I love my MT, but this is just silly hyperbole. There are no awards for being the biggest CVT hater.

 

Same here - this is my first non-manual DD since I started driving in the late 1970s. I did close to 30K miles in my first year with the Fit - a lot of road trips to see my Dad who has dementia and lives 16 hours away. The CVT is perfect for that use case.

On the rare occasion I'm on a more engaging road (midwest, so not many twisties), I do miss having a manual, but from what I keep reading about the poor ratios in the Fit 6MT, I'm not so sure…

Since I replaced my stock exhaust with a Tanabe (a little more 'tone'), I've found it more fun to use the paddle shifters in Sport mode. They are definitely not a substitute for a MT, but it is fun to wind the engine out to the redline – other than the "shift" transitions being somewhat slushy, it almost sounds like a MT.

es

 

Sounds good. Now if any EX manuals will ever show up. Only LX 2016 manuals so far.

 

Bob Lindsay Honda in Peoria (where I bought my car) still has three '15 EX 6MTs on the lot; silver, grey and white. No '16s yet.

es

 

Considering that stick shift cars make up something like 4% or new car sales in the US, I disagree.

 

I wanted a manual, but it wasn't available in June 2014. And I definitely wanted the Fit, so CVT it was. Given that we do the occasional 1500 mile trip, I'm glad due to the poor M/T gearing.

 

bwahahaha! o wait you're serious

beauty is in the eye of the beholder. manuals ARE special, and so are automatics (to greatgrandparents who shouldn't be driving.... manuals)

just because people think race car driving pros are cool, and race car driving pros happen to prefer manuals doesn't mean that, people drive manuals to appear cool.

people prefer manuals for the same reasons the professionals do. ultimately it offers an ass-ton of more freedom.

but, we can bring cool into the equation... "cool" is a frame of reference. when I'm 90 ill think autos are "cooler" than manuals, because autos will offer me more freedom at that time. today i am 38, and manuals are "cooler" to me than autos, because manuals offer me more freedom at this time. so "cool" is not constant and ultimately not related to the issue.

 

Unless someone hears my gearbox shifting into reverse, they're not going to know my little econobox has a manual. And most people don't know what that sound is anyway. The manual isn't for cool, the manual is for being better able to control the car, which is cool.

You know what's got an awesome CVT? My lawnmower. I'm not kidding or making a backhanded compliment, it's what a CVT should be. The engine stays at its peak setting and I've got a big lever to control speed. Until we all have Teslas, the best thing we could have would be a throttle with notches for Off, Economy and Power- and a big Go lever controlling the transmission.

And until then, with limited power and imperfect methods of applying that power, I need a manual so that I can actually get something done- and if I lose a limb along the way I'm going to have to get something with a DDC.

The way CVTs are currently implemented, pretending to be regular automatics with a sport mode that pretends to be a manual... That's just all kinds of wrong. They could be so much more than either. Pretending that they actually are so much more, that's just sad.

 

In the evening news today in the 2015 Consumer Reports Reliability Survey, Honda dropped to 4 places to 8th most reliable. Consumer Reports rep cited CVT and infotainment issues as the reason for Honda's drop. Kia took Honda's place. There are a couple of CVT recalls for the Fit at the moment, and none for manual transmission. If reliability is top of mind for you consider the manual transmission over CVT.

source

 

Just get the manual. It's the only one you're sure not to regret.

 

CVT trans have pretty much hammered every marque that came with one... Remember the Subaru CVT? Trashed them in the US market. Nissan Altima with CVT, crappy mileage and horrible electrical problems.. I've had 3 as rentals all three ended up going back on a tow truck...

A transmission that uses essentially friction to move the vehicle has wear. Its why snowmobiles carry extra belts.. LOL I also have a Quad with a CVT and its the main maintenance item.. Besides oil changes..

Regular Auto or MT.. Keep the CVT.

 

Look I understand what driving a manual is like. I've driven it in the past. I also have motorcycles that are manual as well. What I don't understand is the hate for autos/cvt, and then saying those who drive them are wheelchair operators. That's just asinine.

If I was able to teach my GF, no my wife, how to drive one then anyone can learn to drive a stick shift. So let's not make it out that those who drive stick shifts are any better than those who drive an auto/cvt. It's not like you get a special license for driving a stick shift.

For me it was a question of which got the best MPG. I was going to initially by a manual because they normally got better MPG. I was surprised to learn that the CVT got the better MPG. More research found that the manual also ran higher RPMs at highway speed. I've got almost a 90 mile commute, and I really didn't want to hear the engine the whole time. The CVT runs about 2300-2400 RPM at 70 MPH. It's pretty much background noise to the wind noise. Even after putting on the HKS exhaust, I can just barely hear a hum at highway speed. I didn't need to denigrate the manual to come up with my decision.

 

I'm not better or cooler than anyone else because I can operate a clutch, tie my own shoes or cook my own meals.

You've just summed up the differences, but you've got the wrong take on them: it's not about operating a clutch, it's about driving the car.

Neither the CVT nor the manual gets better mileage, in and of itself: one does everything it can to operate the car for you and you get the mileage it gives you in the conditions. The other one lets you drive it yourself. If you drive in the exact style and conditions of the EPA test, you'll probably get better mileage in a CVT. I do neither. I can get better or worse mileage as I care to, moment to moment. I can loaf along or zap it, and I know that when I hit the gas the car isn't going to wonder what's going on and eventually decide to do something. I can be working on a personal best tank and still blast through my favorite esses or shut down some asshat. Being able to drive the car myself is a really high priority, it's fun as hell.

And my commute is over 40 miles each way, mostly highway. With the poorly geared MT, which doesn't "give" you any performance or mileage- it simply lets you make your own. And as long as I can walk, I see no need for a mobility scooter. Once my feet are totally shot and a cane can't do it I'll tool around the grocery store in one of those things. And I'll drive an automatic of some sort. Because if a wheelchair is your only choice, that's cool.

 

I can drive fast when I want, or I can drive slow when I want with the CVT. It's not feature that's held only by a manual. You're making it out like driving a manual gets you into an elevated plane of consciousness with the car. This is driving a econobox where eking out every last ounce of performance isn't my priority. If you were talking about driving a Ferrari, I'd probably let it slide, but it's a Fit. Heck Ferrari may not even offer a manual these days...

You've already admitted that with all things being equal, the CVT in the GK does better MPG than the manual. Right out of the box, it's configured to give you better MPG driven equally. Obviously no one does that, so that's why I can get horrible gas with the CVT if I drive like I stole it and I can also get much better mileage in a manual if I drive it more sedately.

Well I guess I'll agree to disagree...

 

I have an 09 fit with about 139k and wish I had gotten the MT on it.....would have been my first MT and the fit would have been a great car to learn it on.

that way I could mover to the FoST or the FiST or even the up and coming civic SI!!!

 

I really enjoy my CVT, and I was dead set against it to start with (girlfriend convinced me to go CVT due to my insane stop/go commute on I-5). Its not quite the same as a stick, but in sport with the paddles I still get most of the "engaged" driving sensation I got with my 5MT 2005 Civic and its plenty quick off the line.

 

The fit I ordered has a MT which makes me cool because 99.9% of the fits on the road here in Japan are CVT.

Other than that, I agree with you. The CVT is probably best for freeway driving because of the lower revs, and for city driving because of all the gear changing and clutching that you have to do just to arrive at the next red light.

It's also probably better if you're interested in getting up to speed. A CVT in sport will settle into the sweet spot of the powerband and just keep it there.

At the end of the day, the MT will give you that feeling of control that an automatic doesn't give you. It's a much busier driving experience, and there's nothing that can take the fun out of a daily commute faster than putting your transmission into D and driving to work.

 

Unless of course your daily commute consists of stop and go gridlock, which will automatically take the fun out of any commute, that is, if there was any fun in it to begin with.

 

Yup, I knew buying the Fit it was a commuter car and nothing more. My commute was going to more than double so I needed something that got better gas mileage than my 4Runner. It had to do well with highway and stop and go the last 10 miles of the commute. The Fit has been getting about 41-43 MPG the last handful of fill ups, compared to 17 MPG in the 4Runner on the same commute. My wife is happy to have the 4Runner replace her Mustang.

 

back into the 36 mpg range this tank. happy happy