This was the poorest performance in a while. I'm not driving conservatively anymore and I've had more wasteful short trips.
I'm thinking of buying a Scangauge so that I can velcro it to the dashboard and watch my real-time MPG. It will tell you what the optimum shift time is, optimum highway speed, and other things that will help you get more out of your mileage. It will also give you a real-time coolant temp gauge (in degrees) as well as RPMs, battery voltage, manifold pressure, ignition timing, throttle etc. Too bad they cost $160 or so on ebay. Others who are having low MPG issues might consider this. I personally want to squeeze every last mile from this expensive gas and I will take whatever help I can get.
I just passed 2000 miles and I'm getting on average slightly less than 30 MPG. I'm in Colorado, and I haven't been paying attention to how much ethanol is in the gas... but I think it's 15% for 87. The prices are just aggrivating.
Taking it on a roadtrip from Colorado to Chicago later this month... hoping on my return that the milage will have improved. Dealer advised that after the first few thousand miles I can probably drop down to 85... thoughts?
Seen one Fit on the street so far... it was another AT Base, silver like mine. =D Wasn't quick enough to honk. XD
This past week I have done quite a bit of driving and most of it was on the motorway doing about 80 mph with the A/C on 90% of the time. The rest of it was stop/go rush hour. This morning I tanked up to a depressing 29.8 mpg, my worst so far...I am usually averaging 33-35. Anyway, the reason I had to fill up was a rather lengthy day trip from which I just returned. In an effort to redeem myself from the last tank, I stayed at 65 most of the way with a few bursts up to 80 for some passing. Even with the A/C on about 60-70% of the time, almost entirely highway I received 41.7 mpg, finally meeting my 40 mpg goal!
I think one of the biggest killers for the mpg in the 5MT is high speeds. At 80 mph the engine is spinning just below 4000 rpm, I think the exact number is 3900. However, at a more leisurely (and considerably more legal) speed of 65 you are around 3200. I am not sure what speed VTEC kicks in at (I thought I heard 3400 or 3500 rpm), but having that off really does wonders for your fuel economy. Maybe Honda can include a "VTEC Override" button on the dashboard? :P
I have a Storm Silver Sport AT. Around town I usually get around 27-28 (one tankful did come out at 30.5 mpg), which is really the same as I usually got in my '04 Civic EX/AT, which is also EPA rated at 31/37. The only trip I have made with any significant highway mileage was from Poughkeepsie, NY to Paramus, NY (to the new IKEA store). I already had 100 miles o flocal driving on that tankful and added 150 for the round trip to IKEA. Overall for that tankful, I got around 34 mpg.
You are probably cool to use 89 octane...but i wouldn't switch back and forth too much. From what my dealer explained to me is that the valve timing gets use to one or the other so that switching back and forth between 87 and 89 octane screws up the timing of the valves.
Honda seems to have decided to gear the MT versions of their small cars to have greatly reduced highway mileage -- the 2006 Civic is pretty much the same sort of story as the Fit. An extra gear in the MT would help mpg tremendously.
My mother and sister drive one-generation-old MT versions of the Corolla and Civic. Both easily best 40 in strictly highway driving...
"From what my dealer explained to me is that the valve timing gets use to one or the other so that switching back and forth between 87 and 89 octane screws up the timing of the valves."
Where do people get this crap from and why do you even believe it? :mad: Total BS
Sport Auto... fill up shows 35.16mpg, about 60%hwy/40% city. It'll be interesting to see what my numbers will be this coming week, as I'm heading down to VA Beach for a few days.
"the 2006 Civic is pretty much the same sort of story as the Fit."
We have a 2002 (7th generation) Civic EX coupé in addition to the Fit. It has very similar RPM numbers to the Fit on the highway. However, I completely agree that a 6th gear to lower the RPMs would be great.
I'm no mechanic and this is only my 2nd AT, how do I tell if it's in the gear it should be? For example... usually look the rpm meter to tell when it should be switching (I hear or see it racing). If it's not switching soon enough (racing for what seems to be too long an interval) is that a transmission problem?
The automatic transmissions in Hondas will be in the correct gear for road conditions, your throttle input, load, and it's efforts to save the engine from unnessary stress and best mileage possible for those conditions.
I would think that, like the Pilot and CR-V, the Fit probably has "GRADE Logic" or something similar. In effect when going up a long grade the tranny may downshift or simply unlock the torque converter to allow the engine to gain some RPM, thus more available horsepower. This can actually help to increase MPG under those conditions instead of simply pouring more gas into a straining engine. It may stay in 4th until you reach the top or the stress is over. You can fool it by accelerating fairly hard and gaining a few miles per hour. Then let up on the throttle. It may shift back up into 5th. However, as soon as it realizes it still on that grade, trying to maintain that speed, it will usually shift down again.
Grade Logic will also do something like that going down a very steep grade. Starting from a stop at the top of the grade it may not shift into 5th until the grade levels. Using the brake to slow down will often times cause the tranny to shift back to 4th. It too will stay there until the the grade levels, then shift into 5th if speed dictates it. It is almost like the Logic is reading the car's ability to gain speed on that steep grade faster than the throttle setting would indicate. It is weird, but kind of a nice feature. It does the downshifting instead of driver having to use the brake or downshift manually.
Have faith that Honda engineers are doing all they can to give their customers the most reliable, best mileage, and best performing cars possible in their class.
Noticed A/C issue today with other people in the car. I know it's very hot like 100+ degrees. But couldn't tell if it was when stopping or when accelerating. Anyone have answer for this yet? Doesn't get warm but stops blowing real cold. Ugh!!!!
I noticed it in Phoenix this past weekend. It seemed to me the compressor takes a quick break during acceleration to ease the load on the engine - not the entire time you're accelerating. It only lasts for a few seconds but it's definitely noticeable. I imagine it's designed that way - just a minor annoyance IMO.
Hey don't be disappointed there - cuz mine's worse!
The best I could get so far is 29.25 MPG, but it's usually around 24-27 MPG. I seldom have any passengers and stuff in the cargo area and I don't turn on the AC often either. I think this has probably due to my short and frequent commutes. I think the Fit is ONLY good for long trips. Start and stop really really HURTS the MPG of this car...maybe I should have gone for the Accord Coupe EX V6 w/Navi instead...oh well...but I do admit that I love the look of the Fit though - although it lacks so many basic equipment such as armrest, locking fuel door, an optional sunroof, passenger side's vanity mirror (I can't believe Honda is so cheap! Come on now, I know cutting cost is necessary but this?!)
Anyone does short and frequent commutes? Please post your MPG too. Thanks.
The main problem with your fuel economy is the automatic transmission in stop/go driving. When you say "short and frequent", how many miles are you talking about? I take it you do a significant amount of driving on a cold engine?
I have the base 5MT. My commute is approximately 25 miles each way almost entirely freeway. In the morning there is about 5-6 miles of medium speed 20-40 mph driving and the rest is 70-75 mph...although I go 65 when I am feeling somewhat more conservative As for the afternoon commute, there is about 15 miles of clear freeway, and 10 miles of heavy stop/go 5-20 mph.
I typically average 33-35 mpg. I found for the manual the most significant hinderance to high mileage is high engine speeds...so a long trip will only do good for the mileage if you don't speed too much. Last weekend I did a long day trip (mentioned earlier in this discussion) with 3 people in the car, another 30 lbs in the back, and with the A/C 70% of the time...very hot day. I received almost 42 mpg. However, this was not because of a long trip, but because of my engine speeds which stayed close to 3000 rpm since I went around 65 most of the time. Had I driven at 80 mph (4000 rpm), it would have adversely affected the mileage. My worst tank involved 70% driving at 80 mph and the rest stop/go driving. Just less than 30 mpg.
My first tank of gas only got me about 23 mpg, but that was a fairly heavy week of city driving on small errand trips. And, admittedly, I have a bit of a heavy foot on the gas when I'm on the highway, so that probably affected gas mileage, too. :X It's also been insanely hot around here, and that means I've had to run the a/c a lot.
I've put a bit more gas in the car, and it's already seeming to last a bit longer, despite the initial low MPG. That's promising. I've owned the car for six days, and it has 361 miles on it, so I guess the engine's beginning to break in.
Taking my first road trip in her at the end of the month (day trip to Manhattan from Philly), and I hope she'll serve me well, in terms of gas mileage.
Back from my trip down to the beach... 41.9mpg on the way down there, and 42.1 on the way back!!! I tried to keep it close to 5mph over the speed limit (55/65, depending on area). Our timing was good, as we also managed to avoid the traffic backups at the tunnel, and approaching the beachfront.
couldn't tell if it was when stopping or when accelerating
The more ozone friendly freon used in todays automobile AC systems doesn't cool real well at idle engine speeds.
In theory there is enough "COLD" remaining in the system from normal driving to last through a normal traffic light wait. However, if sitting still and/or just creeping along at slightly above idle the vent air will probably begin to warm.
Two things you might try. 1. Set the AC controls to "Recirculate" the air inside the car. This way the AC system is dealing with already cooled air, instead of trying to cool 100+ degree air from outside. 2. When all else fails, put tranny in neutral and rev the engine to 1500 RPM, or so, until time to start moving again or desired cooling is reached.
I have a SportAT. Most driving is mostly stop and go with most trips under 10 miles (typically 3 - work is 3 miles north, grocery store is 3 miles south, malls are less than 1 mile from home). I have been getting around 28mpg, consistently. I did take one trip. On that tankful, 150 miles of expressway, 100 miles of stop and go, I averaged 34 mpg. Planning a trip to Indiana next month (about 1600 miles round trip), so I will get a better idea of highway mileage then.
Have a Fit MT Sport. First month - mixed driving 33-35. Highway 39-40+ consistently. Then suddenly intermittent fill ups under 30 for mixed driving, i.e., under 30 alternating with original good MPG. Traffic conditions haven't changed at all. Bought the locking gas cap, so siphoning in Gotham isn't the problem. Dishonest gas pump metering? Diluted fuel somehow? or something with the car? Any ideas? Car has just over 3,000 miles. I am not an aggressive driver. :confuse:
~330 miles of this tank was mostly my daily commute to work all week. I also had 2 short trips at lunchtime and 1 other errand. My daily commute involves 10 miles of stop-n-go city driving.
I have increased my cold tire pressure to 38 psi and I'm trying to keep my rpm's low. I've had to do a few quick accelerations to merge into traffic, but I typically don't drive faster than 65 to 70 on the highway.
a/c use is about 80%
I have a Blue Fit Sport m/t. Maybe my engine is starting to hit its sweet spot of break-in? (now around 3800 miles on the odometer)
Just refilled. Back to typical gas consumption. Eyeballing the odometer it looks like the usual 35+ for non-highway driving. Someone mentioned gas stations in California were aerating pumps so tanks would react as full, but not be filled with gas. Anyone hear about that? Newsday just wrote a very positive Fit article. This car is very good, despite the strange experiences with irregular gas consumption. There's a reason for everything, even if we haven't figured it out yet. :confuse:
On your AT Sport, do you typically drive the "conventional" way, or do you regularly use the paddle shifters? Just trying to figure out how I can maximize my mileage on my AT Sport. I average 28-30 with regular mix of driving. Also, has anyone else experimented with 89 octane gas like Volksheime reported in earlier message?
Had first fill up from dealer tank and it took in 9 gallons.. there were only 240 miles on it.. about 26-27 miles.. not good so far.. sport auto... hope to get better.. assuming dealer did not fill up.. if they didn't then it might be a difference of 20-30 additional miles.. so best would've been about 30mpg.. not that great stilll.... oh well....
i drive auto.. and occasionally paddle.. does the paddle help save gas like the manual?
Your car's fuel consumption is especially amazing in that you are achieving these numbers in primarily city driving. At what engine speeds do you normally shift at when starting out from a stop? I think I might start trying that...
"i drive auto.. and occasionally paddle.. does the paddle help save gas like the manual?"
I highly doubt it. In fact, I would think that since the paddle shifters are there for entertainment, one would be inclined to drive more aggressively and shift later, thereby causing increased fuel consumption. The conventional "D" mode should for the most part keep the car in a gear that is best for efficiency (and at the same time not strain the engine), provided that you are driving conservatively. The automatic is still a 100% conventional automatic no matter how you look at it, whether in "D" or "S". Consequently all of the things that usually cause a drop in fuel economy in an automatic vs. a manual are there, such as the torque convertor, hydraulic pumps, etc. The 5MT will beat the 5AT on the Fit in most real-life driving situations in terms of fuel economy, except for higher speeds (such as freeway) where at any given speed, the 5AT will be traveling at lower engine speeds.
If you wanted lower fuel consumption, you should have looked at the 5MT. However, as your engine breaks in you should see a marked improvement in fuel economy, and as said several times before, you should never take the first tank too seriously.
My daily work commute is really 2/3 highway, 1/3 city (really secondary roads and 35 MPH streets). There are a total of 15 traffic lights each way + 5 stop signs. On the highway I usually must drive 65 because of state trooper speedtraps or ~70 when there aren't any.
I think the key is that I don't do alot of short trip driving. Each way my commute is ~36 miles. I definitely never redline it between gears. I find that shifting around ~3000 rpms is sufficient speed for me. I think the best way to find out the Fit's sweet spot for gas mileage is to use a ScanGauge which I plan on getting very soon. I don't do a lot of down-shifting either, but if see I'll have to stop up ahead I stop accelerating, then throw it out of gear and finally brake to a stop. (When a driver accelerates up to the last moment and then brakes it's a real waste of gas.) The few times I have needed to merge into highway traffic I have found that accelerating in 3rd and 4th gear from 45 to 65 or 70 is probably my highest rpms, but even then I'm not redlining it.
On the highway here in the North Carolina Piedmont there is not a lot of congestion. Secondary roads during rush hour are very similar to San Diego, it's just a smaller geographical area.
I wonder that Americans have forgotten how much better MPG a small engine car gets with a stick shift.
The ToV review of the Fit makes what Honda has done with the AT sound quite clever -- gearing such that the engine stays "boiling" then a deep 5th gear to lower highway RPM's. It isn't going to produce particularly good mileage, though...
I filled up with chevron and ooouch.. hsighway driving and i'm getting worst mpg than on the dealer tank,, at the halfway mark on the dealer tank i was at 152 mpg.. and by E i got 243 total..
on my first fill up i'm at half and am only getting 123.. how could that be??.. it's getting scary now.. i hope i don;t get 200 on a whole tank tanksince it drops much faster once it's at the half point.. i hope to break 200 miles on this tank.. i've been driving conservatively too.. ouch!
I wasn't driving to maximize gas mileage (some fun stuff ), plus there was a significant amount of idling time while my wife waited in the car w/ the AC running.
And I Zaino'ed the little beast this weekend - the Storm Silver shines up nicely! :shades:
The automatic is still a 100% conventional automatic no matter how you look at it, whether in "D" or "S". Consequently all of the things that usually cause a drop in fuel economy in an automatic vs. a manual are there, such as the torque convertor, hydraulic pumps, etc
When driven properly the MT will definitely yield higher MPG. Plus the MT are just more fun to drive. However, I would think that on a day to day basis most drivers would get better economy with the automatic vs manual. Most drivers don't understand or have that feel for shifting at the right time. Resulting in the engine revving more than necessary for a given condition, or pouring more gas into an already straining engine that is not revving high enough.
Last MT I owned was an 87 model. Many cars of that time had a light on the dash that came on when conditions were right to shift. Is that still available??
I wonder if the CVT technology is developed enough for longevity and does it yield better mileage!
why smaller, lighter cars with smaller displacement engines, such as the Fit and Yaris don't get better proportionate mileage than larger cars of the same type.
This is not intended to be disparaging toward the Fit or any other car. It is presented as a question that hopefully someone can answer.
Example: Our AT 4wd Pilot weighs 4400+ pounds has a 240HP 3.5 liter engine and stands fairly upright, presenting a lot of glass and metal to wind resistance.
Fit weighs near half, the engine is less than half in size and has much less than half the HP. The shape and area moving through the air appear to offer much less resistance. It is also 2wd and doesn't have to turn the "Idle" drive shaft going to the rear wheels.
Layman logic would dictate the Fit to yield at least twice the MPG of the Pilot. Yet it doesn't seem too, from what I'm reading on this forum.
My commute to work is 6.5 miles. It involves 1 stop sign, 1 yield sign, 5 traffic lights, and 7 roads. Several times during a tank there will be a trip or two of 10-15 miles each way and several trips of 3-4 miles to shopping. Not exactly a formula for good mileage. Mileage is consistently 17-19 MPG. Road trips at 65-70 generally yield 25-28 mpg depending on use of AC and terrain.
A Fit would have to average 34-38 commuting and 50-56 highway to be proportionate.
I feel like an idiot when driving a vehicle the size of the Pilot to work with just me inside. I would like to keep the miles off of it and keep it for those road trips. Therefore something smaller (Preferably Honda) would be nice for "scooting" around.
It has to be a physics thing. Does anyone have any ideas on the above question? (In layman language)
"I wonder if the CVT technology is developed enough for longevity and does it yield better mileage!"
Honda has been using CVTs regularly in their cars since the HR-V in 1999. There is a good chance they had them earlier too, I just don't know. I am sure they have improved the reliability, but in my opinion nothing beats a conventional manual in terms of overall upkeep and longevity.
On the European Jazz, the CVT is rated as having slightly less fuel consumption (7.2 l/100km) in urban driving when compared with the manual (7.3). That equates to approximately 32.7 mpg with CVT and 32.2 mpg with 5MT. In extra urban/highway driving, both are rated as 5.1 l/100km or 46.1 mpg. Note that the testing system/conditions used are different than the US so the mileage numbers cannot be directly compared.
Honda has been using CVTs regularly in their cars since the HR-V in 1999.
It seems that back in the '80s they were using a form of CVT in the "Economy" models of Civics. It was a small engine of 1300cc or so. I believe, even before that, a version was also used in one of their 500cc "V" twin motorcycles for a couple of years. Of course Snow Mobiles and ATVs have been using them for years with success.
Is Honda using it in any of the NA automobiles today?
I wonder if they have the longevity of conventional automatics.
"Is Honda using it in any of the NA automobiles today?" The Civic Hybrid and Insight. The other NA-market (outside US and Canada) Fits have it as the only AT option.
"I wonder if they have the longevity of conventional automatics." While they have improved over the years, I still don't think they are quite up to par in terms of longevity. Can you make 100,000 miles? I would guess yes quite easily, but whether they can go 200k or 250k miles I would not be as sure of. Another issue is that in the past, CVTs have been confined to the realm of smaller displacement engines. That explains their prevalence in snowmobiles, mopeds, and cars with engines less than ~2.0L. Of course with cars like the new Maxima having a CVT in a 3.5L engine, that limit has been disappearing as of late.
nice to find someone else who uses Zaino. I put two coats of Z2 on last weekend. It makes the red reallllly deep.
Did you use the clay bar the first time? I did on other new cars but this had a very clean surface. When you ran your hand over it i could feel nothing.
33.1 on the last tank. I am mildly disappointed in the gas mileage so far. I remember I owned a 1983 Nissan Sentra that approached 50 mpg. Of course it had a lot less horse but it still drove me cross country from San Diego to Charleston, SC in relative comfort. I wonder why Honda chose this particular engine for the Fit.
No, I haven't used the clay bar - I don't think I need it as my Storm Silver shined up nicely. I initially wanted the red but didn't want to wait any longer then I had to already - are you happy with it?
Being a Zaino fan have you considered putting a clear bra on your Fit? I'm putting one on my '06 TL in a couple of weeks - if I like it as much as I expect I plan to do my Fit, too...
awesome.. is ur's a MT? I have an auto and first tank was 26.. second tank.. i'm approaching 23.. very disappointed.. the needles drops faster than it should.. which is aweful.. my corolla give give 37+ and it takes forever to drop.. unlike the fit..
did u guys experienced lower mpg after ur 1st tank? i was expecting it to go up.. improve not down!
I have an AT, but I can't imagine how you get under 30mpg. Are people gunning it on the green light, or cruising at 90 MPH/4000 rpm? I don't get it. I've never gotten below 32 mpg. Most are 35-36.
You should get 40 miles before the needles starts to move below the 'F'. and about 175 miles at the half way point.
Comments
I'm thinking of buying a Scangauge so that I can velcro it to the dashboard and watch my real-time MPG. It will tell you what the optimum shift time is, optimum highway speed, and other things that will help you get more out of your mileage. It will also give you a real-time coolant temp gauge (in degrees) as well as RPMs, battery voltage, manifold pressure, ignition timing, throttle etc. Too bad they cost $160 or so on ebay. Others who are having low MPG issues might consider this. I personally want to squeeze every last mile from this expensive gas and I will take whatever help I can get.
Taking it on a roadtrip from Colorado to Chicago later this month... hoping on my return that the milage will have improved. Dealer advised that after the first few thousand miles I can probably drop down to 85... thoughts?
Seen one Fit on the street so far... it was another AT Base, silver like mine. =D Wasn't quick enough to honk. XD
This past week I have done quite a bit of driving and most of it was on the motorway doing about 80 mph with the A/C on 90% of the time. The rest of it was stop/go rush hour.
This morning I tanked up to a depressing 29.8 mpg, my worst so far...I am usually averaging 33-35. Anyway, the reason I had to fill up was a rather lengthy day trip from which I just returned. In an effort to redeem myself from the last tank, I stayed at 65 most of the way with a few bursts up to 80 for some passing. Even with the A/C on about 60-70% of the time, almost entirely highway I received 41.7 mpg, finally meeting my 40 mpg goal!
I think one of the biggest killers for the mpg in the 5MT is high speeds. At 80 mph the engine is spinning just below 4000 rpm, I think the exact number is 3900. However, at a more leisurely (and considerably more legal) speed of 65 you are around 3200. I am not sure what speed VTEC kicks in at (I thought I heard 3400 or 3500 rpm), but having that off really does wonders for your fuel economy. Maybe Honda can include a "VTEC Override" button on the dashboard? :P
My mother and sister drive one-generation-old MT versions of the Corolla and Civic. Both easily best 40 in strictly highway driving...
Where do people get this crap from and why do you even believe it? :mad: Total BS
We have a 2002 (7th generation) Civic EX coupé in addition to the Fit. It has very similar RPM numbers to the Fit on the highway.
However, I completely agree that a 6th gear to lower the RPMs would be great.
For example... usually look the rpm meter to tell when it should be switching (I hear or see it racing). If it's not switching soon enough (racing for what seems to be too long an interval) is that a transmission problem?
The automatic transmissions in Hondas will be in the correct gear for road conditions, your throttle input, load, and it's efforts to save the engine from unnessary stress and best mileage possible for those conditions.
I would think that, like the Pilot and CR-V, the Fit probably has "GRADE Logic" or something similar.
In effect when going up a long grade the tranny may downshift or simply unlock the torque converter to allow the engine to gain some RPM, thus more available horsepower. This can actually help to increase MPG under those conditions instead of simply pouring more gas into a straining engine. It may stay in 4th until you reach the top or the stress is over. You can fool it by accelerating fairly hard and gaining a few miles per hour. Then let up on the throttle. It may shift back up into 5th. However, as soon as it realizes it still on that grade, trying to maintain that speed, it will usually shift down again.
Grade Logic will also do something like that going down a very steep grade. Starting from a stop at the top of the grade it may not shift into 5th until the grade levels. Using the brake to slow down will often times cause the tranny to shift back to 4th. It too will stay there until the the grade levels, then shift into 5th if speed dictates it. It is almost like the Logic is reading the car's ability to gain speed on that steep grade faster than the throttle setting would indicate. It is weird, but kind of a nice feature. It does the downshifting instead of driver having to use the brake or downshift manually.
Have faith that Honda engineers are doing all they can to give their customers the most reliable, best mileage, and best performing cars possible in their class.
Just sit back and let the tranny do it's job.
Kip
By the way, 3100 RPM's at 85 MPH! My 92 Accord EX would sit at about 3500 RPM's at the same speed.
This is quite the little super car
The best I could get so far is 29.25 MPG, but it's usually around 24-27 MPG. I seldom have any passengers and stuff in the cargo area and I don't turn on the AC often either.
I think this has probably due to my short and frequent commutes. I think the Fit is ONLY good for long trips. Start and stop really really HURTS the MPG of this car...maybe I should have gone for the Accord Coupe EX V6 w/Navi instead...oh well...but I do admit that I love the look of the Fit though - although it lacks so many basic equipment such as armrest, locking fuel door, an optional sunroof, passenger side's vanity mirror (I can't believe Honda is so cheap! Come on now, I know cutting cost is necessary but this?!)
Anyone does short and frequent commutes? Please post your MPG too. Thanks.
I have the base 5MT.
My commute is approximately 25 miles each way almost entirely freeway. In the morning there is about 5-6 miles of medium speed 20-40 mph driving and the rest is 70-75 mph...although I go 65 when I am feeling somewhat more conservative
As for the afternoon commute, there is about 15 miles of clear freeway, and 10 miles of heavy stop/go 5-20 mph.
I typically average 33-35 mpg. I found for the manual the most significant hinderance to high mileage is high engine speeds...so a long trip will only do good for the mileage if you don't speed too much. Last weekend I did a long day trip (mentioned earlier in this discussion) with 3 people in the car, another 30 lbs in the back, and with the A/C 70% of the time...very hot day. I received almost 42 mpg. However, this was not because of a long trip, but because of my engine speeds which stayed close to 3000 rpm since I went around 65 most of the time. Had I driven at 80 mph (4000 rpm), it would have adversely affected the mileage. My worst tank involved 70% driving at 80 mph and the rest stop/go driving. Just less than 30 mpg.
I've put a bit more gas in the car, and it's already seeming to last a bit longer, despite the initial low MPG. That's promising. I've owned the car for six days, and it has 361 miles on it, so I guess the engine's beginning to break in.
Taking my first road trip in her at the end of the month (day trip to Manhattan from Philly), and I hope she'll serve me well, in terms of gas mileage.
boatfloyd
The more ozone friendly freon used in todays automobile AC systems doesn't cool real well at idle engine speeds.
In theory there is enough "COLD" remaining in the system from normal driving to last through a normal traffic light wait. However, if sitting still and/or just creeping along at slightly above idle the vent air will probably begin to warm.
Two things you might try. 1. Set the AC controls to "Recirculate" the air inside the car. This way the AC system is dealing with already cooled air, instead of trying to cool 100+ degree air from outside. 2. When all else fails, put tranny in neutral and rev the engine to 1500 RPM, or so, until time to start moving again or desired cooling is reached.
Kip
Sport AT %90 freeway at 70-75 mph (~2800rpm)
AC %100
Also, dirty oil might affect your MPG, but not by that much.
Gals: 8.327
--------------
= 41.972 MPG
This car is amazing!
~330 miles of this tank was mostly my daily commute to work all week. I also had 2 short trips at lunchtime and 1 other errand. My daily commute involves 10 miles of stop-n-go city driving.
I have increased my cold tire pressure to 38 psi and I'm trying to keep my rpm's low. I've had to do a few quick accelerations to merge into traffic, but I typically don't drive faster than 65 to 70 on the highway.
a/c use is about 80%
I have a Blue Fit Sport m/t. Maybe my engine is starting to hit its sweet spot of break-in? (now around 3800 miles on the odometer)
There's a lot of fill neck leading to that tank.
AC 50%
Load: 294 lbs.
Also, has anyone else experimented with 89 octane gas like Volksheime reported in earlier message?
there were only 240 miles on it.. about 26-27 miles.. not good so far.. sport auto...
hope to get better.. assuming dealer did not fill up.. if they didn't then it might be a difference of 20-30 additional miles.. so best would've been about 30mpg.. not that great stilll.... oh well....
i drive auto.. and occasionally paddle.. does the paddle help save gas like the manual?
At what engine speeds do you normally shift at when starting out from a stop?
I think I might start trying that...
I highly doubt it. In fact, I would think that since the paddle shifters are there for entertainment, one would be inclined to drive more aggressively and shift later, thereby causing increased fuel consumption. The conventional "D" mode should for the most part keep the car in a gear that is best for efficiency (and at the same time not strain the engine), provided that you are driving conservatively.
The automatic is still a 100% conventional automatic no matter how you look at it, whether in "D" or "S". Consequently all of the things that usually cause a drop in fuel economy in an automatic vs. a manual are there, such as the torque convertor, hydraulic pumps, etc.
The 5MT will beat the 5AT on the Fit in most real-life driving situations in terms of fuel economy, except for higher speeds (such as freeway) where at any given speed, the 5AT will be traveling at lower engine speeds.
If you wanted lower fuel consumption, you should have looked at the 5MT. However, as your engine breaks in you should see a marked improvement in fuel economy, and as said several times before, you should never take the first tank too seriously.
I think the key is that I don't do alot of short trip driving. Each way my commute is ~36 miles. I definitely never redline it between gears. I find that shifting around ~3000 rpms is sufficient speed for me. I think the best way to find out the Fit's sweet spot for gas mileage is to use a ScanGauge which I plan on getting very soon. I don't do a lot of down-shifting either, but if see I'll have to stop up ahead I stop accelerating, then throw it out of gear and finally brake to a stop. (When a driver accelerates up to the last moment and then brakes it's a real waste of gas.) The few times I have needed to merge into highway traffic I have found that accelerating in 3rd and 4th gear from 45 to 65 or 70 is probably my highest rpms, but even then I'm not redlining it.
On the highway here in the North Carolina Piedmont there is not a lot of congestion. Secondary roads during rush hour are very similar to San Diego, it's just a smaller geographical area.
The ToV review of the Fit makes what Honda has done with the AT sound quite clever -- gearing such that the engine stays "boiling" then a deep 5th gear to lower highway RPM's. It isn't going to produce particularly good mileage, though...
I filled up with chevron and ooouch.. hsighway driving and i'm getting worst mpg than on the dealer tank,,
at the halfway mark on the dealer tank i was at 152 mpg.. and by E i got 243 total..
on my first fill up i'm at half and am only getting 123.. how could that be??.. it's getting scary now.. i hope i don;t get 200 on a whole tank tanksince it drops much faster once it's at the half point.. i hope to break 200 miles on this tank.. i've been driving conservatively too..
ouch!
And I Zaino'ed the little beast this weekend - the Storm Silver shines up nicely! :shades:
When driven properly the MT will definitely yield higher MPG. Plus the MT are just more fun to drive. However, I would think that on a day to day basis most drivers would get better economy with the automatic vs manual. Most drivers don't understand or have that feel for shifting at the right time. Resulting in the engine revving more than necessary for a given condition, or pouring more gas into an already straining engine that is not revving high enough.
Last MT I owned was an 87 model. Many cars of that time had a light on the dash that came on when conditions were right to shift. Is that still available??
I wonder if the CVT technology is developed enough for longevity and does it yield better mileage!
Any Ideas?
Thanks,
Kip
This is not intended to be disparaging toward the Fit or any other car. It is presented as a question that hopefully someone can answer.
Example: Our AT 4wd Pilot weighs 4400+ pounds has a 240HP 3.5 liter engine and stands fairly upright, presenting a lot of glass and metal to wind resistance.
Fit weighs near half, the engine is less than half in size and has much less than half the HP. The shape and area moving through the air appear to offer much less resistance. It is also 2wd and doesn't have to turn the "Idle" drive shaft going to the rear wheels.
Layman logic would dictate the Fit to yield at least twice the MPG of the Pilot. Yet it doesn't seem too, from what I'm reading on this forum.
My commute to work is 6.5 miles. It involves 1 stop sign, 1 yield sign, 5 traffic lights, and 7 roads. Several times during a tank there will be a trip or two of 10-15 miles each way and several trips of 3-4 miles to shopping. Not exactly a formula for good mileage. Mileage is consistently 17-19 MPG. Road trips at 65-70 generally yield 25-28 mpg depending on use of AC and terrain.
A Fit would have to average 34-38 commuting and 50-56 highway to be proportionate.
I feel like an idiot when driving a vehicle the size of the Pilot to work with just me inside. I would like to keep the miles off of it and keep it for those road trips. Therefore something smaller (Preferably Honda) would be nice for "scooting" around.
It has to be a physics thing. Does anyone have any ideas on the above question? (In layman language)
Thanks,
Kip
Honda has been using CVTs regularly in their cars since the HR-V in 1999. There is a good chance they had them earlier too, I just don't know. I am sure they have improved the reliability, but in my opinion nothing beats a conventional manual in terms of overall upkeep and longevity.
On the European Jazz, the CVT is rated as having slightly less fuel consumption (7.2 l/100km) in urban driving when compared with the manual (7.3). That equates to approximately 32.7 mpg with CVT and 32.2 mpg with 5MT. In extra urban/highway driving, both are rated as 5.1 l/100km or 46.1 mpg.
Note that the testing system/conditions used are different than the US so the mileage numbers cannot be directly compared.
It seems that back in the '80s they were using a form of CVT in the "Economy" models of Civics. It was a small engine of 1300cc or so. I believe, even before that, a version was also used in one of their 500cc "V" twin motorcycles for a couple of years. Of course Snow Mobiles and ATVs have been using them for years with success.
Is Honda using it in any of the NA automobiles today?
I wonder if they have the longevity of conventional automatics.
Kip
The Civic Hybrid and Insight. The other NA-market (outside US and Canada) Fits have it as the only AT option.
"I wonder if they have the longevity of conventional automatics."
While they have improved over the years, I still don't think they are quite up to par in terms of longevity. Can you make 100,000 miles? I would guess yes quite easily, but whether they can go 200k or 250k miles I would not be as sure of. Another issue is that in the past, CVTs have been confined to the realm of smaller displacement engines. That explains their prevalence in snowmobiles, mopeds, and cars with engines less than ~2.0L. Of course with cars like the new Maxima having a CVT in a 3.5L engine, that limit has been disappearing as of late.
Did you use the clay bar the first time? I did on other new cars but this had a very clean surface. When you ran your hand over it i could feel nothing.
Being a Zaino fan have you considered putting a clear bra on your Fit? I'm putting one on my '06 TL in a couple of weeks - if I like it as much as I expect I plan to do my Fit, too...
my corolla give give 37+ and it takes forever to drop.. unlike the fit..
did u guys experienced lower mpg after ur 1st tank? i was expecting it to go up.. improve not down!
You should get 40 miles before the needles starts to move below the 'F'. and about 175 miles at the half way point.