EPA revised fuel estimates for the Fit

[JDM_DOHC_SiR]

Background:
Since the EPA is redoing their calculations for city/highway fuel consumption for 08, they've gone back and redone their numbers for older vehicles as well.

So I figured I'd compare the Fit's numbers. Old Numbers:
City: 33( manual ) / 31 ( auto )
Highway: 38 ( manual ) / 37 ( auto )

New Numbers:
City: 28 ( manual ) / 27 ( auto )
Highway: 34 ( manual ) / 34 ( auto )
In case anyone cares You can find the info at Find a Car

[biblicone]

Those numbers seem to match up more to real life numbers. Good find.

[FITrunner]

Yeah good find. Although my 1991 Acura Integra seemed to get a little more than stated by about 1-2mpg. But its close. Good thing I sold it and got my Fit. My NSX on the other hand lol yup, sucked gas with old chart, sucks gas with new chart, so really theres no change.

[ewdysar]

Originally Posted by JDM_DOHC_SiR

Background:
Since the EPA is redoing their calculations for city/highway fuel consumption for 08, they've gone back and redone their numbers for older vehicles as well.

So I figured I'd compare the Fit's numbers. Old Numbers:
City: 33( manual ) / 31 ( auto )
Highway: 38 ( manual ) / 37 ( auto )

New Numbers:
City: 28 ( manual ) / 27 ( auto )
Highway: 34 ( manual ) / 34 ( auto )
In case anyone cares You can find the info at Find a Car

The bad part of this will be if someone has a Fit that gets less than 24MPG, Honda will call it close enough. And 24mpg is in V6 200+hp territory...

Eric

[George02]

nice find, thx for the info

[doug577]

I think it's interesting though what factors the EPA now considers to get those new numbers...

"Starting in model year 2008, estimates will reflect the effects of

• Faster Speeds & Acceleration
• Air Conditioner Use
• Colder Outside Temperatures"

Most interesting to me is the "faster speed and acceleration." Has a study been done that shows that people drive faster or accelerate more quickly these days?

[litesong]

Doug577...Who needs a study. New cars with 50 to 100% more horsepower are accelerating faster than the old cars. I got to steer faster to keep my poor little 65 HP Festiva out of the way of the rearing & raring horses.

[NaTuReB0Y]

I averaged about 30mpg.........that's more like it.

I've heard people getting 48mpg.......

[Gordio]

EPA civic
26/34 for MT
25/35 for AT

EPA fit
28/34 for MT
27/34 for AT (S)

Civic: Based on an average of 9 real drivers, the average MT is 29 mpg. Bassed on 28 real drivers, the average AT is 30mpg.

Fit: Based on an average of 23 the average is 34.8 mpg for MT. Based on an average of 32 drivers, the average AT (sport) is 29.3mpg.

The EPA number are still more realistic, but they make heavier cars seem better than they are. I think this sucks, cuz this might be why the fit can't get the mileage it needs for the green rebate in canada

[dank24]

I got 44mpg on my last tank, the EPA must have the a/c on and accelerating fast and shit. I just drive sensible and no a/c with slow acceleration under 2k and I get great numbers.

[ZebiFit]

This Car and Driver article explains the updated EPA mileage numbers pretty well. It even has a link to the complete 400+ page EPA specification for the new testing method.

The "Faster Speeds..." part has to do mostly with the fact that the old tests assumed national speed limits of 55 mph. Thankfully the ole double nickel has gone the way of the dodo

[sortanewinatl]

Their highway number seems about right, if you assume cruising at 75-80MPH. But their city number seems low... my worst tank was 28MPG and I was actually trying to see what the mileage would be if i drove it as hard as i could for an entire tank. I'm a fairly agressive driver and I still average about 31MPG city... and I'm in Atlanta... so the AC is always on.

[s0x]

iono about these estimates lol a lot of ppl say they reflect better but it says my 1995 eagle talon should be getting 21/29 and i have the ac on all the time and i get like 34 consistantly so i think there is still some margin of error

[s0x]

2006 scion xb
26/31
anual driving cost=1649
Hp=103

2008 scion xb
22/28
anual driving cost=1927
Hp=158

55 hp for 3 mpg? lol not to shabby

[biblicone]

I am wondering - for anyone getting better than average miles per gallon - do you have wheels other than stock on your car? Have you found out if there is a larger or smaller circumference of your wheel? This would cause the odometer/speedometer to change.

I know if you put huge tires on a car the speedometer reads slower than actual speed - making it appear as if you are getting worse mpg than actual. Same with putting smaller tires on, it makes it appear as if you are going faster than the actual speed and makes your mpg appear better.

(Maybe this is why the base Fit comes with 14" wheels?)

[Gordio]

Originally Posted by s0x

2006 scion xb
26/31
anual driving cost=1649
Hp=103

2008 scion xb
22/28
anual driving cost=1927
Hp=158

55 hp for 3 mpg? lol not to shabby

Like the old epa ratings, the new ones for whatever reason seem to inflate the MPG numbers for larger cars. Even under the new epa rating, the accord gets the same mileage as a civic, which is impossible because it has a bigger engine and more weight. The fit, a small car, tends to be underestimated.

[aznguyen316]

I do get around the new EPA recommendations but also on highway + cruise I've gotten around the old EPA mileage. Between city and highway I get around 30mpg.. I guess around par.

[greygang]

Wish I had read this thread before I bought the Fit.
Bought one a month ago because I had read 35/40 mpg. I was so excited about getting better gas mileage. I had an Element that was only getting 23 mpg, and wanted to do better. I couldn't afford an SUV hybrid, plus I wanted better miles, anyhow. I haul dogs so the Prius wasn't going to work.

I'm only getting around 30 mpg. But it's 100 degrees here, and I drive 75/80 mph on the highway. So this thread explains it. I had no clue that air conditioning would be that big a drain. Or my lead foot. My air conditioning doesn't even seem to cool that well in the back for the dogs, either.

Bummer.

Claudia
Greyhound Gang Greyhound Adoption

[piyoimut]

1994 Civic SI: 4 cyl, 1.6 L, Man(5), (VTEC) (FFS), Regular
25 CITY 32 HWY... but I get an average 33, never less than 30 MPG (even when I redline the car a lot)...

2000 Integra: No type R on the website.. but GSR got 22 CITY 28 HWY..
my average with the R is 25, never less than 20(driven hard to the max at the track, auto-x, etc).

I forgot about my other previous Hondas.. back then I made more $$ and the gas was cheap I don't really care that much.

I can't say much about the Fit yet, only got 250 miles on it..
but today fill is 7 gallons so 250/7 = 35.71 MPG... not bad
I want to get 40 MPG average though.. (with AC and occasional spirited driving when on ramp to the highways)

[Digital Designs Fit]

I get no less than 33mpg city and have got anywhere from 38-46mpg on the interstate. I've always got the A/C on and my car is an Automatic. No engine or drivetrain modifications yet. I've not measured recently with the new 17" wheels and tires.