[megapixle]

For 2010 Odys without VCM Honda claims mileage of 16/23/18 (City/Highway/Combined).

For models with VCM Honda claims 17/25/20.

If I plan on driving a new Ody 140,000 miles, a VCM motor would consume roughly 7777 gallons of fuel, whereas a VCM motor would require only 7000 gallons of fuel.

Over the life of the vehicle that's a difference of around 777 gallons, which at a conservative $3/gallon, is a savings of roughly $2300 dollars. This would be something for me to consider as I decide whether to buy an EX vs. EX-L.

Does real-world experience verify Honda's claim of improved fuel consumption for VCM motors? Do any independent sites verify this?

 

[ChocLabman]

I have a 2008 EX-L which has the VCM. I recently logged about 1500 miles on a trip from Florida to Tennessee. I recorded 25.3mpg on the interstate with the cruise control set at 75mph and the A/C running. I have also tracked my mileage back and forth to work which would qualify for a combined mileage and got 19.6 mpg.

 

[skinny2]

I think it's a very hard question to answer. Unless someone drives both vehicles the exact same route with the same driving characteristics I'm not sure you can fairly compare. Originally the EPA estimate on these was 28mpg highway...but that has obviously come down as EPA revised testing. But IMHO, the tests are still skewed by vehicles with multi-cylinder technology, hybrids, etc.

I personally would not take the VCM into consideration when comparing for monetary purposes. Theoretically it HAS to use less fuel but it's nearly impossible for joe-public to quantify the difference. The other reason I say to ignore it is because there are potentially more parts to require service later in life. The engine mounts are more sophisticated on VCM models and they don't have a terrific history. We've already had an engine mount replaced at 40k miles, luckily under warranty. There are several of these special engine mounts as well as different exhaust components, computer controls, etc. to help control vibration when the engine is put into an unnatural state (i.e. running on 3 cylinders....).

For me it was simply that I wanted the features of the EX-L regardless so I get the VCM...like it or not. I'm sure that's Honda's plan to help push their CAFE numbers by forcing folks into the vehicle with the higher EPA ratings.

 

[roadcarver]

VCM really shines on highway driving, as for city driving, I don't think it is as beneficial.

But for the 08 and newer, it may be better since (if I recall correctly) can go running as low as 3, and 4 cyclinders.

My 07's VCM only shuts off the back 3 cyliinders.

 

[County Honda]

I had a 2003 Odyssey 3.5 240 HP no vcm
Bought 2007 EX-L Odyssey 3.5 244 HP and VCM
Same driving find roughly about a 8 to10 per cent improvement in fuel economy on the 2007 over the 2003. 2007 Van has roughly 75 thousand miles 121 thousand kilometers. I did not buy the 2007 for VCM I wanted leather. VCM was a bonus.

 

[JAvendan]

I actually wanted the VCM.

For me the leather was a bonus.

I drive quite a bit and have an approx 80 round trip commute.

My average MPGs to date is in my sig.

Also, my MPGs have dropped a lil because of my roof basket.

Joel

 

[Tri-C]

Based on my experience, VCM delivers noticeably improved mileage.
I am presently contemplating buying a '10 and am leaning toward an EX-L principally because of VCM.

Driven at 65, my '05 Touring typically got 27 or better and once hit 29 mpg. Increasing the speed to 75, however, had a dramatic negative impact as mileage would drop into the 24 range.

skinny2 (as always) makes some excellent points relative to possible increased maintenance.

 

[megapixle]

Any other opinions on this? I'm also waiting on final word for the 2011 Ody fuel economy, I hope it's as good as advertised.