My 20 year old Civic was on OEM clutch (140k miles).

As was my 12 year old Integra (121k miles).

And my 5 year old Fit (80k miles).

All shifted perfectly, no signs of slip.

 

How is revving your engine high in second wearing the clutch? Unless you are mashing the gas in neutral and dumping the clutch there should be no problem.

800$ for an auto trans rebuild? Maybe for a manual trans rebuilt but auto rebuild? My mechanic changed my clutch for 300$. I bought the clutch for 150$ and he put it in.

 

Let's go back and review the post I quoted. I'll highlight it to make it easier:

"Dropping the clutch" at 3-4K is going to be hard either on the tires or the clutch, depending upon how quickly it is "dropped."

I'd love to find a $300 clutch job performed by a competent mechanic. Perhaps it could be had on an aircooled VW, but not on a transverse FWD car. Hereabouts it is at least double that. Abuse the clutch as above and more than one clutch will be required.

 

In general, I think clutches are very durable. They are usually build to be durable from the factory. Automakers know they are not easy to get to and service.
I drive a lot miles. All of my previous vehicles were manuals. I have driven my past 3 vehicles all past 200,000mi.
My most recent was traded at 258,000mi. All my vehicles have been relatively trouble free. My most recent never left me setting anywhere. I had a few repairs. Nothing pricey or big expenses. All had clutches and manual transmissions. I have never in my life had to service or repair or replace a clutch or transmisssion, other than a fluid change.
If a clutch doesn't last for at least a quarter-million miles, then you didn't drive it right!
I have no idea what a new clutch job costs or what an transmission rebuild costs. In 20 years of driving, the issue has never came up. Than again, I've never owned a Honda personally.

I know for fact my Dad traded an old '84 F-150 at 310,000mi. It was 4-speed manual. I learned to drive on it. He used it for work and towed a boat with it often. It had original clutch, transmission, engine at trade.

 

Sorry, that's just verbage, I should have said "roll on the clutch"

If you're smooth with it and don't slip it too much, just enough, it's fine. Sidestepping or just letting off causes unneeded drivetrain shock and clutch wear. Plus the pegleg burnout is embarrassing lol

My Corolla has 225k miles and it's on the stock clutch, and the PO didn't drive it nicely either. Still grabs fine.

My Corolla before that had a clutch change at 60k miles, PO had all of the maintenance paperwork dating back to 1985. She was an old lady, and AFAIK was still quite an old lady in 1985. I'm sure she wasn't hot rodding the car everywhere, she was probably lazy on the clutch day to day, and that's what kills clutches. Laziness.

 

If by lazy you mean that the driver slips the clutch excessively you are correct, and that does not always mean that the driver is being aggressive or fast. Some people rev the engine up to 3-4K before they start to let the clutch out, for fear that they will stall the engine. They keep it running and get a smooth start but at the expense of excessive clutch wear.

When I teach people to drive a stick I emphasize that the engine should never exceed 2000RPM with their foot on the clutch. That's all you need to get a smooth start and the foot should be completely off the clutch pedal before feeding in more throttle.

The reliability of modern cars actually works against us regarding clutches. Most mechanics put in a new disk as a matter of course when the engine or transmission is out, but with engine lives exceeding 200K even the best clutch designs often wear out before the engine needs pulling. The clutches are no worse, the rest of the car is just that much better and the clutch becomes the weakest link.

 

Yes, I've ridden with people that rev way too high on normal starts, like you said, 3k or so. Every stoplight, in parking lots, going into parking lots, coming out of parking lots, backing up, you get the picture haha

They wonder why their clutch goes out so early.

Coming from a stop day to day I usually just go to about 1.5k. It's REALLY hard to stall the Fit. Like REALLY hard.

I did it yesterday but my wheel was caught on a curb and I didn't realize it.

 

Its not the miles but the number of shifts at rpm that matter. I know guys who don't get 50,000 miles without a new clutch but they shift a lot and with lots more revs than matching. the more long streches you drive the longer a clutch will last.
and yeah, no real shop can change a honda fit clutch for $150 plus parts.

 

I didn't even consider the CVT. I have a CVT Nissan Altima, and Nissan extended my warranty on that vehicle because Nissan had been sued because of the high cost of CVT replacements. My understanding is CVT's require full factory unit replacement at very high cost (deep into the thousands). I have had no issues in 80,000 miles on the Altima, but I am sure some day the thing will run $5,000 or more to replace. Between the rubbery feel of a CVT and the eventual high cost of a total unit replacement. I went with a shifter. That's the cost aspect of it for me. I don't think I will own another CVT. Although I understand their economics, and efficiency and that Honda is making it its prime transmission choice for the N.A. market.

The real decision came down to fun. A manual brings more of the power of this nice 1.5L motor to the touch and feel of a driver. I think if you are a driver. It's not even a choice. It's MT or nothing. As far as rev notes. There are rev notes that are unpleasant at times in the 2015 Fit. This has been documented by professional reviewers and this happens at certain rev points and with certain road/highway surfaces. It is a not a deal breaker. One rev note that is pure sweetness is over 4,000 RPM in 6th gear in the MT. It is an absolute delight. Not sure how the CVT would do in that situation. Probably noisy and added noise over the engine noise. Any commentators on that?

As a few people have said, this is one of the easiest MT's you'll ever have to operate. It is light, works with nearly no revs. It's a dream. Remember this little killer engine loves to rev over 4,000 to 6,000 RPM. One poster wanted to get the HR-V, it's going to be the same thing, and the car will be more laborious because the HR-V will be heavier. I would think the HR-V would be an exciting vehicle with a 2.0 Turbo, AWD mated to a 6-speed MT. That would be a kick to drive with well over 200 hp. But then you are talking more of a WRX / Crosstek kind of competitor from Honda, which will run you near $30K, and not a sporty, practical B-Class that's had for under $20k. For daily commuting, and several cars in the garage, you have to own a Fit.

 

Screamin' down the highway for hundreds of miles at the same rpm/speed as a '74 Pinto... a delight? Different strokes for different folks. Keep in mind the GK's 6th is the same as the GE's 5th, which is the same overall as the Pinto's 4th.

Loafing along at less than 2,700 rpm where you're turning 4,000. Quiet.

 

Exactly. That sounds like a good time to me.

While this thread is fun to watch the bickering back and forth on, no one's changing anyone else's mind, obviously.

 

Another post worthy of a "Like" button.

 

Hi there, longtime listener, first-time caller.

This is what grandpa used to call "Ford vs. Chevy" ... the one guy is never going to convince the other guy of his car’s merits (or demerits of the other guy’s car) so anything beyond amicable bantering is stupid, especially because it often leads to hurtful feelings.

And for the record, we were all Chevy guys back then – and MT fanatics.

 

The thing here is that torque converters almost completely eliminate feeling and responsiveness, so to get the attention of an AT driver you have to be pretty blunt.

 

I used to do that, until I realized that both were crap.

Both transmissions have their place. They both have advantages and disadvantages. Horses for courses and all that.

Yes, the Chaparral 2a-2C was certainly lacking in feeling and responsiveness as their transmissions consisted of only a torque converter. Yet, for some reason, they was dominant in the Can Am racing series of their time including a win at the 12 hours of Sebring. Dominant to the point that their innovative technologies were banned!

What people ignore is the fact that abrupt changes in wheel forces are not what you want if you wish to be fast on the track. Break a wheel loose in a corner with a "responsive" drivetrain and you're in a world of hurt. Smoothness wins races.

 

Well, I don't think this is anything more than amicable bantering. I enjoy a good discussion. No, I don't think anyone's mind is being changed at the end of all this, but that's not the point really, to me anyway.

 

I'm thoroughly convinced that I need a manual now. Thanks everybody!

**Now to find that manual online on everything I need to know about the CVT** Hehehe!

 

Correct about the mileage. I changed my clutch at 55k because the tranny had to come out anyway. I live in the city so I'm shifting all the time with stop signs at every street corner. In the winter, I just wouldn't have it any other way; total control with my manual transmission.

If I recall correctly, I paid 170$ shipped for my exedy clutch and paid my mechanic 300$ to pull the tranny and change the clutch. Total: 470$. Not bad for a repair that will probably last 60-70k miles (since I'm the only driver now). I'd rather pay that then deal with mysterious auto tranny problems that are hard to diagnose/fix.

 

The problem with modern manual transmissions is they have way too many gears with too much shifting. All you need is one to start in, one for acceleration and passing, and one for cruise. They need to bring back three on the tree, bench seats, and a T-handle parking brake hanging under the dash.

 

This is true. Mileage is just an indicator of use, but like I said, it's how you drive the car in that mileage. Someone with bad practices that shifts exactly the same amount of times (hypothetically speaking) as someone with good practices will have much shorter clutch life comparatively.

I don't see how you kill a clutch in 50k miles, obviously it happens though, there's plenty of evidence of that. I've just never known anyone that's done it unless it was done having fun, and the repairs are just part of the game. I've never lived in a rural area in my life either, so it's not like everyone I know is cruising the backroads at 40mph with no stop signs or cares in the world racking up miles.