My experience with a Honda Civic hybrid

jim beam > wrote:
> with respect, that's not surprising. the only time the hybrid comes
> into its own is in city driving. constant stop/start consumes a lot of

I've tried to correct Jim's mistaken impressions before.
http://makeashorterlink.com/?K3D0211E9
I don't think Jim has a hybrid, and he argued with me about fundamental
concepts of how the Honda IMA system operates.

The thread noted here as a Google reference has some postings from me.
http://groups.google.com/groups?hl=e...6a538ae&rnum=3

I have a 2003 Honda Civic Hybrid, and I average 43-45 mpg.
http://www.rahul.net/dold/clarence/Honda_Mileage.htm

Freeway travel at 70 mph can get above 50, but you have to cruise.
"Keeping up with traffic" with goofy speed fluctuations on highway 680 in
the SF Bay Area, will cut severely into mileage. Traffic flow is anywhere
from 60mph to 85+. I was doing just over 80, third in a pack of cars,
when I realized a Chevy Tahoe was running up my butt. The Tahoe changed
two lanes to the right to go around me in a gap that I didn't consider
large enough to pull over into. When I did find a gap, I dropped back to
cruise-control 70mph. I could stay up with the faster traffic, but that
just eats into the mileage.

It's a little motor, 1300cc. At cruising speed, it is working comfortably,
with no hybrid assist. Power for acceleration needs to come from somewhere.
It either comes in short bursts from stored battery power, or from
overtaxing that little itty bitty engine.

I don't believe that hybrid is any sort of scam. I think it works very
well for me. I live in a rural area, and do a good bit of interstate
driving, so the idea that it is a city-only car is wrong.

My daughter has a Chevrolet Metro, which gets over 40mpg on the highway,
but she realizes that is a far different car from mine.

I also have a Ford Escape Hybrid, but I don't have enough miles on it to
comment about the city/highway mileage yet. The electric motor in it is
rated for the same horsepower as the Honda gas+IMA. Different vehicle.

--
---
Clarence A Dold - Hidden Valley (Lake County) CA USA 38.8-122.5

QDurham wrote:
>
> >If we
> >> were getting 43, I would feel scammed, but good night, 33? It's
> >> really a crime.
>
> If I may point out, on a 1200 mile Southern California desert/mountains/cities
> trip -- 9,000' passes, 85 mpd freeways (cheated a bit for about 1/2 minute
> slightly over 90 --was still being passed -- USI5) occasionally significant
> traffic, 1990 Honda CRX, I averaged 39.9 mpg.
>
> Quent



I just can't see a hybrid with numbers that work.

CRX models, (especially the low end examples), always got superior gas
mileage with good payback if one kept the car for a number of years.


--
JT

(Whose next NEW car will be the perfect "water combusting" car when perfected..)

QDurham wrote:
>
> >If we
> >> were getting 43, I would feel scammed, but good night, 33? It's
> >> really a crime.
>
> If I may point out, on a 1200 mile Southern California desert/mountains/cities
> trip -- 9,000' passes, 85 mpd freeways (cheated a bit for about 1/2 minute
> slightly over 90 --was still being passed -- USI5) occasionally significant
> traffic, 1990 Honda CRX, I averaged 39.9 mpg.
>
> Quent



I just can't see a hybrid with numbers that work.

CRX models, (especially the low end examples), always got superior gas
mileage with good payback if one kept the car for a number of years.


--
JT

(Whose next NEW car will be the perfect "water combusting" car when perfected..)

"QDurham" > wrote in message
...
> >If we
> >> were getting 43, I would feel scammed, but good night, 33? It's
> >> really a crime.
>
> If I may point out, on a 1200 mile Southern California
desert/mountains/cities
> trip -- 9,000' passes, 85 mpd freeways (cheated a bit for about 1/2 minute
> slightly over 90 --was still being passed -- USI5) occasionally
significant
> traffic, 1990 Honda CRX, I averaged 39.9 mpg.
>
> Quent
In sum, one could conclude that the higher price you pay for the hybrid will
not give payback over a reasonable period of time -- say 100k miles. Then,
you are also faced with the cost of battery replacement at some point.

"QDurham" > wrote in message
...
> >If we
> >> were getting 43, I would feel scammed, but good night, 33? It's
> >> really a crime.
>
> If I may point out, on a 1200 mile Southern California
desert/mountains/cities
> trip -- 9,000' passes, 85 mpd freeways (cheated a bit for about 1/2 minute
> slightly over 90 --was still being passed -- USI5) occasionally
significant
> traffic, 1990 Honda CRX, I averaged 39.9 mpg.
>
> Quent
In sum, one could conclude that the higher price you pay for the hybrid will
not give payback over a reasonable period of time -- say 100k miles. Then,
you are also faced with the cost of battery replacement at some point.

twaugh5 > wrote:
> you are also faced with the cost of battery replacement at some point.

About $680 at current prices. Let's see what happens when they get to
aftermarket.


--
---
Clarence A Dold - Hidden Valley (Lake County) CA USA 38.8-122.5

twaugh5 > wrote:
> you are also faced with the cost of battery replacement at some point.

About $680 at current prices. Let's see what happens when they get to
aftermarket.


--
---
Clarence A Dold - Hidden Valley (Lake County) CA USA 38.8-122.5

Elmo P. Shagnasty > wrote:
> Just wait until AFTER the first lawsuit, where there's an accident and
> the batteries are blamed for some serious mishap.

D-Cell batteries? What, are they going to be "ejected from the vehicle"
and fly through the window of some other car?

--
---
Clarence A Dold - Hidden Valley (Lake County) CA USA 38.8-122.5

Elmo P. Shagnasty > wrote:
> Just wait until AFTER the first lawsuit, where there's an accident and
> the batteries are blamed for some serious mishap.

D-Cell batteries? What, are they going to be "ejected from the vehicle"
and fly through the window of some other car?

--
---
Clarence A Dold - Hidden Valley (Lake County) CA USA 38.8-122.5

In article >, muzz
> wrote:

> I have read several posts about the Civic hybrid. We have had ours for
> a year now.After a thousand miles, with the a/c off, I was averaging
> 34 mpg. I took it back to the dealer and complained. They said that
> since it only had 1000 miles, the mileage figure was not what is to be
> expected, and after a good break-in (he suggested 4000 miles), we
> should be getting close to the EPA 46/48. We therefore drove the Civic
> on a 2000 mile interstate trip to get the mileage up. We averaged 40.6
> on the interstate trip. We now have almost 5000 miles on the car, and
> the last two tanks averaged 33 mpg. I think that is ridiculous. If we
> were getting 43, I would feel scammed, but good night, 33? It's
> really a crime. Can't wait to see what the dealer says when I take it
> back in a few weeks for service.
>
> I also get very disgusted when some say that it's the way people drive
> that is the problem. We live in flat-land and drive it normally
> without rabbit starts etc. 33 is disgusting.
>

>
The 34 mpg and 33 mpg is certainly cause for concern. But I think that
you must have something wrong with your particular car. I've had my
2003 Civic hybrid for well over a year. I average just at 40 mpg. The
vast majority of the miles are stop and go traffic on the 20 minute
drive to and from work.

I definitely do not think - as others on this thread have opined - that
the hybrid is a "scam". I have thoroughly enjoyed driving mine and have
had zero problems. There have been articles explaining that EPA tests
are not well suited to judging real-world performance of hybrids. I
admit to being somewhat disappointed that I'm not getting in the mid
40's. Still, for the kind of driving I do, 40 mpg is not bad - it's
twice what I was getting with the Mazda I had before.

I hope you can find an answer from the dealer or elsewhere as to why
your car is doing so poorly in the mileage department.