Agree. These threads always seem to devolve into "tranny wars" and it's getting really boring.

 

I'm an amateur excel junkie (i.e. my math may be wrong)....I ran, for the sake of argument, $2.25 per gallon of gas, which is about what it is about today in sunny Concord, NH....

Based on 30mpg, cost per gallon = 8 cents, $30.00 for 400 miles, $1,875 for 25,000

Based on 35mpg, cost per gallon = 6 cents, $25.71 for 400 miles, $1,607 for 25,000

Based on 40mpg, cost per gallon = 6 cents, $32.50 for 400 miles, $1,406 for 25,000

Based on 45mpg, cost per gallon = 5 cents, $20.00 for 400 miles, $1,250 for 25,000


I have a CVT and get mid 30's around town, 40 on the highway at 65ish, have gotten as good as 42....

It seems to me that you need to decide if $6.50ish per week is worth your happiness or not....

Based on my math, we are talking a negligible amount....

 

Hondas are meant to rev??
Serious question - is this true and why?

I've seen this notion before somewhere else in the forums and it does make me wonder. What's really going with the engine when it revs? Is my MT going to have an early death for reving higher than a CVT? Is the effect on mpg really significant?

 

I'd say that, given Honda's many decades of experience building high revving motorcycle and racing engines, the company knows a bit more about building good engines than we do. I worry about a lot of things in this world. Wearing out my Fit prematurely because I bought a manual transmission is not one of them.

Then again, the speed limit in NY state is 65, and being an old man, I seldom drive more than 70 for any length of time. As they say, YMMV.

 

I don't believe that it is any more true of Honda than it is of Toyota, Mazda, or any other maker of small automobile engines. All engines have a good working RPM range that will minimize wear. Below that range you stress the engine because each power pulse has to be large to produce the desired power. This is called "lugging." Above the good working RPM range you stress the engine via high reciprocating loads as the pistons change direction rapidly. This is overrevving.

Overrevving does not mean exceeding the redline. If you were to operate an engine continuously at 500 RPM below redline your engine life would be very short. Most engines operate at about half of redline or less.

There are a few engines that are really made to rev higher. The S-2000, RX-8, and WRX can rev to 8000 or 9000 RPM. You don't want to operate continuously at those RPMs but they are available for bursts of power. Note that these are specialty engines and you're going to pay for that rev-ability.

In many cases I think that folks saying "This engine was meant to rev" is really a polite way of saying "This engine lacks low RPM torque." Honda is rather known for this. I used to switch back and forth between Nissan and Honda vehicles and the Hondas always seemed rather lacking at the low end. Situations where the Nissan just required a prod at the throttle required a downshift on the Honda.

 

personally, i prefer the manual. i drive a lot, and a majority of the time it is very spirited. the manual car is much more visceral compared to the cvt, thus it is an easy choice for myself.

wife gets over 40mpg when she drives it, i get 33-35. she drives speed limit or near it, i am +15 or so everywhere. she listens to the radio and is a droid on the way to work with her coffee at her will. i have fun, many times just enjoying the sounds of driving and smelling the brakes (traction control intervening on the days the sensors are connected...).

 

Yea buy what you like, but if you buy a manual you better like it because most drivers would not consider a manual transmission and resale is dismal.

 

The last post on this subject was over a year and a half ago... I think he bought whatever he wanted by now.