ECO-Fit DiscussionThreads discussing the pursuit of ultimate economy, hypermiling techniques & maximizing your MPG
Welcome to Fit Freak!
Welcome to Fit Freak,
You are currently viewing our forum as a guest, which gives you limited access to view most discussions and access our other features. By joining our community, at no cost, you will have access to post topics, communicate privately with other members (PM), respond to polls, upload content and access many other special features. Registration is free, fast and simple, so please join our community today!
The mileage estimates for the manual base fit are lower than that for the automatic. I read somewhere the reason is that the manual runs at higher revs than automatic (different gearing ratio?). Does anyone know why the estimate mileage is lower? Does the lower mileage reflect real world experience? What is the trade off of using a different gearing ratio? thanks
im consistently doing about 33-34mpg on my GD with smaller profile tires. and i dont drive the car to save mpg and drive rather spiritedly.
hwy speeds do kill the mpg though. revs too high. i only use the car for surface roads.
__________________ 08 FitSport (5MT) Storm Silver - My modded dd 09 FitSport (AT) Taffeta White - My stock GE8 as her dd 04 G35Coupe (6MT) Silver - My modded weekend touring car. 09 370Z (6MT) Silver - My weekend sports car.
Post your questions in my Fit Blog
The mileage estimates for the manual base fit are lower than that for the automatic. I read somewhere the reason is that the manual runs at higher revs than automatic (different gearing ratio?). Does anyone know why the estimate mileage is lower? Does the lower mileage reflect real world experience? What is the trade off of using a different gearing ratio? thanks
You are correct. gearing for the manual is higher numerically than automatics. But manuals get better mpg in town as a rule than autos but autos at least even up on the highway in real life.
For example the auto in fifth has a total gear of .552 x 4.56, or 2.55:1 while the manual has .727 x 4.56 or 3.32: 1 so the engine on a manual turns 30% higher revs than the automatic.
Why would they use a higher gear ratio for the manual, especially if it is super annoying at highway speeds? Is there a benefit at lower speeds?
Makes it peppier around town and means lazy people won't have to downshift on the highway (which I think is a lame excuse--people who buy a manual don't mind shifting). A lot of manufacturers have been doing this for years, even on cars with somewhat bigger engines. A friend has a older Contour SE with a 5-speed and a V6, and he says it's over 3000 RPM on the highway.
It is quite misleading, but the real world of driving the manual does tell a different story. Almost without exception, the manual Fits are getting much better mileage both in town and on the hwy. (see eco thread)
The extra revs on the hwy do give better performance. I had two friends who test drove the auto Fit, and did not like it. Then (at my urging) they test drove a manual Fit, and loved it.
Also, the manual gives you more options in how to drive. Hypermiling techniques are not that hard with a manual, but much trickier with the auto. We use hypermiling only a bit, but we also run our tires at 45 psi, which makes a huge difference.
The result spread over every fillup and 1.25 yrs.....we are getting a consistent 41 .1 mpg. That is some highway, but mostly town driving.
__________________
StanMan 2008 Honda Fit sport 5-sp manual. Getting over 40 mpg.
It is quite misleading, but the real world of driving the manual does tell a different story. Almost without exception, the manual Fits are getting much better mileage both in town and on the hwy. (see eco thread)
The extra revs on the hwy do give better performance. I had two friends who test drove the auto Fit, and did not like it. Then (at my urging) they test drove a manual Fit, and loved it.
Also, the manual gives you more options in how to drive. Hypermiling techniques are not that hard with a manual, but much trickier with the auto. We use hypermiling only a bit, but we also run our tires at 45 psi, which makes a huge difference.
The result spread over every fillup and 1.25 yrs.....we are getting a consistent 41 .1 mpg. That is some highway, but mostly town driving.
When you drive in Auto and not in drive there's no difference in how you drive. Gear selection is by padle vs clutch and there isn't enough difference to detect.
Expect 62 mph at 3000 rpms on highway. I find it rather annoying compared to my 2002 CRV (67mph @ 3000rpms, small but noticeable difference for me), as well as the 99 Civic we sold recently for the Fit (about 70mph @ 3000 rpms).
The Civic was smooooooth on the highway. Incredible mileage, yielding 43mpg before I sold it, not even trying to hypermile! All 3 cars were 5 sp manuals by the way.
Why would they use a higher gear ratio for the manual, especially if it is super annoying at highway speeds? Is there a benefit at lower speeds?
Honda expects manual drivers to drive more thus having more hp and torque available at most speeds is advantageous. Honda expect auto drivers to be 'norma' USA drivers but at least conceded that they might like shifting too. My auto does get better interstate mpg than my friends manual on the same trip. But only on interstate.
Lower revs means quieter driving and of course less wear on friction parts.
Why would they use a higher gear ratio for the manual, especially if it is super annoying at highway speeds? Is there a benefit at lower speeds?
.......
The manual runs about 2800 rpm@60mph in top gear, while the automatic runs about 2100. However, even the slightest 'goose' of the throttle will cause the automatic's rpm to rise considerably, as either the torque converter winds up, the transmission executes a 5-4 shift or both. Not unusual to find that a modest throttle push at 60 mph results in the rpm's going to 3000 short term.
The mileage estimates for the manual base fit are lower than that for the automatic. I read somewhere the reason is that the manual runs at higher revs than automatic (different gearing ratio?). Does anyone know why the estimate mileage is lower? Does the lower mileage reflect real world experience? What is the trade off of using a different gearing ratio? thanks
i get 46/47mpg local driving,but it is a rual area, shifting at 2200/2800rpm.
on the interstates the best 41/44mpg at 60 65. 2900/3200rpm.
Wow - I'm impressed. Do you hypermile? I live in a suburban/rural area - town has one stoplight. What do you mean by "shifting at 2200/2800rpm?" I am not sure at what rpm I usually shift my '88 crx. Is that high or low?
have to agree with mahout's post above about MT drivers demanding more performance, AT drivers demanding normacy.
i have both MT and AT (GD & GE per my sig). the AT gets far better mpg in real world, but my MT is much quicker around town. what i demand from the 2 cars is different. MT for
performance aspects, AT for just casual transportation.
my engine is reving 3k+ at a stop just a split second before
i engage for a quick getup and go. can't do that on a AT. have
to wait for the clumsy tranny to shift into 1st kinda abruptly.
__________________ 08 FitSport (5MT) Storm Silver - My modded dd 09 FitSport (AT) Taffeta White - My stock GE8 as her dd 04 G35Coupe (6MT) Silver - My modded weekend touring car. 09 370Z (6MT) Silver - My weekend sports car.
Post your questions in my Fit Blog
Wow - I'm impressed. Do you hypermile? I live in a suburban/rural area - town has one stoplight. What do you mean by "shifting at 2200/2800rpm?" I am not sure at what rpm I usually shift my '88 crx. Is that high or low?
Interestingly enough, all I have to do to bump my mpg average by about 2 mpg is make a short trip (it's under 10 miles each way) via interstate. Even if the number of miles is longer than going through town with stoplights, the mpg soars on the interstate.
AND, that benefit of the one trip stays throughout the tank. If I make a second trip, I get another 2 mpg showing in the average. If I was to make daily trips, I think my mpg would be way up there with some of the spectacular results shown on this site.
It takes a lot of gas to move that car from a dead stop.
One thing I have noticed about the auto base is that it seems like I'm very insulated from the sense of speed. It seems it will take forever to get up to highway speed, as if it's barely moving...and the next thing I know I'm at the speed limit and still accelerating.
With the stick on my former car, I was VERY aware of the speed, so tuned in to where the stick shift was (visual) and the position of my hand on the shifter (kinetic). I could hear the engine (auditory), very well, and knew it was time to shift or that I shifted too soon for the slope and was going to bog down...
I liken the auto base with a magic carpet. I don't have to do much, and it goes and I'm there riding along, piloting without much effort.
HOW one drives is another thing and WHERE one drives.
I'm pretty sure I've posted this link before, but it's over at the Fuel Economy site. There's a movie to watch, and there is also the text version to read: Tips to improve your Gas Mileage
Same cars, same roads, different driving habits. Car used was rated:
EPA ratings of 18 MPG City/24 MPG Highway.
Here's an example from the text...
On the highway, our drivers returned a high average MPG of 24.4, and a low of just 17. That's a 43% difference! Here efficient driving works out to be an extra 140 miles of range per 19-gallon tankful.
---
FitFreak Fossilized Fuddy-Duddy 
Linear Mode
