Fit vs Fit Sport mileage...
Thread Starter
|
New Member
Joined: Jul 2009
Posts: 10
From: College Station, TX
Fit vs Fit Sport mileage...
I noticed that the AT version of the regular Fit is rated at one more mpg than the Fit Sport. I mentioned this to my salesman and he told me that the various aero body panels on the Sport create more drag, hence the slightly lower mileage.
This sounds backwards to me; any opinions from those who know about this stuff?
Gary,
College Station, TX
This sounds backwards to me; any opinions from those who know about this stuff?
Gary,
College Station, TX
Member
Joined: Nov 2008
Posts: 561
From: Illinois
Maybe the weight of the panels and other stuff in the car.
I don't know how the EPA does it.
In my real-life experience with 10,000 miles on our M/T Sport, there are many variables that affect mileage. I'm starting to think that the biggest variable is whether the gas has ethanol.
I think the Sport is worth the difference.
Cheers.
I don't know how the EPA does it.
In my real-life experience with 10,000 miles on our M/T Sport, there are many variables that affect mileage. I'm starting to think that the biggest variable is whether the gas has ethanol.
I think the Sport is worth the difference.
Cheers.
Member
Joined: Jul 2009
Posts: 136
From: York, Pa
Also add the extra weight of the skirts,cruise control components,and few other things sport has over standard. Also larger wheels,and wider tires would contribute to loss of 1 MPG. The sticker is wrong anyway. I am getting much better mileage then posted. I average 40+ highway,35 city, 36-39 mixed in an 2009 5 speed Sport.
PaFitter
PaFitter
The stickers are ridiculous to begin with... I get 34mpg on mine w/ pretty much 100% city driving.
One of the biggest factors in your mileage comes from adjusting the nut between the steering wheel and driver's seat.
One of the biggest factors in your mileage comes from adjusting the nut between the steering wheel and driver's seat.
Member
Joined: Jul 2009
Posts: 107
From: Philly?
Also add the extra weight of the skirts,cruise control components,and few other things sport has over standard. Also larger wheels,and wider tires would contribute to loss of 1 MPG. The sticker is wrong anyway. I am getting much better mileage then posted. I average 40+ highway,35 city, 36-39 mixed in an 2009 5 speed Sport.
PaFitter
PaFitter
Member
Joined: Sep 2008
Posts: 300
From: Milwaukee
Also add the extra weight of the skirts,cruise control components,and few other things sport has over standard. Also larger wheels,and wider tires would contribute to loss of 1 MPG. The sticker is wrong anyway. I am getting much better mileage then posted. I average 40+ highway,35 city, 36-39 mixed in an 2009 5 speed Sport.
PaFitter
PaFitter
Member
Joined: Mar 2009
Posts: 28
From: Evans, Ga
I think the gearing (both transmissions and differential) are different between the Sport and base. Seems like I remember the base having lower revs for the same speed. I think this could explain the difference.
Member
Joined: Sep 2008
Posts: 81
From: Vancouver, WA
Well, for sure the rear wing will caused some drag.
And it will reduce some of the fuel efficiency.
Wing doesn't make your car go faster. It supposed to help your rear tires stay planted on the road during high speed.
Unless you are a street racer...triple decker wing would surely make your car go faster. in fact, so fast it can fly.
And it will reduce some of the fuel efficiency.
Wing doesn't make your car go faster. It supposed to help your rear tires stay planted on the road during high speed.
Unless you are a street racer...triple decker wing would surely make your car go faster. in fact, so fast it can fly.
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
Squeezeboxbis
Fit Engine Modifications, Motor Swaps, ECU Tuning
19
Feb 23, 2017 04:05 PM
