Welcome Guest [Log In] [Register]
Posted ImageWelcome to the all new Geo Metro Forum. We hope you enjoy your visit.

You're currently viewing our forum as a guest. This means you are limited to certain areas of the board and there are features you can't use and images you can't see. Registration is simple, fast, and completely free. If you're already a member please log in to your account to access all of our features:

Join our community!




Username:   Password:
Add Reply
any good civic forums out there?
Topic Started: Jun 6 2015, 01:43 PM (1,556 Views)
Freeman
Member Avatar
The Family Man

No way haha. I wish it was mine! I'm going to keep my thread under lock and key. It is super out dated and definitely show cases some of my worst decisions.

Credit to the guy who did it, but it is definitely not my Civic. There are a couple of threads like that spread across the internet though. They just aren't very popular because it isn't something you can pick up on eBay and bolt on or measure on a dyno. That's about all you have in the Honda world; eBay kids and dyno queens.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
robertino
Member Avatar


Depends on what you need help with ..what's wrong with your Honda ( I was a Honda factory tech if that matters)

As far as which Honda is the best !? on MPG that is also up for debate. I'd take a Civic VX over a Metro anyday and twice on Sunday ! the HF is definitely worth its weight , but it only came in the 2 seater CRX (well until the recent revamp) The CX had the air bags so I'm leaning more towards that one , because I have kids and that's important to me ( Maybe not you)

I could be wrong but I think CarNut was selling one of his VX's ....Hey CarNut , you wana trade for a 99 Metro
Edited by robertino, Jun 10 2015, 10:34 PM.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
dayle1960
Member Avatar
Fastest Hampster EVER

robertino
Jun 10 2015, 10:33 PM
Depends on what you need help with ..what's wrong with your Honda ( I was a Honda factory tech if that matters)

As far as which Honda is the best !? on MPG that is also up for debate. I'd take a Civic VX over a Metro anyday and twice on Sunday ! the HF is definitely worth its weight , but it only came in the 2 seater CRX (well until the recent revamp) The CX had the air bags so I'm leaning more towards that one , because I have kids and that's important to me ( Maybe not you)

I could be wrong but I think CarNut was selling one of his VX's ....Hey CarNut , you wana trade for a 99 Metro
Robertino, I've been looking at the MPG's for the Gen7, Gen8, and Gen9 civics. Seems they are all close at 39 MPG's and I've been wondering if that is a fact or did Honda stretch the numbers. I like the looks and add-ons with the 2012+ models yet the 39 MPG sticker has me worried. I'd like to see "real world" MPG numbers on the 2012 yet I cannot find any good numbers except on fuelly.com and Ecomodder.com. Every driver has different terrain and I suspect the guys who get 39+ MPS's are driving on level roads whereas I have hills that I contend with.(Ozark mountains).

I test drove a '12 EX-L and was pleasantly surprised at the fit and feel of the vehicle. Also the green and blue fuel efficiency bars in the dash are pretty cool.

With my metro I can bang on it all day long and get 42 MPG. If I drive for fuel mileage I've gotten 51 MPG. I just wonder what I would get if I drove the same in the Civic. Or would I really, really have to baby it to get even 40 MPG.

Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Freeman
Member Avatar
The Family Man

I'd suspect you'd need to baby it. My pops has a gen 7 civic and I'd say he gets closer to 30 MPG on a good day. It is an auto slush box though.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
robertino
Member Avatar


It's a buncha crap ! my friend.
There is no Civic out there that will do those numbers other than those 3'rd 4'th and maybe a 5th gen VX (Maybe if you can find one that hasn't been molested ) . All you have to do is close the doors on one of those older models and you'll know why you are getting those MPG numbers ! they were flimsy like our Metros ! As they went into the 5th gen they started putting more and more stuff in them , and made them quieter and stiffer and and safer and gave them better handling, but that just added on the weight !
The 1.5 was an awesome engine. Simple and got the job done with the least amount of fuel. I LOVE THEM ! but then we went up to the 1.6 and 1.7 and we had to, to move the weight around.

When they test these cars at the factory for the MPG , they put them on a dry track on a perfect day, windows closed , ac off going 55-65 MPH without stopping and going ! Who the hell drives like that ...I DON'T -DO YOU ?

If I could describe my favorite car that we hardly ever saw in the shop for anything other than the regular oil change and no-one ever wanted to sell them because they loved them ...it would be a Civic Wagon ! it has a D15B2 in there for the FWD and the RT4WD. AND PEOPLE LOVED THEM !! Easy to drive, easy on gas and simple to fix if it ever did need anything , which was usually just brakes or a clutch.
http://en.autowp.ru/image/format/picture/picture-medium/honda/civic/autowp.ru_honda_civic_wagon_15.jpeg

To be honest I haven't seen 40's with my 3/5 99 Metro in years ! Just like the Hondas, the minute you go over 55MPH in it the MPG's drop like stones. Our speed limit around here is 70 and my 3 cyl at that speed gets like 36-37 maybe ! The best I ever got was 45 MPG and I was going 55 or less.
Edited by robertino, Jun 12 2015, 12:10 AM.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Freeman
Member Avatar
The Family Man

Robert, if you can find me a Civic Wagon I will buy it right now. Those things are SUPER rare. And when you do find them, they are over priced rust buckets. The RT4WD power train is stupid amazing and even less common.

If I got my hands on a 4th gen Civic wagon (the only actual Civic wagon), I would swap everything over from my hatch and drive that thing religiously. I'd probably never drive the Metro again. 4 door hatchbacks/wagons are the bomb.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
myredvert
Member Avatar
myredvert

Quote:
 
When they test these cars at the factory for the MPG , they put them on a dry track on a perfect day, windows closed , ac off going 55-65 MPH without stopping and going ! Who the hell drives like that ...I DON'T -DO YOU ?
That's not how the numbers are measured but it does make a good point about how our driving may not reflect the testing process used to get them. The testing is actually done on a dyno programmed to simulate the EPA defined test cycle, and the program adjusts the dyno to account for variables such as aerodynamic drag and vehicle weight. And in 2008 the test cycle was modified to reflect such things as AC use and faster "normal" speeds, among other things.

The standards and procedures are federally regulated, and the EPA independently reviews all results and even spot checks a certain percentage of them in their own lab to ensure the manufacturers are in compliance. While a manufacturer may not "cheat" to get higher numbers, they certainly can design any particular car to perform best over the test cycle and not necessarily the best for any one person's driving conditions and style.
EPA
 
EPA fuel economy estimates are based on standardized tests designed to reflect "typical" driving conditions and driver behavior, but several factors can affect MPG significantly:
How & where you drive
Vehicle condition & maintenance
Fuel variations
Vehicle variations
Engine break-in
Therefore, the EPA ratings are a useful tool for comparing the fuel economies of different vehicles but may not accurately predict the average MPG you will get.

The actual mileage you get will still vary based on your driving habits, traffic conditions, and other factors.
According to the EPA, the test numbers are for comparison, they are not predictors, and YMWV (your mileage will vary).
Edited by myredvert, Jun 12 2015, 07:06 AM.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
68custom


dayle1960
Jun 11 2015, 05:11 AM
robertino
Jun 10 2015, 10:33 PM
Depends on what you need help with ..what's wrong with your Honda ( I was a Honda factory tech if that matters)

As far as which Honda is the best !? on MPG that is also up for debate. I'd take a Civic VX over a Metro anyday and twice on Sunday ! the HF is definitely worth its weight , but it only came in the 2 seater CRX (well until the recent revamp) The CX had the air bags so I'm leaning more towards that one , because I have kids and that's important to me ( Maybe not you)

I could be wrong but I think CarNut was selling one of his VX's ....Hey CarNut , you wana trade for a 99 Metro
Robertino, I've been looking at the MPG's for the Gen7, Gen8, and Gen9 civics. Seems they are all close at 39 MPG's and I've been wondering if that is a fact or did Honda stretch the numbers. I like the looks and add-ons with the 2012+ models yet the 39 MPG sticker has me worried. I'd like to see "real world" MPG numbers on the 2012 yet I cannot find any good numbers except on fuelly.com and Ecomodder.com. Every driver has different terrain and I suspect the guys who get 39+ MPS's are driving on level roads whereas I have hills that I contend with.(Ozark mountains).

I test drove a '12 EX-L and was pleasantly surprised at the fit and feel of the vehicle. Also the green and blue fuel efficiency bars in the dash are pretty cool.

With my metro I can bang on it all day long and get 42 MPG. If I drive for fuel mileage I've gotten 51 MPG. I just wonder what I would get if I drove the same in the Civic. Or would I really, really have to baby it to get even 40 MPG.

using a hypermile strategy I wound not expect much better than 42 maybe, and we DO own a 12 EX-L sedan. remember a newer Honda is a safe car with leather, A/C on, side air bags etc. my old metro was ok and durable but no way I would go back to one. I would love a clean one to hot rod though...
Edited by 68custom, Jun 12 2015, 09:41 AM.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
myredvert
Member Avatar
myredvert

Quote:
 
using a hypermile strategy I wound not expect much better than 42 maybe
I got high 30's (38-39) with my 4wd Tracker with aero mods and driving a steady 55 mph on the highway and never shutting the engine off. When I actually hypermiled it (engine off coasting, pulse & glide, engine off at stops, etc) I could get well into the 40's.

Using a "hypermiling strategy" I could easily get high 40's. If a car already gets in the high 30s EPA number wise, if you can't easily get into the 50s without any additional drag reduction, then your 'hypermiling strategy' needs a strategic overhaul, because you are doing something wrong. :whistle

Maybe I don't really understand what your definition of "hypermile strategy" actually is? Maybe it's just slowing down 5 mph from what you normally drive? Of course, that right there is worth 5 mpg minimum.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
68custom


yes I am not that much of a fanatical Hyper miler dude, my wife less so. who knows, maybe 50++ is possible. all I DO know is that it does everything way better than my old Metro did, the Metro BTW was admittedly close to bullet proof. and I feel much safer.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
myredvert
Member Avatar
myredvert

Perceptions aside, it's hard to believe there have actually been too many cars if any sold in the US in the last few decades that had a lower level of crashworthiness than the Metro... :lol
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
dayle1960
Member Avatar
Fastest Hampster EVER

today I chatted with a fellow who had an 07 Honda Civic Hybrid. He told me when he bought it that he would get 45 miles per gallon on the highway very easily. Now eight years later he only gets 40 miles per gallon because the battery is slowly dying. Plus he appeared to be a computer programmer which makes me believe he babied the mileage but didn't hypermile.

The search for mph mileage "real work results" continues.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
myredvert
Member Avatar
myredvert

Quote:
 
Now eight years later he only gets 40 miles per gallon because the battery is slowly dying.
Somehow I think 8 additional years of the engine wearing down has a lot more to do with it than "the battery wearing down," unless they have the first ever magic internal combustion engine that never wears and loses efficiency like all of ours do.

A roughly 8% reduction in engine efficiency which will reduce the fuel economy that much over 8 years doesn't seem that big of the stretch whatsoever.

Dayle, this isn't rocket science or voodoo. With your typical driving conditions and your engine likely in average condition, you currently get a couple of mpg over the EPA number for your model and year Metro. It's likely you will do the same with pretty much any car.

That is a much more objective way to look at it than to try to figure out what you will get by asking others what they get. They may or may not have an engine in the same condition as you will, they may or may not drive differently, and their local driving conditions will almost certainly be different.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
dayle1960
Member Avatar
Fastest Hampster EVER

myredvert
Jun 12 2015, 02:14 PM
Dayle, this isn't rocket science or voodoo. With your typical driving conditions and your engine likely in average condition, you currently get a couple of mpg over the EPA number for your model and year Metro. It's likely you will do the same with pretty much any car.

That is a much more objective way to look at it than to try to figure out what you will get by asking others what they get. They may or may not have an engine in the same condition as you will, they may or may not drive differently, and their local driving conditions will almost certainly be different.
http://www.fuelly.com/car/honda/civic

I agree whole heartedly with your remarks myredvert. If you click on the link you will see a bell curve and the middle ground is about 32 mpg. There seems to be about the same number of cars on both sides of the curve. All I'm trying to ascertain is how the folks on the right side of the curve are doing so much better than the sticker. :dunno

From what I can think, there are a few cars and driver combinations which garner 33+ mpg. Some guy wakes up, buys a Civic and TADA!! says I get 35mpg and I don't have to do anything special to get that mileage. It's just something that nobody can explain, but it is there for all to see. Then there are the folks on the far right side of the graph and you KNOW those folks are driving for fuel mileage. And lastly the very few folks on the extreme right side who probably push their car too and from work every day just to save gas.

I'm trying to find the folks on the far right of the graph and see what driving style they have and how to emulate the results. I'd hate to purchase a Civic because of the bells and whistles just to find out that no matter how I drive it I will only get 30 MPG because that is the one particular Civic which didn't have the good mojo on it when it was built.

That is the reason why I'm asking these questions. I wanna know what I'm getting into before I plop down a huge chunk of change and get buyers remorse after three or four months of crappy fuel mileage.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
myredvert
Member Avatar
myredvert

But you won't, and can't really "figure it out." You already know how to drive to get the highest fuel economy as practical for the conditions. If there is one thing that is consistent with people in any manual transaxle is not really knowing where peak torque is, when is the appropriate time to shift, and where the engine gets the best BSFC for any given conditions. That takes a torque curve and a fuel map to figure out, and then all you have to do is use the information wisely.

Unless you account for all the variables affecting fuel economy that the people in the "good mileage group" you can't pin down any unique details in driving style for a particular car to mileage. How do you know that the "good group" simply doesn't drive on average 3 mph slower that could account for as much as 5 mpg? Most people's driving style is some unique combination of good and bad habits, and it's next to impossible to account for and separate each one and their specific effects.

It's justmy opinion, but if you want to make sure you can get the best economy possible/practical out of any car that you can get, find the factory procedure for a compression test on the model/year you are serious about and follow it to do one on a car before you buy it. Best investment from a fuel economy standpoint you could possibly make before deciding to buy one over another. And it probably isn't bad to know it won't need a rebuild anytime soon.

1% reduction in engine efficiency = 1% reduction in fuel economy.

All other things remaining equal, worn engines = reduced engine efficiency. Tight engines near spec get the best efficiency. Don't buy one with a worn engine. Get Direct TV. Buy one with a tight engine. :thumb

God luck finding a good one, they all pretty much seem like very good cars to me.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
1 user reading this topic (1 Guest and 0 Anonymous)
Go to Next Page
« Previous Topic · The Geo Metro Lounge · Next Topic »
Add Reply