i’m just running a traditional cold-air intake. just a 3" pipe from the throttle body to the fenderwell behind the bumper with a cone filter w/ built in velocity stack. doesn’t look stock at all, lol.
i do however, intend to convert to something a little more “low profile” in the future. i intend to make an airbox to fit between the battery and fender, remove my cold-air extension and put the filter itself inside the new airbox (a cone filter, for the record) and then drilling a hole in the bottome of the custom “airbox” and running a smooth 90 degree bend to the fender area. a setup VERY similar to comptech’s icebox intake.
i’m even going to go the extra step to have mugendaxsi modify the bumper lense on the passenger side to allow outside air to flow through the lense and draw air to the intake air duct. while still maintaining functionality of the blinker as well.
If your integra can’t easily get over 25mpg in town or 30mpg cruising the highway it is not running right…it might have something to do with where you live also (higher altitude and lots of elevation changes - I live at sea level and it’s dead flat). My first Integra, an automatic '90 GS (some 300+ lbs heavier than this RS BTW) would get 35mpg cruising on the highway at 80+ mph; could go just over 420miles on 12 gallons. My 5-speed 2.4L Toyota Tacoma Extended Cab gets 27mpg cruising the highway at 80mph at stock height riding on sticky 245/45-16 Hankook R-S2 Z212’s. Key concept is to keep as much load off the engine as possible…or being mindfull of throttle control to maintain momentum (not wasting energy in unneccessary acceleration or deceleration.)
So you are getting way better than the factory rating:
5spd 30mpg hwy/25mpg city
auto 29mpg hwy/24mpg city
That’s awesome. For me, my combined hwy & city driving is at 25.6mpg. I do notice that on hwy alone, I am somewhere in the 28-30mpg range though.
I’m sure Honda would love to know how after 14-17 years you are getting better mileage than they got when they first built the engine. Fucking seriously.
Manufacturer mileage claims should be considered minimum expected fuel mileage…and you should be able to get over the Manufacters claims.
My 2WD Tacoma Extended Cab is rated at 21/24mpg and I get 21-23/27mpg…and that’s worse than others who get 24-25/29-30 out of their 2WD Tacomas.
My parents '03 Camry with 2.4L I-4 and 5-speed manual is rated at 23/32mpg. On long highway trips it has averaged 36-37mpg, that’s with 3 people and luggage.
With a heathly vehicle in proper tune and a good driving technique the manufacturers suggested MPG should be the lower limit for what your car is capable of achieving…
As an anecdote, Honda’s suggested mpg on the Insight is 56/70mpg. You know what highway mileage Car and Driver were able to get out of the Insight in a fuel-mileage challenge? They managed just over 121mpg…using slightly unconvential means, but still without changing anything on the car they achieved 121mpg for a car rate at 70mpg. Most Insight owners only get 5+mpg more highway than Honda suggests though…
Al I can say is make sure your vehicle is in top running condition and change your driving habits if you want better fuel mileage…25-27/34+mpg should be EXPECTED for a DA integra to achieve at sea level on flat ground.
I’ve mentioned this before already, MY 93 RS can attain 36 mpg highway easy, just over 400 miles. No weight modification at all, P/S and A/C intact. He NEVER opens windows unless its been parked, but as soon as he can he’ll turn the a/c on rather than have open windows. My dad has done it several times for his commute. I do not drive like my dad therefore I have not yet reached it.
running K&N drop in w/o resonator. I’ve had this car for just over a year got it at 150k, now ~165k
to the OP, save the money and go K&N drop in. if you want sound, remove the resonator too.
That is completely untrue about EPA estimates. In fact, the numbers posted are the absolute BEST the testing could obtain. My ex’s dad has worked as a master mechanic at Toyota for 20 years now, 5 at Honda. He knows what he’s talking about. If anything, you should wonder if you’ll ever get what the numbers say.
Oh and don’t tell me about my driving habits. I accelerate like a granny, I have no a/c or p/s and my car runs like a champ. All three of my DAs have gotten the same mileage, had no problems.
Haha. But i filled up last night, and my tripometer said 417 mi. And you divide that by 13.2 and u get…31.5 mpg? Oh boy. Combined city/highway. I/H/E, hi flow cat, lightweight flywheel, chipped ecu, advanced timing, 93 octane. I deliver pizzas. and I got that my last tank. :sipread:
i dont need to, i’ve already surpassed them. I dont know how EPA tests their cars, but my car is proof in a real-world situation. I wouldnt say my car was in great running condition either, but we did get it a good tune-up when we got it. It burns about 1/2 quart every 3k, and has some unknown coolant leak that hasnt given me problems. we’ve spent around 1k fixing this car up and it better give me good performance (power or mpg wise)
I can get 36 mpg WITH P/S and A/C.
edit- asked my dad and he simply said accelerate slow, and maintain constant speed. He said he had about 1/2 gallon left after traveling 400+ miles.
I used to live in Yuba City, CA and always drive to San Francisco on Sunday and monday early mornings. Its about 152 miles there and back would be a a little over 300.
I would have about just under 3/4 tank left after this and thats where it starts to eat alot i guess.
But even for that I was always going 68-74mph max. I would normally change gears at about 3k rpm.
At the time I/H/E did help me.
I now get shitty mileage lol thanks to my jdm s1 short gear tranny. And I now change gears at 4k rpms.
Are you running on stock tires? If you are running different size tires, then that will have impact on actual mileage and you will need to adjust your calculation.
As BacardiBreezer states, EPA is the best mileage that the automaker was able to get.
my tires are the stock 195/60-14s on steelies. the fronts are khumo all seasons, the rears are the factory michelins.
I am not the automaker.
my dad has good luck with mileage. the 89 civic he had before could reach 400 easy as well. That thing had 266k miles before we donated it. Just imagine, the integra’s only half way through its lifespan! (165k) he’s easy on the clutch, granny shifts (slightly pausing in neutral ever upshift), uses a/c, never rolls down windows, always tries to maintain speed or at least keep moving. I dont know why its so hard for people to believe we get better than EPA estimates. Driving habits affect mpg more than weight. Thats what it all comes down to.
does the EPA continue testing 15 or so years after the car’s made? NO. In fact, they’re testing it brand new most likely. So just because the car’s older doesnt mean it cant get better (i.e. breaking in ).
In regards to TIRES, my first two DAs were stock, my current one is on 205/55/R15, all the same mileage, 23-25 city, couple better on the highway. EPA estimates are like the best they can squeeze out, why would they not say their best number, when that is a huge selling point for cars today? Oh and yeah, a 89 Civic would have no problem with that. I had a 88 CRX Si w/ 11.1 : 1 compression and it still got 35 mpg on a bad day.
