Looking for car that gets over 32mpg

[rohan]

I found a 2000 Honda Civic HX on my way into work today.  Fueleconomy.gov says 39mpg.  Anyone know anything about how reliable it is?  this car was in really good shape inside and out and carfax shows no accidents.  68k miles and it's listed for $3800. 

[Eye of the Tiger]

A Honda Civic? How reliable? HA!!!!    Ha ha HA!!!!!!!!!!!

[Laconian]

I found a 2000 Honda Civic HX on my way into work today.  Fueleconomy.gov says 39mpg.  Anyone know anything about how reliable it is?  this car was in really good shape inside and out and carfax shows no accidents.  68k miles and it's listed for $3800. 

2000? That's Peak Civic right there, before they started cheaping out the suspensions. I'm surprised that car hasn't already been assimilated into the flaming pile of ricer wrecks!

[ifcar]

I found a 2000 Honda Civic HX on my way into work today.  Fueleconomy.gov says 39mpg.  Anyone know anything about how reliable it is?  this car was in really good shape inside and out and carfax shows no accidents.  68k miles and it's listed for $3800.  

That's a screaming deal if it checks out. It won't be worth much less than that once you sell it.

[Eye of the Tiger]

It's an HX, so it could be a CVT.

[2o6]

It's an HX, so it could be a CVT.

Yeah, I haven't heard great things from that CVT, but I could be wrong.

[Eye of the Tiger]

Yeah, I haven't heard great things from that CVT, but I could be wrong.

I used to see a Civic HX CVT at autocrosses on a regular basis. The thing made an awful drone, and seemed awfully slow off the line. I think my 70hp 4-speed Civic would have given it a good run in a drag race.

[2o6]

I used to see a Civic HX CVT at autocrosses on a regular basis. The thing made an awful drone, and seemed awfully slow off the line. I think my 70hp 4-speed Civic would have given it a good run in a drag race.

Reliability wise, though. I actually prefer CVT's.

[Eye of the Tiger]

Reliability wise, though. I actually prefer CVT's.

The theory is nice,
but CVT's pretty much suck at driving.

[2o6]

The theory is nice,
but CVT's pretty much suck at driving.

I love the feeling they provide with big engines. I drove a V6 Murano, and the CVT is sublime. I could not make the car rev over 4K.


On little engines, it can be a bit annoying, but I still think it's pretty good. The New 1.6L Versa is pretty smooth and very good at adjusting to the proper ratio with the little engine.

[hotrodalex]

I love the feeling they provide with big engines. I drove a V6 Murano, and the CVT is sublime. I could not make the car rev over 4K.

That's only helpful if peak power is found under 4k.

[2o6]

That's only helpful if peak power is found under 4k.

Not the point.


The car is fast and smooth, and has none of the associated kickdown and overrevving of a regular automatic.



I'm sure if I did a foot-flat-on-the-floor 0-60 run, it'd hold it at 6K.

[Speed_Racer]

The difference between good CVTs and bad CVTs is how they are programmed to respond. I also test drove a Murano CVT and found it pretty good.

The SX4's CVT is good and bad. Good in that it helps it get really good gas mileage. Bad in that it has a very pronounced rubber-band effect which can get frustrating - like it reads my input through gas pedal and just says "nah...we're gonna go with 1500rpm, fool."

[2o6]

The difference between good CVTs and bad CVTs is how they are programmed to respond. I also test drove a Murano CVT and found it pretty good.

The SX4's CVT is good and bad. Good in that it helps it get really good gas mileage. Bad in that it has a very pronounced rubber-band effect which can get frustrating - like it reads my input through gas pedal and just says "nah...we're gonna go with 1500rpm, fool."

Yeah, Nissan does them very well. I've driven a Ford Freestyle that was also pretty good, but the one in the current Lancer isn't all that great. It's slow to change the ratios, and it really doesn't adjust to accelerator demand all that well.

[68_427]

Subaru's new one is supposed to be very good as well.

[Speed_Racer]

Yeah, Nissan does them very well. I've driven a Ford Freestyle that was also pretty good, but the one in the current Lancer isn't all that great. It's slow to change the ratios, and it really doesn't adjust to accelerator demand all that well.

Also good is if they have a slap-shift 'manumatic' mode with CVT cog ratios. It's a good way to overrule an unintelligent computer.

[2o6]

Also good is if they have a slap-shift 'manumatic' mode with CVT cog ratios. It's a good way to overrule an unintelligent computer.

I think that's incredibly stupid and defeats the purpose of the transmission...

[ifcar]

I think that's incredibly stupid and defeats the purpose of the transmission...

Not at all -- it just gives you a choice. It doesn't defeat the purpose any more than any other manual shift mode for an automatic transmission.

[2o6]

Not at all -- it just gives you a choice. It doesn't defeat the purpose any more than any other manual shift mode for an automatic transmission.

CVT - Continously Variable Transmission


With manual ratios, what is the point? (And I think manual functions on non AMT trannies is dumb, too)

[ifcar]

CVT - Continously Variable Transmission


With manual ratios, what is the point? (And I think manual functions on non AMT trannies is dumb, too)

The point of an automatic transmission is to not have to shift. The point of a CVT automatic is to maximize efficiency. Nowhere in that point is not letting the driver override the computer if the driver feels he knows better either for performance or noise levels or anything else.

[Laconian]

I like having manual function on my car's AT. I have a lot more situational awareness and can plan ahead far better than my car can. I know that I should downshift in advance to prepare for heavy acceleration, or that I want to avoid going over 25mph on a downhill slope because of the stupid cops, etc. The car can only respond to the inputs available at that instant.

[hotrodalex]

I like having manual function on my car's AT. I have a lot more situational awareness and can plan ahead far better than my car can. I know that I should downshift in advance to prepare for heavy acceleration, or that I want to avoid going over 25mph on a downhill slope because of the stupid cops, etc. The car can only respond to the inputs available at that instant.

I shift my Saturn manually at least a couple of times a day. It's a nice option to have.

[Laconian]

Not to mention that the feature is essentially free, since it can be implemented with a couple extra hardware switches and a few lines of code.

[Speed_Racer]

I like having manual function on my car's AT. I have a lot more situational awareness and can plan ahead far better than my car can. I know that I should downshift in advance to prepare for heavy acceleration, or that I want to avoid going over 25mph on a downhill slope because of the stupid cops, etc. The car can only respond to the inputs available at that instant.

Exactly. Manumatic aren't any fun when you use it just for kicks, but it's handy in certain situations where you can plan ahead while the transmission computer can't.

The worst part of the the SX4 CVT is that it takes what feels like forever to 'downshift' to a passing lane ratio. Hit the gas, engine whirs up, CVT does its thing, and finally it goes. But by then you've missed your opportunity to pass and you've got to wait.

Slapping it down to "3rd gear" just gets it all ready so when the coast is clear you can go.

Same with going down hills, and snowy roads. It's a nice feature that really helps out, but it's nowhere near as controllable as a manual. But my mother can't drive a manual, so the only choice was CVT.

[Raza]

Manual mode in automatics is also useful for snow, when you don't want the transmission jumping between gears because it doesn't know what to do.