I know that my fit has read 115mph on the speedometer and my GPS tracked it at 114mph on several different occasions when it was stock. A few of those runs were on I95 in NC when there were no other cars around me. At least 2 late night runs on I64 here in the Hampton roads, Virginia.

I have not gotten above 110mph since having the turbo installed.

 

Wow... I didn't know a gutted GE8 with a roll cage along with these parts below is a "very seriously prepared B spec"

Must be the camber bolts...




Not for nothing, but there's a few GE8 owners on here who've already done 105mph+... on a stock GE8.




Also iirc, GE8 peak torque is ~ 5200-5600rpm (right before vtec kicks in ), not sure of the GD3 but doesn't their vtec kick in at a much lower rpm ~3k?


In one post limiter is 6800, the next it's 6500?
Are we talking about the GE8 or GD3??? Info keeps toggling back & forth...

Thanks DSM & Wanderer for bringing some facts to this thread... +reps... That Apex'i unit might do the trick for our GE8's.


Anyways, this past week I was bouncing off the rev limiter in 3rd, but it was a different type of bouncing, it wouldn't cut all the way as had happened before, but more of a slight cut & back on again... I wasn't flooring it, it was more of a consistent pedal... anyway that was at about 6800-7000 rpm, so for sure the GE8 rev limiter is not 6500rpms..... #coolstorybro

 

Again, via GPS I can confirm 116 mph on non public roads in a stock GD

Peak tq in a GD is around 5K, hp is not far after around 6K.

Just a few more facts

 

I can squash this shit.

I have the track recorder plugin for torque pro.

Ill put OBD speed, GPS speed, revs, short and long term fuel trim, and timing advance on the overlay.

Then I will laugh as you apologize for being one foolish person

 

Well I was just gonna take a shitty iPhone video but that's better and not as incriminating lol

I think we all know this magic 105 speed barrier doesn't exist. You have good advice sometimes mahout but I think you need to concede on this one man with all respect.

What's the fastest anyone's got to in a Fit on the bank at Autoclub Speedway? I think I'm gonna give it a go this year with SV and see. I will be getting passed I'm sure but just for the lulz.

 

I've never once seen mahout go "You know, maybe I was mistaken."

As someone who can be very blunt too, when someone can demonstrate how and where I made an error.. I try to own it to learn and remember at least.

The tuning stretch I used for when I made those way back on the FIC-6 is rural, nearly 4 miles long, surrounded by prairie on both sides with jersey barriers, no cross traffic and flat enough to see a max of two-three giant "mirages" in the heat.

VSS and GPS are good enough, I do not video any of these as they are not for showing off.

 

Man, reading through this thread made me use up two bags of popcorn! I think some people are confusing top speed of stock Fits with top speed of modified Fits. Then you also have to factor in that there are two different chassis styles, and different domestic models, and a myriad of other variables that will affect top speed (elevation, weight, wind speed/direction, etc).

Top speed in my 2007 USDM Base has been about 90mph/145kph. Not because it couldn't go any faster but because I'm older and don't feel the need to see how fast it can go. I also don't have access to any closed courses because I'm lazy, which leaves me with only public roads. After hitting 135mph/217kph on my motorcycle once I figured that was the fastest I was ever going to go and I'm okay with that.

As far as the torque curve and peak horsepower are concerned, below is the dyno chart for my Fit. Peak torque is at about 4700rpm and horsepower is around 6000rpm. But, that is for MY Fit, others will certainly be different.

 

If you had read, you would see we quite literally just spent the last page of this thread discussing precisely all of that.

 

I did read. Which was why I said what I said because no one else had pointed out the obvious. It's like arguing which is the better baseball player: the first baseman or the center outfielder. It isn't even like comparing apples to oranges - it's like comparing apples to Cheerios. The argument goes nowhere unless everyone is on the same page as to what they're arguing about. Stock vs modified (engine swaps vs forced induction vs non-swapped setups), GD vs GE, sea-level vs mountains, winter vs summer, uphill vs downhill vs average between the two, packed with the whole fam damily on a road trip vs stripped and gutted for "the track". I think a better question would have been "How fast have you had YOUR Fit up to? Provide engine size (1.3L, 1.5L, 2.4L, etc), modifications (if any), domestic model version (Japanese, North American, European), and photograph or video as proof". Then that would lead to a better discussion.

 

Shrug.

There were only two sides:

1. No way a Fit can top 105.
2. I top 105 all day erryday.

That was the funniest part, both GD and GE are completely capable of doing this, so it didn't really matter. Everything else was just semantics.

The thread was fine before I showed up I think lol

 

You know, it really surprises me that, in all the pages of discussion here, nobody bothered to check to see if there's any published data on the Fit's top speed. As is happens there is: Car and Driver has tested both the GD and GE Fits, and has published observed top speeds for both. Unlike other magazines who only estimate top speeds, C/D still tests for observed top speed whenever possible and publishes the results.

So, here we go:
GD Fit Sport MT (from long-term test): 113 MPH

GE Fit Sport MT: 114 MPH
GE Fit Sport AT: 113 MPH

I should also mention that C/D does the test properly: average of top speed in two directions to allow for wind effect.

 

I don't find enthusiast magazines authoritative in matters pertaining to performance.

 

quotable. Especially 0-60 tests. I know they have to have test controls but some of their results are laughable.

Here's the thing... and this is not directed at you 4thCornerFit, just a rant at the clouds lol

WHO CARES about uphill, downhill, tornado, whatever. In real life, there are situations where natural terrain, occurrences, weather help your performance. So if it's a high pressure day you're going to tell yourself "well all that fun I just had didn't count because it was a high pressure zone so that's not legit data". Lets say I best a "insert X sportscar here" on the downhill somewhere in Malibu. Doesn't count because it was downhill and there were turns right? Would have never happened if it was on the freeway so that doesn't count, the sportscar is still faster Whatever, it happened and it was fun, and in that moment, that sportscar was not faster.

Engineers think too much about data and miss the important stuff that's not always quantifiable. I work with them all day long

I assume anyway that those top speeds published are computer limited, which tells me nothing other than Honda thought 114 mph is all the fun you're going to have.

 

Yes, I'll agree that going strictly by numbers doesn't necessarily select the "best" car; also that trying to compare numbers between publications is an exercise in futility 'cause they each have enough variation in their testing methods and equipment to make that statistically irrelevant.

However, I'll use comparison-test data from one mag to get a rough idea of how competing models stack up against each other -- odds are pretty high that this testing will be done on the same day, at the same location, and by the same driver. And for top-speed, I'll take whatever I can get from someone who actually measures this.

In C/D's test results page for the GE Sport MT, it explicitly states that the 114-MPH top speed is "drag-limited". If it was redline-limited (rare these days) or governor-limited, this would have been declared; I've seen it in tests of other vehicles. There's also a note there that says it takes a loooong time to get to that speed from 100 MPH due to aerodynamic drag. FWIW.

 

It does take a lot of real estate.

 

Maybe I was on a deceptively flat looking decline or something but it didn't seem to take very long from a 85 mph roll in 4th in my most recent adventure. I looked down and it was a little past 115 before we shut it down to pull off. *Uninhabited highway in the middle of the Nevada desert. It didn't feel like it was slowing down at all though?

I mean I'm not completely stock but no power mods really except panel filter and run 91... I just find this 114 mph brick wall suspicious because I didn't feel like it was trying all that hard. I'll try again to push that and check speed via GPS, but my speedo should be accurate, less than 1% off.

 

Few speedometers are within 5% at 100 mph; its a point that should have been made initially.
Try using gps to determine the distance between two places about 1000 feet apart accurately and then time it takes to cover with a stopwatch. Then repeat in the other direction and average the two speeds. That way any change in elevations is negated if not cancelled.
good luck. you may have the fastest Fit.

 

Yes I agree with this and is something I should have taken into consideration. Will try again with GPS.

Does the speedo get it's data mechanically or electronically?

 

You could just measure tire roll-out and use crank speed...

 

Or just use the GPS to measure your speed; a GPS can determine speed quite accurately. (That's not to say that all consumer GPS units necessarily do, but even the worse will probably be more accurate than the vehicle speedometer.)

As an aside, GPS units can determine speed more or less directly by comparing the relative speeds of the satellites they are "listening" to (as determined by doppler shifts in the signals relative to each other), rather than by comparing position fixes over time. Position is determined from the differences in the time required for the signals to reach the receiver from various satellites, which gives the difference in distance between pairs of satellites. A "little" trig/math is of course involved in these processes, and things are somewhat complicated by the satellites themselves being in motion as well.

@Wanderer—the speedometer is electronic, I believe, but of course ultimately derives from the rotation of the drivetrain bits.