I honestly had done it when it was bone stock, but dont remember the exact #'s and didn't took a photo..... but since it hasn't been tuned with the mods i think it should have been better stock, but also think that after tuning, an engine being an air pump, with a better flow of gasses it SHOULD get better....... we'll see as soon as i get the program back from @Ktuner and dyno it!😬

 

My best full tank MPG has been 47.726. I travelled 387.200 miles and filled up with 8.113 gallons of gas. The stars must have been aligned on my commutes as I have not been able to best it. I have hit 47 again with some sprinklings of 46 and 45 MPG. Those were using ECON and 87 Gas from non top tier gas.

At this point I've gone with wider tires (205/50/16) and drive with ECON off, and I'll consistently get 42-44 MPG. That's good enough for me!

 

Two weeks ago I got 42.6 averaging 75mph. did the drive today and averaged 39.5 @80mph. Also, I lowered the car since then.

 

I've only had mine one week tomorrow, but I'm at 32.5. I must admit though, if I wasn't losing and gaining 2500 feet in elevation each day, I suppose my mileage would increase. Yikes, probably a lot. I've been driving like an old woman that's blind in one eye and has a cataract on the other. Yes, when going to work, (downhill) I got 55 mpg. By the time I got back home it was at 42 mpg. I'm still impressed.

How about tire pressure experimentation. I came from a 2004 Nissan 350Z convertible. I did increase mileage by one or two mpg by going from the nominal pressure to the max (COLD) pressure. Nah, I've got to say two mpg. I haven't checked to see what my pressures are right now, but I'd guess they put the nominal in. So that will probably allow me to go up a good four or five pounds per square inch. One site I read yesterday said that you can get .4 of a mile MPG improvement for each pound of pressure. ??? Within the labeled limits of course. If that's true, I should be getting two miles per gallon more after the pressure change today. That would take me to 44 MPG. I'm of course expecting an increase once the car is broken in as well. I only have four hundred miles at this point. What sucks is that amount of mileage accrued in ONE WEEK, and will accrue at that rate from this point forward.

What are you going to do? I've been a machinist for 42 years and in my experience, machinist jobs are easy to find but it's also very easy to find jobs that are pretty uncomfortable. Lots of pressure. Lots of brow beating. Not great pay, but decent. So, when you find a job that is actually comfortable, you really don't want to chance going back to nasty. That's something that typically takes a while to find out. Hence, a 400 mile per week commute IF, I don't work O.T. on Friday. If I do, then 500 miles.
Yikes.


I'm very optimistically hoping for a good 45 MPG after I put one or two thousand miles on it.

To change subjects; I can't believe the amount of room in these Fits. My God it's amazing. This morning I tried an experiment. I put the back seats down and climbed in the back. Very nice in deed. I can lay down and stretch out completely straight. I'm 5'10" so I think that's pretty damned cool. So if I wanted to use it for an ad hoc camping trip or something, I can sleep completely stretched out in the back. I wouldn't thought in a million years I'd be to do that in a compact economy car.

I'm very, very happy at this point. There's only one complaint I have. I have NEVER paid more than MSRP, out the door. I.E., I've always got the dealer to cover the tax, license, and all fees. At the very least that is. Not this time. I was in a real bind. It was a perfect storm kind of thing and I didn't prepare as I should have. So I pretty much HAD to get a car, that weekend. Therefore, there was no real time to haggle or go from dealer to dealer or to research anything. So, I ended up paying MSRP, PLUS, Tax, License, and all fees. Ouch that hurts.

 

welcome!

I was able to pull off 52.4 mpg (48.9 per ScanGauge) from San Diego to the city of Irvine (76.5 miles away). This was the perfect day, where the roads were perfectly flat and I had an awesome truck to draft behind






For more "real" numbers, here's a 333+ miles (5 hours road trip, with AC on) example from San Diego going to Las Vegas. On this trip, HILLS (tons of it) are involved. I was able to pull off 42 mpg

 

Jumping into the mileage discussions with some random Fit details.

Common details between two Fits:
>>Lifestyle has not changed while owning both cars. Midwest, USA travels for bicycle racing
>>Same hitch and bike rack, even same bikes on the back
>>Typical load - counting rack, bikes, people, gear: 700-800 pounds.
>>I fill until the pump shuts off and usually pull the handle one more time until it shuts off.
>>Tire pressure 34-35psi, I think and need to confirm, I am second guessing myself on this one.
>>When I buy the lowest grade gas it is when I know the entire tank will be consumed that day.

The Cars:
2015 LX 6MT - SOLD
205 Trips to the gas station
52,199 miles logged
Highway cruise control: 72-73mph
All time average MPG: 34.9
Fuel: Premium starting around 10,000 miles. Ethanol Free anytime it's available. Every now and then on a road trip I buy cheapest to test my sanity.

2018 EX CVT - Current
67 Trips to the gas station
16,351 miles logged
Highway cruise control: 77-78mph (this is +5 mph)
All time average MPG: 32.6 (this is a 2.3 mpg drop)
Fuel: Premium or ethanol free anytime it's available. Every now and then on a road trip I buy cheapest to test my sanity.

>>I drive the 2018 considerably faster on average. I would consider the cars the same fuel economy if I would drive them both the same speed on the interstate. The low rpm of the CVT makes faster feel much better.
>>A key difference, I use the cruise in the 2018 much more out of laziness. I can gain about 2mpg if I drive the car without cruise on a hilly route.
>>2015 LX cars record was my all time high, but caused by some really odd traffic patterns and an early fill. My best of 39.8 in the 2018 that was calculated on Fuelly was without cruise, car at about 600 pounds over empty weight, and one bike on the back, also miracle winds.

Oberservations: (not to start a fuel debate because there is no angle of the argument we haven't heard already) (and we know the cheap stuff is always cheaper, and we know about "in the long run" LOL... )
>>Low grade fuel: 3-4mpg less than the gauge
>>High grade fuel: .5-2mpg less than the gauge
>>Ethanol free: .2-1mpg less than the gauge

>>Gusting wind seems to be the commonality when the actual mileage vs the gauge is at its worst.

 

so on high grade fuel, your mpg reading went from being 3-4 mpg less than the gauge, down to 0.5-2mpg less? IE, there appears to be an improvement in mpg?

2nd question, assuming mpg's did increase, would the gains in mpg offset the cost of going up to high grade fuel?

 

Answering both:
Higher octane fuel consistently shows more accuracy for me. Doing my best to get ethanol free (only one ethanol free pump in my city of 40,000+) and avoid e10 because it not only takes 3-4% of your mileage, but the ugly stories of ethanol seem to go on and on. Once upon a time, I believe on this forum, it was explained how the fuel economy gauge works. The car knows exactly how much fuel it is putting in, what is does not know is how big of boom it is going to get out of that fuel. Calibrated for perfect fuel, and likely some ideal air temps, we can only try to get our numbers right on what the gauge says. Yes we have knock sensors, but I don't think that means the cars runs as advanced timing as it possibly can. So the closer you get to that the gauge reads, the higher the quality of the fuel. last - we hardly know the accuracy of filling up the car. Flat pavement at a gas station doesn't seem all that common around here. And the quality or brand of the pumps come into play too..

2nd part...
I haven't checked my math all that closely here, but generally speaking, you cannot get enough more MPG's to make up for the extra cost. Jumping from $3 to $3.50 is a 17% increase. I think it's relative to the MPG's so I would need to go from 35 to 41 without any doubt in the outcome. I am convinced the gas stations know this. LOL.

Something else I have wondered and my best guess is the MAF is crazy accurate... Accounting for altitude and maintaining accuracy.

 

keep in mind this is only going from an octane rating of 87 to 93, a 6% increase in octane... i'd expect an increase from ~35 to ~37 if there's any direct correlation.

the price difference of 17% is a premium for premium.

 

Based on my experience - same route, A/C on and off over several trips - I've never been able to establish a mileage penalty for using the A/C. The benefits, however, are obvious.

 

You can get 3-5mpg, or more, improvement in your MPG by removing the windshield wipers. I live in the high desert north of LA, where it rains 3-5 days a year, so this makes sense, preserving the wiper blades, reducing wind noise, and cutting aerodynamic drag substantially while making a dramatic improvement in passing time both on the freeway, and especially, on secondary roads where speed limits are 55-65 mph.

I think this is the best MPG number I ever got, driving from Victorville to Landers on hwy 18 and hwy 247. I had a tailwind going out and a headwind coming home, but suspect the wind died a bit in the 2 hours or so I was driving this test route. Speeds were 50-55mph with no traffic. The terrain is long, gentle hills at around 3,000ft elevation.

On the freeway, or mixed freeway and secondary roads we usually get 42 to 45 MPG. This includes two 1,700 mile trips to New Mexico and Texas. The only time the MPG drops below 40 MPG is at 80mph freeway speeds with a headwind.

O&B test route results.

 

Ooops, right commentary, wrong pic. This is the best MPG result achieved. 2016 Honda FIT EX-CVT. All stock except for removing the windshield wipers.

 

Unless your AC runs on perpetual motion it's taking power from the engine, so the MPG must take a hit.

Driving through the Imperial Valley of California on the way to Mexico in June the AC cost me about 3-5 mpg. I spent the money for 3M's Crystalline window film after 3 such trips. The cabin noise is much more agreeable, and now the MPG hit is in the 1-2 MPG as I don't have to run it nearly as hard. YMMV, of course, but all AC takes power as it's a Freon pump and pumps take power to operate.

 

The effect on MPG of premium fuels has been well documented by major car publications for over a decade now. For modern engines, and especially direct-injection engines, burning octanes higher than those the engine was designed for makes ZERO improvement, and in certain rare instances, reduced MPG. Stick with the fuel your engine was designed for. My personal experimentation confirmed all of this for my 2016 FIT.

Ethanol contains LESS, and significantly less energy per volume (82/114ths as much) than gasoline, less than propane (81/91) in fact.

 

Moved down to Victorville from Carmichael & used to do a lot of cycling up near Grass Valley. Here's my RX for better MPG. Ditch the windshield wipers!
I keep a box-end wrench of the right size and the driver's wiper under my seat just in case, but in a dry climate losing the wipers adds 3-5 MPG.

(Did you work for Shilling in Shingle Springs? Heard they were pretty awful. Now part of FMC IIRC)

 

It probably does, but it's so slight that I could never measure it. Pulling a trailer is something different. I have a 4 x 10' flatbed trailer that I sometimes pull to carry large items. That makes a definite difference in MPG, easily measurable.

If I can't measure the difference, then it doesn't matter. I'd rather ride in a cool, quiet car than assume I'm saving pennies on gas by driving in a hot, noisy car.

 

Yes, I take your point.

This research is targeting hybrid and electric vehicles, and is circa 2000, but I was interested to see that an average of 5 gasoline test vehicles showed a 22% reduction in fuel economy (Table 8, pg 7). For the FIT, assuming 40 MPG, that would be a bit more than 8 MPG. That seems high to me, but my 3-5 MPG estimate for very hot conditions now seems likely.

It's also interesting that they cite the windshield as a major source of heat infiltration. Having already had the rest of the windows filmed with mid-grade dark films, I applied 3M's Crystalline Film to the windshield. This film rejects 97% of heat (IR energy) even in the very light shades, and 91% for the clear film. It is expensive, but in the desert it makes a huge difference in how often the AC compressor runs, fan speed & noise, and how long it takes for the AC to cool the car after soaking in the sun - the latter is just flat out amazing, being less than a minute in many cases. Electric cars are going to push this tech very hard to preserve battery life, and we who drive smaller vehicles can all benefit.

In the past I have replaced the door panel's plastic barrier with a reflective blanket (Space blanket) and a layer of Thinsuate clothing insulation. This is very effective, especially against cold, and happily, cuts noise dramatically. Having done about all I can with window film, this is the next logical step for my FIT, as it's cheap and fairly easy. I just wish this was offered, at least as an option, by car mfgs.

 

Wiper Arms removed.... lets see if this works! Will report back in 2-3 tanks

 

If the rain is hard enough, and you're driving fast enough, Rain-X will keep the windshield clear. ( It says I haven't typed ten characters, so I will type some more. a a a a s s s d d f f g gh h j j kl oityu rytucq[a98yua- [98ryca-9e8cyqj-09e8r6jc -0x9r86)

 

I have a brand new 2018 LX CVT with Honda Sensing. Two tanks so far, avg about 45MPG. But I drive 60-65 on the highway. My 2009 Fit Sport got 40MPG driving 60-65, 30MPG driving 75-80.