Automatic Civics?

[suprapsu]

Anyone here with Automatic Civics? I have a 94 Civic DX 4 door and got 25 MPG. a bit disappointed.

[SVOboy]

I had an auto CRX, but those days are over,

[Lincoln]

My girlfriend is in need of a better daily driver. I have been looking at the automatic Civic HX (Automatic: 35 mpg / 39 mpg)

She is all over the road when she drives now. If she had a manual, I would be afraid she would hit a pedestrian or another car head on.

[suprapsu]

Yeah, stick is a little tricking getting used to. She needs some time behind the wheel before going on the open road.

Hey, would you be interested in my 1994 Honda Civic DX?

[lane]

my automatic 2000 civic gets 30-41 MPG, the only mods are a free flowing intake and i use acetone in the gas, and it has 195K mi.

[brucepick]

Makers started putting torque converter lockups into auto trannies some time in the early '90's. So I think it's possible the '94 Civic doesn't have the lockup. An auto w/lockup should get better FE, all other things being equal.

Without lockup there's some continual slippage in an auto tranny. Lockup only works at higher speeds and in top gear (or maybe top two gears?) so it should feel almost like an additional top gear when it kicks in.

Anybody know when the Civics got lockup torque converters?

[TomO]

Originally Posted by Lincoln

My girlfriend is in need of a better daily driver. I have been looking at the automatic Civic HX (Automatic: 35 mpg / 39 mpg)

I would recommend staying away from the CVT HX. I've read the horror stories of having to have them replaced at nearly $4000! Most owners of the DVT HX end up doing a swap to a manual transmission since it ends up being way cheaper. The first thing that goes out in the DVT trans is the starter clutch and from there the belts wear out.

[DaX]

Originally Posted by SVOboy

I had an auto CRX, but those days are over,

Ditto. You can check out my gaslog to see what kind of mileage I was getting when it was an automatic.

[bobski]

Originally Posted by brucepick

Anybody know when the Civics got lockup torque converters?

I'm sure they've had them since at least the '88 model year. The '88-91 models have a single stage (on/off) lockup mechanisim. The '92-95 years have two solenoid valves which allow for more precise control of the lockup mechanisim... It allows for partial lockup, whatever that means. '96+ years have additional computer control which also tinkers with shift points and such.

[crabbyman]

Originally Posted by suprapsu

Yeah, stick is a little tricking getting used to. She needs some time behind the wheel before going on the open road.

Hey, would you be interested in my 1994 Honda Civic DX?

Where you located at?

[lindermant]

I'm getting ok numbers from my '05 civic dx with auto trans

[veloman]

I've averaged up to 37mpg in my 97 civic auto with 80% highway driving at 65-70mph, taking 20 mile commutes to work and back.

But I recently got the idea that my speedometer is about 9% fast - according to my friends 2007 Impala, which I would presume would be more accurate? As well as the police radars on the side of the road that show your speed. (Although I don't have a clue why my car would be off. I ride the same size tires as I'm suppose to, I think.)

[Blue03Civic]

I get around 32 City MPG in my auto civic and around 40 highway. I absolutely hate the fact that I can try to drive so carefully and efficiently and the auto does not allow me to get good mileage. I am looking into installing a way to control my TC lockup, because the biggest reason ATs get worse FE than MTs is because of that damn energy-wasting torque converter.

[Minger]

I'm averaging 36-38 mpg with mine...no mods, was getting these numbers even before the scanguage...just the u sual neutral coasting, occasional engine off.

[karnovking]

mine is a 93 DX automatic with 199K. my all time best MPG was 40.8. My worst was 27.5mpg I usually get around 34-35 and that is mostly on the highway.

[Nerds laugh at me]

93' DX automatic.
Worst has been around 30 MPG ( city driving )
Best was over 56 on the highway. ( tailwind )
Usually, I break 50 when driving on interstate highways.
How ?
I drive so slow that I literally have Winnabagoes pass me while flipping the finger. ( No joke )
For example I drive around 55 in a 65 zone - 65 in a 75 zone etc.

Aero mods seem to be good for a couple of MPGs - but only at highway speeds.

[smalldisplacementfreak]

I have a 2003 Civic 4dr EX and am getting around 32mpg...check out my log. Actually my wifes V6 Accord doesn't do too bad because of the way she drives...when she drives my Civic, it gets better mileage. Perhaps I need to encourage her to get rid of the V6 and spring for Hybrid Civic.

Does anyone know what the Honda diesel are coming out?

Take our gasoline as precious

-SDF

[Scott_in_Tulsa]

I have a 2000 Civic Coupe EX w/ auto trans. I just bought it 2 months ago with 63,000 miles and have been getting between 33 and 35 mpg. I just hit 35 mpg with the last tank doing as much neutral coasting with the engine running as possible.

I have a 76 mile daily commute (round trip) and it is 90% highway with little traffic. I can pretty much leave the cruise on the whole time but have been testing the neutral coasting concept since I can do so without ticking off the other drivers when I slow down.

Does anyone have any idea how to get 38 mpg out of a Civic auto? That is my new goal for my vehicle. Definitely open to ideas here.

Thanks,

Scott in Tulsa

[RoadWarrior]

My auto experiences lead me to have the opinion that the following is best for FE with them...

Don't try to accelerate too gently from a standstill ... below about 2000 RPM you're really just churning fluid in an auto... get about 60% efficiency, just give it a touch more gas so you're between 2000 and 3000 and you get about 90% efficiency. It gets better at a steady speed, so no need to scream round with it in 2, and you can accelerate gently with traffic at 30, or on the highway, but IMO trying to granny an auto from a red light is wasting gas.

Change fluid regularly, (~30,000 miles or 2 years) old fluid has poor lubricity and is too thin to transmit power effectively.

Advanced:

Turn up the line pressure for firmer shifts.

Fit a severe duty shift kit for firmer shifts and less slush.

Try adding "Lucas Transmission Fix" it will stop any wasted power from seeping seals inside the transmission, and also thickens up the fluid a bit effectively increasing pressure, leading to firmer shifts, and better power transmission through the torque convertor. Friction modifiers will help worn linings grip better.

Experimental:

Increase line pressure, add shift kit and fill with Universal Tractor Fluid.

[s2man]

Doh! So much of my old racing knowledge applies to FE, either directly or inversely. But I forgot about stall speeds on torque converters! Good point, RW. Thanks.

I've bought the parts to build an adjustable throttle limiter, so I can do an acceleration experiment. i.e. four runs at 20%, 30%, 40%, etc. And I've picked a stretch of road to perform it on. I just need to get busy and do it.

[KrazyDawg]

I have a 1995 Civic EX Automatic with 119,000 miles on it. I'm currently averaging 29-30 MPG. No mods installed unless you want to count the K&N air filter. I also use acetone but am not able to determine if it has led to an increase. I've had two occasions where I've hit 39 MPG.

[Minger]

So...highway driving from Rochester to Buffalo and back (Hour each way) I averaged an even 40 mpg...was a bit cold and drafted what semis I could find. Stuck around 65 mph the whole way...not bad for that speed.

[mkiVX]

i have a fully loaded (heavy) 1999 civic ex auto sedan
i could not muster over 33 mpg
i bought a scanguageII and i got 45mpg going up the cajon pass.. i could not believe it

[suprapsu]

I heard you shouldn't neutral coast in an automatic because it will burn out your tranny.

Originally Posted by Scott_in_Tulsa

I have a 2000 Civic Coupe EX w/ auto trans. I just bought it 2 months ago with 63,000 miles and have been getting between 33 and 35 mpg. I just hit 35 mpg with the last tank doing as much neutral coasting with the engine running as possible.

I have a 76 mile daily commute (round trip) and it is 90% highway with little traffic. I can pretty much leave the cruise on the whole time but have been testing the neutral coasting concept since I can do so without ticking off the other drivers when I slow down.

[bobski]

Define:

Originally Posted by suprapsu

burn out your tranny.

and I might entertain that idea. I've been neutral costing my auto CRX for years without issue.

[theholycow]

The question of automatics being damaged by neutral coasting has been argued to death. There's no reason why it would be a problem, and some people have extensive experience proving it.

[AMX]

I previously had a 1993 Civic LX sedan. I got low to mid 30 MPG with it, with no extra gas saving techniques. Now I have a 2002 Civic LX sedan and with my gas saving techniques, I have been getting 40 MPG (US). Both cars are automatics.

[Beelzebubba]

Originally Posted by suprapsu

Anyone here with Automatic Civics? I have a 94 Civic DX 4 door and got 25 MPG. a bit disappointed.

I've always owned cars with manual transmissions (all Hondas except my current Mazda3), but there have been several Civic automatics in my immediate family over the years. The '92-'95 DX/LX models (1.5L 102hp) with automatic were only rated a few mpg below the 5-speed manual's rating of 40mpg highway. My dad had a '93 DX manual and my step-mom had a '95 LX automatic. The manual would easily exceed the 40mpg highway figure if driven sensibly and near the speed limit...and it averaged 37mpg overall. In the automatic, my step-mom struggled to top 30mpg overall. When I drove it, I barely got 28mpg! In reality, the manual transmission got about nine miles per gallon more than the automatic- rather than the 3-4mpg difference in the EPA ratings.

The problem, I strongly believe, is that the automatic transmission was FAR too eager to kick down to a lower gear. While it made the cars feel 'peppier' than a lot of the competition, it also took a toll on fuel economy. The '96-'00 Civic improved quite a bit in this area- partly due to revisions to the A/T and partly because of simple increases in power. The '01'05 models with automatic are worlds apart form the older ones- smooth as silk, for the most part. They'll kick down when you floor it and actually want power, but not just climbing a small hill or lightly accelerating. The '01 redesign not only included a new (and very 'intelligent') automatic transmission but also additional increases in horsepower and torque @ lower rpm.

And there's more than you ever wanted to know about automatic transmissions in the Honda Civic. =)

[bobski]

The eager-to-kick-down behavior you experienced in the '95 LX may have simply been a misadjusted cable. That transmission's electronic control is limited to locking the torque converter. Shift points are decided by throttle position (judged by a mechanical cable linkage) and vehicle speed. The cable linkage can be adjusted to change the amount of throttle required to make the transmission kick down.
The '96 model year transmissions switched to fully electronic shift control, with grade logic control (fuzzy logic programming) built into the TCM. '01-05 models still used D-series motors, so the transmission was probably just a further refinement of previous generations.

[cat0020]

I have a 1990 Civic DX Hatchback with automatic transmission.. little over 100400 miles on the original engine. Recently replaced the distributor, sprakplugs and wires... first full tank of fuel added and it's gotten me over 390 miles.. I'll find out how much fuel I used when I fillup in a few days.