|
Found a Civic VX; Great Mileage Starts Now!
Hi folks,
Boy, I tell you... trying to find a decent Honda Civic VX for a reasonable price that hasn't already been molested (such as those with turbo'd 2 liter engines with tranny swap, etc) with the features I want (AC, necessary for my family in the Sac Valley area) within a reasonable distance (150 miles of my home) is ... ahem ... challenging! Finally found myself my "Mouse", a 1994 Honda Civic VX sold by the original owner... Not too bad a shape, considering it has nearly 304,000 miles on it :eek: The orig owner was fastidious about maintaining the engine, with oil changes every 5K and timing belt / water pump changes every 100K (among other things; detailed paperwork was included). The maintenance was definitely noticeable as the car runs and drives very well; no smoking, no drips, no issues with acceleration, tracking down the road, or pulling to either side under braking. A little bit of body damage on the passenger side, where it kissed a guard rail after being side-swiped by a hit&run driver back in 2000. Since it's a CA model, the EPA MPG estimates are a bit lower than the Federal model, but my goal is to average an FE of high 60's to low 70's during my daily 50 mile RT commute. It is going to take a while to get there, as I don't have much spare $$ or time. Also, since it'll be a family car, any mods I make will have to pass the "wife test." ;) So my plans are something like this:
The first fillup after I bought the car gave me 40.7mpg; 3/4 of that tank was driven by the original owner. So not really a fair baseline, but I'll have a couple of weeks worth of driving done by mid- to end- January; I should have a better idea of what a realistic baseline is by that time. I definitely welcome thoughts & comments from this community. :thumbup: |
I think you'll like it, :). Don't forget the MPGuino, :)
|
Glad to see another member join the VX crowd.
60-70 mpg is ambitious, but achievable depending on how far you're willing to tweak the nut behind the wheel. Bonus for you is that 25 mile each way commute - you're driving a long enough difference that the warm-up hit (assuming you don't use a block heater) is proportionally pretty small. The fact that you live in Cali is great too, climate wise. FYI: Quote:
|
MetroMPG - Thanks for the link to the thread... very interesting!
I agree with your comment RE: "tweak the nut behind the wheel." That's why I've got that goal at a higher priority than aero mods... I expect much of the "nut tweaking" to happen when I get the instrumentation in place (so I can actually see what kind of effect I'm having when I'm driving). My "to work" commute is pretty much all down hill so should be able to do a lot of EOC ... and I'll just have to be a lot slower than I'm used to coming back up the hill. I'm definitely getting a LOT of ideas and inspiration from this site! |
I plan to test the use of pulse & glide on moderate upgrades. I've done it, and I do think it saves fuel vs. a steady climb using normal appropriate rpms + gears. I hope to get some time to test it using the ScanGauge to show some hard numbers.
Just a thought, re. your commute route. Might be useful. |
Quote:
|
Of course the the main reason I chose the 5th gen Civic VX is because of what I've been researched info on this and other forums. But now that I have one, I'm looking at the "next level of detail." Found very useful information that TomO gathered at the GasSavers site regarding the VX specifically as well as useful information on the 5th gen Civic over at the Civic-EG site and the Honda-Tech site. Placing the links here for future reference.
Finally had a chance to drive the Mouse in a more or less "normal" manner yesterday (only other time I drove it was when I bought it several days ago, and that was primarily freeway). Definitely a unique experience compared to all the other manual transmission cars I've driven! I typically skip 2nd & 4th gears on my other 5spd cars; much harder to do on the VX as it has such tall gear ratios. Also, read that the Fed versions of the cars have a shift indicator light that goes on at somewhere around 1200 to 1800 rpm; tho' the CA version does not have that, I still try to shift in that range. On paper, it shows that the D15Z1 engine has a decent amount of torque vs HP, and it sure is noticeable when shifting at the low RPMs. Tuesday I'll be getting the windshield replaced (there's a baseball-sized "bullseye" in it). I'll get a pic of the current windshield posted asap. Having read about the diff in FE between CA and Fed versions, I'm also hunting down a Fed ECU and a 5-wire O2 sensor... based on my readings, it sounds like a collection of connectors from a wrecking yard is all I need to make a reversible CA / Fed setup. Will post the progress of the conversion. |
My wife drove the Mouse today for the first time... and she likes it!! :thumbup: Well, what she actually said is that it was pretty gutless, but at least she didn't say something to the effect of "I'm not driving that piece of $!@# again!" :D That's good, because there are days when she has a 70 mile RT (once a week for one meeting, and once a month for another) where she can take the Mouse while I take the Redhead to work. If I've got the numbers right, that means we'd only use 2/3 the fuel compared to her taking the Roo:
Yes, I do believe I'm going to enjoy this Civic VX quite a bit... :p |
Tried a little bit of "engine off coasting" during my commute this week... kinda weird, having never done it before... Feel like I'm doing something that I'm not supposed to be doing. Learned that the speedo no longer works when the ignition is off on the VX, so, I've got to turn the ignition back on right away (rather than waiting 'til I'm ready to bump start).
Also found 3 annoying things that I've GOT to fix on the Mouse:
All relatively easy fixes, and high on the list of things to get done. |
1 Attachment(s)
Used my GPS to map out an altitude profile for my commute today... below is what it looks like... this is the "to work" direction...
http://ecomodder.com/forum/attachmen...1&d=1231480012 I know that the fuel gauge is relatively inaccurate (I "lost" 1/4 tank taking a fwy on-ramp :eek: then it slowly "came back" over the next few mins :thumbup:), but nevertheless, I'm kinda bummed that I've only gone ~160 miles by half tank... :( Windshield is fixed, clock is on it's way, and will prolly look at fixing climate control lights and adding a "lights on" buzzer this weekend. EDIT: Realized that I left out a few data points on my graph... was half asleep when I put the graph together... :rolleyes: |
Woohoo! Scored both a Fed ECU and a "new" OEM 5-wire O2 sensor on fleabay! $35 for the ECU and $175 for the sensor. Definitely will need to plan a visit to the auto dismantler in order to cannabilize the necessary "connector sets". :D
|
1 Attachment(s)
Another view of the GPS data, but this time it is the "from work" direction and includes my current speed.
http://ecomodder.com/forum/attachmen...1&d=1231484033 Kinda interesting to look at... Looks like the speed kinda lags a bit behind the altitude. Gives an idea of the challenge of getting up the hill with the Maus. Floored in top gear still can't overcome the pull of gravity... :turtle: On this trip, you can kind of see that I downshifted to try to keep the momentum up, but even that didn't help much. More recently, I've tried attacking the hill ahead of time (i.e. getting a running start), which helps a (very) little bit... at least it I can stay in top gear the whole way. The drop to zero mph indicates the begin & end of the freeway (on & off ramps). GPS data also indicated that the odo shows about 2.6% fewer miles than actual (Odo -> 44.3 miles vs GPS -> 45.5 miles). I figured I was a little off because the previous owner had put slightly taller tires on the car (175/70R-13 vs the stock 165/70R13), but it was interesting to see that the actual odo error is almost exactly the expected odo error; the on-line tire size calculator that I like to use (at Tire size calculator) showed that the calculated odo error was 2.5% too slow. Meaning that the odo would be pretty much dead-on with the stock tires! Fun stuff... :) |
Well, I'm bummed... Filled up today, calculated my MPG, and I only got ~35mpg... :( I kinda suspected this would not be a good tank at about half tank (see previous post), but bummed nevertheless. This was primarily a commuting tank, with one "for fun" trip and some errands.
Guess that I'm really going to have to work on my driving style! Obviously the key to that is instrumentation so I know what exactly I'm doing (or not doing) correctly. Unfortunately, it's still going to be about a month and a half before I can afford the time and $$ to add instrumentation. Besides, the whole point of these first couple of months is to get a baseline according to my driving style and my commute route. Ah well... |
Quote:
|
Quote:
Great suggestion... I will look into doing that. Unfortunately, no wrenching for the next week or two due to planned trips... :( |
Ritter: do you get to coast DOWN that climb later?
|
Hey Metro: I've been experimenting with that a bit... and that could definitely be part of it.
- On that last tank, I took one long(er) trip (~75 miles) down the hill and back up with the family... Drove more or less "normally" ... no EOC, no coasting in idle, very little "timing lights", etc. - For the days I commuted, I rarely coasted in idle; instead, I took my foot off the throttle completely while in top gear. The reason I was doing this is because I had read elsewhere that the fuel is cut off if there is no load on the engine over ~1000 rpm. And in fact, I can definitely feel the fuel cut back in right at 1000 rpm. The idea being that if I stay in gear with my foot off the throttle, I would actually use less fuel over the same distance than if I take it out of gear and coast in idle. Of course, the disadvantage being that the engine drag slows the car more than when I am out of gear so I can't quite go as far. - I've been trying to come up with the best way to get UP the hill... As the altitude plus mph trace shows, I was initially downshifting to maintain speed... lately I've been able to get up even the steeper hills without downshifting provided I pulse at the right time. So it's been a combination of learning the car's capabilities as well as the best methods for the terrain I commute over. For this latest tank, I've been doing a LOT more coasting in idle along with coasting in gear where it makes the most sense, I'm getting the hang of the right places to pulse on the different commute directions, and getting much better at shifting at lower revs (I'm able to skip over gears much more often now). The current tank is shaping up to be a bit better than the last tank... |
I might be wrong here.
I think the accepted wisdom is that it's generally more efficient to coast in neutral than to engine brake. Sometimes engine braking might be better, like: Coasting in neutral gets you going too fast downhill (try cresting the hill slower so you don't have to engine brake) You have to stop, and you can engine brake all the way to the stop (if you get into neutral earlier than this point, you save gas by removing the load earlier) Otherwise, the gains from engine braking (hurrah I'm using zero fuel!) are offset by the (substantial) energy loss to the braking. |
Hmmm... I don't know if I should be :eek: or :confused: or :mad: ... I'm at 160 miles but have only used a quarter tank out of a 10 gal tank... Either I'm doing something really well and I'm targeting ~50mpg+ on this tank; or I did something very wrong in my calculations last time (Yes, I do know how to calculate MPG on a tank!) or didn't fill it right (I am certain it was full); or the fuel gauge isn't working right all of a sudden (maybe I'll run dry when it's indicating 1/4 tank... :( )
Guess I'll know soon enough... KJSatz: Ya, I agree with what you're saying which is why I mentioned that on this tank I've adjusted to more coasting in neutral vs 'coasting' in gear; I was just trying different things out. |
Quote:
|
Congrats on the VX. You will love it, though it can be a bit tempermental. Mine is a fed vx with 130 K on it and when I got it it was lowered and the lean burn hardly worked. I was getting about 45 MPG then. It went up to about 53 once I got the lean burn working. I would definately get the lean burn going. Also, do a partial grill block. The grill block added a couple of mpg. The Lrr tires added about 3 MPG (and I just replaced 2). I would definately recommend the sumitomo htrt4 tires in the 165 size. Mine now gets 52 MPG in the snow and ice 15-20 degrees F, with 3 passengers!
Follow the advise of others on the site on putting the right spark plugs in and gap them correctly. also check valve clearance, air filter, cap and rotor. check ground wires. Since yours is over 300k I would check compression. I would guess that yours would have more trouble than mine getting high MPG just because of the milage on it. For driving tips: With the lean burn it is more important to keep in lean burn than to keep the revs down on the uphills. Lean burn only works in 3, 4 and 5. Shift down to 4 or even 3 to remain in lean burn. On downhills, coast in N when possible. I have found that my car idles lower when I turn the fan off, so I do this when coasting long distances. I use the fuel cut quite a bit, but only when I dont want the momentum, like on steep hills to avoid using the brakes, or when approaching a stop. Otherwise coast in N for FE. |
Hey James - Thank you very much for the tire recommendation!! :thumbup: Didn't realize how difficult it was going to be to find 13" LRR tires in the stock size! Also appreciate all your other tips ... :)
Looking at the progress of my current tank... ~250 miles at half tank... so target is still looking like ~50mpg... I think what Clev said is correct... I'm thinking that on my very first ever fillup (back on 12/30), the station fuel pump might have shut off early, giving me a higher than expected first tank MPG result and then a lower than expected second tank MPG result (which is actually true... I was surprised how high the result of the first tank was given that the orig owner drove most of that tank and was claiming only 30 to 35mpg)... and now this tank is more in line with "reality". Phew, I think... |
Quote:
I could get more accurate results by always going back to the same station and same pump, but paying less per gallon is more important to me (as is getting the most miles out of a tank so I fill up less often.) |
Yep,
the vx is notorious for having large variations in the amount of gas you can get into the tank...which, because of its small tank, makes the MPG calculations vary considerably. All you can do is get FE instrumentation, or take the average from several tanks. I typically see differences of 10 mpg or more per tank. If you get one bad one it could be that the one before was much better and the following one will be better. Just take the avg of several tanks. |
I'd get that grill block in right away. The white colored waxed veggie boxes from the supermarket are free and waterproof for a while. They burn hot so dont put them inside the engine bay. I just throw them in and put clear packing tape around the edges to keep them in. Not beautiful, but not too bad, and very cost effective. Be careful not to block too much right away. If you are not using the A/C you can block much of that side of the air intake.
My fed VX with the shift light tells me to shift from 2nd to 3rd at 19 mph, 3 to 4 at 26 mph and 4 to 5 at 30mph under really light loads. |
Hey James - I definitely will do the grill block (as well as other aero mod things) but not 'til I get a decent baseline of pre-aero mod FE. With the fuel fillup variability (as you mentioned and as I've discovered), it'll take a few tankfuls to get a baseline I can be confident with.
After I have a baseline, then I will do instrumentation to further refine my driving style, and after that I will start with the aero mods. I'm doing it this way intentionally because I know I'll be modifying my driving style regardless and didn't want to throw another variable into the overall FE progress. (I'd like to be able to highlight what changes have what FE impact.) Of course resisting the urge to do simple aero mod stuff is going to be tough... So we'll see how well I can stick to my plan... :cool: Switching to the Fed ECU is yet another variable, but I really do want that to be part of my baseline as well (i.e. pre-aero mods). Though I don't have the shift light, I have been shifting as low as possible... most often under 2K rpm, and sometimes even under ~1300 rpm... very impressive how well the d15z1 engine can pull at those low rpms! |
I sometimes wish I could have done scientific testing for each change to see what mpg improvement I am getting from it. I haven't installed any instrumentation, and I usually do upgrades several at a time so I dont know what effect each change has.
The VX engine is the only gasoline car that has the low rpm torque of a diesel (well, a really small diesel). It will drive down the road fine at 1,100 rpm! |
On a biz trip at the moment so not much time to write... but wanted to mention that I filled up just before the trip, and on this tank my mileage was ...
... wait for it ... ... 48.9 MPG!!! Woo hoo!! :D Definitely more along the lines of what I was hoping for!! Now the goal is to get close to that (or better it!) for the next 2 tanks. Then instrumentation... Then aero mods... Oh ya, received the ECU and the O2 sensor, so need to set some time aside to raid some connectors from another Honda... I promise, I won't raid yours... ;) |
Nice work! Keep us updated on your progress.
You are lucky to be in California, we don't hit ecomodding season till april here. |
Ya, that is true... though it does get "cold" here, I realize it's no where near the low temps much of the northern parts of the country gets... :cool:
Currently at 150 miles at the 3/4 full mark... Looks like I should be getting ~50mpg again if I stay consistent. Kinda exciting (in a weird sort of way :rolleyes:) being able to repeatedly get this kind of FE without either instrumentation or aero mods... I'm really looking forward to the next stage of this experiment! |
That's one thing I really like about the VX. You can get 55 MPG without having to shell out 24K for a hybrid, to drive painfully slow, or be constantly turning on and off the ignition. All you have to do is keep it in good shape, drive it right, and keep the speed below 60.
|
I just wanted to add that the Honda fuel guage in our cars is a complete joke.
Don't trust it. ( I can drive almost 100 miles before the needle even drops below 1/8 " on the guage. At half a tank, I have driven over 250 miles, yet the next time that the car is started, the needle drops 1/4 " within two seconds. Others here on this forum have experienced the same thing as well. ) Good luck with your mileage. (I'm envious since I have a '93 DX automatic ) |
Ha ha... ya, don't I know it!! I admit that I am totally guesstimating how much fuel I've used so far based on the general neighborhood of where the gauge is pointing... when it more or less wanders between the full mark and the half way mark, I'm guessing the tank is roughly 3/4... and so on. I kinda panicked the first time I took a freeway onramp and my fuel level "dropped" from about the 7/8 mark to the 1/2 mark :eek: ... of course it slowly came back. Getting more used to it now.
I think my instrumentation work is going to have to include a more accurate fuel gauge. I was thinking that the MPGuino code could be modified... since it already has the ability to measure how much fuel is being used instantaneously, and since the car manufacturer provides the fuel tank capacity, it ought to be a fairly straightforward modification to provide the MPGuino with the tank capacity (minus some small amount if you want a safety margin) so that it can continuously subtract the instantaneous amount used from the total amount and then display how much is remaining in the tank (for instance, via bar graph LED). Each time you fill up and hit the tank reset, it starts over. I do enjoy open source projects for that reason ... ! |
The owners manual on my DX states that I have a 11.9 gallon tank, yet I have never filled up more than around 10.5 gallons, despite the needle being several millimeters below the 'E' mark.
I'm not brave / stupid enough to test how far I can go before running out of gas. It's just hard to believe that there is still over a gallon of gas left in there. ( The car even drives funny - as if it is going to die at any moment ) Supposedly, a VX has a 10 gallon tank. |
Correct; owners manual for the VX states a 10 gal tank. With the needle deep in the red, I'm typically am putting in ~8ish gallons.
My thought with the MPGuino controlled fuel gauge was mainly to get a more accurate view of how much fuel I've actually got left. I'd still want to fill at about the same time. Speaking of which, I filled again today, and the last tank I got 47.6 mpg. Not bad, but I'd hoped to do a little better than last time. I think it's time to order the MPGuino, especially since they are available pre-assembled now... :) |
Well Son of a Monkey's Furry Behind!!
Dangit!! Just discovered that on my Honda VX, when I turn off the ignition in order to do an Engine Off Coast, the trip odo stops recording mileage ... Argh!!!
I have not yet verified if the "master odometer" also stops recording mileage... Since I always use the trip odo for calculating my FE, and since I did a lot of EOC last tank, and since I didn't turn the ignition on until I needed to do the bump start, I probably lost about 20 miles worth of distance on my trip odo on the last tank (there are 3 times where I can coast from ~65mph down to ~55mph over 2 to 3 miles on the way down the hill to work)... Though I knew the speedo was electronic (it goes to zero when ignition is off) I just made the naive assumption that the trip odo operated mechanically.... Guess I'm going to have to look at a better way to kill the engine (I've seen several different approaches in threads here) if I want to EOC and keep accurate track of the miles. |
You can't just turn it back to on and have it work? Thats how you should be doing things. Newer cars with airbags won't work if the car is off. It also is safer since you have one less step to bump start.
|
Ya, I can definitely do that... Mainly was irritated because I blew the last tank plus this tank as far as accurate FE is concerned... :mad: These were supposed to be my pre-instrumentation baseline tanks...
I was thinking I should look for a better way to do EOC because even 5s between off & on at 60+ mph, I'll lose 0.1mile on the odo. OK, so it'll probably take me less time to cycle between off & on, but that's the kind of thing going through my mind... I guess due to the fact that I'm a bit old-school, I was uncomfortable leaving the ignition on for a long time without the engine running... I recall learning that the points-based ignition system of older cars didn't always like that. Might not be a problem anymore for the electronic ignition cars... :) |
Quote:
|
Ya, that's a good point too. I do have a "Crank Position Sensor", but have no idea how interrupting it would affect the engine... I may have to experiment with that ... :D
|
| All times are GMT -4. The time now is 08:51 AM. |
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, vBulletin Solutions Inc.
Content Relevant URLs by vBSEO 3.5.2
All content copyright EcoModder.com