I used to think that way about the planet. "do ALL we can to save it". But it is really unfeasible. Second law of thermodynamics says the earth will be destroyed eventually. The only thing you can do is slow it down. If global warming is that important, you bike. But even biking has carbon emissions (exhaling your breath). Same with modernization. If you really hate global warming, are you going to live in a forest, and rely on a bike or a horse, or just walk, to get around? Where do you draw the line of how much you sacrifice?

I'm environmentalist too. My job I got two weeks ago is 35 miles away from me. 70 miles round trip. And I spetn a week trying to figure out how to bike to work using transit, because our local transit is electric powered. I found out you can't have a bike on the train during rush hour times on certain stops. This didn't stop me. I kept trying to figure if there was any other way, and this went on for 5 days. Eventually I had to come to the sad realization I had to drive my fit to work. Some day, I might get a folding bike, because that's permitted, and I won't mind the smaller wheels (easier to lose balance) and fewer gears. But I just got this $300 bike, so I won't get a secnod one that fast. *eventually* maybe. But my point is, as an environmentalist, you can't expect the solution to be in absolutes, all or nothing mentality.

Dont' judge suv's so harshly. When my mom got an RDX, a turbocharged acura crossover, i had a problem since it's a gas guzzling SUV. But my mom drives 20 miles the entire day. If you think about it, I actually contribute to global warming more than her. A small car driven far distances may pollute more than a SUV driving short distances. But I do hate hummers, not only cuz of low mileage, but because America resorts to having big cars to fill big the emptiness inside their personal lives Plus, that car's MPG meter is put there, so when you accelerate, you see "1mpg" and supposed to feel PROUD about that. That's pretty arrogant.

I'm not sure what you mean by emphasizing the word "average." If it is what I think it means, I think that's wrong. It's worse to oscillate from 45-55mph, (averaging 50mph) as opposed to driving a steady 50mph. The reason is the gas you save from relaxing the engine for 50-->45 mph does not compensate for the gasoline it takes to accelerate the car back to 50, or 55mph.

 

Well, it depends. Certainly aimless acceleration and deceleration wastes fuel, and that's why in many cases cruise control improves mileage. However, 'pulse and glide', where one accelerates above the target speed and then coasts (freewheeling or engine braking as appropriate), is significantly more efficient than driving at constant speed. Certainly this isn't always practical in real traffic, but in light urban driving, accelerating hard from each stop and coasting to the next (or until speed drops too much for the conditions), I've had trips reaching 4.5L/100km (52mpg US or 62 mpg Imperial).

 

first tank was 32.5mpg, 50/50 highway/city, sport manual

I'll have a 2nd tank update by the weekend.

 

How in the world are some of you getting that much mileage out of a single tank? I barely can break 300! I mean, consistently at 270 +- 10 miles, my gas light goes on. I refill and divide the number of miles i drove by the gallons it took to refill. typically with the gas light just turning on, I use about 9 gallons to refill. Calculations have given me anywhere between 31 mpg and 33 mpg (on a good day). Worst mileage was 28 (all highway but in mountainous areas). Babying the throttle (no rev's above 3500 and never pressing more than 1/4 throttle) gave me...32 mpg. I'm now at 5K miles and have not seen any type of improvement in gas mileage. with a 33/38 mpg rating, i would figure i'd get at least a consistency in between, but i'm falling under or at the city mileage when 98% of my driving is highway. i just can't win.

 

I'm not sure what to tell you Adrenergic, but I know I got a large MPG increase by lowering my shift point, even with larger throttle positions. Now I almost always shift below 2500 RPM and I average 36-38 MPG in mixed driving. Before I would shift at 3k or so and I got 32-34. Also if you are driving mostly highway at high speeds that could actually reduce your mileage with an MT rather than help it. Although on a road trip I averaged 36-37 going 80MPH or so...

 

First: check your tire pressures. Test when the car is cold and use a digital or dial gauge, not a pencil gauge (garage pump or otherwise). Never let the pressure get below the level marked on the door jamb. (If you don't mind a firmer ride, add more -- half way between that and the tire maximum (on the sidewall) is a good start.)

As Bennet Pullen suggests, try shifting earlier. You don't have to accelerate gently; it's better to get to cruising gear quickly. In general, acceleration doesn't make a big difference -- braking does. However, if your driving is mostly highway you don't do much of either.

You don't say how fast your highways are, but unfortunately the Fit is a big tall brick and 10mph makes a noticeable difference. If most of your driving is 80mph+ and the rest is city, your numbers are plausible.

When you're in hilly or mountainous areas, pick up as much speed as you safely can coasting downhill with the clutch in (or in neutral if conditions permit) and/or coast downhill in gear with no throttle (which limits your speed but uses no fuel).

 

Hi Adrenergic1...I drive a Dodge Caliber with continually variable ratio transmission(CVT). I have found the CVT more sensitive than other tranny types to varying quantities of acceleration & speed changes. Plus the Caliber is more bricklike(less aerodynamic) than kps's Fit description. All statements here apply even stronger to the Caliber CVT, except for kps's statement about acceleration. High acceleration kills Caliber MPG. Even moderate acceleration with the Caliber CVT will take lots of MPG away from the Caliber. Only true fffeeeaaattthhheeerrrrfffoooootttiiinnnggg & low acceleration will sustain even moderate MPG on the Caliber. Tho the Honda Fit isn't as sensitive as a CVT, please take my CVT observations in consideration. Tho many complain about low MPG on Caliber websites, my own SE Caliber driven with good featherfooting is averaging 29.3MPG with a flat highway high of 34.9MPG. My travels over 4000 foot Washington state mountain passes have averaged 32.5MPG, almost 10% over EPA highway averages showing the CVT really works to keep the engine in a low stress gear if you drive for economy.

 

Thanks for the replies guys...i thought shifting under 3500 rpms was babying it, lol...usually i shift at 4500-5000 so i can pick up good speed (this yields the same mpg as shifting under 3500)...i'll try the under 2500 rpm shifts and report back, but damn its gonna be hard to accelerate quickly enough and i woulda figured with the astronomical power (kidding) that shifting that early would drop my rpm's too low especially on inclines. my highway driving speed is 70 mph +- 5 mph btw. oh well, we'll see...

 

Sorry big guy, I forgot if you have MT or AT Sport, but with the paddle shifters you cannot shift gear under 3K rpms unless you want to reach 40 mph in a century, same doing the open road, at 75 mph cruising speed and the rpm is at or over 3K rpms... but if you're 80 yo probably doing 40 mph all the time and for sure the rpm will always be under 2500
Chris

 

second tank I got 29.5. this was about 75% city driving, with about 3 hours or basically idling traffic jam.

3rd tank, I went back up, 31.2mpg. That was 75% city but without traffic. Started to rev the engine a bit more this tank, getting a feel for the car.

I see no reason why I won't be able to get 40+ mpg on the highway. My civic which has a modified motor swap in it that uses a decent bit more gas than the fit can easily get high 30's on the highway, going 75-85mph.

 

3 tanks of 100% city driving, all between 32 and 34 mpg
2 roadtrips.
1 was about 180 miles on the interstate at 73mph and another 180 on a 2 lane hwy, doing 60mph, AC was on about 20% of the time... 42.5 mpg
the other was all interstate at 80mph+, AC on about 50% of the time... 36 mpg

 

As I read some of your mpg, is it really safe to run 44psi in the factory tires?

 

i average about 36 mpg with my two highest tanks being 39mpg and my last the best to date at over 41 mpg on CA. chevron gas.

 

I am at 170miles, half way point

 

There's (at least one) tire pressure discussion. Generally, yes, you can safely inflate up to the maximum pressure printed on the tire sidewall, but use an accurate gauge: digital or dial. Don't use a pencil gauge, including the ones built into service station pumps; they are often very far off and can lead you to seriously over- or under-inflate.

 

mmm. if you inflate it up to the maximum pressure, once you get into the car, the pressure in the tire will increase due to your weight. and then if you add more people or cargo in the car (weight) you'd be even further over the maximum pressure. would that not be exceeding the maximum pressure? then if the temp goes up, your pressure will go up EVEN more.

 

you got a good point

 

I'll echo the importance of tire pressure .. turns out that my rear right was around 10 psi!!! I got it up to 35, and boom.. mileage goes up to 37 mpg from 28.5 mpg or so.

 

Tire pressures are quoted cold and take into account heating during driving.

This is what's written on the side of my tires: "SERIOUS INJURY MAY RESULT FROM TIRE FAILURE DUE TO UNDERINFLATION OR OVERLOADING". Lawyers and all, notice what it doesn't say?

Don''t forget to check it again -- it may be leaking.

 

I got just 37.4mpg all city driving shifting at 2k (some highway, but not much)