When you click on links to various merchants on this site and make a purchase, this can result in this site earning a commission. Affiliate programs and affiliations include, but are not limited to, the eBay Partner Network.
The EX has that same piece. The difference in gas mileage can probably be attributed more in the weight difference between the two. The LX is lighter because of the lack of Moon roof, camera, speakers etc. Supposedly there is more sound dampening in EX as well. EX has wheel liners in the rear wheel for example. I don't know the full list but enough to add a few hundred pounds and that makes a difference over time.
Assume an average of 230kmi lifetime use. Assume about $2.40/gal average over that time (the current price is a bit lower here, has been for a while, but given the new global oil paradigm, this seems a very fair estimate over the next 5-10 years).
Alternatively, savings per 1,000mi is: $12.
Alternatively, savings per hour is: $0.50. (avg 35mph = 28hr/1kmi)
The question becomes then: is the headache of hypermiling worth $0.50/hr to you?
Hypermiling made a lot more sense back when cars got 20MPG standard but could be pushed up to 30MPG (eg my last car) and gas cost $3-5/gal. There, it could save you $75/1kmi, or over $3/hr. Now, I can get 37MPG without trying, and hypermiling saves me all of maybe 3-4MPG with $2.10 at the pump... So I focus on engine savings rather than fuel (though the two are fairly mutual), as I want to keep that going as long as possible.
The difference in gas mileage can probably be attributed . . .
I believe it has been said that the MPG rating between the CVT LX and EX models has to do with the CVT EX shifters (when used). The MT LX and EX models have the same MPG rating.
Honda says: "EX with available CVT and EX-L feature race-inspired paddle shifters that offer you more control and make your drive that much more fun."
Does anybody know what the specific differences are in the LX and EX CVT models that give the LX a higher fuel economy rating (33/41 for LX vs 32/38 for EX)? I saw that the LX is about 100 lbs lighter, but I can't believe that would net 3 mpg more on the highway.
I also see that the LX does not have paddle shifters, but does that make a difference if you never use the paddle shifters in the EX? Is there any other difference in the transmissions?
Since these numbers are self-certified I think that Honda "cooked the books" a little to produce that magic 40+MPG number. They can use the number to advertise over the entire Fit range, but since only one trim level is involved the chance of a group of LX owners getting together and comparing their real-world mileage is acceptably low to Honda. It won't be like Kia where a bunch of Soul owners realized that they weren't even coming close.
10-09-2016, 04:49 AM
