Its a combination of both. More air allows the car the breathe better and in open loop its actually runs leaner. Less throttle and more power which means less fuel. The electric motor, I am still learning but It just helps move the car from a dead start. That is where most of fuel is used due to higher engine loads. Its basically keeping the engine in low load.

 

Here is something I found http://www.oxytane.com/mystery/engin...0%20EUROPE.pdf

Its funny how they understand it in Europe and we have more stressful driving.

 

Look at it like this TC, more torque means LESS pedal thus meaning MORE mpg's

 

Well I'm down a bit, 40 mpg on the nose but then again, its getting even colder now and trust me, I'm not complaining one bit as I know its going to be going down even further as its getting colder, like this week its supposed to be low 40's to mid 30's for a high

I will say this though, that last tank was Mobil 93 though, I was a couple bars below a half when I got gas today, topped off with BP 93. I guess we'll see how that goes next time out.

 

I topped off my car and got 36.5 mpg. I think your mpg might go up with Bp but the wind and cold is here to stay and I expect it to fall soon. We had a good run of semi-warm weather and every day of no snow is 1 day closer to spring.

I found some excellent info and after I go through it I will post it. I found that auto ignition is based of H2O2 production from easy to break low octane fuel. MBT timing is optimum for torque which uses the least amount of fuel and is the least stressful on the motor.

 

My OBC is knocking on 43 mpg's door

 

So I've been watching you guys troll non-Fit MPG and thought it time to come back with some real freakworld info_

I've switched out those OEM Dunflops for a set of 205/50/16 Conti DWS's and been running regular local brand petrol. Locally I'm seeing 40MPG. My recent trip to Maine returned a 35MPG average at 70MPG turnpike speeds. That seemed a bit low, but my highway driving has always been below my local driving mileage. I ain't sweating it, and I love those tires. Drove down my daughter's unpaved 1/4mile drive in 10" of snow without a blink.

I'm thinking the weather conditions and fuel blends had a bit to do with the MPG...

K_C_

 

i think i got a new record last night when i was going to VA to sell some stuff, it was just a 1 lane road...

and for a 100 miles or so of driving, i was making 49.2 MPG!!!!! i was following a 18 wheeler truck the whole time. my max MPG is generally like 41... at BEST and its normally 33-37MPG.

I even had a marshall head in the car, and my dad in the passenger seat. with the trip starting off with a full tank of gas.

 

When the weather was warmer (summer/fall) I'd get 35-36 mpg in mixed driving with the 205/50 DWS tires but I also had the 7" aftermarket wheels too and my highway mileage was 43 mpg right before I traded the car in but like you said, the winter blend does affect the mileage, not to mention the colder weather itself.

I like what you said about the snow and the DWS' performance, the two go hand in hand, they're amazing tires. Check your tire pressure in the winter too, very important for maximizing the mpg's.

I filled up today, still using SPORT mode and I got 39.5 mpg, down about 1-2 mpg but its been really cold in the mornings here, its not turning better anytime soon so its time to get used to sub 40 mpg numbers over the next 3 monthes. Maybe a switch to NORMAL mode is order "just to see"

BTW I've been thinking about some other stuff too. I plan on getting new tires/wheels in the spring and there's NO debate about what tires I'll be using but rather what size wheels to get. I know the 17's are going to be heavier compared to the 16's but I really wonder if the aftermarket wheel will be a little lighter compared to the OEM wheels. I'm looking to go with 17" MB Weapons (17 x 7's) and then running a 215/45 but they've also got some MB Competitions in a 16" size that are nice too but the only problem is this, Continental doesn't make a 215/50/16 which is what I'd really wanna run on the CR-Z, same formula used on the Fit (20mm wider and 5% less aspect ratio) but the only tire offered by DT is a Kuhmo ASX. So, do I go with looks AND DWS' that work for the 17's or bite the bullet and get the 16's with a 205/50 DWS which may look a little too low on the CR-Z

 

I'm getting 32 mpg, driving a combination city and highway in metro Atlanta's peak rush hour traffic. Plenty of stop and go here.

My new Fit only has around 250 miles on the clock. I'm extremly pleased with the mpg.

I'm sure on long trips, without much traffic, it will be in the high 30's or even better.

 

Yeah the mileage will go up for sure, any mods planned for it? BTW, I just checked out your ride, awesome color, just like Revolution Orange, it looks like a custom paint job color,VERY impressive!

My mileage is back up a bit, 40.7 mpg (previous 39.5 mpg) and for this tank I'm back to using NORMAL mode just to see what happens.

 

Thanks my friend! I'm really enjoying this car. 40.7 mpg. That is awesome!

As far as mods, I plan on a starting off real simple with the OEM cargo tray. I was on WeatherTech's website, but it appears they don't have a cargo tray for 2009+? I'm also looking at the Zeta armrest and doing some research there. I just want to make sure it's a quality piece.

 

The Honda cargo mat is very nice but get those Weathertechs everywhere else. I know this thread is huge but one thing I can tell you about the Fit is this, it gets better gas mileage when using premium, atleast it did for me last winter when I made the switch. I went from 22-23 mpg in mixed driving last winter and then made the switch to premium and it went up to 28-29 mpg, just sayin'. Once you do your first oil change you may wanna switch over to Mobil 1 0w20 and get a K&N drop-in at the very least. I had the K&N typhoon and my mileage didn't take a hit, infact, right before I got rid of the Fit, I got 43 mpg on a trip back home to Detroit doing 70 mph all the way, mixed driving during decent weather was 36 mpg.

BTW, since your new, check out my sig

 

My mpg is around 35 and I am happy with that. Winter fuel has less btus and the temp correction lowers mpg. Found this to explain higher alcohols IGP Energy: Superior Performance of Higher Alcohols vs. MTBE . The octane would be around 93 or so.

Note that higher octane lowers emissions due to less knock.

 

I'm real happy. I went 204 miles and had just under a half a tank on gauge. I added 5.54 gallons to fill it up and hand calculated 36.78 mpg. This was city and highway, but I did a little bit more highway driving this time around. Running 87 octane. This really is an amazing little car. I'm so glad we purchased it.

 

Your mileage is right on target, try switching to premium and monitor your mileage afterwards. It could take 2 tanks to notice but it does work, trust me (read the thread) If and when you do this, your route must be the same or pretty damn close as well as the temps to get an accurate reading. Also, the tank of gas needs to be almost empty so your running pure premium. On average, its only .20 cents more per gallon and on the Fit, that's a whole $2.00 extra.

Check it out!

 

I will definitely try it. Thank you for the tips!!

This tank is going just the same. MPG has been awesome thus far! Plus, this car is awesome in turns.

 

Changing to larger heavier tires killed my fuel mileage at the last fill up.. 27.7 is about the worst I can remember and I drove in a relatively sane manner for most of the tank... I like the increase in traction but it sure comes with hidden cost.

 

I added air to my wifes car and threw in mid grade, Its now fixed. I am a little mad at the dealer because it was just in there and they did not fill the tires like they said. The last tank was 22 mpg. It should be around 30 now. She has been picking up my son from school and idles a lot more. I did not know that until this week.


My car I get at least 37 and have 4000 miles on the oil and have not checked the air but it should be check at least once every two weeks..

 

Ok, so, I've been poring over this entire thread from the very beginning. All speculation aside, I do agree that, yes, 87 is the minimum octane rating. That allows some flexibility. My previous car was an '08 Volkswagen R32, which has 11.4 CR and a 91 octane minimum fuel requirement. Where I live we have 93, not 91. There is less flexibility there, obviously, as I can only run 93 or higher, with higher octane being quite rare and more expensive. In an emergency situation, you could put a lower octane, but the car would protest. In theory, then, 100 octane would make the car run better since the octane rating denotes the fuel's resistance to detonation. I did not tune the car to run on 100 octane, which is a $600 reflash charge from APR or REVO or some similar company. Any MPG increase, there, though would be thoroughly offset by the cost of the reflash to take advantage of 100 octane without even considering the cost of the fuel.

With that said, I notice that, on occasion, some of you have used fuel additives such as Dry Gas. How much does this product cost? I'm all about maximizing my fuel mileage, but when trying to squeeze out those last couple MPGs it's easy to run into diminishing returns. For example, here in Knoxville, TN, the average price of 87 this year has been 3.30 per gallon. Today it's 2.95, but this is about as low as it's been all year. Premium, 93 octane, averages about .31 cents per gallon more, annually, than our 87 does here. I could not use 87 in the R32, so this comparison would be useless there. The OBC on my '12 Fit Sport MT shows that I'm getting 34.7 MPG with mixed city/hwy driving. In reality this is probably going to turn out being 33, which is still very good in my eyes coming from 20mpg average in the VW (6-cyl AWD). My drive is nearly identical every single day. Fifteen miles, one-way, with 13 of that being interstate highway with occasional trips around town. We live in the foothills of the Smoky Mountains, and climbing constant hills has an effect. I don't see my mpg changing much from where it is, but I'm tracking it on fuelly.com just like I did with my VW. Let's take those average annual fuel costs I mentioned earlier: $3.30 for 87, $3.61 for 93 octane. For me, anyway, I would have to average, at a bare minimum, 3 mpg better on 93 octane for an entire year in order to break even on the costs. I know it's only a few bucks per tank (3.10 per tank, on an empty tank using the annual fuel price averages), but that adds up quickly over a year. In fact, given a 3mpg increase I would be spending $5 more per year on 93 octane than I would on 87 octane.

I suppose in my case I could argue that t would not actually be wasting money on 93 octane, assuming I can actually average 3mpg higher for an entire year by doing so. If I am wrong, and I see no gain in economy then my annual fuel cost, for my mileage driven, would be $150 higher that year to experiment. (This does not take into account any fuel additives, since that totally destroys any financial benefit of higher MPGs that moving to a higher octane fuel might entail). In order to actually make back that $150 a year, I would have to average, for an entire year, 6.5 mpg better.

Is it possible? Who knows. What I do know, though, is that Honda did engineer the Fit to operate reliably on 87 octane fuel. I'm not pointing fingers and saying anyone is wrong. Clearly Klasse-Act saw a fairly large gain in economy that time in November 2010, but did it hold true all year? If you can financially justify the move to premium fuel, then that's definitely what you should do. Part of the reason I sold my R32 was to get better gas mileage, among several other factors, including trying to start a family. The benefit alone of being able to move to 87 octane over 93 was pretty nice. That alone would save me $50 a year in that particular car. Add in a whopping 13 mpg average increase, and you're talking major bucks - 1500 annually, actually, which is massive when you consider that's just the gains from better fuel economy on cheaper fuel. If premium is, indeed, helping people see a true benefit, then that's what you should do. In my case, though, it would not help me at all. I don't like to think in terms of monthly payments, since I like to focus on limiting debt as much as possible, but consider this: If your annual fuel economy is unchanged, overall, by moving to premium, and your average fuel prices are similarly about .31 per gallon different, then you're actually losing $150 a year, which is 12.50 per month. This is basically adding 12.50 onto your monthly payment for which you get nothing in return.

I mean, look, sometimes being wrong is great, and if I can save actual money (I would need to see 4-6 mpg increases to see any savings) by going to 93, then I will, but can someone else post any sort of annual numbers for their car as far as fuel consumption is concerned? I think if we can see a truthful breakdown of total fillups at a certain cost for a certain grade of fuel, then we can extrapolate what sort of gain you're actually seeing - on a relatively stock vehicle without forced induction.

As a side note, before the R32 I had a 2003 Civic Si, which I supercharged with a high-boost kit. It was a night and day difference. The Hondata computer ran a little rich, but not overly so. The funny thing is, I was shocked to hear that Klasse-Act was getting better results from the BP fuel. I have a BP station about 1/4 mile from my house, so it was always convenient. For a while I got misfires constantly in the Civic. They weren't audible, but they don't have to be. Around the time I was looking at tuning my fuel, I literally stumbled upon some information I had never seen before. Several automotive manufacturers came together and discussed which fuel detergent work best in their vehicles. At the time, the list was much shorter, but what they created is called Top Tier Gas (toptiergas.com). Those MFGs are BMW, General Motors, Honda, Toyota, Volkswagen, and Audi. On the list of fuel providers, BP was nowhere to be found - they are still missing from the list. Conoco and Shell did and still do use Top Tier detergent. Both of which are also quite close to my house. I made the switch to gas from those providers and my misfire problem disappeared for good. I made no tuning changes, only a change in the brand of fuel I used. I only mention this out of curiosity, since, in the MPG arena, Klasse-Act saw better economy with BP, whereas I saw worse performance and detonation resistance with that same brand of gas. I put BP in the Fit since it's so close to my house, and this car is unmodified. Because of my experience, though, I do still prefer to hit the Conoco or the Shell by my place, and I will seek them out on road trips, even if it is out of habit due to years of bad temperament my Civic showed toward BP gas.