I got my A/T before I became a "true" car enthusiast. I regret that decision now. If I keep my fit long enough, I'm sure I'll do a conversion.

 

Yeah, nobody was doing that.

 

I have owned 6 fits sports all 2009's. One 5MT and the other 5 were 5 SPD AUTO, I just got a 2009 Honda FIT Sport with NAVI last week
all the autos were better on gas, but I dont sit at the bumper to bumper traffic my commute is mostly 50-80 km/h

My experience and most reviews, you get more performaince out of the car and the small engine and 5MT. This car has a wide range of buyers, a lot of woman...older ladies and girls like the car and they all want AUTO, and the 5SPD manual i sold to a 20 year old male.

 

Why have you owned 6 fits? dealer?

 

Im not comparing paddle shifters on a FIT, just the concept in general that race cars use and how they have become standard on many vehicles....... obviously you can't understand the simplicity of that relationship like DUH
its all marketing

 

Manufacturer/EPA test methods short change manuals for some reason. What really matters are real world numbers that real consumers are getting.
Go to the Eco Fit forum and look at the mileage reports for automatic and manual trans. Average out the first ten reports from each thread. If one person gives multiple numbers take the best one.
I come out with:
30.17 mpg for auto
36.51 mpg for manual

Formula one and other race cars have sequential manual transmissions. The internal construction of a manual, including clutch. An electro-mechanical device does the shifting simply because it can move faster than the human arm in a race where seconds can mean winning or losing. They bear no resemblance to the energy wasting slushbox auto in a typical street car.

The DSG is similar in concept to the sequential transmission. Internals like a manual for efficiency, combined with fast automatic shifting.

Both of these are not very common at this point and add weight cost and complexity over a conventional manual. Interesting idea though.

I'm still waiting for some documentation that resale is better for autos.

 

AT getting better mileage than MT is going to be an increasingly bitter battle, because it's true that ATs are becoming refined enough to rival and even best a MT in MPG, and CVTs are better than both.

However, the conventional AT and MT are so different that one driver could get better mileage on the AT and another could get better on the MT, just depends on driving style and such.

Debating which one gets better MPG is utterly futile.

 

true depending on driving style, and owner bias towards each type, but the manufacturer specs are based on the average driving style, and 5SPD AUTO receives a fraction of a better MPG rating.

 

It is amazing that some folks are toooo lazy to look or are incapable of simple analysis of the polls on this forum.
Further, the parasitic hydraulic pump losses take up a bigger percentage of the Fit's relatively tiny power output than about any other car let alone a V6 or a V8

I am not against AT in the slightest, just against BS

but but but, the government says.................
Yeah right! the government hardly F'ups anything

 

The numbers I provided ARE averages. Averages for real people driving real cars on real roads.
The published ratings are crap derived from flawed testing methods.

No matter how refined the automatic becomes you will not fix the torque converters bad habit of turning kinetic energy into heat energy.

 

These guys speak the truth. The information is available out there, some people just blindly follow without doing any of their own research.

 

Ford plans on putting DSGs in all of their small cars within the next few years.

 

Why go that route over a simplified manual transmission? Think about it, sure it's technology going forward, but really think why manufacturers would go this route and do away with manuals. The question is rhetorical for me, I know why.

 

Makes sense, I look forward to it. The manual will live on but eventually in automated fashion. I also really like the CVT in my wife's Murano (she works for Allstate corporate also)
That CVT SUV, loaded up with 2 big dogs, our 2 girls and a but load full of stuff gets 24MPG on trips to the WI North Woods.

 

Here is what "Car and Driver" said about the 2009 Fit Sport manual transmission:
"As before, the standard five-speed manual transmission is a pleasure to use. Internal ratios are taller, but the final drive is shorter, leaving all ratios except fifth shorter overall. The new Fit gets to 60 mph in 8.5 seconds and through the quarter-mile in 16.6 seconds at 83 mph."

Here is Car and Driver's take on the 09 Fit Sport Auto that they compared to the outgoing 08 Fit Sport Auto:

"How Much Slower, You Ask (vs the auto 08)?

"When we got the acceleration test results, they were all positive. That’s positive in a bad way, as in, “We’re sorry, Mr. Gluckman, but the test came back positive.” With the Sport automatic, the sprint to 60 took an extra 1.4 seconds (9.9 vs. 8.5), and the quarter-mile was accomplished 1.0 second slower (17.6 vs. 16.6) at a lower speed (79 mph vs. 83). Skidpad grip and braking performance from 70 mph were basically unchanged."

Thus, if you want more performance, the M/T is a no brainer. The GE8 0-60 in the manual is 8.5 seconds vs the auto's 9.9 seconds. The second thing I got out of these articles is that the GD3'S auto is just a quick as the GE8's manual transmission. So if you want the performance auto that is as quick as the GE8's manual, you should purchase the previous generation's version.

 

The way I always understood the auto vs manual with the auto getting slightly better gas mileage was only because of the higher final gear. Just like Car and Driver stated above. Thus the explanation of the auto getting 1mpg better on the highway only.
As for performance yes a MT is going to get you the better acceleration, braking, better handling but (ONLY IF PUSH THE CAR AND YOU KNOW HOW TO PROPERLY DRIVE A STICK THOUGH). Which in turn means you probably won't get better gas mileage than a slush box.
The Fit is not a sports car...it's an econo box and great DD so a majority of its owners this is their only car (or main driving car) and don't intend to take this car to driving school or to the track every weekend. Meaning they are not going to know how to correctly heel and toe, properly decelerate into a turn apex and accelerate out and consistently push their car to its limits. Yes there is going to be exceptions (I know there are plenty of drivers here that have their weekend warrior cars) But we are the exception the "enthusiast". Not the average joe schmo. My point is yes the mt would be faster but how many so called "good drivers" don't miss a shift or don't know how to properly operate a mt? I know a lot of people with MT that can't drive worth a sh*t. In these cases the mt is not faster and by them thinking they are fast and racing they are not getting better gas mileage and if they are constantly burning the clutch they are not going to have a cheaper car.
I got the auto because of the convenience. I wanted a reliable small car with decent handling, great storage, great mpg's. If I wanted to race everyday I would and actually be fast I would have bought a s2k, Cooper S, GTI, Audi TT, GTO, Lotus Elise/Exige, Corvette, etc...etc. Which is fine if you don't have to sit in traffic, stop on hills, have a wife that actually knows and is willing to drive a stick, and honestly if I didn't like to be able to eat and drink a soda while driving.

 

I totally agree with you.



We can be here forever arguing which one is better.
Fact of the matter is i like my car and the thing everyone
fails to realize is that it's an econo box. 0-60 1/4 miles times
MPG are all determined by the driver and all drive differently.
Plus i hate to say it but all the numbers are just single digits
apart. IE 0-60 is 1 sec diff and same for 1/4 mile. who cares
about one second.
Get what you like and suits your needs and be happy.

 

I had the same doubts as OP but i went for the manual transmission. I test drove the automatic and even though it felt adequate i have always thought that to get the most out of a small engine you MUST have a manual transmission.

Being stuck in traffic is minor setback. the clutch on the fit is smooth and not a problem at all. If I had to choose again I'd take manual transmission.

 

The higher final gear. Yes. And you may not have thought of it, but the reason it's able to be geared the way it is???? TORQUE CONVERTER. And if you spend more time on the highway than in the city, that means in REAL LIFE you ***can*** get better mileage with the AT than MT.

^^^^Now that up there? That's me making a point about the AT, not arguing it's better overall. Please don't make it more than it is.

 

You can also get better mileage with the AT than MT if the MT driver is cruising at 6500 rpm in 2nd gear. Or when hes cruising at 1mph or 120mph on highways.