2020 Honda Pilot MPG is 27 MPG on engine:
The 2020 Honda Pilot MPG to weight ratio is shown in the graph:
We calculated that 2020 Honda Pilot MPG is up to 28% worse than the world average consumption.
Vehicle | Consumption (city / highway) | Consumption to weight ratio | Difference from world average consumption | Driving range (full tank) | Consumption per passenger |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
3.5 V6 |
20
/
27 MPG
(11.7 / 8.7 L per 100 km) |
1.8 L per 100 km to 100 kg | 28% worse |
373—559 miles
(600—900 km) |
1.5 L per 100 km / person |
Vehicle | 3.5 V6 |
---|---|
Consumption (city / highway) |
20
/
27 MPG
(11.7 / 8.7 L per 100 km) |
Consumption to weight ratio | 1.8 L per 100 km to 100 kg |
Difference from world average consumption | 28% worse |
Driving range (full tank) | 373—559 miles (600—900 km) |
Consumption per passenger | 1.5 L per 100 km / person |
2016 Honda Pilot MPG is 27 MPG on engine:
The 2016 Honda Pilot MPG to weight ratio is shown in the graph:
We calculated that 2016 Honda Pilot MPG is up to 28% worse than the world average consumption.
Vehicle | Consumption (city / highway) | Consumption to weight ratio | Difference from world average consumption | Driving range (full tank) | Consumption per passenger |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
3.5 V6 |
20
/
27 MPG
(11.8 / 8.7 L per 100 km) |
1.8 L per 100 km to 100 kg | 28% worse |
373—559 miles
(600—900 km) |
1.5 L per 100 km / person |
Vehicle | 3.5 V6 |
---|---|
Consumption (city / highway) |
20
/
27 MPG
(11.8 / 8.7 L per 100 km) |
Consumption to weight ratio | 1.8 L per 100 km to 100 kg |
Difference from world average consumption | 28% worse |
Driving range (full tank) | 373—559 miles (600—900 km) |
Consumption per passenger | 1.5 L per 100 km / person |
2009 Honda Pilot MPG is 22 MPG on engine:
The 2009 Honda Pilot MPG to weight ratio is shown in the graph:
We calculated that 2009 Honda Pilot MPG is up to 44% worse than the world average consumption.
Vehicle | Consumption (city / highway) | Consumption to weight ratio | Difference from world average consumption | Driving range (full tank) | Consumption per passenger |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
3.5 V6 |
16
/
22 MPG
(14.7 / 10.7 L per 100 km) |
1.6 L per 100 km to 100 kg | 44% worse |
311—435 miles
(500—700 km) |
1.6 L per 100 km / person |
Vehicle | 3.5 V6 |
---|---|
Consumption (city / highway) |
16
/
22 MPG
(14.7 / 10.7 L per 100 km) |
Consumption to weight ratio | 1.6 L per 100 km to 100 kg |
Difference from world average consumption | 44% worse |
Driving range (full tank) | 311—435 miles (500—700 km) |
Consumption per passenger | 1.6 L per 100 km / person |
2003 Honda Pilot MPG is 22 MPG on engine:
The 2003 Honda Pilot MPG to weight ratio is shown in the graph:
We calculated that 2003 Honda Pilot MPG is up to 41% worse than the world average consumption.
Vehicle | Consumption (city / highway) | Consumption to weight ratio | Difference from world average consumption | Driving range (full tank) | Consumption per passenger |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
3.5 V6 |
17
/
22 MPG
(13.9 / 10.7 L per 100 km) |
1.6 L per 100 km to 100 kg | 41% worse |
373—435 miles
(600—700 km) |
1.5 L per 100 km / person |
Vehicle | 3.5 V6 |
---|---|
Consumption (city / highway) |
17
/
22 MPG
(13.9 / 10.7 L per 100 km) |
Consumption to weight ratio | 1.6 L per 100 km to 100 kg |
Difference from world average consumption | 41% worse |
Driving range (full tank) | 373—435 miles (600—700 km) |
Consumption per passenger | 1.5 L per 100 km / person |