Difference in mpg info at Edmunds

mdanderson · #1 (**permalink**) 07-08-2007, 08:56 PM

I have been thinking about getting the Fit and I have been reading the various reviews on mpg on this site and at others like Edmunds. There seems to be a wide variance in mpg results at Fitfreak. Some people are getting a good vehicle for gas mileage and others are not. I also looked at reviews on Edmunds and most people seem to be quite satisfied with their mpg results. I wonder why there seems to be more of a variance on this site. I currently own a 2002 Civic DX-AT with 234000 miles and I still get 35-38mpg combined city/hwy. I am a courier and I use my car every day around the Dallas area.

I really wanted to get the Fit but it seems like I am taking a chance on getting one of the low mpg ones. Thanks.

RedAndy · #2 (**permalink**) 07-10-2007, 10:30 AM

Seems to be more of an issue with the AT's. If you look at the MT/AT poll #'s, theres a much narrower range of MPGs with the MT vs AT. The AT in the US/CA Fit is unique to us - the rest of the world has MT or CVT transmissions, so maybe the AT isn't as tweaked as it possibly could be....

Also in CR's real world testing, the AT had a wider city/highway range than the AT - 26/41, vs MT - 28/39 (from memory - may be slightly off here - check the CR issue (12/06?) to get exact #'s).

As with all cars, driving style and conditions make a real big difference in your actual MPG's. The only thing that seems clear is that most of the AT milage complaints come from people who do a lot of city driving, and I haven't seen many of those for the MT. However, if you cruise a lot on the freeway, the AT may give do a bit better than the MT.

I have an MT, live in the city, and get about 34-35 overall in mixed driving, FWIW. Either car is great and a hoot to drive.....

kps · #3 (**permalink**) 07-10-2007, 11:49 AM

I remember one poster who got low mileage in an MT, but his driving was all stop-in-go in a congested city, so it was reasonable -- every car gets 0mpg standing still. As far as I know, all the people saying they get unreasonably low mileage have had ATs, mostly Sport ATs.

Again as far as I know, no one getting low mileage has tried very hard to find out why, so it's unknown whether there actually is a problem with some cars. My mother just bought a Fit Sport AT (it's ok for her to drive a slushbox, since she is a little old lady -- oh, um, hi Mom!

). If hers gets low mileage, I'll find out what's wrong.

LizardKing · #4 (**permalink**) 07-10-2007, 12:11 PM

My sport AT gets low mileage, between 23 and 26 mpg, but my driving is ALL stop-and-go. And I do mean stop-and-go: 34 lights in 10 miles and 40 minutes, so I am stopping an average of just about once every minute. I have not yet complained to my dealer, as I am hoping to have it looked at when I get the oil changed.

Consumer Reports reported 22 mpg for city only, so I am doing better than that.

From what I've read, it's not the people who are getting low mileage not trying hard to find out why, it's Honda and the dealers. Basically, it sounds like they are saying either "it's good enough" or "it's your driving style." I hope I get a better answer.

jacksan1 · #5 (**permalink**) 07-10-2007, 12:13 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by RedAndy

Seems to be more of an issue with the AT's. If you look at the MT/AT poll #'s, theres a much narrower range of MPGs with the MT vs AT. The AT in the US/CA Fit is unique to us - the rest of the world has MT or CVT transmissions, so maybe the AT isn't as tweaked as it possibly could be....

Also in CR's real world testing, the AT had a wider city/highway range than the AT - 26/41, vs MT - 28/39 (from memory - may be slightly off here - check the CR issue (12/06?) to get exact #'s).

As with all cars, driving style and conditions make a real big difference in your actual MPG's. The only thing that seems clear is that most of the AT milage complaints come from people who do a lot of city driving, and I haven't seen many of those for the MT. However, if you cruise a lot on the freeway, the AT may give do a bit better than the MT.

I have an MT, live in the city, and get about 34-35 overall in mixed driving, FWIW. Either car is great and a hoot to drive.....

I live in the same area as Red Andy, and our Fit (Sport AT) averages 32 MPG. The breakdown is almost exactly 50/50 city/highway. When strictly on a freeway, we have found it impossible to get below 35 MPG.

kps · #6 (**permalink**) 07-10-2007, 12:44 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by LizardKing

I hope I get a better answer.

Did you have a previous car that you drove in the same conditions? How much of your time do you spend stopped? How do you drive between stops?

LizardKing · #7 (**permalink**) 07-10-2007, 02:18 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by kps

Did you have a previous car that you drove in the same conditions? How much of your time do you spend stopped? How do you drive between stops?

Interestingly, my previous car never made the same commute, as I got my Fit and started a new job the same day, and had been borrowing a car for a few weeks before I got my Fit. Also, while I had always estimated my mileage before, I never did even one tank "by the numbers" to find out what I was getting before (I always went "about" 200 miles on "about" 10 gallons, so I'm still doing "about" better).

Time stopped depends on traffic, and its very difficult to estimate, but I'd say its about half. I don't hit the gas hard when I go, because I know that I'll just need to stop again at the next light.

I only had one opportunity to measure highway mpg, and that was only about 80% highway, but I still only got about 28 mpg. However, the last tank of gas netted me almost 27 mpg, and that was only about 15% highway but also about 5% stuck-in-traffic-went-2-miles-in-40-minutes driving.

kps · #8 (**permalink**) 07-10-2007, 02:33 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by LizardKing

... I'd say its about half.

I'd say you get about 40mpg. Problem solved!

Seriously, without finding out what's actually going on, you'll never know whether there's really anything wrong with the car, or whether there's something you could change about your driving.

LizardKing · #9 (**permalink**) 07-10-2007, 02:42 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by kps

I'd say you get about 40mpg. Problem solved!

Seriously, without finding out what's actually going on, you'll never know whether there's really anything wrong with the car, or whether there's something you could change about your driving.

I knew when I said I spend half the time stopped you'd (about) double it. Thats why I mentioned my 80% highway drive only giving me 28 mpg. Of course, that drive was only about half a tank, so it's still inconclusive.

But that means I'd probably consider the city driving of the people who get 32 mpg in the city to be almost-highway.