Menu
What's new
By:
Advanced search...

2004 i-CTDI low MPG

ELFijka

ELFijka

Members
Messages
46
Reaction score
0
Location
Dublin
Car
2012 DTEC EX Accord
Hi Everybody!

It's 4th Accord I have and it's the first time I have this type of problem. Before I had 2005, 2008 old shape, 2008 new shape and now I bought 2004. They all were diesel.

Basically I'm getting 30MPG when I usually was getting 55-60 MPG on all previous cars.

It's high mileage 165K but I do not think it's an issue as my first Accord was 150K and was still doing 60 MPG.

There is no fumes or any other problems with the car. Services recently - fuel filter changed.

Does anyone ever had similar problem?

I will be looking to sell this one if I will not be able fix that.
 
Check that none of the brakes are binding.
Injectors may be leaking? But you'd probably notice excessive smoking if it was this.
Likewise, I'm sure you'd notice if the clutch was slipping badly.

Welcome to the club.
 
Thanks Jon_G !!!

Jon_G said:
Check that none of the brakes are binding.
Injectors may be leaking? But you'd probably notice excessive smoking if it was this.
Likewise, I'm sure you'd notice if the clutch was slipping badly.

Welcome to the club.
Click to expand...

1. Brakes. I had an issue with rear brakes when bought it. But after replacing the cable it's all like new. I presume that if it would be a brake problem wheels would be hot but it's not.

2. Injectors. I'm thinking about them... but need to get more confidence as it's quite expensive even to check them and there is no smoke.

3. Clutch is not slipping, I mean the rpm is fine when changing a gear

However I did not mention that the flywheel is close to be replaced but not yet, as it makes very small noise.
 
Natasha said:
1. Brakes. I had an issue with rear brakes when bought it. But after replacing the cable it's all like new. I presume that if it would be a brake problem wheels would be hot but it's not.
Click to expand...
Yes - a brake 'dragging' would result in a hot disc

Natasha said:
2. Injectors. I'm thinking about them... but need to get more confidence as it's quite expensive even to check them and there is no smoke.
Click to expand...
To get such poor MPG would have to mean that the injectors were over-fuelling very badly, so there would be smoke.

Natasha said:
3. Clutch is not slipping, I mean the rpm is fine when changing a gear
Click to expand...
The clutch slip would have to be so bad that you'd smell the friction material burning. And clutch slip is pretty obvious!

The severity of your problem is unusual - I can't remember a similar complaint here (or elsewhere) where someone was only getting 30MPG... most owners rarely report less than 40MPG (and moan about that!). As my first suggestions don't seem to apply, then I'm wondering if you should have it looked at by someone using a Honda Diagnostics System (HDS), there are members with them, but I'm not sure if any of the Irish members have them. Otherwise I'm wondering if you have a blocked cat, or if the car has been badly remapped sometime? A faulty turbo, or leaking boost pipe/intercooler would also cause poor power and MPG, but you would then have the ECU warning light on (and you didn't mention that).

Hopefully someone else can also chip in with a few ideas!
 
Where are you getting the MPG figure from? How are you working it out?
 
I'm getting about 400 miles from full tank (65L) what is around 30 mpg.

We did Diagnostic on that when we bought it. It had one error something about flap on inlet manifold. Today we have dissembled and cleaned inlet manifold, flap before in manifold, unit where MAP sensor is and EGR valve. It was lots of carbon inside inlet man. and flap was covered by that as well. Not sure if that helps... but keep you posted.

We are also concern about little vibration of engine, it's not major and I personally can't feel that but my husband says it's there. It may be caused by flywheel going or injectors over fueling into cylinder but there is no smoke and no faults on diagnostic. We also did a back leak test on injectors and it's more less the same in all cylinders. That all makes us think that it's not an injector problem.

Car has plenty of power and no other issues. Therefore it's not a turbo, intercooler problem. There are no warning lights on dash and computer does not show any faults at all.

Even if the flywheel is going that should not affect consumption.

How would I know if somebody remapped an engine?

Anyway if today's clean out will not help we think it may be MAF sensor (mass airflow). If somebody can do us a big favor and measure reading from air flow meeter with diagnostic when car is working that would be a big help as it will not always show fault on the computer. It could be still working on minimum but will give a wrong mix of air/fuel.
 
As Jon has said if the car was ovefuelling to the extent needed to produce this sort of drop in mpg it would be smoking badly.

Although the brakes do not appear to be a problem my first line of attack would be to have this checked properly. Go down to your local equivalent of an MOT testing station and ask them to put in on the roller brake tester. This will pick up any tendency of the brakes to drag even subtlely. For the cost it's worth doing if only to properly eliminate this possibility.
 
H Peasource said:
As Jon has said if the car was ovefuelling to the extent needed to produce this sort of drop in mpg it would be smoking badly.

Although the brakes do not appear to be a problem my first line of attack would be to have this checked properly. Go down to your local equivalent of an MOT testing station and ask them to put in on the roller brake tester. This will pick up any tendency of the brakes to drag even subtlely. For the cost it's worth doing if only to properly eliminate this possibility.
Click to expand...
Couldn't you just jack each wheel up and see if it turns freely?
 
Welcome along Natasha, you seem to know your stuff!! What's the service history like on the car, and is there any hesitation in acceleration or anything like that? What oil do you use when servicing?
 
Thanks everyone.

Brakes were fully checked when cable was replaced and wheels are turning freely. And just to mention I'm driving same road every day and in few places I let it drive in Neutral (no gear) and it does same distance as all previous Accords. If that would be the brakes car would definitely do a smaler distance and wheels would be warm. So I think it's not brakes.

Unfortunately I do not have the receipts with the service history, only stamped service book, so I would not know what was done and why.

We used a fully synthetic oil when serviced.

Also it seems that yesterday cleaning did not help, as I did 70 miles today and fuel level has already moved. On all pevious Accords that would not move for the first 130-150 miles. But I still have to finish the tank to make sure.

So we are open to any other surgestions.

We actualy own a garage for the last 8 years and my husband is a good mehanic, I hope you are not going to blame me for that. I have chosen that car for myself as I know from experience how reliable they are. But now it's silly that we cann't fix our own car.
 
Has it been like this since you've owned it? If not, when did it begin being thirsty?

You've pretty much done everything that I can think of (I was going to suggest cleaning the IMRC, EGR & MAP sensor, but you've now cleaned these components). But the injector leak-off test wouldn't rule out a 'dribbling' injector that maybe might still be overfuelling one (or two) cylinder(s) and, as it isn't all the cylinders, might not create too much excess smoke... this might also explain the slight vibration? But I'm admittedly scraping the barrel.

Get it looked at on a HDS. Or sell it.
 
It was same since we bought it. I know that it would be easier to solve the problem if we would know how this happened but unfortunatly... Now I understand why Im the 3rd owner gor the last 18 month. :(

Anyway we have 2 options left:

1. MAF. But I need the readings to compare

2. Injectors. We have found a guy who can test them and repair if needed.

We have been talking to Honda dealer mehanics but they never came across something simillar before. In relation to the Honda diagnostic, we have very reliable Sweden diagnostic what never let us down in the past 5 years, so I do not think Honda can help ys any way.

I just hate spending money on something I'm not 100% sure.

If next week we will not find the problem and get it done I have no other option than to sell it. It's pitty as we have just installed the heated seats (I have Sport model) and the latest Parrot and actually this car ticks all bixes for me - it has factory tinted windows and genuine low profile alloys, so eould be really dissapointed to sell it.
 
After you've done the above, and before you sell it, a few things that you mentioned previously...
Turbo
Intercooler
ECU previously remapped

Whilst you can't easily check the last one, are you sure that the first two are piped up securely, and that the intercooler isn't clogged up ?
re turbo, I've seen a thread somewhere in this forum about a diesel turbo issue that took a while to track down.

Finally FYI if you didn't alreaady know, and if it would help, it's possible to access the parts drawings from this link
 
Natasha said:
1. MAF. But I need the readings to compare

2. Injectors. We have found a guy who can test them and repair if needed.
Click to expand...
1. I'd clean the MAF anyway - do a search on this site for a guide on this, but it isn't a tough job (just try not to touch the sensor too much!). I'm not sure what readings you want, but I'll measure some cold idle MAF readings tomorrow and post them. Although who's to say that my readings are a good example?

2. Got to be worth testing, especially at that mileage.

It isn't just Honda garages that have a HDS... they are widely available (mostly in clone form) from, say, eBay and so long as the user is experienced can pretty much tell you everything about everything. Much more info is available than a simple OBD2 reader.

Are you absolutely sure the problem isn't your fuel gauge giving a low reading? Your earlier reply about how you calculated the MPG did sound like you were using the gauge to account for the volume of fuel.

This might sound a little irresponsible, but if all else fails then why not try driving it around really hard to try to provoke the fault? If you could get the ECU to register a problem then at least you could read off the DTC and you then might learn something about the problem. Just a thought...
 
I check if somebody has a HDS, notsurewhat the difference with EOBD though.

Also will check an intercooler.

MAF and MAP are both clean now but did not helped.

I would really appreciate if you can measure the readings of MAF on cold idle car. Well your readings has to be right as your car is not consuming 9.7 for 100 km.

I have measured the consumption from full tank till yellow light and I did it 3 times. It's only today I looked at fuel gauge to see if it's moving, so it's not a gauge problem.

I also have noticed that if I do more town driving the consumption is less and i'm doing more miles then if I'm driving fast on motorway.

Anyway will keep you posted on progress. Really hope to get it solved...
 
Starting from cold, @ idle, with coolant temp = 5 degs C, then MAF = 19g/s. This reduced to 15g/s after a minute or so when coolant temp = 14 degs C. Then, @ 2000RPM, MAF = between 45-50 g/s (struggled to hold at steady RPM). Hope this helps.

Sorry to keep banging on about this, but I still don't understand how you can accurately calculate your fuel consumption by using only the fuel gauge readings. I realise that the gauge is actually moving, but that doesn't mean it's in any way accurate (or even consistent)... for example, maybe it's going down too quickly and the yellow light is coming on when you actually have nearly half a tank full? You really need to know exactly how much fuel you're putting in from the (calibrated) fuel station pump against the distance recorded on your odometer. I wouldn't even trust the on-board computer (if you have one).
 
Jon_G said:
Starting from cold, @ idle, with coolant temp = 5 degs C, then MAF = 19g/s. This reduced to 15g/s after a minute or so when coolant temp = 14 degs C. Then, @ 2000RPM, MAF = between 45-50 g/s (struggled to hold at steady RPM). Hope this helps.

Sorry to keep banging on about this, but I still don't understand how you can accurately calculate your fuel consumption by using only the fuel gauge readings. I realise that the gauge is actually moving, but that doesn't mean it's in any way accurate (or even consistent)... for example, maybe it's going down too quickly and the yellow light is coming on when you actually have nearly half a tank full? You really need to know exactly how much fuel you're putting in from the (calibrated) fuel station pump against the distance recorded on your odometer. I wouldn't even trust the on-board computer (if you have one).
Click to expand...

Thanks for readings, will get ours compared tomorrow morning. Then will let you know.

RE MPG. The way I have measured is 61 ltr filled on petrol station set trip A to 0, at 380 miles the yellow light came on and gauge is on red. So 380 / 13 gallons is 29 MPG.
 
Natasha said:
RE MPG. The way I have measured is 61 ltr filled on petrol station set trip A to 0, at 380 miles the yellow light came on and gauge is on red. So 380 / 13 gallons is 29 MPG.
Click to expand...
But how do you know how much of that 61L that you put in is still left in the tank? You're relying on the gauge telling you that the tank is nearly empty... if the gauge is reading too low then you might still have, say, half of it remaining so the MPG would be 380/6.5 gallons = 58MPG. Or am I missing something?
 
That's why I asked earlier, Jon. I ***umed with the reply that brimming the tank is putting in 60l each time, and it's doing 380 on that 60 l consistently, then filling to the brim with 60l again.
 
HuskyMan said:
That's why I asked earlier, Jon. I ***umed with the reply that brimming the tank is putting in 60l each time, and it's doing 380 on that 60 l consistently, then filling to the brim with 60l again.
Click to expand...
Yes Trev, that would be my ***umption too. But it would be nice to definitely eliminate something simple (like inappropriate faith in the fuel gauge?) before the OP gets so fed up she decides to sell the car! I hate suggesting something so basic, but it would be great if it was something that simple...
 
Jon_G said:
But how do you know how much of that 61L that you put in is still left in the tank? You're relying on the gauge telling you that the tank is nearly empty... if the gauge is reading too low then you might still have, say, half of it remaining so the MPG would be 380/6.5 gallons = 58MPG. Or am I missing something?
Click to expand...

As I said I did measure it for the last 3 times so yellow light on 1st fill 61 ltr did 380miles till yellow light, second fill 62,5 ltr 384 miles till yellow lighr, last fill 58 ltr, not over yet.

I'm sorry guys but if Im saying it's 30 mpg it is 30 mpg. I'm driving Accords for the last 5 years and I know what i'm talking about. I'm not relying on computer and on gauge. But if before I was able to do 5 trips to work on full tank now i can hardly do 3 - that's simple maths!
 
Yeah it's just very strange if there are no other signs at all, so we like to check the obvious even if it seems we're accusing you of being silly :blush: , no offence meant we're just clutching at straws :D
 
I would not waste your time for something like gauge problem.

I also have to say that after maf, map, inlet manifold and flap cleaning car is starting much better in the mornings and in general. This is jyst for those who have a problem with start.

But our problem still open.
 
Don't know if it helps but maf on mine tonight with a hot engine was around 6 climbing to 160ish under acceleration
 
I'd love to see an outcome to this post. Best average I've ever had was ~44mpg, but overall its more like 42<>43 mpg.

When I saw the post ***le...my first thought without reading the post text was 'injectors', but as others have already said, poor fuelling means smoking on acceleration.

I've noted its always been the earlier 2004/5 models that seem to suffer. Just wonder whether 5-speed & wider tyres on the 17" rims has a big effect.
 
Natasha said:
As I said I did measure it for the last 3 times so yellow light on 1st fill 61 ltr did 380miles till yellow light, second fill 62,5 ltr 384 miles till yellow lighr, last fill 58 ltr, not over yet.

I'm sorry guys but if Im saying it's 30 mpg it is 30 mpg. I'm driving Accords for the last 5 years and I know what i'm talking about. I'm not relying on computer and on gauge. But if before I was able to do 5 trips to work on full tank now i can hardly do 3 - that's simple maths!
Click to expand...
It's actually worse than you think, because the speedo (and hence odometer) reads 5% fast. So the miles you've done are only 95% of what it says.

You shouldn't use the fill before, what you should use is the fill "after" the miles. Also, it's good to take it over more fills.

So .... it's 380 miles to second fill of 62.5, then 384 miles to last fill of 58.

Average of them is (380 + 384) ÷ (62.5 + 58) = 764 ÷ 120.5 odometer miles per litre
= (764 x .95) ÷ (120.5 ÷ 4.54)
= 727 ÷ 26.54
= 27.4 actual miles per gallon !!!!

That is seriously bad for a diesel.

What you want to try is this ......

1. go to a motorway, fill up at a service station until the pump cuts first time, and zero the odometer
2. when you're on the motorway, fix cruise control at 60 mph
3. drive a round trip of about 30 miles on the motorway back to the same service station, same pump, fill until pump cuts first time, and note the litres and odometer.

This will give a guide as to your mpg at the most economical speed.

Then do exactly the same but in 30mph area (suburban/rural driving) over about 30 miles, without exceeding 30 mph (use cruise control wherever possible).
This will give a guide as to your mpg at the worst economical speed (without being too slow).

There should be a difference, and it depends how good or bad each is, and the difference, as to what could be going on.

.
 
^ I've just been to Tesco, and an idea came to mind while driving :unsure:

You're in Dublin, and the Irish Republic went metric on speeds and distances after 2005.

Your car is a 2004, I presume it's in mph and the odometer is miles. If you've been converting the odometer readings from km to miles, that's the problem i.e. your actual true mpg is 27.4 x 1.6 = 43.8 mpg.

If the odometer readings you gave us are straight off the odometer without converting, then do the mpg checks I mentioned in the post above.

Check the odometer anyway over a measured distance. In the UK, emergency phones on a motorway are almost always exactly 1 mile apart, I don't know about the Irish Republic. I doubt if an odometer could be that far out, but if the odometer was replaced at some time with a km odometer then your mpg is incrediby bad i.e. 27.4 ÷ 1.6 = 17 mpg :lol:

But the point is, maybe the odometer is giving very low readings, though I wouldn't know how that could happen without giving very low speeds as well (and as I say, my speedometer and odometes both read 5% high, which is normal).

.
 
That still doesn't change the fact she could do 5 journeys to work on one tank in her previous Accord and only 3 in this one.
Its obviously a lot worse and that is what she wants to sort out, not whether her mpg calculations are slightly out
 
Dave G said:
That still doesn't change the fact she could do 5 journeys to work on one tank in her previous Accord and only 3 in this one.
Its obviously a lot worse and that is what she wants to sort out, not whether her mpg calculations are slightly out
Click to expand...
pm sent, let's not obfuscate this with a public argument.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top