2015 Honda Fit Deep Dive - Everything You Need to Know | The Truth About Cars

A revival of the 6 speed gearing discussion.

 

Another sharing of an article containing the writer's objective analysis.

Reading and learning from people who actually have driven the GK means way more than from others who decide to extrapolate information from statistics and draw pre-mature conclusions without a mere second behind the wheel.

Kudos again for your continuing efforts to share.

 

I'll be testing both manual and CVT for sure.

 

I havent seen/heard what the revs are in 6th gear at 60mph but still the only regret I have with the Fit I have is the CVT. Was forced on me cause the misses license is auto only but I dont like the slipping clutch feel they give of just sitting at a set rpm as the car accelerates. For a non fun daily commuter its fine but for anyone that enjoys driving I dont understand how they could live with it. YUCK.

 

News release said 60mph would require 2800 RPM in the manual, vs 1800 in the CVT… awfully buzzy.

'Don't know the comparative efficiencies of the rubber band CVT vs. the gear train of the 6-speed, but if the engine has sufficient torque to pull 60 at 1800 RPM in the CVT version, then it ought to be able to do likewise with the manual gearbox.

Of course it would require wider spacing of the ratios. But it seems silly to go to all the trouble of adding an extra gear and not cover "both ends," so to speak… the engine's torque band can't be that narrow.

Note: the engine is very under square, which augers for more torque at lower RPM… but with today's metallurgy they can still wind the engine and not wear out the cylinder walls and rings. Maybe that's why they spray oil at the bottoms of the pistons

P.S. If you want to feel "clutch slippage," try going up hill in my 2010 Prius… Atkinson cycle engine… sounds like a 747 trying to take off.

P.P.S. All this is moot as SWMBO (the missus) wants the automatic for around town.

-----

Actually, this is all better discussed on the "Manual Gear Ratios" thread. I edited the numbers here; they were off 200 RPM… now corrected.

 

My intuition is that CVTs have increased frictional losses vs. actual meshed gears. However, this seems to be offset by the vastly different ratios of this car's two transmissions.

Possibly the automakers don't want us to be able to make a "1800 rpm in a CVT" vs. "1800 rpm in a manual" comparison. That would be interesting. Does such a case occur in the auto world?

 

The CVT's rpm doesn't depend on speed, like it is with manul, it depends on the required torque. The CVT simply adjusts to the demand. So going uphil at 60 might result in 4000 rps vs going downhill with the same CVT might result in 1700 rpm.