 kg gained on the bodywork or something..
Filled all the way up with Caltex 98 fuel. Then I did ~100km of <5 min 'cold engine' trips, ~230km of highway cruising then ~330km of reasonably lead-footed city driving.
I just filled up with 98 again from the same pump. According to the trip computer I drove 559.8km using 50.3L of fuel (which works out to be about 8.985 L/100km). The trip computer showed my fuel consumption as 8.7 L/100km. So the trip computer appears to be about 0.3 L/100km optimistic judging by other posts here as well.
EDIT: I got stock 16" wheels at 36psi (although they were about 31-32psi for half of this tank. I'm surprised how differently the car handles when you pump the tyres a little harder).
according to the owners manual there's about 10L left when the reserve light comes on, so depends what you averaged for the first 55 liters.Quote:
Originally Posted by dee-y
I got 500K's (2003 manual luxury, done about 128,000kms) before the light came on, mostly urban driving using Caltex Vortex 95, with the occasional heavy foot on the pedal, but most of the time changing at about 3500 for the early gears and about 2500-3000 for the higher gears.
so out of 55 liters I got 500k's = 11L/100kms..... not bad, I'm gonna try BP ultimate next, shifting no higher then 3000 and hope to get 600k's before the fuel light comes on!
11/100?? not bad??? thats horrible isn't it......
It's not that bad considering the amount of kms, almost due for a service and the occasionally hitting 5500-6000 rpm.Quote:
Originally Posted by MingZai
whats your fuel consumption like?
i got like 440km..... worse then u... I think I hit VTEC too much....
Sorry if this has been mentioned before, but everyone should make an account on fuelly.com - it just makes it easier to track how much you've spent, distance travelled and all of that sort of stuff. And you can search for specific cars. It's free. (And I promise I'm not affiliated with them)
I'm surprised I've been able to keep my car at 8.9L/100km for the past month and a bit. I do a lot of short trips (picking up brothers, groceries, driving to the city, friends house etc). I also do drive in peak hour/school hours quite a bit and once in a while, I'd get 10-25mins on the freeway. Guess the light footed driving is working. I do hit VTEC here and there but I try not to since my car is still fairly new.
well I filled up on thursday, and I've just hit 300kms, and the fuel guage needle is sitting just over half a tank! I have been changing gears less then 3000rpm about 85% of the time, which is pretty good for me, I was a bit of a hard driver, I've calmed down heaps. this time i filled up premium 95 from 7-11 (previously a mobil) so i dont know where 7-11 is sourcing their fuel from now, but from memory 7-11 fuel was shit house! but im pretty pleased considering the last tank of fuel was caltex vortex 95, and at about 250kms my fuel guage was pretty much half way!
hmmmm I've only hit VTEC once so far ever since my refuel... going to measure again once it hits the light.
BTW what do you mean my light footing? not stepping on the pedal yeah??
Too bad I have an INJEN CAI which makes me want to step down on it all the time..
I used to drive around Eastern suburbs in Sydney and would hit redline going from 0 to the 90km/h limit once a day. Still got a fuel consumption of 10.5L/100km. Hitting vtec/redline once or twice a day doesn't drastically increase your fuel consumption because the time in which you are using full throttle is very short compared to the rest of the time when you are driving normally or idling in a traffic jam. I've also testing driving full throttle for 90 minutes on a race track, keeping the revs from 4000 up to 7000rpm and got about 27L/100km.
so when does vtec actually engage in the k24???? I was under the impression that i-vtec technology is more gradual as vtec engages, kicks in earlier and you dont really notice or hear it as much.... i tried to search info on it but u can imagine how many results come up when i type the word 'vtec' in the search bar haha
6000 rpm
^ thats right 6000 rpm. Well quick update... My fuel tank is 1/4 down and surprisingly it's already done 220 km :D .
I've hit VTEC once or twice and been driving it like a prius :)
Yeah, I mean just easing off the pedal a lot and not really stepping on it hard. And don't worry, I know how you feel.. I have a Takeda SRI and I've also disconnected my muffler (just for sound as it's still a bit quiet in the lower RPM's with a stock exhaust) and I'm always tempted to step on it harder just for the louder sounds.Quote:
Originally Posted by MingZai
Whoa, 27L/100km, that's crazy.. But I guess that's what you're gonna be getting since you're at a track.Quote:
Originally Posted by aaronng
On Saturday, after my friend gave me a run in his EP3R (me as the passenger), I gave him a run in my Euro just to feel the difference (but obviously, mine no where near as fast as his). We both ran our cars for about 10mins of VTEC'ing each down empty streets and I thought my fuel consumption would've went up but luckily it stayed.
If mods do affect fuel consumption, I just have a Takeda SRI plus the disconnected muffler. I also run on BP Ultimate.
I thought it was around 5800 but I guess it's 6000rpm, I'll try pay more attention next time lol.Quote:
Originally Posted by [SDCTVE]
Also, could anyone please explain to me the difference between i-VTEC and VTEC? People ask me and I don't know who to ask lol. (You could PM me if this is getting off-topic. Thanks.)
Just to throw another users experience into the mix. I have about 2000km on the clock and have averaged 7.8l/100km. This is a mixture of highway at 110km/h, freeway at 100km/h and around town in a ratio of around 50:40:10. Currently averaging 81km/h.
This is with some pretty spirited driving inbetween the highway clicks. I have had it as low as 6.5l/100km on just freeway driving stretches.
Cheers
Far, 7.8L/100km.. Saving heaps of money on fuel! I'm averaging like.. around 38km/h :\Quote:
Originally Posted by Jones Boy
my best FC... 5.1l/100km.... Pump petrol at Sutton Forrest Shell, reset and drove off, did it for around 90km distance doing 110km/h on cruise control on M5. photo taken in the 70km plus mark. Was trying to see if it drop to 5.0l/100km but hit traffic jam and slow to a crawl and FC went back up to 6.0l/100km before going smooth again.
http://i7.photobucket.com/albums/y25...a/DSC00007.jpg
craazzyy ^
ahh i wish the 03-05 euro had a proper trip computer :(
I filled up with Caltex 95 for the first time last week. I have done a good 100kms so far on this tank to reach the same fuel tank level (driving style and conditions identical).
Trip computer agrees showing 9.1L/100km up from 8.4.
So there you have it.
In the 3 years I had my 08 CU2 Auto the average over 40,000km was 7.1, best recorded was 6.23. It will be interesting to see how the MY12 compares over time. I mostly used Vortex 95.
average 8.3-8.4L per 100Km. Mixed driving, mixed road. CL9
Wow, i got the same car, driving harder compare to you (sounds to me anyway), and i get 630 before the light comes on... Why such a huge difference? hmmQuote:
Originally Posted by [SDCTVE]
Hey Guys, first post for me - just recently bought a 2006 Accord Euro CL9 with 97,000km on the clock. bought from a dealer with new tyres.
so far so good for fuel economy - better than i expected.
1. First Full fillup was Caltex Vortex 95 and got 640km when the reserve light comes on - then filled up, average 7.2lt/100km 70% Freeway 30% Urban
2. filled BP ultimate - improved economy again down to 6.8lt/100km so far with 540km and gauge is saying there is a little more than 1/3 of a tank left. so far so good! again same ratio freeway/urban.
on 1 run Monash Freeway and Eastlink - about 30km distance i managed to have it down to 5.2lt/100km on that stretch which is amazing!
the car is now on 132xxx, service done, installed an Injen CAI, using BP Ultimate and I'm getting close to 600kms per tank.so averaging about 9.1L/100kmsQuote:
Originally Posted by adis
pretty happy with that.
Just elaborating on my above post. So i ended up with 6.9ltr/100km which im very impressed with...fuel light came on at 736km and ran it to 769km and refuelled. Amazing numbers i must say - definitely a far cry compared to my previous car ('99 Mitsubishi Magna) which ran between 9.5-10ltr/100km.Quote:
Originally Posted by jbzonda
just refueled and calculated the fuel consumption.. turned out to be 10.7l/100km... all city driving, no highways, using caltex 95 57,xxxkms. pretty happy :D
so the cl9 models before 06 dont have a fuel trip consuption reading is that right?
yeah 03-05 dont have trip computersQuote:
Originally Posted by cris
a 99 magna averaged 9.5-10? was it a v6? I had a V6 manual 97 magna, I used to average 13L/100kms but man that thing used to go pretty good :DQuote:
Originally Posted by jbzonda
i had a 3.5 v6 Magna yeah they were great cars! i did have a few mods that may have helped the economy...i usually got 550-580km per tank most of the timeQuote:
Originally Posted by [SDCTVE]
Dont forget too that most of my kms are 70% freeway, im sure around town its much worse.
Just did melbourne to adelaide about 720kms and no fuel light haha