Why do new honda's MPG suck?

[luvit]

i've owned few hondas and all i know is that before i've ever heard the word hypermiling, i'd blow away the advertised MPG.
my 2004 civic hybrid would consistently get 53MPG on highway. -- i think it advertise 37mpg.

[SentraSE-R]

A 1970 Datsun 1200 weighed 1640 lbs. A 2009 Nissan Sentra weighs 2700, and its base engine size is 50% larger than the 1200. Same thing has happened to Civics.

Add that to what Frank said. My 2002 SE-R got a boost from 19/26/22 mpg to 22/28/25 mpg in 2008 because of the EPA testing changes.

[bwilson4web]

Originally Posted by Domman56

. . .
how come with all this (oh so good) new technology and vtech and all this other stuff the new civic hybrid is rated at like 40MPG highway i believe and the new insight is like 50 MPG that's not too impressive to me

Is it just me or is that a little confusing? . . .

If you'll check the user reports in Fuel Economy, you'll find a better and more accurate answer. The EPA labs provide a consistent metric but the user reports provide the real world numbers.

Bob Wilson

[mcrews]

Originally Posted by MadisonMPG

Frank Lee, don't do it.

lol

why does madisonmpg remind me of my big brother

[mcrews]

Originally Posted by mcrews

lol

why does madisonmpg remind me of my big brother

.......and not my girlfriend

[jamesqf]

Originally Posted by Domman56

how come with all this (oh so good) new technology and vtech and all this other stuff
the new civic hybrid is rated at like 40MPG highway...

A couple minutes with Google finds two reasons (in addition to the already-mentioned change in EPA test methods).

Honda CRX: 89 HF M/T 1,834 lb
'90-'91 HF M/T 1,967 lb

2010 Civic Hybrid MT/AT): NA / 2877 lb

One's pretty obvious, hauling around an extra half ton doesn't do a lot for anyone's mpg. Second is that the CRX had a manual, the Civic doesn't.

Then there's maybe a bit of aerodynamics: the 2-seat CRX has a nice tapered roofline, the Civic's a sedan.