What's that mileage in U S terms.

Tom
"Tony Hwang" <dragon40@shaw.ca> wrote in message
news:uU6wb.476616$6C4.257413@pd7tw1no...
>
>
> Judy wrote:
>
> > "jwacom201" <none@jwacom201.com> wrote in message
news:<1sadne0DOuGY512iRVn-gw@comcast.com>...
> >
> >>Im looking for a car (snip)> now im looking at the CR-V which is a 98
EX.
> >
> >
> > ...........
> >
> > Hmmm...I just got a 1998 5-speed manual CR-V (base model, no A/C),
> > which I am comparing to the 2000 CR-V automatic we already have (with
> > A/C). Interesting to see the differences between the 2 years.
> >
> > I believe the 1998 has a slightly larger, boxier body, but the real
> > (not good) surprise has been the gas mileage. I have always been told
> > that manual trannies should get better gas mileage than automatics,
> > all other things being equal. The 1998 has been getting only 22 mpg in
> > mixed driving conditions. This car came with the typical Honda dealer
> > guarantees & it has been recently looked over and tuned up.
> >
> > When you look into various websites for gas mileage on this model you
> > hear anything from 22 to 26 to 31 mpg. I'm not too happy to be at the
> > bottom of that scale with the '98 model. Our '00 automatic gets an
> > average of 26-28 mpg even with the a/c on.
> >
> > Otherwise the 1998 CR-V is superb. The CR-V is built on a Civic base
> > and handles like a tall car. The gearbox is a dream.
> >
> > So I'd suggest you find a way to verify fuel consumption on the '98
> > you're checking out.
> >
> > Good luck!
> >
> > Cranky
> Hi,
> I have a 98 CR-V with ~160K Km on it. Still original brake pads/linings,
> second set of tires, one rad flush, regular oil change, topped up diff.
> fluid for making noise when turning. Now time to replace timing belt.
> Nothing else done or happened. Just keeps on going without any trouble.
> It is auto tranny. Oh, I installed NGK platinum plugs at 100K Km.
> Gas mileage is consistent 10km/liter.
> Tony
>

 

What's that mileage in U S terms.

Tom
"Tony Hwang" <dragon40@shaw.ca> wrote in message
news:uU6wb.476616$6C4.257413@pd7tw1no...
>
>
> Judy wrote:
>
> > "jwacom201" <none@jwacom201.com> wrote in message
news:<1sadne0DOuGY512iRVn-gw@comcast.com>...
> >
> >>Im looking for a car (snip)> now im looking at the CR-V which is a 98
EX.
> >
> >
> > ...........
> >
> > Hmmm...I just got a 1998 5-speed manual CR-V (base model, no A/C),
> > which I am comparing to the 2000 CR-V automatic we already have (with
> > A/C). Interesting to see the differences between the 2 years.
> >
> > I believe the 1998 has a slightly larger, boxier body, but the real
> > (not good) surprise has been the gas mileage. I have always been told
> > that manual trannies should get better gas mileage than automatics,
> > all other things being equal. The 1998 has been getting only 22 mpg in
> > mixed driving conditions. This car came with the typical Honda dealer
> > guarantees & it has been recently looked over and tuned up.
> >
> > When you look into various websites for gas mileage on this model you
> > hear anything from 22 to 26 to 31 mpg. I'm not too happy to be at the
> > bottom of that scale with the '98 model. Our '00 automatic gets an
> > average of 26-28 mpg even with the a/c on.
> >
> > Otherwise the 1998 CR-V is superb. The CR-V is built on a Civic base
> > and handles like a tall car. The gearbox is a dream.
> >
> > So I'd suggest you find a way to verify fuel consumption on the '98
> > you're checking out.
> >
> > Good luck!
> >
> > Cranky
> Hi,
> I have a 98 CR-V with ~160K Km on it. Still original brake pads/linings,
> second set of tires, one rad flush, regular oil change, topped up diff.
> fluid for making noise when turning. Now time to replace timing belt.
> Nothing else done or happened. Just keeps on going without any trouble.
> It is auto tranny. Oh, I installed NGK platinum plugs at 100K Km.
> Gas mileage is consistent 10km/liter.
> Tony
>

 

Assuming that it is tuned up, don't be too quick to blame the car for
poor mileage. The simple fact that you know how to shift gears doesn't
mean that you know how to drive it for good mileage. Always standard
will have better mileage than auto, but most people will get actually
the opposite (like you) for the simple reason they don't know how to do
it correctly, is just simple as that.

Judy wrote:


>
> Hmmm...I just got a 1998 5-speed manual CR-V
> I believe the 1998 has a slightly larger, boxier body, but the real
> (not good) surprise has been the gas mileage. I have always been told
> that manual trannies should get better gas mileage than automatics,
> all other things being equal. The 1998 has been getting only 22 mpg in
> mixed driving conditions. This car came with the typical Honda dealer
> guarantees & it has been recently looked over and tuned up.

 

Assuming that it is tuned up, don't be too quick to blame the car for
poor mileage. The simple fact that you know how to shift gears doesn't
mean that you know how to drive it for good mileage. Always standard
will have better mileage than auto, but most people will get actually
the opposite (like you) for the simple reason they don't know how to do
it correctly, is just simple as that.

Judy wrote:


>
> Hmmm...I just got a 1998 5-speed manual CR-V
> I believe the 1998 has a slightly larger, boxier body, but the real
> (not good) surprise has been the gas mileage. I have always been told
> that manual trannies should get better gas mileage than automatics,
> all other things being equal. The 1998 has been getting only 22 mpg in
> mixed driving conditions. This car came with the typical Honda dealer
> guarantees & it has been recently looked over and tuned up.

 

Assuming that it is tuned up, don't be too quick to blame the car for
poor mileage. The simple fact that you know how to shift gears doesn't
mean that you know how to drive it for good mileage. Always standard
will have better mileage than auto, but most people will get actually
the opposite (like you) for the simple reason they don't know how to do
it correctly, is just simple as that.

Judy wrote:


>
> Hmmm...I just got a 1998 5-speed manual CR-V
> I believe the 1998 has a slightly larger, boxier body, but the real
> (not good) surprise has been the gas mileage. I have always been told
> that manual trannies should get better gas mileage than automatics,
> all other things being equal. The 1998 has been getting only 22 mpg in
> mixed driving conditions. This car came with the typical Honda dealer
> guarantees & it has been recently looked over and tuned up.

 

Assuming that it is tuned up, don't be too quick to blame the car for
poor mileage. The simple fact that you know how to shift gears doesn't
mean that you know how to drive it for good mileage. Always standard
will have better mileage than auto, but most people will get actually
the opposite (like you) for the simple reason they don't know how to do
it correctly, is just simple as that.

Judy wrote:


>
> Hmmm...I just got a 1998 5-speed manual CR-V
> I believe the 1998 has a slightly larger, boxier body, but the real
> (not good) surprise has been the gas mileage. I have always been told
> that manual trannies should get better gas mileage than automatics,
> all other things being equal. The 1998 has been getting only 22 mpg in
> mixed driving conditions. This car came with the typical Honda dealer
> guarantees & it has been recently looked over and tuned up.

 

This is really encouraging. My family has 3 cars and i think its time one
gets a miniSUV. But i dont think id be towing them out of the snow since i
already accept that cr-v isnt that powerful.

Btw for the rav4 and cr-v (especially the cr-v), ive read that there is a
big blind spot at the back. IS this really true and bothering you?



"tflfb" <fuksatw@qwest.net> wrote in message
news:Wq7wb.66$dW4.39165@news.uswest.net...
> Judy .
>
> You must do allot of in town highway driving to get an in town average of
> 26, what do you get strictly in town stop and go?
>
> Tom
>
> "Judy" <crankybanker@hotmail.com> wrote in message
> news:9326b0a.0311230746.1fb8bee5@posting.google.co m...
> > "jwacom201" <none@jwacom201.com> wrote in message
> news:<1sadne0DOuGY512iRVn-gw@comcast.com>...
> > > Im looking for a car (snip)> now im looking at the CR-V which is a 98
> EX.
> >
> >
> >
> > Hmmm...I just got a 1998 5-speed manual CR-V (base model, no A/C),
> > which I am comparing to the 2000 CR-V automatic we already have (with
> > A/C). Interesting to see the differences between the 2 years.
> >
> > I believe the 1998 has a slightly larger, boxier body, but the real
> > (not good) surprise has been the gas mileage. I have always been told
> > that manual trannies should get better gas mileage than automatics,
> > all other things being equal. The 1998 has been getting only 22 mpg in
> > mixed driving conditions. This car came with the typical Honda dealer
> > guarantees & it has been recently looked over and tuned up.
> >
> > When you look into various websites for gas mileage on this model you
> > hear anything from 22 to 26 to 31 mpg. I'm not too happy to be at the
> > bottom of that scale with the '98 model. Our '00 automatic gets an
> > average of 26-28 mpg even with the a/c on.
> >
> > Otherwise the 1998 CR-V is superb. The CR-V is built on a Civic base
> > and handles like a tall car. The gearbox is a dream.
> >
> > So I'd suggest you find a way to verify fuel consumption on the '98
> > you're checking out.
> >
> > Good luck!
> >
> > Cranky
>
>

 

This is really encouraging. My family has 3 cars and i think its time one
gets a miniSUV. But i dont think id be towing them out of the snow since i
already accept that cr-v isnt that powerful.

Btw for the rav4 and cr-v (especially the cr-v), ive read that there is a
big blind spot at the back. IS this really true and bothering you?



"tflfb" <fuksatw@qwest.net> wrote in message
news:Wq7wb.66$dW4.39165@news.uswest.net...
> Judy .
>
> You must do allot of in town highway driving to get an in town average of
> 26, what do you get strictly in town stop and go?
>
> Tom
>
> "Judy" <crankybanker@hotmail.com> wrote in message
> news:9326b0a.0311230746.1fb8bee5@posting.google.co m...
> > "jwacom201" <none@jwacom201.com> wrote in message
> news:<1sadne0DOuGY512iRVn-gw@comcast.com>...
> > > Im looking for a car (snip)> now im looking at the CR-V which is a 98
> EX.
> >
> >
> >
> > Hmmm...I just got a 1998 5-speed manual CR-V (base model, no A/C),
> > which I am comparing to the 2000 CR-V automatic we already have (with
> > A/C). Interesting to see the differences between the 2 years.
> >
> > I believe the 1998 has a slightly larger, boxier body, but the real
> > (not good) surprise has been the gas mileage. I have always been told
> > that manual trannies should get better gas mileage than automatics,
> > all other things being equal. The 1998 has been getting only 22 mpg in
> > mixed driving conditions. This car came with the typical Honda dealer
> > guarantees & it has been recently looked over and tuned up.
> >
> > When you look into various websites for gas mileage on this model you
> > hear anything from 22 to 26 to 31 mpg. I'm not too happy to be at the
> > bottom of that scale with the '98 model. Our '00 automatic gets an
> > average of 26-28 mpg even with the a/c on.
> >
> > Otherwise the 1998 CR-V is superb. The CR-V is built on a Civic base
> > and handles like a tall car. The gearbox is a dream.
> >
> > So I'd suggest you find a way to verify fuel consumption on the '98
> > you're checking out.
> >
> > Good luck!
> >
> > Cranky
>
>

 

This is really encouraging. My family has 3 cars and i think its time one
gets a miniSUV. But i dont think id be towing them out of the snow since i
already accept that cr-v isnt that powerful.

Btw for the rav4 and cr-v (especially the cr-v), ive read that there is a
big blind spot at the back. IS this really true and bothering you?



"tflfb" <fuksatw@qwest.net> wrote in message
news:Wq7wb.66$dW4.39165@news.uswest.net...
> Judy .
>
> You must do allot of in town highway driving to get an in town average of
> 26, what do you get strictly in town stop and go?
>
> Tom
>
> "Judy" <crankybanker@hotmail.com> wrote in message
> news:9326b0a.0311230746.1fb8bee5@posting.google.co m...
> > "jwacom201" <none@jwacom201.com> wrote in message
> news:<1sadne0DOuGY512iRVn-gw@comcast.com>...
> > > Im looking for a car (snip)> now im looking at the CR-V which is a 98
> EX.
> >
> >
> >
> > Hmmm...I just got a 1998 5-speed manual CR-V (base model, no A/C),
> > which I am comparing to the 2000 CR-V automatic we already have (with
> > A/C). Interesting to see the differences between the 2 years.
> >
> > I believe the 1998 has a slightly larger, boxier body, but the real
> > (not good) surprise has been the gas mileage. I have always been told
> > that manual trannies should get better gas mileage than automatics,
> > all other things being equal. The 1998 has been getting only 22 mpg in
> > mixed driving conditions. This car came with the typical Honda dealer
> > guarantees & it has been recently looked over and tuned up.
> >
> > When you look into various websites for gas mileage on this model you
> > hear anything from 22 to 26 to 31 mpg. I'm not too happy to be at the
> > bottom of that scale with the '98 model. Our '00 automatic gets an
> > average of 26-28 mpg even with the a/c on.
> >
> > Otherwise the 1998 CR-V is superb. The CR-V is built on a Civic base
> > and handles like a tall car. The gearbox is a dream.
> >
> > So I'd suggest you find a way to verify fuel consumption on the '98
> > you're checking out.
> >
> > Good luck!
> >
> > Cranky
>
>

 

This is really encouraging. My family has 3 cars and i think its time one
gets a miniSUV. But i dont think id be towing them out of the snow since i
already accept that cr-v isnt that powerful.

Btw for the rav4 and cr-v (especially the cr-v), ive read that there is a
big blind spot at the back. IS this really true and bothering you?



"tflfb" <fuksatw@qwest.net> wrote in message
news:Wq7wb.66$dW4.39165@news.uswest.net...
> Judy .
>
> You must do allot of in town highway driving to get an in town average of
> 26, what do you get strictly in town stop and go?
>
> Tom
>
> "Judy" <crankybanker@hotmail.com> wrote in message
> news:9326b0a.0311230746.1fb8bee5@posting.google.co m...
> > "jwacom201" <none@jwacom201.com> wrote in message
> news:<1sadne0DOuGY512iRVn-gw@comcast.com>...
> > > Im looking for a car (snip)> now im looking at the CR-V which is a 98
> EX.
> >
> >
> >
> > Hmmm...I just got a 1998 5-speed manual CR-V (base model, no A/C),
> > which I am comparing to the 2000 CR-V automatic we already have (with
> > A/C). Interesting to see the differences between the 2 years.
> >
> > I believe the 1998 has a slightly larger, boxier body, but the real
> > (not good) surprise has been the gas mileage. I have always been told
> > that manual trannies should get better gas mileage than automatics,
> > all other things being equal. The 1998 has been getting only 22 mpg in
> > mixed driving conditions. This car came with the typical Honda dealer
> > guarantees & it has been recently looked over and tuned up.
> >
> > When you look into various websites for gas mileage on this model you
> > hear anything from 22 to 26 to 31 mpg. I'm not too happy to be at the
> > bottom of that scale with the '98 model. Our '00 automatic gets an
> > average of 26-28 mpg even with the a/c on.
> >
> > Otherwise the 1998 CR-V is superb. The CR-V is built on a Civic base
> > and handles like a tall car. The gearbox is a dream.
> >
> > So I'd suggest you find a way to verify fuel consumption on the '98
> > you're checking out.
> >
> > Good luck!
> >
> > Cranky
>
>

 

On Sun, 23 Nov 2003 04:12:37 -0500, "jwacom201" <none@jwacom201.com>
wrote:

>
>Im looking for a car. First it was the jetta but heard bad reviews regarding
>reliability. (very far from an SUV right? i think im really a small suv
>type, i never liked lowered cars where i have to steer away from small
>potholes and risking myself in ramming a truck instead.)
>
> now im looking at the CR-V which is a 98 EX. Since its a honda i expect it
>to be reliable. Is this a good car? i want something that has a high profile
>but not too much like standard SUVs. I want something that still rides like
>a car. how is the aftermarket parts on the cr-vs?
>
>Im also looking at the Rav4 and debating which one i should look into. Seems
>like cr-vs have more aftermarkets like roofracks, bike racks, bras and
>etccc...
>
>Reports says that rav4 takes 13secs on 0-60 while crv takes 11.3.

I helped a friend shopping G1 CR-V vs. RAV4. With AT, the RAV4 was
actually scary it was so slow. The CR-V was superior in other ways as
well, but that was the big one.

>Should i be concerned to see mileages of up to 85k on toyota rav4s and honda
>cr-vs? It seems that on the VW's its scary to have mileages that high.

It shouldn't be too scary with Honda or Toyota. Just check it out
closely and understand that you may need to do some service or repair.

>
>btw, im not a speedfreak. I want something that is rugged, sporty, not too
>big and has a good MPG. (did i mention reliable?)
>
>I also carry wide & long cargos. some are illustration boards that are 3x4
>feet and rollled paper that are 107 inches long.
>

 

On Sun, 23 Nov 2003 04:12:37 -0500, "jwacom201" <none@jwacom201.com>
wrote:

>
>Im looking for a car. First it was the jetta but heard bad reviews regarding
>reliability. (very far from an SUV right? i think im really a small suv
>type, i never liked lowered cars where i have to steer away from small
>potholes and risking myself in ramming a truck instead.)
>
> now im looking at the CR-V which is a 98 EX. Since its a honda i expect it
>to be reliable. Is this a good car? i want something that has a high profile
>but not too much like standard SUVs. I want something that still rides like
>a car. how is the aftermarket parts on the cr-vs?
>
>Im also looking at the Rav4 and debating which one i should look into. Seems
>like cr-vs have more aftermarkets like roofracks, bike racks, bras and
>etccc...
>
>Reports says that rav4 takes 13secs on 0-60 while crv takes 11.3.

I helped a friend shopping G1 CR-V vs. RAV4. With AT, the RAV4 was
actually scary it was so slow. The CR-V was superior in other ways as
well, but that was the big one.

>Should i be concerned to see mileages of up to 85k on toyota rav4s and honda
>cr-vs? It seems that on the VW's its scary to have mileages that high.

It shouldn't be too scary with Honda or Toyota. Just check it out
closely and understand that you may need to do some service or repair.

>
>btw, im not a speedfreak. I want something that is rugged, sporty, not too
>big and has a good MPG. (did i mention reliable?)
>
>I also carry wide & long cargos. some are illustration boards that are 3x4
>feet and rollled paper that are 107 inches long.
>

 

On Sun, 23 Nov 2003 04:12:37 -0500, "jwacom201" <none@jwacom201.com>
wrote:

>
>Im looking for a car. First it was the jetta but heard bad reviews regarding
>reliability. (very far from an SUV right? i think im really a small suv
>type, i never liked lowered cars where i have to steer away from small
>potholes and risking myself in ramming a truck instead.)
>
> now im looking at the CR-V which is a 98 EX. Since its a honda i expect it
>to be reliable. Is this a good car? i want something that has a high profile
>but not too much like standard SUVs. I want something that still rides like
>a car. how is the aftermarket parts on the cr-vs?
>
>Im also looking at the Rav4 and debating which one i should look into. Seems
>like cr-vs have more aftermarkets like roofracks, bike racks, bras and
>etccc...
>
>Reports says that rav4 takes 13secs on 0-60 while crv takes 11.3.

I helped a friend shopping G1 CR-V vs. RAV4. With AT, the RAV4 was
actually scary it was so slow. The CR-V was superior in other ways as
well, but that was the big one.

>Should i be concerned to see mileages of up to 85k on toyota rav4s and honda
>cr-vs? It seems that on the VW's its scary to have mileages that high.

It shouldn't be too scary with Honda or Toyota. Just check it out
closely and understand that you may need to do some service or repair.

>
>btw, im not a speedfreak. I want something that is rugged, sporty, not too
>big and has a good MPG. (did i mention reliable?)
>
>I also carry wide & long cargos. some are illustration boards that are 3x4
>feet and rollled paper that are 107 inches long.
>

 

On Sun, 23 Nov 2003 04:12:37 -0500, "jwacom201" <none@jwacom201.com>
wrote:

>
>Im looking for a car. First it was the jetta but heard bad reviews regarding
>reliability. (very far from an SUV right? i think im really a small suv
>type, i never liked lowered cars where i have to steer away from small
>potholes and risking myself in ramming a truck instead.)
>
> now im looking at the CR-V which is a 98 EX. Since its a honda i expect it
>to be reliable. Is this a good car? i want something that has a high profile
>but not too much like standard SUVs. I want something that still rides like
>a car. how is the aftermarket parts on the cr-vs?
>
>Im also looking at the Rav4 and debating which one i should look into. Seems
>like cr-vs have more aftermarkets like roofracks, bike racks, bras and
>etccc...
>
>Reports says that rav4 takes 13secs on 0-60 while crv takes 11.3.

I helped a friend shopping G1 CR-V vs. RAV4. With AT, the RAV4 was
actually scary it was so slow. The CR-V was superior in other ways as
well, but that was the big one.

>Should i be concerned to see mileages of up to 85k on toyota rav4s and honda
>cr-vs? It seems that on the VW's its scary to have mileages that high.

It shouldn't be too scary with Honda or Toyota. Just check it out
closely and understand that you may need to do some service or repair.

>
>btw, im not a speedfreak. I want something that is rugged, sporty, not too
>big and has a good MPG. (did i mention reliable?)
>
>I also carry wide & long cargos. some are illustration boards that are 3x4
>feet and rollled paper that are 107 inches long.
>

 

On Sun, 23 Nov 2003 12:59:05 -0600, "tflfb" <fuksatw@qwest.net> wrote:

>What's that mileage in U S terms.

160K km is about 100K miles.


>Tom
>"Tony Hwang" <dragon40@shaw.ca> wrote in message
>news:uU6wb.476616$6C4.257413@pd7tw1no...
>>
>>
>> Judy wrote:
>>
>> > "jwacom201" <none@jwacom201.com> wrote in message
>news:<1sadne0DOuGY512iRVn-gw@comcast.com>...
>> >
>> >>Im looking for a car (snip)> now im looking at the CR-V which is a 98
>EX.
>> >
>> >
>> > ...........
>> >
>> > Hmmm...I just got a 1998 5-speed manual CR-V (base model, no A/C),
>> > which I am comparing to the 2000 CR-V automatic we already have (with
>> > A/C). Interesting to see the differences between the 2 years.
>> >
>> > I believe the 1998 has a slightly larger, boxier body, but the real
>> > (not good) surprise has been the gas mileage. I have always been told
>> > that manual trannies should get better gas mileage than automatics,
>> > all other things being equal. The 1998 has been getting only 22 mpg in
>> > mixed driving conditions. This car came with the typical Honda dealer
>> > guarantees & it has been recently looked over and tuned up.
>> >
>> > When you look into various websites for gas mileage on this model you
>> > hear anything from 22 to 26 to 31 mpg. I'm not too happy to be at the
>> > bottom of that scale with the '98 model. Our '00 automatic gets an
>> > average of 26-28 mpg even with the a/c on.
>> >
>> > Otherwise the 1998 CR-V is superb. The CR-V is built on a Civic base
>> > and handles like a tall car. The gearbox is a dream.
>> >
>> > So I'd suggest you find a way to verify fuel consumption on the '98
>> > you're checking out.
>> >
>> > Good luck!
>> >
>> > Cranky
>> Hi,
>> I have a 98 CR-V with ~160K Km on it. Still original brake pads/linings,
>> second set of tires, one rad flush, regular oil change, topped up diff.
>> fluid for making noise when turning. Now time to replace timing belt.
>> Nothing else done or happened. Just keeps on going without any trouble.
>> It is auto tranny. Oh, I installed NGK platinum plugs at 100K Km.
>> Gas mileage is consistent 10km/liter.
>> Tony
>>
>