K tuner worth it one CVT?

gtman

Senior Member
First Name
Mitch
Joined
Oct 27, 2015
Threads
328
Messages
16,659
Reaction score
24,351
Location
USA
Website
www.civicx.com
Vehicle(s)
2017 Cosmic Blue EX-L Sedan
Vehicle Showcase
2
I've also contemplated getting Ktuner for my 2.0 LX sinse they came out with it. My question is, does it affect anything when you're on "S" mode, does it feel any different then on "D" while running ktuner on both?
The tune on the 2.0 will increase throttle response and add hp and torque mostly in the midrange and you can even change the vtec crossover. S and D are transmission programs. As such, Ktuner doesn't change them at all. S will still feel more potent than D because it's revving higher where there's more power (at the expense of mpgs).
Sponsored

 

gtman

Senior Member
First Name
Mitch
Joined
Oct 27, 2015
Threads
328
Messages
16,659
Reaction score
24,351
Location
USA
Website
www.civicx.com
Vehicle(s)
2017 Cosmic Blue EX-L Sedan
Vehicle Showcase
2
I am really interested in having a better driving experience, so I’m really leaning towards this purchase. Anyone with a conflicting opinion/additional information on my above points please chime in!
Here's a simple fact. Tuning will transform your car. Not just in ultimate power, but in everyday driveability.

If I were you, I wouldn't start with the TSP tune. Not because it isn't amazing (it is) but for one main reason. Education.

What I mean by that is, start with the Ktuner Starter tunes. They allow you to learn a bit about how your car responds to various settings you can change. Things like throttle response and boost ramp and part throttle responsiveness. Tuning is a science and it's good to have some hands on experience with adjusting various settings and how your car responds.

The TSP tune is mostly locked meaning that there are few if any settings a user can adjust. I run it currently and highly recommend it, but still, try the Starter tunes first and get that knowledge base first.

Here's a couple topics I started if you want additional reading:

https://www.civicx.com/threads/my-ktuner-experience-an-ongoing-journal.29033/

https://www.civicx.com/threads/hands-on-with-tsps-stage-1-tune-for-the-1-5t-non-si.39135/
 

UberCivic

Senior Member
Joined
Jul 20, 2016
Threads
1
Messages
464
Reaction score
370
Location
Michigan
Vehicle(s)
2016 Modern Steel Civic EX-L 2006 Highlander Hybrid 2002 Honda Insight 2000 Audi A6 2.7t
Country flag
stop using the computer and do actual mileage numbers, reset your Trip B odometer when you refill, refill till the pump clicks off (don't round to the nearest dollar) and use the same pump for every fill up then report back your actual numbers, not the bullshit the computer says.
It all depends on the fillup because they are not accurate either. You cannot consistently fill to the same level, it is impossible so then you cannot know exactly tank to tank how much gas you used. The only accurate way is pump receipts, but you have to average your tanks together because no single tank is accurate. That said the computer is actually pretty darned spot on. The hand calc numbers end up about 3% optimistic of the computer numbers for me, but the hand calc numbers are off too because I have verified the speedo and odometer (with newish stock tires) are pessimistic by about the same 3%. I've dually verified this by passing speed indicators and comparing them to my dash speed and by hand calculation my trip distances versus GPS. My 70k mile car (rolled over yesterday) actually has like 72000 miles. I kept all of these numbers but logged only hand calc numbers on my fuelly. After doing this for the first year and a half I lost track because my wife borrowed the car and put 1500 non logged miles on a road trip. I just gave up tracking after that. Now with worn or non stock tires it's almost impossible to track accurately without doing a long road trip and comparing to GPS because the odometer on any car will always be off as well.
 

UberCivic

Senior Member
Joined
Jul 20, 2016
Threads
1
Messages
464
Reaction score
370
Location
Michigan
Vehicle(s)
2016 Modern Steel Civic EX-L 2006 Highlander Hybrid 2002 Honda Insight 2000 Audi A6 2.7t
Country flag
These are full tanks and not even my best which was 60.8 on the display and ended up 58.9 hand calculated without correcting for the odometer error. My 44.2 mpg fuelly is hand calcs and includes a lot of Uber driving which brought the numbers down that low.

Honda Civic 10th gen K tuner worth it one CVT? nc_oc=AQnAVMU7F7YH6Rzo8gYnjdhkNtjB2Trfeq98lg-vBXV3tNJeKucuh2IRjOupWsnpFfA&_nc_ht=scontent-ort2-2
 


Joined
Oct 13, 2019
Threads
3
Messages
17
Reaction score
4
Location
Portland, Oregon
Vehicle(s)
2019 Civic Coupe EX
Country flag
These are full tanks and not even my best which was 60.8 on the display and ended up 58.9 hand calculated without correcting for the odometer error. My 44.2 mpg fuelly is hand calcs and includes a lot of Uber driving which brought the numbers down that low.

nc_oc=AQnAVMU7F7YH6Rzo8gYnjdhkNtjB2Trfeq98lg-vBXV3tNJeKucuh2IRjOupWsnpFfA&_nc_ht=scontent-ort2-2.jpg
I’m still struggling to understand how you are getting such high mpg. I hadn’t heard of “hypermiling” until now but I looked up it and I follow all the checkpoints without realizing it. I forgot to mention I also almost solely drive at night so no traffic (night shift). Can you explain why you get such a significantly higher mpg for your highway miles than what the stock specs are? I assume when they test they are purposely trying to get the highest reasonable mpg they can as well.
 
OP
OP
U.S.C

U.S.C

Senior Member
First Name
Bo
Joined
May 17, 2019
Threads
215
Messages
832
Reaction score
738
Location
So cal
Website
instagram.com
Vehicle(s)
2019 Civic Hatchback
Country flag
Thanks everyone for their input. So based on what I’m reading so far in this forum and others, using the Ktuner + TSP Stage 1:

-won’t significantly affect my mpg
-won’t put excess strain on my otherwise almost fully stock car (provided I’m not driving like a madwoman) - I do have aftermarket wheels and cosmetic upgrades but likely wouldn’t upgrade anything else performance wise for now.
-is worth the performance upgrade even if I do not do any performance events.
-shouldn’t affect my warranty (again, provided I am not driving aggressively and flash back to factory before going in for anything).

I am really interested in having a better driving experience, so I’m really leaning towards this purchase. Anyone with a conflicting opinion/additional information on my above points please chime in!
you can also look into afe scorcher a lot of people use this as well. Not so common in the Honda scene but it gives a good boost in power as well and sometimes can get them for much cheaper than the Ktuner. I believe now it’s $100+ less than ktuner. But you do way less with it.
 

UberCivic

Senior Member
Joined
Jul 20, 2016
Threads
1
Messages
464
Reaction score
370
Location
Michigan
Vehicle(s)
2016 Modern Steel Civic EX-L 2006 Highlander Hybrid 2002 Honda Insight 2000 Audi A6 2.7t
Country flag
I’m still struggling to understand how you are getting such high mpg. I hadn’t heard of “hypermiling” until now but I looked up it and I follow all the checkpoints without realizing it. I forgot to mention I also almost solely drive at night so no traffic (night shift). Can you explain why you get such a significantly higher mpg for your highway miles than what the stock specs are? I assume when they test they are purposely trying to get the highest reasonable mpg they can as well.
I use the fuel economy meter on the info display that helps a lot. There is not much difference in actual thrust bogging down the throttle to 40mpg with a moderate ignition load than there is to sitting at 60mpg with a very light load. It's literally just a few mm on the gas pedal that you wouldn't notice if you weren't constantly monitoring that economy bar. After a while you get used to it by feel. You want to target a MPG on that meter and stay as close below it as you can when accelerating and hopefully cruising right at or above it then your slow downs should offset your accelerations and your end mileage should be real close to your target cruise. The other main tricks are slow takeoffs, never braking unless absolutely necessary, picking slightly slower speeds, and drafting larger vehicles (within reason). I also did most of this just by performance driving habit, but the main change I made was less aggressive stoplight to stoplight and slowed down form 85-90 to 65-70 on the interstate. I still had a 500 mile 53mpg highway trip doing 75mph though by drafting large trucks 5 car lengths back. I also had the same trip at the same speeds in the high 30's with my wife driving.
 
Joined
Oct 13, 2019
Threads
3
Messages
17
Reaction score
4
Location
Portland, Oregon
Vehicle(s)
2019 Civic Coupe EX
Country flag
Here's a simple fact. Tuning will transform your car. Not just in ultimate power, but in everyday driveability.

If I were you, I wouldn't start with the TSP tune. Not because it isn't amazing (it is) but for one main reason. Education.

What I mean by that is, start with the Ktuner Starter tunes. They allow you to learn a bit about how your car responds to various settings you can change. Things like throttle response and boost ramp and part throttle responsiveness. Tuning is a science and it's good to have some hands on experience with adjusting various settings and how your car responds.

The TSP tune is mostly locked meaning that there are few if any settings a user can adjust. I run it currently and highly recommend it, but still, try the Starter tunes first and get that knowledge base first.

Here's a couple topics I started if you want additional reading:

https://www.civicx.com/threads/my-ktuner-experience-an-ongoing-journal.29033/

https://www.civicx.com/threads/hands-on-with-tsps-stage-1-tune-for-the-1-5t-non-si.39135/
Thank you for the info! I’ve been reading a lot about tuning and these more specific resources are very helpful. I will definitely be starting with the base map! I should’ve worded it as not going beyond the TSP Stage 1 (and even then, from my reading I would only run map 1, MAYBE map 2 waaaay down the time road).
 


Daniel644

Senior Member
First Name
Daniel
Joined
Aug 31, 2019
Threads
7
Messages
241
Reaction score
127
Location
Ellijay, GA
Vehicle(s)
2016 Civic EX-T Sedan, 2003 Trailblazer LS, 1999 Pontiac Firebird
Country flag
It all depends on the fillup because they are not accurate either. You cannot consistently fill to the same level, it is impossible so then you cannot know exactly tank to tank how much gas you used. The only accurate way is pump receipts, but you have to average your tanks together because no single tank is accurate. That said the computer is actually pretty darned spot on. The hand calc numbers end up about 3% optimistic of the computer numbers for me, but the hand calc numbers are off too because I have verified the speedo and odometer (with newish stock tires) are pessimistic by about the same 3%. I've dually verified this by passing speed indicators and comparing them to my dash speed and by hand calculation my trip distances versus GPS. My 70k mile car (rolled over yesterday) actually has like 72000 miles. I kept all of these numbers but logged only hand calc numbers on my fuelly. After doing this for the first year and a half I lost track because my wife borrowed the car and put 1500 non logged miles on a road trip. I just gave up tracking after that. Now with worn or non stock tires it's almost impossible to track accurately without doing a long road trip and comparing to GPS because the odometer on any car will always be off as well.
I've got YEARS of being able to track down to 0.1 MPG variations using the hand method by using the same pump at the same time of day in my Trailblazer and even my 3 fill ups so far on the civic haven't varied by more then 1.2 MPG and I did have to switch pumps once so if you take the average of those first two (where the 2 different pumps where used) the variance is 0.7 MPG (but that third tank had a new Air Filter after replacing the one that had 41k+ miles on it.
 

UberCivic

Senior Member
Joined
Jul 20, 2016
Threads
1
Messages
464
Reaction score
370
Location
Michigan
Vehicle(s)
2016 Modern Steel Civic EX-L 2006 Highlander Hybrid 2002 Honda Insight 2000 Audi A6 2.7t
Country flag
If you're using the same vehicle at the same station and same time of day in a state like Georgia when the temps don't vary much then you definitely have a good steady baseline. I fill up at several different stations in several states and have stopped at a few with obviously fraudulent pumps. Never was able to cram more than 12.7 gallons in the winter and the one time i tested the runout to empty I only pumped 12.2 in the summer. But I stopped at some station and pumped 13.7 once and went inside to let them know their pump was fraudulent and I was calling the state inspector. Anyway at a normal pump and reading the computer it is definitely about 3% optimistic vs the pump and hand calcs. The thing I forgot to mention that basically equalizes it for me is that I run 50psi in the tires which changes my tire circumference almost exactly the same 3% in the other direction. Running 32psi on stock tires the computer is definitely optimistic by that 3%. I'm about to get some 18's with new rubber and will have to see what the speedo/odo error factor is on them.
 

Daniel644

Senior Member
First Name
Daniel
Joined
Aug 31, 2019
Threads
7
Messages
241
Reaction score
127
Location
Ellijay, GA
Vehicle(s)
2016 Civic EX-T Sedan, 2003 Trailblazer LS, 1999 Pontiac Firebird
Country flag
If you're using the same vehicle at the same station and same time of day in a state like Georgia when the temps don't vary much then you definitely have a good steady baseline. I fill up at several different stations in several states and have stopped at a few with obviously fraudulent pumps. Never was able to cram more than 12.7 gallons in the winter and the one time i tested the runout to empty I only pumped 12.2 in the summer. But I stopped at some station and pumped 13.7 once and went inside to let them know their pump was fraudulent and I was calling the state inspector. Anyway at a normal pump and reading the computer it is definitely about 3% optimistic vs the pump and hand calcs. The thing I forgot to mention that basically equalizes it for me is that I run 50psi in the tires which changes my tire circumference almost exactly the same 3% in the other direction. Running 32psi on stock tires the computer is definitely optimistic by that 3%. I'm about to get some 18's with new rubber and will have to see what the speedo/odo error factor is on them.
yeah running high PSI like that significantly reduces your contact patch giving you less traction and less rolling resistance.

also in reference to one of your other comments where you talk about keeping the "instant" meter around a certain target, that is straight up impossible on a hill climb of any amount of grade because the idle isn't strong enough to climb the hill and thats where the throttle would need to be to reach the kinds of numbers you are saying, I don't know how flat the roads in your area are but the only way I can hold the instant MPG numbers near the numbers you are claiming is on a slight downhill slope where I basically just have to rest my foot on the throttle to give it enough juice to hold the speed, Hypermiling doesn't work in the North Georgia mountains, you need Plains States to get that kinda flat level ground.

I'm 1 day left in my test of using the Econ mode for a tank (filling up tomorrow night) in which we also saw a temperature shift (fall finally showed up over night one night, like we literally went from highs in the mid 90's to highs in the mid 70's overnight about a week, week and a half ago) so I also greatly reduced the amount of A/C I was using and actually started using the heat at night on some nights, so this tank will be far outside the norm of what i've driven so far on the other tanks so I expect it to be my biggest variation. My car is used as a business vehicle and so it gets driven 5 days a week to the same place and back following the same route each night so to say I have the most repeatable numbers would be an understatement.
 

gtman

Senior Member
First Name
Mitch
Joined
Oct 27, 2015
Threads
328
Messages
16,659
Reaction score
24,351
Location
USA
Website
www.civicx.com
Vehicle(s)
2017 Cosmic Blue EX-L Sedan
Vehicle Showcase
2
Forgetting mpgs here, I think 50 psi is too much for a variety of reasons.

1. Like Daniel said, reduced contact patch creating poorer handling AND more wear in the center of the tire.

2. I do bump my psi by a couple, but adding 18 psi over recommended will produce a harsher ride quality.

3. Less resistance to damage from road hazards.

Uber, have you considered maybe compromising to something like 38 psi?
 

UberCivic

Senior Member
Joined
Jul 20, 2016
Threads
1
Messages
464
Reaction score
370
Location
Michigan
Vehicle(s)
2016 Modern Steel Civic EX-L 2006 Highlander Hybrid 2002 Honda Insight 2000 Audi A6 2.7t
Country flag
You are completely right about hills. Where I am in Michigan it is pretty flat. I am from Vermont and purposely moved to the hilliest area around because I can't stand how flat and straight the roads are here. That target MPG is just that a target and when I climb the hill by my house on the way to drop my kids off at school I'm in the high 20's climbing that hill with a cold engine. Warmed up it's high 30's, but coming down the other side is completely coasting so the downhills generally offset the uphills. It's not always perfect, depending on where stoplights turns and exits are you can either get worse or better mileage in hilly areas. If you have your turns and stops at the top of hills you can use gravity to slow your car, then use the gravity again to speed up using less gas coming back down. If your stops are at the bottom of hills you're wasting momentum to stop and wasting gas to climb again. I actually go a slightly different way home than I to to work to avoid stopping at the bottom of a big hill and having to climb it again. Last time I went to Vermont I got 122mpg on a 22 mile trip down the mountain to my aunt's house and then still got 36mpg on the way up. Because of where the stops and acceleration zones were I got way better overall mileage than I would have gotten on flat ground. I took the steep way down and the gradual way back up, different routes both the same distance.

As for the 50psi It definitely gives a harsher ride, but actually improves handling response and I've got 70k miles of even wear on the stock rear FT140's with plenty more to go, put 50k miles on the fronts before I replaced them. The fronts are now Sumitomo HTR's (which are miles better then the FT140's in the snow but terrible in wet and dry grip) with 20k miles and I can still see the sipes. If I was hot rodding around then yes the tires would heat up expand and crown wearing the center way too much, but at the light loads I put on them they stay flat. The biggest benefit from hypermiling for me is reduced maintenance/wear, followed by less road rage and speeding tickets, with the actual gas savings really being no big deal. My oil life goes over 10k every time, driving aggressive you can cut that in half.

I bought 18x9 et35 Motegi MR131's and am putting Goodyear Exhilarate 245/40's on them as soon as a black friday deal lands in my lap. I expect to take a 10% fuel economy hit just on those tires and will have to play with the psi to make sure I can run as much as possible without crowning.
Sponsored

 


 


Top