I did a 240 mile loop yesterday in the HCH and got a whopping 32mpg (computer). This is by far the worst trip I've ever had, but it was also the hardest my poor little car has ever had to work. The trip was up to Keystone with three of my biking buddies, four DH bikes on the roof (~160 pounds), plus gear, beer, etc. We drove from my house in Colorado Springs up and over Loveland Pass (~12k feet) to get there and then back over the pass to get home.

The new PCM software upgrade is DEFINITELY better for mountian driving. In the past, it has always blown through all SoC on the way up I-70 from Denver to Evergreen, but this time I never got below 3 bars. The only downside is that since it rarely dropped below 4 bars, I didn't have as much capacity for "motor braking" down the other side before the pack filled up again. This was a pretty gnarly test, and the battery never recalibrated--I think they have made big improvements with this version.

 

Another perspective on the PCM/CVT software update is that my mileage jumped 4 mpg Calculated) after the update, halfway through the tank. Right now the trip computer average MPG is also up 5 mpg. I am very interested to see what the gain will be on a full tank.

 

I notice this economy gets hit hard on hills. I suppose every vehicle does though, just not by as large of a margin. It's due to the little 1300cc engine having to be almost wide open on hills, then recovering the Battery Pack after the hill is also a hit.

 

Wow, I'm really looking forward to getting the latest software update. Very reassuring.

Jess

 

Oh yeah. I wonder how a gas Civic would have faired under similar circumstances--I'm guessing mid 20s, but that's just a guess. The bottom line is that I had to keep the engine well-reved the whole time so it was WAY outside of the efficiency band.

That being said, my best tanks (the two at 62.4mpg) were also high in the mountains--the only difference was that I didn't have a 4 foot sail on top and a car full of people. It's all about keeping the revs low and the glides long, and neither of those were possible yesterday.

 

My worst tank ever was the very first tank... after that, the second worst was about 48 mpg with a bike rack on the back. Amazing what wind resistance from two road bikes can do to mileage (lifetime avg = 53)!!!

I haven't done any recalibrations. Still on whatever they installed from the factory in 2006... and that's just fine with me. I don't want any dealer touching my car. Ever!

 

I'm always amazed at the MPG claims on these boards. I've owned my 2004 Civic Hybrid since gas hit 1.86. I don't believe I ever got better than 42 and that was flat land driving. My lead foot and the appalachian hills don't help either but I average - realistically around 34MPGs

 

I did a San Diego – Los Angeles – San Diego run yesterday with three people aboard, AC, and 65 MPH using cruise control (due to broken foot)... 49 MPG... would have been 50+ if the headwinds hadn't picked up on the return trip.

 

Claims?!? That implies we're lying about our mileage. While it's true that my mileage is about 3% inflated because of the odometer*, all of my "claims" are honest calculations of dividing miles driven by gallons purchased unless specifically called out as MPG computer calculations like in the post above.

*Odometer testing showed that it's about 3% GPS-calculated distances.

 

I think mountains have got to put a dent in mileage: you don't recoup on the downhill what you lost going uphill. Some, but still it leaves you behind a bit overall.

We do a run over to the west coast of Vancouver Island every so often: the road just gets more and more windy/hilly as you head west. I've found putting the transmission in S (sport?) generally improves things: reducing braking effort, giving you better aceleration when needed. At least for the constantly winding/climbing/dipping stretches.

At the end of that run our mileage is still pretty good. And I think the engine, transmission and brakes are happier in S, for that kind of driving.