Edmunds dealer partner, Bayway Leasing, is now offering transparent lease deals via these forums. Click here to see the latest vehicles!
Popular New Cars
Popular Used Sedans
Popular Used SUVs
Popular Used Pickup Trucks
Popular Used Hatchbacks
Popular Used Minivans
Popular Used Coupes
Popular Used Wagons
Comments
For the first 1/2 years we were happy with 30/32 MPG everyday, and about 36 on long freeway trips. After reading about Hypermiling, we started really watching our starts & stops, trying to time the redlights, and setting our cruise at 55 on freeways, even in a 70 zone.
Just came back from a weeklong camping trip in Maine, with the back loaded to the ceiling with our gear. Average per tank was 44.5MPG, with a high of 45.8. Even in Acadia National Park, with all it's mountains we got 37.
We are quite happy with the greatly improved mileage. The thousands of cars that pass us may not be, but they don't buy our gas!
1st tank: 32.52 from the dealer fill up
2nd tank: 40.47
3rd tank: 39.16
I don't do anything different to obtain this mileage from my last car, I drive the speed limit, anticipate stop lights and stop signs. Accelerate slowly when traffic allows and have our tires pumped up to 40 PSI which seems to be a good compromise between MPG and ride comfort. I am thrilled with the MPG results so far and love the car.
If normal is 32-35, you may get premature wear in the center of the tire.
I hope next will give me better millage.I'm driving 99% in city, I'm not speeding so I don't know what a hell :confuse:
I've got Fit Sport 08' AT
My contribution to this forum is to check your odometer's accuracy and adjust your calculations before believing your mpg. You can do this by finding a section of highway with several measured mile signs, or by imaginative use of your Garmin/Magellan/TomTom, etc., GPS. Some lawyers got together and sued Honda a year or so ago because of the odometers reading more miles than actual (affecting car lease terms). The odometers are not at fault; it has to do with the tire diameter.
You are absolutely right though; the difference just isn't that great.
I drive a 1990 Nissan pickup truck, bought it new and has gone over 200k miles, still going strong. My nissan averages about 23mpg combined hwy/city but pure hwy driving at 55 mph it will get 35mpg.. if I speed up to 60 mph then it drops down to 24-25mpg.. makes a tremendous difference. Why?, because of air drag.. the Fit is a lot more aerodynamic than my pickup but dont forget speed kills your gas mileage. I get better gas mileage driving manually than if I use the cruise control because it is always trying to compensate for slight hills, wind gusts ect.. drive smoothly if you want gas economy. I have a stick shift and a 2.4liter 4 cylinder engine. It is hard to drive at 55mph, you have to concentrate but after a while you go into a zen like state and you relax.. I find it keeps me awake.
I was a big fanatic about fuel economy in the late 70's, grew up to see the gas lines from the first gas embargo. I remember from way back then an article that stated that every extra 70lbs of excess weight in the car would cost you 1mpg (city driving, not hwy), so keep all the junk out of the car and leave it at home.
Regarding tires.. tires pressure should be measured COLD, before you have driven the car, driving will heat up the tires as it flexes.. tires should be inflated to the maximun pressure listed on the tire itself, not what the car manufacturer recommends.. it is safer that way, tires overheat and explode if kept under-inflated, modern radial tires will wear evenly if kept at the maximum pressure, they will still wear evenly at lower pressures so it is not an issue. This is not the case with old style bias-ply non-radials, not sure if you can still buy those. Yes your ride will be harsh at maximun pressure but your economy and safety will be maximized.
Do not economize on tires, buy premium.. make sure when you replace the tires in your Fit to use low rolling resistance tires (like Hoda did), it will be worth 10-15% in gas economy so dont be penny smart and pound foolish. If the tire dealer does not have those special high gas economy tires go someplace else.
From reading all these threads I see the Fit is very sensitive regarding gas mileage.. I believe that the engine is too small for the weight of the car, and so if you are a bit agressive then that will kill your mileage.. so it would actually get better gas mileage if it had a bigger engine.. you could accelerate up to speed quicker, get off the gas pedal and settle down to cruise. The Fit is about 2400lbs, my old 1985 Honda Civic Si was 1800lbs.. big difference.
Till I finally read something on how to get more miles per gallon. I haven't done much, other than the ol' coast to a stop when you see it red up ahead (or traffic stopped), more gradual starts (keeping my rpms at 2000 or less, and using the paddle shifters every once in a while to shift to 5th when the car wants to stay in 4th at those RPMs, helps get my speed up quicker). In the city I keep my RPMs between 1500 and 2000, and highway under 2500 RPMs (about 72 mph I think). On my city only tanks, I got two tanks of 29mpg and one of 31.5mpg.
And I just took a road trip, loaded down with lots of beer and coolers and ice, suitcases, etc, and finally broke the 40mpg wall - 42.83 mpg!!! Almost got more than 400 miles out of the one tank, but I wasnt sure when the next gas station would be, and ended up only needing a little over 9 gallons. I'd gotten close to 40mpg before - a few 200 mile trips that were 39.5mpg, so I was thrilled with 40+. And that's not being too conservative on speed that I felt like I was crawling.
I really think RPM is the key factor to getting better mileage, and I'd never heard that before. I just keep an eye on my RPM gauge, and let that dictate how quickly I accelerate.
Now that sounds like a road trip right out of Animal House! :P
33.533mpg (40% heavy stop-and-go and 60% hwy at 65-80mph)
37.126mpg (40% heavy stop-and-go and 60% hwy at 65-80mph)
34.51mpg (40% heavy stop-and-go and 60% hwy at 65-80mph)
42.53 mpg (mostly highway trip at 65-85mph with around 10% city driving)
35.34 mpg (40% heavy stop-and-go and 60% hwy at 65-80mph)
I am not doing anything special to increase my mileage at all (except filling up with Shell premium). I shift at around 3000-4000 rpm all the time. I am pleased thus far and know that if I really do some of these "hypermiling techniques" (no intention of doing so, at this time), I can pretty easily break the 40mpg barrier.
Point to note is that the engine is fairly buzzy at higher speeds (except when coasting, obviously) and taking curves at higher speeds are definitely hairy, with the skinny "base" tires not helping any.
"Honda says odometers on 6M cars click off mileage at too-quick pace
Updated 2/19/2007 10:10 AM ET
"...The carmaker says its odometers were accurate to within 3.75% on the high side and 1% on the low side.
"Honda (HMC) is notifying 6 million owners of Hondas and Acuras that they are entitled to warranty extensions and, in some cases, payments because odometers in their vehicles rolled up miles too fast.
"That made warranties expire too soon and hit some lease customers with excess-mileage penalties.
"...The Society of Automotive Engineers' voluntary standard is plus or minus 4%, or no more than 4 miles high or low in every 100 miles. The National Highway Traffic Safety Administration says it doesn't regulate odometer accuracy.
"Honda says its odometers were accurate to within 3.75% on the high side and 1% on the low side, within the SAE standard. But it says it will extend the warranty mileage 5% and will pay lease-mileage penalties due to fast odometers, at least $6 million just for overcharges on vehicles leased directly from Honda.
"Holmes says the fault was noted by Jay Kutchka, a Fort Smith, Ark., lawyer who drove a Honda Odyssey.
"'No odometer is going to be perfect,' says Honda spokesman Chris Martin. But prompted by the class-action lawsuit, Honda realized, 'The customer expectation is that it would be based on zero. We weren't. So we decided to settle the suit.'
"Starting with '07 models, Honda tightened its odometer accuracy and centered in on 0%, Martin says.
"A U.S. district court in Texas will accept or reject the settlement, probably this summer [2007]. Holmes says it's rare for a settlement not to be approved.
"Vehicles covered in the deal: 2002 to 2006 Hondas and Acuras bought from April 13, 2002, to Nov. 7, 2006. Some 2007 Honda Fits also are included."
Here is my hang up. Overall I get the impression that most people who consciencious drive to get good mileage (not necessarily hypermiler fanatics) appear to get 33-36 highway mpg - that is pretty dang good mileage. Some occasionally break 40 mpg. But I can't understand why the Fit with its 109 HP engine & all the goodness of Honda engineering can't do 40+ mpg consistently on the highway with occasional runs of 45+.
My 92 Civic Si consistently got 30-35 in the city & 40+ on the highway. Same with 2 Del Sol Sis - the manual DS got consistently topped 40 on the highway & AT DS got 43-45. Both rarely dropped below 30 in city/suburban driving. All the Sis had 125 HP & pretty good scoot! My 92 HP VX consistently topped 50 mpg highway.. Admittedly the VX was a very light, bare bones car, specialized fuel mizer. But then doesn't that also describe the Fit (althought the definition of "bare bones" has changed in the last 15 years). Even my wife's Audi A4 1.8T CVT consistently gets 33-36 highway. Compared to the Fit the Audi is huge & vastly more comfortable.
So what is it about the Fit & the current crop of fuel misers that they don't seem to be able to consistently break the 40+ mpg barrier? Can't Honda do better with the most fuel efficient car it sells in the US? :confuse:
I'm thinking the Fit was designed to be more of a Town Runabout. The engine is quite small and the shape of the car may not be as aerodynamic as it could be, due to it's "utility" nature. Therefore, running at 70+ mph may place quite a strain on it's drive train.
Living on both this and the Civic forum have shown me that the Civic, with it's larger and more powerful engine seems to consistently exceed the Fit in real world mileage on the highway.
The Toyota forums also indicate that the Corolla equals or betters the Scion/Yaris models on the road.
Late model cars are strapped with stricter EPA requirements than the older ones were. In the early 80s I had a Dodge Colt hatch back that consistently exceeded 40 MPG and it had a carburetor. No fuel injection, no computer.
Also a Civic wagon with a 3 speed automatic and carburetor that delivered 32 mpg in most any type of driving.
However, I also had an early model MT Ford Pinto that would consistently deliver 21-23 mpg on the highway at 70 mph. That is not a Type-o. 21-23 on the road! What a POS that was.
Kip
As soon as a viable electric car comes out we can use for around town errands, the Fit is gone.
I have the base AT, and was getting in the mid 20's for the first 2000 miles, and just started getting close to 30, all city. When you are at a red light with the A/C off, what rpm are you idling at? Look at the idle learning procedure a few pages back. You should definitely take it in under warranty, there could be another underlying issue.
And why are today's cars, including the Fit, heavier? As others have remarked, it is primarily the safety requirements, not just with the "bags" and other electronic gizmos, but also with the more rigid body structure, that make the cars heavier.
I find that my driving habits really effect the mileage. I can race around and get about 33 mpg. Or I can drive sensibly and get it over 40. My husband and I have made a game of it and hit 45.56 yesterday. This was a combination of highway driving and back roads. (We live in rural Maine.) Lately our mpg has been 42 or higher.
Our techniques are simple and easy. We drive 40 or so on back roads and try to anticipate stops to reduce braking. On the highway we go 55 (him) or 60 (me - I have my limits!).
The highway drving speed has been interesting. I slowed down from 75-80 to 60. It adds very little to the total trip time, really bumps the mpg up - and I find it more relaxing. OK, it was a little frustrating at first but I was surprised at how quickly I adjusted.
And lets face it, although very safe for a little car, the Fit is still LITTLE! Slower speeds are probably the single simplest way to increase the safety as well as the mpg. You just have more time to react. And at 60 on the highway, you're usually not tailgating anyone (if you are, wave, it is probaby my husband going 55!)
Added bonus - you get to feel smug and make disparaging remarks about all the SUV's whizzing by you!
BYW, just found out that at highway speeds it is more fuel efficient to use AC than to open the windows (open windows create drag.) At lower speeds, windows are better.
I love my Fit! Twice in the last few weeks - once when loading compost and once when loading rental tools from Home Depot - bystanders have commented "So, this is your pick-up truck?" And it IS - I love how much room I have.
Kip
But then the Fit will cost less to purchase than a Civic or Corolla, so you'll save $$ there that can be used to pay for some gas on the long highway trips. Also, the Fit can hold a lot more stuff than a Civic or Corolla so for our family, we're using the Fit instead of our larger vehicle.
Regardless of the interior CuFt specs, when sitting in the Fit, I feel like there's a lot more room inside than in either the Civic or Corolla. Maybe the higher ceiling helps as does the hatchback design, but for me 2 adults and 2 kids in the back have more usable space then in Civic/Corolla, plus the larger cargo area and space under the 2nd row seats to put stuff (with a 7 month old and 3 1/2 year old you have a lot of stuff!).
We'll see how the next generation Fit does for MPG...
I've drive before Taurus Sel 03' V6 3.0 and I had 23 miles per galon in city so that's make me wonder.Is my skills went down:P :confuse:
3600 4700 27.89mpg 4700-52389 29.88 mpg :confuse:
My guess with our fit is that it runs in a less fuel efficient way for the first few miles to heat up the catalyst to improve emissions. If your commute is long enough, this first little part is not significant, but if you take only short trips (like we do) you run in this mode most of the time, and the mileage sucks. Its been back to the dealer-nothing wrong with it.
We love the versatility of the shape and seats. Don't like the mileage (and the rapid wear of the "carpet" near the mats). The in town mileage is within one or two mpg of our 1987 911. It seems like the fit should do a lot better.
Manufacturers and magazines typically quote the drag coefficient. It would not surprise me if the Fit has a relatively decent drag coefficient that is not too far behind the Civic. The Fit is a lot taller than the Civic, so it has a larger cross-sectional area and I suspect that is where much of the mileage difference lies.
If you look at VW's 1 liter concept car, it has tandem seating which greatly reduces the cars cross-sectional area: http://www.autobloggreen.com/2008/07/01/vw-supposedly-still-working-on-one-liter- -car-possible-2010-lau/
In other words, I don't think that solution is going to overcome whatever mechanical issue is causing his poor gas mileage.
Anyone with experience with the ac in Arizona summer? I'm a little concerned.
Thanks
Dave
We live in Central Texas where it has been 102 degrees ever other day. Our 2007 Sport AC has worked like a charm. We always use outside air and set the fan speed to 4 and it does a great job. We turn off the AC temporarily when going up a steep hill.
Regards,
Bubba
And you should probably use the Inside Air setting, since it's easier to cool off the inside air than 102degree outside air.
Dave
In other Hondas (Civic, CR-V, Accord, etc) which have a "MAX A/C" button, when this is pressed, it goes automatically to recirculate, since it will make the cabin cooler than fresh air.
The one factor that MOST affects the fuel economy is the driver. I have 3 2008 Fit Sport Automatics -all are the exact same vehicle (they currently have 600, 4300, and 7000 miles on the odometer). My 21yr old son drives one in mostly city driving in "leadfoot" style and typically gets 27-30 MPG. My 53 yr old wife drives another, fairly conservatively, about half city and half highway conditions, but in a very "jerky" style of starting/stopping, and typically gets 29-31 MPG (she's only gassed up 3 times so far, so this is limited data for her). I am also 53 and drive very conservatively and smoothly in 2/3 highway and 1/3 city driving, and typically get 30-35 MPG. I did one 500 mile highway trip on a weekend at 65-70 mpg (on Interstate highways with speed limits of 65-75 mph) with A/C on half the time, 2 passengers, light luggage, mostly flat terrain, tailwind going one way, calm weather coming back, and averaged 38.5 MPG, well above the EPA ratings.
You can go on and on about what a person can do to the vehicle or the type of gas or other physical/hardware devices to improve mileage, but the #1 way to get better mileage is to slow down (if you are currently exceeding the speed limit) and anticipating starts/stops so that your driving style is smooth and gradual. You are probably going to irritate a lot of other drivers who are speeding excessively (10-20 mph over the limit) and driving aggessively in their big SUVs and Trucks. But when it's time to fill up and they're getting 10-12 mpg real-world and you are getting anywhere from 25-40 MPG in your Fit, you will have the last laugh (and pay much less at the pump).
I ended up buying a 2008 Civic Si, I average 30mpg. Yes I paid more but I have gobs of power when I need it. I drive 75-80 mph on the highway and even when I am at 50% City and 50% highway I still get 28-30 mpg. Much above 80mph and the fuel economy drops. It goes up at night when the cops are out in force and the cruise is on.
Oh and all our gas in this state has 10% ethanol in it. :sick: :mad:
The Fit should get much better fuel economy than it does. Hopefully the nw model will correct that. I'll probably take a long look at the new Honda Hybrid that's based on the FCX Clarity as well as other cars.
My wife loves the Fit but most of our driving is on steep hills or the highway. Those seem to work against the Fit. I drove one when I was overseas and loved it but mileage was so-so. No reason the Fit shouldn't get 40mpg.
What car out there gets that in America?
The Fit gets about the best MPG out there. As good as a Civic or Corolla but more usable space inside and more cargo space.
What car out there gets that in America?
If we're talking about EPA highway testing, you'll need a
Prius
Civic Hybrid
VW Diesel
Smart
If we aren't, then drive my Accord. It's a 2006 model, but at 72mph cruise, unloaded, no A/C, I've had 40 MPG on more than one occasion.
We have to get another vehicle in the next year and I will be looking at the Yaris and Fit again. For me, the fit has great room and I loved the MT to drive but the seats were uncomfortable, the pedal position/foot room felt a little cramped and the vehicle clearance was too low. I'm also looking at the continued feedback on gas mileage. There seems to be a wide variation with the fit and much less so with the Yaris. The fit seems to have resolved most of my concerns (except the gas mileage ) so we will see. Yaris is making the 4 door LB this year and adding more saftly features.
What car out there gets that in America?
The Fit gets about the best MPG out there. As good as a Civic or Corolla but more usable space inside and more cargo space.
The fact is the Fit should easily get better fuel economy tan it does. My friend had one, loved it, but hated the fact that he never got above 26mpg in the city. No matter how he drove it. He sold it and bought a Hi-Lux diesel pickup truck and his fuel economy went up to 30mpg and better. That's a 4 door pickup truck with a 5.5 foot bed!
So why can't these small cars get better fuel economy. Saying they don't, isn't an answer. I know they don't but why is 35mpg the best you can get in the US. No one in Europe would buy a car that did so poorly.
The Fit is a great little car, but poor on fuel when compared to other offerings overseas. My wife still wants one so probably she will get one in October. Still a Civic LX would get better fuel economy. I used to own Civic Hatchbacks, Geo Metro's etc... All of them got better than 40mpg. No excuse for a small car to get such low MPG.