Is The S-Type an Econobox?
#21
04-13-2011, 06:16 AM
Veteran Member
Well where I live people don't typically fly on the hi-ways. It's more like combat and that doesn't help your gas mileage. I'm VERY concerned about safety with all the other yerks on the road so I constantly try to position and keep my car positioned for safety. That doesn't help with the mileage either. Cruise control is pretty much a waste of time here as well. On my two long trips in the car it still didn't do any better than the published EPA numbers and in fact it was only when I was able to use the cruise control that I achieved those results. My tire pressures are per the recommended specs as well.
Some guys report better results with the R than I'm seeing so maybe I have a bad one. I also remember the post where AVOS mentioned that the stock map for the R can accommodate the supercharged bump up. I just wonder if they're running the engine a bit richer all the time than a NA version? That's typically done to as precaution to prevent damage and maybe it makes the R a bit more fuelish even when it isn't being driven hard?
I'm 8mpg away from your 30 mpg with the NA V8. That's a long ways away.
Some guys report better results with the R than I'm seeing so maybe I have a bad one. I also remember the post where AVOS mentioned that the stock map for the R can accommodate the supercharged bump up. I just wonder if they're running the engine a bit richer all the time than a NA version? That's typically done to as precaution to prevent damage and maybe it makes the R a bit more fuelish even when it isn't being driven hard?
I'm 8mpg away from your 30 mpg with the NA V8. That's a long ways away.
Staatsof:
Believe it. Most of my driving is hilly interstate flying. The CRV's fuel economy goes to pot at speeds over 70. It gets about 24 MPG. The 06 S-Type I had typically got 29 - 30 under the same conditions because it was loafing. I have gotten the CRV as high as 30 Mpg driving around 65, but, the Jag, at that speed, would easily top 30. IMO, Honda needs to learn how to build an engine with a nice flat torque curve like Jaguar does. The 03 Jaguar X -Type 2.5 I once owned easily matched the fuel economy my 2wd CRV 2.4 delivers, despite having AWD, being heavier, and the ability to blow the doors off a CRV. I beginning to think I drank the Koolaid when I bought the CRV for a business driver.
Regards:
Oldengineer
2010 Honda CRV LX 2WD
2011 Mercedes Benz GLK350 4Matic
1948 Chevrolet Fleetmaster Town Sedan
Believe it. Most of my driving is hilly interstate flying. The CRV's fuel economy goes to pot at speeds over 70. It gets about 24 MPG. The 06 S-Type I had typically got 29 - 30 under the same conditions because it was loafing. I have gotten the CRV as high as 30 Mpg driving around 65, but, the Jag, at that speed, would easily top 30. IMO, Honda needs to learn how to build an engine with a nice flat torque curve like Jaguar does. The 03 Jaguar X -Type 2.5 I once owned easily matched the fuel economy my 2wd CRV 2.4 delivers, despite having AWD, being heavier, and the ability to blow the doors off a CRV. I beginning to think I drank the Koolaid when I bought the CRV for a business driver.
Regards:
Oldengineer
2010 Honda CRV LX 2WD
2011 Mercedes Benz GLK350 4Matic
1948 Chevrolet Fleetmaster Town Sedan
#22
04-15-2011, 05:45 AM
Senior Member
I just rented a Toyota Camry with the 4 cylinder engine to drive to Texas. I was very disappointed to see that got between 25 and 30 mpg (depending on speed) on the trip. When I got 28-29, I was cruising at 70-75 mph. My Jag gets that at 75-80 (by the GPS).
I'm happy with the Jag and disgusted with the Camry. The Camry should certainly get more.
I'm happy with the Jag and disgusted with the Camry. The Camry should certainly get more.
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
3jagfamily
New Member Area - Intro a MUST
11
10-01-2015 01:49 AM
Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)