Lots of people won’t buy turbo gassers at auction period. Once you get burned on one it really scars. Subie turbos even the subdue crowd runs away from. Even if you buy green light and you get a post sale inspection you only have a limited time to arbitrate the sale. And no guarantee that you can cancel the sale. Has to meet certain criteria and each auction sets that criteria, mostly to satisfy the bigger customer in the deal.
It was on the CRV with 1.5 turbo if really short tripped. They changed the programming in the ECU to remedy that. What I read anyway. We were researching them at one point.
Ok so I was remembering correctly...and I think I even said "at some point" or I think Hondas use.... But I was hoping they had fixed the issue but also pointed it out in ase they looked at ones a few years old...just be aware. I am glad to hear it. I am not a Honda hater or anything. Remember the good old days in the 90s when the manual civics use to get high 40s for mpg....haven't seen those numbers ever again. I think there little turbo cars might come close maybe but this is also 25 years later.
I had a lil 1988 Ford Tempo 5 speed...got 40 MPG. Every. Stinkin. Tank. All this tech and we still can't do any better than that?! (although the new stuff does have more power)
Is it because they can't or for some odd reason they don't want to? (serious question) It'd be nice if they ran on tap water, but who'd be making any money then?
Yeah, makes ya wonder huh? Heck they are already running out of water out west...it'd be WWIII if they needed it for fuel too!
Yeah but the crash standards require more than a motorized roller skate now so weight went up and hp went up so mileage suffered. I’m ok giving up a few mpg to have a much better chance at surviving a crash.
Hold on there Clem; not true! I have a 2014 civic automatic (cvt unfortunately.....no problems, just dont care for it) that will easily get 40 mpg with the corn gas. I almost always run ethanol free gas in it and have gotten 47+ mpg. With the ethanol free gas, I will always be right around the 44 (+) mpg unless I baby it and then the higher mpg kicks in. The winter months is a different story as it takes more fuel to move every vehicle through the colder weather and don't the suppliers switch to a winter blend of fuel also? I will run ethanol gas in the winter just due to convenience as the station I buy the "corn free" gas from is close to 50 miles away. But......I need/want a larger vehicle with more room which is why I'm looking at an suv once again. I had a rav4 in the past and we both enjoyed it very much.
I call BS because I drove Saabs; 1993 9000 cse. 5 speed, 230 hp turbo weighed 3850 pounds and got average 36 mpg over 300,000 miles.. Sorry for derail Yoop let us know when you decide bigger is better
Yep. All makers have teething problems. Its how they deal with it that can seperate the brands. We have an 09 civic bought new. 5 speed manual. Wife gets 35-36 average. Just a 1.8 non turbo, non V- Tech engine.
As to the CVT comments... We have a 2016 Honda HRV we bought in August of 2015. It has just over 60,000 miles on it currently with Zero transmission or any other issues. Once Honda put a torque converter in them in place of a computer controlled clutch they got real smooth. No sloppy feel or clunkiness. That said, I'm still not warm and fuzzy about a metal belt powering the wheels. I'll do my darndest to never buy another just out of old school "fear". We have the transmission serviced at 30,000 at the dealership. If we make it 200,000 plus miles I may change my mind but I doubt it. There is a reason CVT utes have low or now towing capacity. That's my thoughts anyway. As far as driving experience with a CVT, this CVT, its fine. Its not a hot rod and we knew it going in. It does get 32mpg average with the wife driving and it's awd.
Manual and 230 hp, our explorer will get 26 highway at 70-75 with the 10 speed automatic 300 hp turbo 4 cylinder automatic 4x4. Curb weight of 4460 was 5 adults in vehicle at time of the 26mpg. The safety features and vehicle weight has cut mileage drastically. A geo metro was a tin box on wheels with a 60hp 3 cylinder and barely got 50 mpg. I believe the car companies are doing the best they can with what they have mileage wise. Not in with the oil companies bought all the patents for the 100 mpg carbs. They don’t use active grill shutters, 10 speed automatic transmissions, felt pads under the car and wind tunnels to get aerodynamics worked out to get the same mileage they did the previous generation of the same car. When your doing things to gain 1/2% in mileage over 7-8 areas your trying to improve.
You also need to compare as close of a version of the new vehicle as possible to the old. What does a new Saab of similar size get for milage. Trucks have improved over old trucks in mpg. My 77 f150 4x4 short bed with automatic and 351m got 10.75 mpg. I'm certain a new f150 short bed 4x4 with even the worst mpg engine in the lineup smokes those numbers. My 84 f150 2wd with 300 six and auto only got 14-15.
2021 f-150 crew cab ecoboost 2.7 short trips 20 mpg average back and forth to work 17 miles and in town drive combined not the easiest acceleration either. On highway 75-80 long trip down to Tennessee there for a week and back home total trip 23 mpg overall computer said 23.6. 5 adults in truck with box full of luggage. Also has double the hp of a 300 straight six.
Can’t GM bought them and closed down.. we went too Subaru and Honda. yooperdave dont underestimate Subaru forrester bigger than CRV and Rav 4.. after 2013 went to timing chain solved the lack of maintenance caused head gasket issues.. All time AWD on my driveway ground clearance is a +