I'm really starting to doubt the benefit of VCM and think it is more of a marketing ploy than anything. Reason I say this is after having the car for about 6,000 miles now, I consistently get about 17MPG in a 50/50 mix of street/highway "normal" driving. Sure, I have occasionally pushed it up to 20MPG if I REALLY babied it (meaning, pissing people off behind me) but that type of driving (hypermileing) is completely unsustainable.

I know other newer V6 cars that get better than this and they don't have VCM. Even the Camry V6 advertises the exact same MPG as the Accord and it doesn't have VCM.

If you really stop and think about this, the only time VCM kicks in is when there is very little to no engine load, in which case, would it really make a different between 3 and 6 cylinders? Even a V8 at little to no engine load is going to use a minuscule amount of fuel to keep the car coasting.

VCM seems to be a great idea who's time has come, but I just don't think it was implemented correctly. Honda seems to have programmed it a little too "safe". It seems that to make VCM more effective, they should've allowed a little more increase in engine load, before knocking it out of VCM. That way, you could accelerate a little, while still reaping the benefits of VCM. Even a head wind knocks the car out of VCM. I think that points to ultra conservative programming which is probably negating any intended benefits of VCM.

Thoughts?

My best so far has been about 25 mpg but that was really taking it nice and easy all week and about 50/50 city / hwy. Not really hypermiling but driving at the limit, no flooring it, basically drove like my 70 year old Dad, in his Corolla. Now I did find, the next week when I did open up the throttle more, the milage dropped significantly, not to 17 mpg for sure but maybe 21-22 mpg. The 17 mpg you speak of reminds me more of my G35 which I used to drive full throttle most of the time.

I get nearly 30 mpg, but most of my driving is on highway like roads, but at every roundabout on the way, I floor it completely..

It sounds like something is wrong. My V6 has over 10k miles and I average about 21 - 22 mpg. That's about 65% highway, A/C almost always on and vtec a few times a day :naughty:. The best I've gotten was 26.5 mpg on a 5 hour highway trip, 75mph avg, A/C on all the time, 4 people in the car. If I drive it like I stole it I'll get about 18 - 19 mpg. That's still higher than your avg so I would think there is something wrong.

With or without VCM, something is wrong to cause your mpg to be that low. I also have an EX-L V6 sedan and I'm getting around 22 in town and 28 on the highway.

i consistently get 25++, i have about 60-70% highway depending.

With or without VCM, something is wrong to cause your mpg to be that low. I also have an EX-L V6 sedan and I'm getting around 22 in town and 28 on the highway.

I have to agree with pmcjr. I'm at 4,800 miles and my typical weekly drive is 80% City/20% Hwy. and I still average 20-21 MPG. I do not "hypermile" nor punch it too often. While on vacation for a week, it was more like 30% City/70% Hwy (typically 70-75 MPH) and I averaged 24-25 MPG. Living in Miami, my A/C is ALWAYS on. In see the ECO light on when cruising at 20 MPH or 80 MPH.

Since something is obviously wrong with my car, but no tangible signs (rough engine, burning oil, smoke out the tailpipe), how do I go about convincing Honda something is wrong? I drive 99% of the time by myself, without A/C on and 50/50 mix street/highway, without ever flooring it and pretty much driving the speed limit, yet, I consistently get under 18MPG. The interesting thing is when I'm cruising on the freeway, the Trip Computer will show anywhere from 35 to 45MPG, but it seems like just the slightest bit of acceleration, will bring it way down to about 18 to 20, so the average works out to under 18 when factoring in stop and go traffic. Maybe it's the So Cal driving? Any of you live in So Cal or in congested traffic areas? I have to admit most of my driving is stop and go, whether street or highway. This is just the reality in So Cal and maybe to blame for my low mpg?? I do notice that when accelerating from a stop, the the Trip Computer will read about 5 to 10 MPG until it gets into about 3rd or 4th gear. This seems really bad to me...

I'm getting the same as you in the DC area...around 17-18.5 mpg...I just drove it about 3 hours up to Ocean City MD and got about 26 mpg and that was straight highway cruise control and not much traffic but haven't been able to get any higher.

-CV

I don't think you need to push hard on the pedal to have less than desirable gas mileage. After all, it is a 6 cylinder and regardless of how one drives it, fuel consumption will never be comparable to that of a 4.

VCM is a marketing ploy IMO. It's a knee-jerk reaction from the manufacturers as there is this increase to move towards more environmentally-sound vehicle. (Too much Al Gore crap being spewed on TV and radio). VCM kicks in only when you are coasting on the highway. In cities, it is hard to see the real benefits of VCM because of the constant stop-n-go, even on freeways during rush hour.

Considering that you have a 3.5L engine spitting out 265 HP fuel economy isn't going to be ideal no matter who the manufacturer is. I'd say there really isn't anything wrong with the car. My colleague has a V6 and his fuel consumption is no where near as good as my 4.

I'm really starting to doubt the benefit of VCM and think it is more of a marketing ploy than anything. Reason I say this is after having the car for about 6,000 miles now, I consistently get about 17MPG in a 50/50 mix of street/highway "normal" driving. Sure, I have occasionally pushed it up to 20MPG if I REALLY babied it (meaning, pissing people off behind me) but that type of driving (hypermileing) is completely unsustainable.

I know other newer V6 cars that get better than this and they don't have VCM. Even the Camry V6 advertises the exact same MPG as the Accord and it doesn't have VCM.

If you really stop and think about this, the only time VCM kicks in is when there is very little to no engine load, in which case, would it really make a different between 3 and 6 cylinders? Even a V8 at little to no engine load is going to use a minuscule amount of fuel to keep the car coasting.

VCM seems to be a great idea who's time has come, but I just don't think it was implemented correctly. Honda seems to have programmed it a little too "safe". It seems that to make VCM more effective, they should've allowed a little more increase in engine load, before knocking it out of VCM. That way, you could accelerate a little, while still reaping the benefits of VCM. Even a head wind knocks the car out of VCM. I think that points to ultra conservative programming which is probably negating any intended benefits of VCM.

Thoughts?


I saw your post in the other VCM related thread, and this is what I had posted there.

"I don't inflate my results, and if need be can show you a spread sheet of every ounce of fuel that has gone through mine in the last 8,000+ miles.

My worst tank ever was early on and it was over 22.5mpg with very "brisk" driving. My overall average in now over 25, and highway mileage is 30.

If one can't get AT LEAST 20+ in stop and go driving, trust me, your driving is a LOT more aggresive than you know, or realize.

It's all in the driving style guys!!! And I don't mean getting run over either. But then I've learned a thing or two over the last 45 years of driving." :paranoid:

I'm really starting to doubt the benefit of VCM and think it is more of a marketing ploy than anything. Reason I say this is after having the car for about 6,000 miles now, I consistently get about 17MPG in a 50/50 mix of street/highway "normal" driving. Sure, I have occasionally pushed it up to 20MPG if I REALLY babied it (meaning, pissing people off behind me) but that type of driving (hypermileing) is completely unsustainable.

I know other newer V6 cars that get better than this and they don't have VCM. Even the Camry V6 advertises the exact same MPG as the Accord and it doesn't have VCM.

If you really stop and think about this, the only time VCM kicks in is when there is very little to no engine load, in which case, would it really make a different between 3 and 6 cylinders? Even a V8 at little to no engine load is going to use a minuscule amount of fuel to keep the car coasting.

VCM seems to be a great idea who's time has come, but I just don't think it was implemented correctly. Honda seems to have programmed it a little too "safe". It seems that to make VCM more effective, they should've allowed a little more increase in engine load, before knocking it out of VCM. That way, you could accelerate a little, while still reaping the benefits of VCM. Even a head wind knocks the car out of VCM. I think that points to ultra conservative programming which is probably negating any intended benefits of VCM.

Thoughts?

consider an oil change soon, if you havn't already, because if you have bad oil, you have bad mpg, for example, eneos gives me 28-29 highway while royal purple gives me 32-33, matters on the oil. :thmsup: But you do have a point when it comes to VCM, I kinda question it sometimes

royal purple and molly. bad.

also, vcm isn't designed to get you significantly better mileage. it's there to get you comparable mileage (to the last accord), while increasing power substantially.

consider an oil change soon, if you havn't already, because if you have bad oil, you have bad mpg, for example, eneos gives me 28-29 highway while royal purple gives me 32-33, matters on the oil. :thmsup: But you do have a point when it comes to VCM, I kinda question it sometimes

are u serious? have u tried castrol syntec or mobil 1?

I just recently filled my first tank on my V6 MT coupe WITHOUT VCM, and I got 22.4mpg. This was with about 25% highway and 75% city driving. I've been keeping it under about 3.5k rpms. Still learning to smooth out the MT.

I'm getting better gas mileage with my 08 V6 than I did with my 01 accord V6. I'm averaging about 22.5 mpg, with about just over half of that being city driving.

are u serious? have u tried castrol syntec or mobil 1?

those are the only two brands i use. they remain stable at the highest temperature ranges.

i used castrol synthetic blend at my first oil change. not sure about this product yet.

But then I've learned a thing or two over the last 45 years of driving." :paranoid:


Mr. Turbodave's been driving for almost twice as many years as I've been alive!:jawdrop:

:biggrin: (23 y/o)

Mr. Turbodave's been driving for almost twice as many years as I've been alive!:jawdrop:

:biggrin: (23 y/o)

u must trust Mr. TD. he is wise beyond his years....which makes his wisdom like dinosauric in age.

u must trust Mr. TD. he is wise beyond his years....which makes his wisdom like dinosauric in age.

Some things never change.

royal purple and molly. bad.

Molybdenium(sp.) is a lubricant and is only bad if you put in a motor oil with a high moly content in a motor vehicle with a wet clutch set up. Motorcycles are most effected.

I dont know if you always use the same gas station, but try another if you do. Start changing certain variables one at a time.