Canadian Gas Mileage
#41
05-27-2008, 03:46 PM
In response to:
I'm pretty sure you're not supposed to express mpg using Canadian gallons
I'm certain thats why some of these guys have such exaggerated mpg estimates.
As good Canucks we should express it in the metric system as liters per 100 Kilometers but I grew up with mpg and even when I went to the local car dealers here, they had stickers on the cars that showed both mpg and liters per 100K which helped me relate. For the Americans on this site, they will not relate as well to metric except to see that certain cars like the Fit, Yaris, etc. use very few liters to travel 100 K. But as far as I know, there's no rule on how to express fuel consumption when communicating this to others, and most people I speak with are in (or closer to my age group), and can relate to mpg better (and they all know that the US gallon is 3.78 liters whereas the Canadian/Imperial gallon is 4.54 liters).
I'm pretty sure you're not supposed to express mpg using Canadian gallons
I'm certain thats why some of these guys have such exaggerated mpg estimates.
As good Canucks we should express it in the metric system as liters per 100 Kilometers but I grew up with mpg and even when I went to the local car dealers here, they had stickers on the cars that showed both mpg and liters per 100K which helped me relate. For the Americans on this site, they will not relate as well to metric except to see that certain cars like the Fit, Yaris, etc. use very few liters to travel 100 K. But as far as I know, there's no rule on how to express fuel consumption when communicating this to others, and most people I speak with are in (or closer to my age group), and can relate to mpg better (and they all know that the US gallon is 3.78 liters whereas the Canadian/Imperial gallon is 4.54 liters).
why would you mix measurement standards
if you're gonna use the american's miles, you might as well use their gallon as well
#42
07-31-2008, 08:47 PM
Adding to this somewhat comatose thread, I finally have numbers to contribute...
Filled up 4 times since I got my M/T in mid-May, and I'm averaging 6.75 L/100km or 34.9 mpg (1 US gallon = 3.7854 L), roughly 50/50 city/highway by distance.
Filled up 4 times since I got my M/T in mid-May, and I'm averaging 6.75 L/100km or 34.9 mpg (1 US gallon = 3.7854 L), roughly 50/50 city/highway by distance.
#43
08-01-2008, 10:42 AM
Gas mileage
Well, I use regular all the time, so I don't know is the octane rating is having any impact, but I am a bit disappointed that my consumption is not improving, but getting worse. Given we are in summer weather, and I am of course running on summer tires, I was surprised when my combined city / highway mileage was only 35 IMPG
I drive carefully, and I'm not hard on the car for starts, and stops, and employ techniques to help with consumption, (yes, I do use A/C when it's hot), so I expected to see an improvement by now. Perhaps if I only did highway driving I might much better figures, but I don't take long trips with this car--normally nothing further than 1 1/2 hours away at today's highway speeds.
Later,
I drive carefully, and I'm not hard on the car for starts, and stops, and employ techniques to help with consumption, (yes, I do use A/C when it's hot), so I expected to see an improvement by now. Perhaps if I only did highway driving I might much better figures, but I don't take long trips with this car--normally nothing further than 1 1/2 hours away at today's highway speeds.
Later,
#44
08-01-2008, 11:13 AM
I use regular as well, but I haven't paid attention as to whether I'm using an ethanol blend.
I also am expecting better mileage; I'm already pretty conservative in my driving style, and don't see what I could be doing differently without going into the more extreme hypermiling techniques.
However, considering my combined city/highway mileage is beating even the highway numbers given by the revised (and more realistic) EPA mileage estimates, I'm not that worried.
I also am expecting better mileage; I'm already pretty conservative in my driving style, and don't see what I could be doing differently without going into the more extreme hypermiling techniques.
However, considering my combined city/highway mileage is beating even the highway numbers given by the revised (and more realistic) EPA mileage estimates, I'm not that worried.
#45
08-01-2008, 11:23 AM
Here are my current averages;
7.7L/100km when I track it
6.7-7.0L/100km in the city
6.0L/100km on the highway
7.7L/100km when I track it
6.7-7.0L/100km in the city
6.0L/100km on the highway
#46
08-01-2008, 11:54 AM
How do you keep track of city vs highway? I calculate mileage based on trip km, and litres put into tank (always stop filling up at the first click); I don't know how to divide that further into city and highway...
#49
12-31-2009, 08:13 AM
Gas Mileage
My last check was in November, and combined highway and city driving resulted in 38 IMPG. Not too bad considering the snow tires were already on during that period, although we had not seen much snow at the time, and temperatures were still mild. Now that colder days are here, and snowy icy roads as well, I expect consumption to increase, which is normal.
I learned recently from a friend that his automatic Yaris yielded 38 IMPG, and he was very disappointed since hi previous Echo used to do 50 IMPG (however, that was a standard transmission, and that makes a significant difference).
But, I still love the car, and it is ideal for my needs.
I learned recently from a friend that his automatic Yaris yielded 38 IMPG, and he was very disappointed since hi previous Echo used to do 50 IMPG (however, that was a standard transmission, and that makes a significant difference).
But, I still love the car, and it is ideal for my needs.
#50
12-31-2009, 10:04 PM
when i was looking around i checked out a used echo as one of my possible choices and after taking one look at the interior, decided against it. it may be economical on gas but the echo has one of the most ugly interiors i have seen.
my fist tank of gas in my fit gave almost 41 (us)mpg but it was about 90% highway.
my fist tank of gas in my fit gave almost 41 (us)mpg but it was about 90% highway.
#51
12-31-2009, 10:33 PM
i owned an echo hatch before the fit, tho it was automatic, but the fit gets better Fuel Efficiency than the echo did.
#52
12-03-2011, 06:27 AM
I just got my 07 lx auto last month and have gotten 6.48, 6.57, and 7.07 L/100kms on my first 3 fill-ups. I live in gravenhurst, ontario (muskoka) and the temperatures have ranged from 5 to -5 degrees. I drive approx. 80% "rural" (no stop lights but slow speed back roads) and 20% highway. I am hugely impressed with my mileage. Car has just over 125k on it, for the record. I can't see a situation where I would get below 30 us mpg.
#53
12-03-2011, 10:46 AM
Sounds like you re hitting the range most owners experience. Regardless of the fact that I don't get the absolute best possible consumption, I still love my Fit, and have no regrets about buying it--I bought my 2007 model brand new in 2006, and the only thing that failed was the A/C due to a leaky fitting. It's such a cleverly designed car, and I would buy another without hesitation.
#54
08-12-2012, 01:47 PM
anyone here has 2nd gen fit
it seems like everyone here has 1st gen fit.. i have 2012 mt sport.. mostly in the city. avg is 7.6-8.1... i'm kinda disappointed of these number, i live in markham, ontario. i fill up with 89 or 91. any of you guys has better avg number on the 2nd gen fit??
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
Squeezeboxbis
Fit Engine Modifications, Motor Swaps, ECU Tuning
19
02-23-2017 04:05 PM
