Autoguide (the folks who picked up Fit Freak's leak about the new Fit's pricimng and trims) has up a new car page for the 2015 Fit.

2015 Honda Fit Specs, Price, Trim Levels, User Reviews, Photos & Buying Advice

What stuck out to me as I looked at it was the markedly lower mpg estimates on the page: 29 city/ 37 hwy for the manual and 32 city/ 38 hwy for the CVT. Honda had earlier predicted 33 city/ 41 hwy.

Is this official? If so, I'm surprised: Earlier generations of the Fit had underestimated EPA mileage.

 

Great post on the latest news. Assuming these are correct its a bit of a let-down. On the positive side, the manual is at least rated 10% better than previous Gens.
Manufacturers can't overstate EPA MPG. Too much of a legal risk.
No worries, after reading posts from frugal driving our fellow Fit members do, wouldn't surprise me if one of them will be able to achieve 55MPG once deliveries start.
Great Thread for your first post. Congrats.

 

Thanks. I've been lurking for a week, hitting refresh to see what came out of Jason's press event. When I saw this, I figured it was time to chip in.

A second source, Car and Driver, is going with the same mpg numbers. They also have a bunch of other specs, including curb weight (2,513 pounds for the LX 6-speed), gear ratios, etc.

2015 Honda Fit Reviews - Honda Fit Price, Photos, and Specs - CARandDRIVER

 

What can all of us say but, you have impeccable timing. From your location, looks like your wishing you could get the Orange RS color available in Japan. A Sooner color!!!!!!!!!!!!

 

A Sooner color would be a plus (I work for the University of Oklahoma), but that would be Milano Red. Orange is the color of our two biggest rivals, Oklahoma State and Texas, but that hasn't stopped me from buying an orange vehicle before. That RS looks noiice...

 

The specifications listed by Car and Driver for the manual transmission gearing is very interesting. If this information is correct, the new Fit is not using the rather tall gears with very tall 6th gear that is used in the CRZ. Instead they are using the extra gear in this 6 speed to make the new fit faster off the line with closer ratios thru the gears and the same 0.73 OD for 6th gear that the current fit uses in 5th.

This means the new manual transmission fit will accelerate faster than the old one, even with the same engine output, but with the higher HP of the new engine, it should be at least 0.5 second faster to 60. Maybe 8.0 sec to 60 and about .5 sec faster in the 1/4 mile maybe 16.0 @ 85.

But at the same time it will still buzz along at 2900 rpm at 60mph. And that could well be the reason for the fuel economy downgrade. If you want 40 mpg on the highway, you need a taller top gear.

 

Those are estimates only.

 

If their numbers are correct, then I'm keeping my GE. Cargo space down to 16.6 cu ft? No good. Same silly gear ratios? No good.

 

Honda seems to be pretty conservative with their mpg estimates.

I wouldn't trade my GE for a 15 and I wouldn't hold off on buying one until the 15 comes out, but if the time to buy a new car had held off a year, I'd have cheerfully bought a 15.

 

The CVT version has a taller top gear, with a range of ratios from 2.53 - 0.41. It will not get off the line nearly as quickly, though.

 

This is why I'm getting the 2015 over the old style Fits

1. Leather Seats - A plus +

2. MoonRoof - A plus + for those that want this

3. Proximity Key entry, and ignition - A plus +

4. Back up camera - A nice addition that I like on my Civic

5. Addition of Honda LaneWatch side-view camera - Safety my friends

6. More horse power, more torq. A nice addition

7. Better fuel economy - Very Good

8. Better sound insolation - Nice

9. Fit should also earn the IIHS top rating of Good..Means its a bit safer

10. More leg room for rear passengers - Nice for passengers

11. A tad more upscale - Thank goodness



52.7 cubic feet on 2015 compared to 2013 Fit 57.3 cargo space - Difference of 4.6 cubic feet.

 

Lo and behold, you mean there are actually two of us??? Won't coin up for the leather though but hell, we'll both be driving with big smiles for sure!!!!

Don't forget to add, 6-speed M/T.

 

Bummer! I thought a big selling point for the new 15 Fit is the significantly higher mileage. I have an 09 Orange Fit and I can easily get over 40mpg on highways. Now I have to seriously think about whether I should trade in. I love the orange color so much. I really don't want to trade it with the taxi yellow unless there are other more compelling reasons for me to do so.
PS I don't like any colors offered in the new lineup.

 

This is a huge disappointment for me. My 09 is rated at 35 mpg/ highway, so 38 is basically the same. I wonder why Honda can't get into the 40s?

 

1. Yes leather is nicer, IMO, but you pay for it and people seem to like th seat covers
2. Sure, but big deal. If it were panoramic (like on Kia's) then woohoo!
3. Who cares
4. Who cares, the car is so small that the sensor is overkill
5. Sure, but again, this is not a large SUV
6. Absolutely
7. Not much better. Highway is only 3mpg better with a CVT (yuck) vs Auto.
8. Absolutely
9. Absolutely, depends on why the rating increase
10. Great, but I hear that comes at the expense of head room
11. Why? In any case it's a $20K compact car. Nobody thinks wow, that's upscale.

Overall, I'm a bit underwhelmed as a person with an 09 Sport. I have the auto, but wanted a manual. I was hoping for 40+ mpg highway or a RS model with more power. I guess this is more of an evolution (like 08 to 09) than a revolution. For now, I'll keep my 09.

 

This is not good news. I really want low 2K rpm on the highway. My 2012 m/t is way too buzzy on long drives. I-5 in CA is no fun at 4K RPM for long periods of time. Usually I've got ear plugs in, but I've forgotten them a couple of times--ouch!

 

I think both Subaru and Honda tend to be conservative with EPA "estimates", and your experience concurs with that. They don't want to be in the same boat as Kia.

 

Yes, and Hyundai.

Hyundai, Kia reach $400-million settlement over inflated MPG claims - Los Angeles Times

The Elantra claimed 40 mpg hwy, but the previous Fits (rated at 33 or 35) consistently get better mileage.

 

If the 6MT has the same top gear ratio as the 5MT, forget it, I'll get the CVT. I don't want to shift all day, and not even have a gear with longer legs for the freeway, where I spend 90% of my miles.

 

Just an estimate folks. Last time around the mileage shown on the 2011 fits was not the mileage we really got which was actually more. Just wait until the final figures come out and not be to hasty is down playing the current estimates.