What's sad is that I remember this from 1997ish
you're assuming there was a decision or logic behind the name but it was a stupid pop culture joke that just stuck ...the first mini-mes were happening at the same time the first Austin Powers movie came out. And coincidentally the LS-Vtec concept was just gaining popularity.
So you had the larger, initially more popular LS/Vtec and than the smaller, almost absurd D-series attempt...mini-me was
It has nothing to do with the displacement, just that its a "small" artificially created D-series frankenstein type of setup.
If you nana it, its true that it can get slightly better petrol consumption however what is the likelyhood that once you get the turbo on there that you will always nana it? Almost zilch.
Lots of highway
38-42mpg
~I did manage to get 50mpg once that barely taping the gas, and costing down hill in neutral. Low rpm shifts 2700rpms give or take
everyplace
32-36mpg
1991 FWD manual.
Short ram intake did help a little.
The Wagon is much bigger, and without the Kamm-back, I don't think you'll get such high mileage. But 40+ MPG seems possible with slow acceleration and turning off the engine to coast.
i get about 250 per tank and now that i have the new flywhee and clutch i think i should get a bit more. i might be able to even hit 300 miles per tank.
Last tank on a tired-oil-eating engine was 280miles on ~10 gal of fuel wich equals ~ 28 MPG ....
I gues some of the fuel gets subsituted by oil
Cheers!
i used to get over 400 miles on a tank of gas in my old wagon...250 miles on a full tank?...wow...something seems to be wrong...i dont remember the exact model i had but, i did have an engine swap (jdm 1.5 sohc),intake,and a fart can exhaust...maybe i just got lucky...that was on stock tires and trans...mostly freeway miles...anyone in socal/ie with a nice wagon,hit me up....later
From what a lot of people have posted it seems that the FWD wagons get better gas mileage. I noticed that I can never break 26mpg and with gas getting up to $3/gal I was looking for some way to get better mpg. Would the wagon get a little better mpg if I disengaged the 4wd and only ran in FWD?
Anything over 9:1 compression really should run on the higher octance petrol..
Actually I run 91 in anything over 10.5:1, 94 in anything over 12:1, and I run 89 in everything underneath....why? That's what honda rates it at.
Oh, and I get around 250-300 miles per tank. Depends on what kinda of driving I was doing. This was on an LS tho. Now I have DOHC ZC with a DX tranny, hoping to see some higher mileage. Mine's a US car imported to Canada.
Just checking in I get 240-255 per tank. I've run the test over four times with full tank each.
the car is 89 fwd and just changed the o2 censor and pcv valve.
I vary, may have to do with the temp? I'm not sure. I used to get 31mpg with Shell 91 octane, roughly over 300 miles on a tank. Lately, it's been like 270 on a tank, I haven't really bothered with the calculations lately but i assume it's roughly 25-27 MPG.
RT4WD DOHC ZC manual lowered with crappy short CAI. (more like hot air intake)
I get about 260-270 not matter what. However, I dont have the 1.5 L in it. I bought mine with a 1.6 L. ZC engine in it. I believe I should be getting more but dont know why.
I get about 260-270 not matter what. However, I dont have the 1.5 L in it. I bought mine with a 1.6 L. ZC engine in it. I believe I should be getting more but dont know why.
Comments
It was a lighter flywhl used on the HFs.You should do another gas mileage run.You'd probably hit mid 40's.
ahhh ha... makes perfect sense. 8)
uuuuuh, no.
guaranteed more gas consumption.
If you nana it, its true that it can get slightly better petrol consumption however what is the likelyhood that once you get the turbo on there that you will always nana it? Almost zilch.
38-42mpg
~I did manage to get 50mpg once that barely taping the gas, and costing down hill in neutral. Low rpm shifts 2700rpms give or take
everyplace
32-36mpg
1991 FWD manual.
Short ram intake did help a little.
Using the "pulse & glide" technique in my '91 Hatchback, I just got 53MPG. I believe I could get it up to 60MPG if I tried hard enough (and spent the money for stuff like a tune-up).
The Wagon is much bigger, and without the Kamm-back, I don't think you'll get such high mileage. But 40+ MPG seems possible with slow acceleration and turning off the engine to coast.
only 24mpg
There's just something I like about driving a hunnerd dollar car with 40 degree air.
I gues some of the fuel gets subsituted by oil
Cheers!
Actually I run 91 in anything over 10.5:1, 94 in anything over 12:1, and I run 89 in everything underneath....why? That's what honda rates it at.
Oh, and I get around 250-300 miles per tank. Depends on what kinda of driving I was doing. This was on an LS tho. Now I have DOHC ZC with a DX tranny, hoping to see some higher mileage. Mine's a US car imported to Canada.
Same with mine.....on 87 octane....
overall, STILL really good
I'm lucky to get around 200-250 miles on a full tank filled with 89..
Though the 56PSI of fuel pressure can't be helping any.. I think I will turn it down some. lol
the car is 89 fwd and just changed the o2 censor and pcv valve.
My head is minty fresh but the rings I know are nearly shot with 227k miles on them. Should have replaced the rings.... doh!
RT4WD DOHC ZC manual lowered with crappy short CAI. (more like hot air intake)
What octane do you use?
Really? I average about 550k's on a tank.