Just wondering if anyone with a Scan Guage has the MPG numbers at different speeds for a MT? I found a post in here for the AT. They had the different fuel ratings posted from 40MPH-75MPH. Thought it was pretty interesting.

 

I started to put one together for every 5mph, but gave up after 3 tries.I do not understand or question the accuracy of anyone doing that. To be accurate, you would have to drive when there was ZERO wind and no traffic as they greatly effect the readings.

I may try again one day.

 

Right on. If you happen to do it...post it here.

 

it was posted in another thread. something like 50mph in fifth gear = 50mpg

 

I was pretty sure that I saw the MPG numbers for a MT in another thread too! (Just couldnt find it...I found one for the AT though.)

 

dude, i JUST ordered a scangauge. i'll get some #'s when i get it.

 

Thanks man!

 

Hey congrats on the scangauge tell us how you like after you get it.

other than that...my ears are perking up to hear what the MT number might be similar to.

I was thinking that in some steady states the AT might get better MPG's than the MT. Because of the lower rpms. But it might lose a bit upon acceleration and when slowing down.

 

Agree. My guess is if the AT transmission is locked and in at a steady cruising speed on flat terrain such that that downshifting to 4th isn't necessary, the AT will do better. Otherwise the MT will probably beat it out.

If I was really counting my pennies and had a long, flat, traffic free commute, I'd probably opt for the AT, otherwise get the MT (assuming you like or at least don't mind shifting...)

 

i have one steady 61 mph on flat ground 41-43 mpg but on a down hill i could peak 70mpg up hill down to 23 mpg its all on cruise control on a 35 mile trip to work i am getting 38 mpg

 

The main reason I went for an AT is that I commute on busy city streets. Having a few extra mpg would be nice but I'd never endure my commute in a MT.

I also like the low revs in 5th

 

That's another reason for the AT. The MPG isn't bad on the either MT or AT - it's still a little car, and a 3-4 mpg difference doesn't mean much if your base mpg is pretty high to begin with.

Me, I don't mind the shifting unless it's seriously bad stop and go, but that sort of thing varies a lot from person to person....

 

I have 33 stoplights over 13 miles and it usually takes 30 minutes to drive it. Definitely AT territory

 

i agree and disagree. i don't think the AT would EVER get better mileage on the freeway. the slushbox automatic transmission kills a lot of the efficiency.

MT 4 lyfe

 

I guess we really do need to see some graphs of mpg vs mph (flat road, 70F, 5th gear, AC off) for AT and MT so we can see the difference.

Someone post an Excel 2-line 'scatterplot' graph please!!

 

I'd like to see that too.. but for ANY degree of accuracy, the test would have to be repeated about 10x right after one another.

 

Hmmm.. If the AT is locked in, my understanding is that it's connected directly to the engine much as a clutch is, and most of it's 'slushboxness' disappears at that point. I would guess that in this state, the economy would be better on the AT given the really big difference in RPMS at cruising.

What I don't know is how/where you have to be driving to stay in this state. Maybe this only works at steady speeds crossing Iowa. From other posts I've read that the AT will find it necessary to downshift at the smallest hill...

 

Ohh that kinda sucks. I did this in my Yaris a while ago. I went like 30 miles on the expressway, hitting 1 toll, speed was about 60 MPH w/ CC on and i came out at 51 MPG. The thread is prob still over at yarisworld.com somewhere. I still think i had a good wind gust

 

Nobody with a AT Fit, SG and data?

After looking at mine for months now, I have one data point I feel is good.
I could get more it's just hard to find a stretch of road and the right conditions.

All is with zero winds
65 mph
3150 RPM's
39 mpg in free air (no other cars around)
42 mpg same deal but in some traffic around and not drafting at all.

If you post data you have to be aware of two things (besides being on flat ground) that drastically alter the data.

Winds It's a waste of time to post anything when you see flags up or tress moving
With traffic you have the same deal. My MPG gauge can move from 28 to 58mpg over a 30 sec time, in traffic at 65mph You have to use averages. and consistent conditions

Those two items can make big changes but more importantly, makes it impossible to compare the results of two cars like the AT and MT.

BTW The Fit AT tranny does not slip at all. The energy loss (beside stupid programing up and down shifts) is in the converter until it locks up.

solbrothers I'm assuming you have not posted the SG data because you saw how hard it is to get decent data.