MPG MPG on EX and Sport

[Big-Chris]

Just looking in my brochure, why is the MPG worse by about 2mpg on the EX and Sport? (both petrol and diesel models)

the only differences I can find that is common to the 2 are the 17" alloys and the HID lights? surely they can't make that much of a difference???

or am i missing something

[Copycat]

Originally Posted by Big-Chris

Just looking in my brochure, why is the MPG worse by about 2mpg on the EX and Sport? (both petrol and diesel models)

the only differences I can find that is common to the 2 are the 17" alloys and the HID lights? surely they can't make that much of a difference???

or am i missing something

I guess it is the HIDs and Satnaz together, maybe even dual-zone climate control. Adds a bit of weight and uses electricity.

[The Great Soprendo]

I would have guessed it's more to do with the wider tyres - more friction.

The CO2 emissions of the SE are similarly better than the Sport, presumably for the same reason.

The satnav and the lights probably aren't in use when they test MPG.

[pengin]

Hmmm, curious. The ES is 4kg heavier than the EX (glass roof?) and 22kg heavier than the sport, yet it doesn't have lower mpg. They all seem to have the same power too. ...Can't see any reason for the difference in mpg.

[Pottsy]

It's the wider tyres. They add significantly to the frontal area, and increase wind and rolling resistance.

[Big-Chris]

aah! thanks for clearing that up Pottsy!

of course, I knew that really - I was just seeing if anyone else did!

[mike20]

Does anybody know why the Diesel Sport and EX models have a worse fuel consuption figure to the SE and ES models?
According to the manufacturer's figures combined consuption for the Sport and EX is 53.3mpg where as its 55.4 for the SE and ES.

I was told by the dealer that there was no differences between the engine specs between models and all of the rest of the stated figure are the same. The weights are more of less identical, in fact the ES is the heaviest kerb weight.

I enquired at Honda.co.uk who suggested it might be because of the HID lights using more power but weren't sure, and my dealer said it was because of the larger wheels, but I don't accept this because the outer tyre diameter will be the same otherwise the speedo won't read correctly.

Any ideas?

[Foggy69]

Does the Sport and EX have wider tyres. Maybe increased rolling resistance.

[paul edwards]

I don't think it would be beyond Honda to recalibrate the speedo' to account for differing rolling diameters?

[TTDegs]

All Civics, from the 1.4 SE to the Type R, have same rolling diams (or near as damm it, to within a few mil)

but yes, wider tyres will have increased rolling resistance, leading to slightly worse fuel consumption. (Which is probably what the dlr was trying to say by 'larger')
But better road holding


You would gets loads better fuel consumption by fitting a space saver spare wheel at each corner (half the tyre width), but I wouldn't recommend it


More seriously though, the published figures are only really a guidline anyway, you will make a lot more difference depending on how you drive.

In normal use, I get about 48mpg.
As an exercise in futility, (and in the interests of this forum!), I once did 130 odd miles as economically as I possibly could, and got 74mpg.

So I wouldn't worry to much about it

[mike20]

Yes thanks, never thought about the width of tyre, yes they are wider 225 as oppose to 205. Could be.

This isn't a major worry to me, I've just ordered a Sport anyway, if I get the 53.3mpg I'll be more than happy.

I'm just the curious type and when I couldn't get a plausible explanation from Honda or the Dealer, I thought I'd try here.

Cheers. Can't wait for my car!

[SteveTDCi]

Width of the tyre does count against MPG, it also increases emmissions !!

[mike20]

yep, stated figure goes up from 135 to 140 g/km CO2, but these are both within the same car tax band.

[Pottsy]

The wider tyres increase the frontal area of the car, which increases drag and fuel consumption at higher speeds.

[FWH]

Originally Posted by mike20

when I couldn't get a plausible explanation from Honda or the Dealer, I thought I'd try here.

you came to the right place!

[javorb]

i own a civic 2.2 es ,i have a tuning unit fitted and usually get 46-54mpg ,i know that most friends that have a civic usually get 42-44mpg ,you will struggle to get the goverment figures ,in fact inside my honda brochure was a card stating that the mpg figures were given from the government not honda figures

[squirrelz]

I'm pretty sure that HID headlights actually use less power than the standard ones, it's definitely the wider tyres that affect it.

[JIMBO7268]

Hi, I have the 2.2CDTi Sport and achieve 50+ mpg regularly. Delighted with that, given my previous mondeo averaged 45 and was not where near as much fun to drive.

[mike20]

Just completed 850 miles in my 2.2 CTDi sport and my second fill-up.
According to the computer my average consumption reads more like 41.8 ish.
How do you get 50+ mpg? Do you only drive down hills?

[Brodick]

Originally Posted by mike20

Just completed 850 miles in my 2.2 CTDi sport and my second fill-up.
According to the computer my average consumption reads more like 41.8 ish.
How do you get 50+ mpg? Do you only drive down hills?

I would say your engine needs a few more miles under it

it was around the 1800 mark before our i-vtec started giving really good economy