3rd Generation (2015+) Say hello to the newest member of the Fit family. 3rd Generation specific talk and questions here.

LX vs. EX Fuel economy

  #1  
Old 03-15-2019, 05:24 PM
Member
Thread Starter
Join Date: Feb 2017
Location: Washougal, WA
Posts: 29
LX vs. EX Fuel economy

Hey all, my '08 Fit is getting a bit long in the tooth and I was thinking about getting something new. My concern is that the '19 Fits have a rapid drop-off in fuel economy when you go up from LX, can anyone explain that? Dropping 4mpg highway is a pretty big deal since I do a lot of driving, so I'd like to know if that's accurate and if there's a good reason for it before making my decision about which trim to investigate further.

Thanks!
 
  #2  
Old 03-15-2019, 06:49 PM
Uncle Gary's Avatar
Member
5 Year Member
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: Upstate New York
Posts: 2,352
I wouldnít worry. I believe they juggle the shift points in the LX to hype the EPA ratings.

I drive a Ď15 EX manual and over 58,000 miles Iíve averaged 39.6 MPG over that distance as calculated (miles driven/fuel purchased). Thatís average of all driving, winter and summer. In mild weather I can easily exceed 40 MPG without trying.

To be sure, Iíve never owned a car that I couldnít beat the EPA highway estimate in all around driving, but thatís me. As they say, YMMV.
 

Last edited by Uncle Gary; 03-15-2019 at 06:53 PM.
  #3  
Old 03-15-2019, 09:32 PM
Spyke's Avatar
Member
Join Date: Nov 2017
Location: NorCal
Posts: 50
I average 38 in our EX, but can get 45 without much struggle if I avoid very steep hills.

Throttle control is the biggest player, but adjustments with tires, tire pressure, and engine health can make you back that small amount EASILY.
 
  #4  
Old 03-15-2019, 10:46 PM
Member
Join Date: Mar 2019
Location: Central Pennsylvania
Posts: 21
EX Fuel mileage

My wife's 2016 EX (CVT) averages 36-38 mpg around town in mixed driving. Drove it from Central Pennsylvania to Dayton Ohio last May, straight highway for 428 miles each way, I averaged 46 mpg (calculated) for the trip, saw the MPG display indicating 49 for a while, ran the AC and used cruise control for most of the trip.I use only 87 octane Toptier fuel, preferably Shell and run only Mobil1 0W-20 AFE. We traded it today for a 2019 EX-L Navi CVT. It will take some time to break it in, so we'll see if it equals the 16. One thing I discovered on the trip was a wish for a gas tank a tad larger!
 
  #5  
Old 03-16-2019, 01:01 AM
Member
Thread Starter
Join Date: Feb 2017
Location: Washougal, WA
Posts: 29
Originally Posted by Uncle Gary View Post
I wouldnít worry. I believe they juggle the shift points in the LX to hype the EPA ratings.
I drive a Ď15 EX manual and over 58,000 miles Iíve averaged 39.6 MPG over that distance as calculated (miles driven/fuel purchased). Thatís average of all driving, winter and summer. In mild weather I can easily exceed 40 MPG without trying.
To be sure, Iíve never owned a car that I couldnít beat the EPA highway estimate in all around driving, but thatís me. As they say, YMMV.
Good to know. I frequently beat EPA with my current one too (at least when my summer tires are on).

Originally Posted by Spyke View Post
I average 38 in our EX, but can get 45 without much struggle if I avoid very steep hills.
Throttle control is the biggest player, but adjustments with tires, tire pressure, and engine health can make you back that small amount EASILY.
Sure, but if you make those adjustments on a car that starts with better base mileage then you get even better results!

Originally Posted by PhilF View Post
My wife's 2016 EX (CVT) averages 36-38 mpg around town in mixed driving. Drove it from Central Pennsylvania to Dayton Ohio last May, straight highway for 428 miles each way, I averaged 46 mpg (calculated) for the trip, saw the MPG display indicating 49 for a while, ran the AC and used cruise control for most of the trip.I use only 87 octane Toptier fuel, preferably Shell and run only Mobil1 0W-20 AFE. We traded it today for a 2019 EX-L Navi CVT. It will take some time to break it in, so we'll see if it equals the 16. One thing I discovered on the trip was a wish for a gas tank a tad larger!
Ooooo, if you think of it could you toss me an update in a tank or two?
 
  #6  
Old 03-16-2019, 09:59 PM
Member
iTrader: (1)
Join Date: Jul 2015
Location: NOVAnistan
Posts: 2,405
I'll just link to this post to save me from retyping: I'm amazed at the fuel economy

43 mpg was my last fill up. I'm doing about 41 MPG average over the life of the car.

EX and up have sunroofs and other extras added on that add to the weight. EX wheels are heavier for example, so that means a lot to MPG.
 
  #7  
Old 03-17-2019, 12:06 AM
Member
Join Date: Mar 2019
Location: Central Pennsylvania
Posts: 21
There is not a real significant difference in the weight between the trims, the EXL is, Obviously, the heaviest, but only by less than 100 lbs, actually a bit less. The CVT is the mileage champ, passenger/driver weight, tire rolling resistance & pressure all have an effect, after all it's a mass vs energy vs resistance equation all mitigated by driver skill, maintenance, fuel quality and a myriad of other factors, even down to air friction, car dirty or waxed, etc. Overall, a well maintained CVT Fit, driven by a driver aware of these factors, or even not will usually get 35-38mpg or so in mixed driving and in the low to mid 40's under steady highway driving at 65-68 mph. The Fit, in my experience, is very forgiving in general driving. Will really surprise you with some attention to driving techniques, delivering hybrid type economy. It's really a delightful car in my experience.
 
  #8  
Old 03-17-2019, 07:03 AM
Uncle Gary's Avatar
Member
5 Year Member
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: Upstate New York
Posts: 2,352
In my experience with my two Fits (see my signature line), Iíd say the Fit responds very well to how you drive it. Driven smoothly, I can get 42-45 MPG on the highway at 55-60 mph. Thatís with the manual transmission. In the winter I get less because I run snow tires, warm-up takes longer and winter fuel has less energy than summer blends. We just switched back to summer fuel here and my mileage has increased by 4 MPG in the last two weeks (38 to 42).

My my advice is to ignore the EPA ratings and buy the model Fit you want. Iím sure youíll be happy in any case.
 
  #9  
Old 03-17-2019, 08:49 AM
Member
Join Date: Jun 2016
Location: Foothills of the Smokies, east Tennessee
Posts: 682
Originally Posted by Uncle Gary View Post
. We just switched back to summer fuel here and my mileage has increased by 4 MPG in the last two weeks (38 to 42).

My my advice is to ignore the EPA ratings and buy the model Fit you want. Iím sure youíll be happy in any case.
Seems we just switched back to summer gas here in TN, my last tank was a good 3 mpg better without trying....i.e., mashing the pedal and winding out the gears as usual...no complaints here on the gas mileage Ö I COULD complain about the gear spread on the 6 spd manual, but, would be beating a dead horse here, and, hey, it's still loads of fun

 
  #10  
Old 03-17-2019, 12:32 PM
Member
Join Date: May 2015
Location: Madison TN
Posts: 660
Originally Posted by Fuelish View Post
Seems we just switched back to summer gas here in TN, my last tank was a good 3 mpg better without trying....i.e., mashing the pedal and winding out the gears as usual...no complaints here on the gas mileage Ö I COULD complain about the gear spread on the 6 spd manual, but, would be beating a dead horse here, and, hey, it's still loads of fun
As I have pointed out before, over 4 Hondas (Civic wagon, Civic EX, Civic Si, and now the 2015 Fit), they don't get their best mileage until after 5k miles. Also the use of cruise control depends upon the landscape. If I drive east from Nashville toward the Cookeville, Knoxville or Chattanooga, cruise control wears the throttle out. I use my built-in cruise control, my artificial right foot, consistent and steady. West toward Jackson and Memphis, the roads are flatter and straighter, Honda's cruise control does a great job. I have no precise readings, but I know when I feel antsy about the fuel supply. Yeah, and a larger tank would help.
 
  #11  
Old 03-17-2019, 04:15 PM
Member
Join Date: Mar 2019
Location: Central Pennsylvania
Posts: 21
My experience parrellells yours , getting 5k on the Fit will take a year though, picking it up Tuesday, the 16 we traded only had 7500mi on it, my wife's retired and averages 200 mi a month if that. Got the 19 for the leather & the sensing, she also really likes the current body style and doesn't like the projections for the 2020
 
  #12  
Old 03-17-2019, 09:47 PM
Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: New York
Posts: 1,152
Speed makes a big difference. I just took a 200 mile (each way) highway trip and driving 55 vs. driving 70, several mpg difference.
 
  #13  
Old 03-17-2019, 11:11 PM
Member
Join Date: Mar 2019
Location: Central Pennsylvania
Posts: 21
I agree, lower speeds, higher mileage. With Central Pennsylvania being the truck terminal center of the East Coast, traveling on I81, I83 & I78 (Pa Turnpike) with the heavy & constant truck traffic, you are, literally, forced to travel at whatever speed the traffic flow dictates or you either form a traffic bottleneck or get hit. We have large multi-truck/car crashes on, sometimes, a daily basis, at least once a week in this area. My trip to Dayton in the 16 FIT was highway all the way, generally 65-70 & higher, keep with the flow or get crushed, in a small car like the Fit, you have to be constantly aware of traffic flow dynamics and stay with it or ahead of it. The EX handled the traffic well, excellent visibility and I averaged in the mid 40's out and back, getting up to 48-49 indicated mpg at times. It was virtually impossible to drive any speed less than the flow. I'd love to take a relaxing cruise at 55, but even Pa route 15 is posted at 65 and loaded with trucks now and they've raised the limits to 70 on most of the Turnpike. It's a bit stressful driving our interstates here. My wife tries to avoid the highway and uses secondary roads, which would be "mixed" conditions, she's averaging 36-38 usually. The Fit's ability to handle varying traffic situations has impressed both of us, not only with its competency but its economy as well.
 

Last edited by PhilF; 03-17-2019 at 11:14 PM.
  #14  
Old 03-18-2019, 07:36 AM
Member
Join Date: Dec 2015
Location: cincinnati oh
Posts: 128
Originally Posted by PhilF View Post
I agree, lower speeds, higher mileage. With Central Pennsylvania being the truck terminal center of the East Coast, traveling on I81, I83 & I78 (Pa Turnpike) with the heavy & constant truck traffic, you are, literally, forced to travel at whatever speed the traffic flow dictates or you either form a traffic bottleneck or get hit. We have large multi-truck/car crashes on, sometimes, a daily basis, at least once a week in this area. My trip to Dayton in the 16 FIT was highway all the way, generally 65-70 & higher, keep with the flow or get crushed, in a small car like the Fit, you have to be constantly aware of traffic flow dynamics and stay with it or ahead of it. The EX handled the traffic well, excellent visibility and I averaged in the mid 40's out and back, getting up to 48-49 indicated mpg at times. It was virtually impossible to drive any speed less than the flow. I'd love to take a relaxing cruise at 55, but even Pa route 15 is posted at 65 and loaded with trucks now and they've raised the limits to 70 on most of the Turnpike. It's a bit stressful driving our interstates here. My wife tries to avoid the highway and uses secondary roads, which would be "mixed" conditions, she's averaging 36-38 usually. The Fit's ability to handle varying traffic situations has impressed both of us, not only with its competency but its economy as well.
The anarchy of the Interstate!
 
  #15  
Old 03-19-2019, 04:07 PM
knope's Avatar
Member
Join Date: Nov 2017
Location: DC, USA
Posts: 316
LX 6-speed (because racecar): average over the last 4.5k miles, mixed driving: spirited, town, and highway...
 
  #16  
Old 03-22-2019, 03:56 PM
Member
Join Date: Jul 2015
Location: Toronto
Posts: 276
The higher trims get the heavier alloy wheels. The steelies on the lower trims are lighter by about 4 lbs/wheel. I owned both the OEM steelies and the OEM alloys and I can tell you they do make a difference in mpg. I also feel how I have to give it more gas for the car to accelerate with the alloys but after a while you get used to it and you can, after all, get similar mpg regardless of trim if you play around with the throttle and drive like a grandma ... like I do LOL.
 
  #17  
Old 03-22-2019, 06:01 PM
Member
5 Year Member
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: Central OH
Posts: 80
I would think that it would take many miles of meticulous records over the same routes in similar weather and temperatures to detect a difference in fuel use between wheel materials. Not even counting different tires and sizes.
 
  #18  
Old 03-22-2019, 11:29 PM
Member
Join Date: Jul 2015
Location: Toronto
Posts: 276
Talking

Originally Posted by rprpclark View Post
I would think that it would take many miles of meticulous records over the same routes in similar weather and temperatures to detect a difference in fuel use between wheel materials. Not even counting different tires and sizes.
I agree. My butt receptors have detected the difference, however. :P And I also weighed the wheels.
I used to own a 2000 corolla and when I switched from 14inch steelies to 17inch wheels I really noticed the difference. The engine simply worked harder to get the car going and overtaking at hwy speeds became more difficult for sure. Any added rotational weight (wheel-wise) will definitely make a difference. But the difference from 36lbs/wheel to 40lbs/wheel is rather small, so not so easy to detect or feel.
 
  #19  
Old 03-27-2019, 10:34 PM
Member
Thread Starter
Join Date: Feb 2017
Location: Washougal, WA
Posts: 29
Originally Posted by CommanderSlug View Post
The higher trims get the heavier alloy wheels. The steelies on the lower trims are lighter by about 4 lbs/wheel. I owned both the OEM steelies and the OEM alloys and I can tell you they do make a difference in mpg. I also feel how I have to give it more gas for the car to accelerate with the alloys but after a while you get used to it and you can, after all, get similar mpg regardless of trim if you play around with the throttle and drive like a grandma ... like I do LOL.
I'm actually deciding on the EX trim, and I'm going to ask them to swap the wheels with an LX because they are lighter and getting a new set of rims for snow tires will be cheaper.
 
  #20  
Old 03-27-2019, 10:47 PM
Member
Thread Starter
Join Date: Feb 2017
Location: Washougal, WA
Posts: 29
Also, I asked Honda Customer Support and their answer was "We don't have technical information"
 

Thread Tools
Search this Thread
Quick Reply: LX vs. EX Fuel economy


Contact Us - Archive - Advertising - Cookie Policy - Privacy Statement - Terms of Service

© 2019 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands

We are a participant in the Amazon Services LLC Associates Program, an affiliate advertising program designed to provide a means for us to earn fees by linking to Amazon.com and affiliated sites.