TSXinTN

I hit the half tank mark this morning on my commute at around 235 miles (wasn't paying close attention). I normally hit half way around 200 miles. Seems like I have a good tank going here.

davidspalding

P. 66 of the 2007 manual explains that there are ~2.3 gallons remaining when the light comes on.

The point might be to warn the driver to get gas before running out.

TSXinTN

The "numbers guy" says, if you are travelling at 80 MPH and getting 25 MPG then you would have less than 45 minutes to get fuel before running out once the light comes on. I have been on interstates where you would need that much planning in order to not run out of fuel.

davidspalding

Highway 10 from Houston to Santa Fe, for instance.

I drive roughly 65 miles a weekday, so a 2.3 gallon reserve warning has to be acted on pretty promptly. YMMV and probably does.

ak3883

Complete BS. I got gas right after my light came on once, and it only took 13 gallons. That's 4 gallons shy of empty, nearly a quarter of a tank left!!! I only had 350 miles on the tank I think. I have an 08.

davidspalding

Here's an interesting answer from Tom & Ray, the Car Talk guys, talking about the ideal speed for high mileage.

http://www.cartalk.com/content/colum...cember/12.html

TSXinTN

But you stopped fueling when the pump cut off for the first time...correct? You would be surprised to know exactly how much more fuel your tank will hold after the pump cuts off.

davidspalding

Sure, I've filled up when the light *just* came on, and found that there was more like 3.5 gallons remaining. So what. When the light is on continually (probably happens within 30 miles), the idea is to caution the driver that there's limited range left on that tankful. Considering the limited common sense of some drivers who talk on phones, eat breakfast, (sometimes both of these at once), apply makeup, and root around in the back seat for something, all while driving (yes, I see this regularly), I don't think this is a needless warning indicator.

Egotist

My 07:
Computer = 28.7mpg
Actual = 23.7mpg

I think this is how people think they get such great mileage. My friend claimed he got 31mpg in his v6 camry. I called bs on it, he showed me his trip/nav thing said 30mpg. We went to fill it up, he got 23mpg, ha! The look on his face was so satisfying. My other friend claimed similar in his passat v6, computer = 29mpg, actual 22mpg.

I've never seen one of those trip computers accurate within 1mpg.

davidspalding

I've seen it within 1-2 MPG, but never a 5 MPG discrepancy. I suspect something else is at work in your case.

Disclosure: I have my TRIP A RESET ON FILLUP option. That's how I measure miles on a tank, not subtracting the old ODO from the current when I fill up.

TSXinTN

I have an '04 which doesn't have an MID. My gas mileage is figured based on the trip odometer.

TSXual

accordind to the gauge says 19.8mpg ha... all city hardly any highway... (6spd)

SSFTSX

i recently used Shell on couple of short to medium trips. there is a difference. I maintained higher speeds like 75 to 80 mph and still got 33mpg in 30 minute drives. and i was also looking at my needle how it behaves. 76/Arco i could only get 28mpg on those speeds.
city driving is even more interesting. up and down hills of sanfranco with 76/arco could only managed 23mpg. Shell fuel is at 29mpg. time to apply for shell credit card.

davidspalding

/me is homesick now.... I learned to drive my first car (MGB) on those hills....

TSXinTN

Filled up this morning. As I indicated at the half tank mark, I had a good tank going. This tank was Shell V-Power 93 and I filled up with the same this morning. My indicator light came on at 417 miles. I stopped to fill up at 486.2 miles. The pump shut off initially at 14.617 gallons. Netting me over 33 MPG by those standards. I continued to pump in an attempt to find the actual "full" level. I went to 15.346 gallons and stopped. I still did not see any gas but I will continue my experiment until I find just how much you can fill past the initial pump shut off.

I am also going to drive like a grandpa on this tank to see just how much of a difference I can make. I am trying to keep the car under 3K RPMs and I have begun putting the car in neutral on significant downhill stretches. Will let you know how it turns out.

instrbTSX

24.8-27.3
08 auto

hunterk1

Wow, that's a great tank. My light just came on at 410, so I'm looking at just a little less mpg than you just got. While I'm sure I've got ~3 gallons left, and have mostly highway driving ahead for the next few days, I'll probably fill up tonight. Someday I'd like to get a 500 mile tank... someday...

I discussed neutral -vs- engine braking with Wakura (I think) a while back, he noted that engine braking is actually better. I mostly agree but think it also depends on the situation - like, if you're going down a long hill or have a long flat stretch before a red light, and engine braking will slow you down too much, throw it into neutral.

Mokos23

i could never drive like a grandpa. i drove and filled up with Vpower and i reset my trip computer and got up to 44 miles until the fuel gauge started to move from full. that's pretty good for this car.

hunterk1

While getting 32mpg+ does require some grandpa-ness, it's not a 100% or nothing proposition, as long as you've got some highway miles in there. Of my most recent 415 miles, about 200 are highway, and the rest are relatively sedate city. I've still VTEC'd it at least 5 times on this tank. I just can't flog the thing most of the time, I'd get bad mileage and I'll wear out the car more quickly...

TSXinTN

Didn't think I could drive like a grandpa either but with recent gas prices and paying closer attention to my gas mileage I want to see how big of a difference it will make.

davidspalding

I'm not a fan of putting a car into neutral for coasting. For one thing, you kinda need your car in gear for safety's sake. What if something unforeseen comes out and you need to accelerate? There you are, rolling ahead with your car out of gear, thumb in your _____.

I also recall the car talk guys answering someone who asked about engine braking to red lights, or just downshifting to keep from lugging, and their answer was very pragmatic. It takes a few hundred dollars to service your brakes. It takes a few THOUSAND dollars to service your tranny. Now ... which do you want to use for braking day in and day out?

When you are decelerating, or going down a hill, putting it in neutral has minimal mileage gains over just using a low-rpm gear and doing heel-toe to regulate speed IMHO, compared with the safety factor. YMMVAPW.

mxmattd

^ I have also read in several places that the injectors will shut off with no throttle input as long as the forward motion of the car keeps rpms above idle speed. So as long as your foot's off the gas, you can use engine braking without using any fuel.

Note: this is just what I read from other sources, not 100% sure about it

oetbyg

My wife and I bought an '08 TSX 5AT about 3 months ago and recently took a 2300 mile road trip. On this trip, we got 32 mpg with fast but not aggressive driving using cruise much of the time. The trip was mainly interstate at 70-75 mph with a few hundred miles of rural non-interstate driving at 55-60 mph. There was very little stop-and-go.

We bought 93 octane exclusively (didn't encounter any 91); the brands we used were Mobil, Exxon, Shell, and Costco.

There were 2 adults in the car and the trunk was stuffed to the gills.

I didn't attempt to top off the tank on fill-ups, but relied on nozzle shut-off. Looking at the differences between calculated mpg and the MID mpg, clearly there were times when the fill wasn't complete, but with 7 fillups, things average out. Overall our MID is about 5% optimistic, showing 33.5 mpg for the trip vs the calculated 32 mpg.

I'm very pleased that a ~200 hp car can get such good mileage at speed. We often saw 34-35 mpg on the MID while cruising in the 70s.

We started the trip with a tank of Mobil 93 octane and saw 31.3 mpg on the MID for the first 350 miles. The first fill-up happened to be at a Shell station, and there was an obvious difference with the CID showing 34.6 mpg over the next 400 miles of mostly interstate driving. I had not seen the posts in the forums about others' experience with Shell V93 prior to the trip. Then again, we got similar results from one Costco fill-up.

The trip was from the northeast to the mid-Atlantic states and back. A/C was running for some of the time, but not all.

Overall, we've averaged 29.4 mpg (calculated, not MID) over the ~4000 miles we've driven the car.

This is our first Acura (also first Honda product), and so far we like the car very much. It was a lot of fun to drive on the trip. We had driven Volvos for decades and chose the TSX to replace our 850.

TSXinTN

Glad you are enjoying the TSX! Welcome!

hunterk1

Here I just wonder, if you're in a top gear you're going to have to downshift anyway to get meaningful acceleration, which takes as much time (if not more since I keep my hand on the stick when I'm coasting in neutral) as putting it back in gear. It also seems to me that you're much more likely to need to do emergency steering or braking, but emergency accelerating? Not so much...?

Tom and Ray are gods. Let me be clear: I am not advocating downshifting through all the gears as you approach a light, rather, just leave it in the top gear and engine brake in rather than coasting in, or put it into neutral once you're lugging and leave it there.

Yeah, when I was a kid I used to downshift through all the gears in my '59 VW Bettle (at least from fourth to second). I told my dad about it and he asked me how much a brake job was compared to replacing the syncros to a transmission. I stopped doing it.

YMMV I think I get but what's APW? Anyway, I left my car in gear going down a large (600-700ft) hill coming into Boulder today. I slowed down (lost 10 mph), whereas if I kick it into neutral usually I'll gain 10 mph (it's steep). It's probably a minimal difference, but I choose neutral, maintain awareness of my situation, and hope I don't need to emergency accelerate out of the way of an oncoming crazy. It's one of the few times I coast in neutral now.

terpfan29

Hi, I can't PM you as I'm new, but I had a few questions for you regarding comparing the TSX to your old Volvo 850. When I was 16 I got my father's old 1995 850 Wagon. I was unhappy it being a wagon, but grew to love it as I really liked the way it drove...the heavy brake pedal, and solid feel to the steering. A few years ago I got a used Accord V6 and love that as well. Now I am about to graduate and am looking seriously at the TSX. How does it feel compared to the Volvo? I plan on test driving it soon, but since you can compare I thought I'd ask. Thanks!

Mokos23

well for 250 miles my navi said that i've gotten about 23.5-23.9 mpg all suburban driving. so, don't know if that is a good or bad thing

oetbyg

I can't PM a reply to you, so excuse the topic drift.

The TSX has a sportier (stiffer) ride than the 850 and probably handles better, but I'm new to the Acura, and the Volvo was traded in so I can't do side-by-side comparisons. I suspect you'll like the TSX. The gas mileage is better, and the engine has ~25% more horsepower.

davidspalding

Welcome to the forums. Hope you've had time to check into the FAQs, found your manual online (hand to refer to at work, or in the home office without going to the garage), and peeked into the "Easter eggs" thread. There are a number of very helpful DIY threads as well. Enjoy.

Terpfan29, you probably have to confirm your e-mail address to be able to PM. I think.

HunterK1 ... YMMVAPW = "your mileage may vary and probably will."

As to coasting in neutral, I asked some experts:

http://www.cartalk.com/content/colum...tember/05.html
http://www.cartalk.com/content/colum...ctober/03.html
http://www.cartalk.com/content/colum...anuary/03.html
http://www.cartalk.com/content/colum...94/May/07.html
... And so on....


You might also refer to your state's driving handbook. It may have something to say about shifting to a lower gear at other than red lights/stop signs (e.g. steep hills). FWIW, North Carolina's does not. California's does. ... YMMVAPW.

davidspalding

Please take new topics to a new thread, eh?

hunterk1

Thanks, good to know, I'll read those links!

TSXinTN

Let me preface this update by saying, the fucktards at the quick lube reset my Trip A odometer so I had to estimate some on my mileage. I clocked the mileage the car had been driven before it went to the quick lube and am 99% sure I am within 5 miles of being accurate.

Indicator light came on at 415 miles and I filled up at 486. Again, I used the very same pump as the previous fill-ups and used Shell 93. It was $3.79/gallon just like last week. The pump initially shutoff at 14.49 gallons. This netted me 33.5 MPG. I continued pumping in an effort to 'once-and-for-all' see how much more gas the tank will hold beyond the intial shutoff. This time I put a whole gallon in after initial shutoff. Still didn't "see" any gas. Amazing.

wilchan

My 08 6MT has 5K miles now. The gas mileage is around 24.5 - 27.1 MPG with half half city/hwy driving. If I go a little more on hwy, MPG improves a bit. I guess if I make a long road trip from SF to LA on hwy 5, I may be able to get 30+ MPG.

In fact, my wife's 2002 TL-S consistently get 26 MPG or so. I think Honda has improved the AT gas consumption quite a bit in the past few yrs and it may be better than MT model now. I wonder if MT car will be extinct in US soon...


-- william

Mokos23

so you've been driving like a grandpa to net 33.5 mpg?

hunterk1

...but

I'm trying the same experiment. I'm mostly doing it to see how much better I can get from baseline (according to the EPA, it's about 25mpg mixed). TSXinTN is seeing a 34% improvement, that's pretty good!

I'm just driving... calmly. Grandpas drive 10 under the speed limit everywhere, in the fast lane when they don't belong there, etc. I'm staying out of people's way, I'm just not driving like a maniac (which is more normal for me).

davidspalding

-- Well established by EPA ratings of the MT and AT models of the TSX, that even with a tranny which likes to shift later when you stomp the accelerator, the mileage overall with a AT is a wee bit better. Though, I think a seasoned MT user could match that ... it's just so tempting NOT to.
I filled up last week and the light just came on when i stopped at the pump. In my 1982 Honda Accord, the light would play peak-a-boo for about 20-40 miles, but in my TSX it comes on and stays on. I filled up 12.9 gallons on the pump, plus a quart of FE cleaner. So ... more than 2.3 gallons when the light first comes on.

S14 n Tsx

lately, I have been getting 32mpg average.

Mokos23

82 Accord? wow, i've never been a pre-1986 Accord ever.

feuss2

iTrader: (1)

...very close to 30 in an 04 6mt-varies from tank to tank but not more than 1 or 2 mpg at the most

davidspalding

http://www.productioncars.com/send_f..._blue_1982.jpg
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedi...ord_3dr_UK.JPG

http://www.honda.com.au/wps/wcm/conn...df?MOD=AJPERES
http://www.honda.com.au/wps/wcm/conn...df?MOD=AJPERES

We've come a long way, baby.