What are you going to get that has far superior fuel economy?
Imperial Gallons into US Gallons is x1.201
So, if we were measuring in Imperial Gallons, the US 5MT Fit gets a fuel economy of 39.6/45.6, which is very similar to the rest of the world.
The Yaris 5MT that we have here in Canada gets Imperial 41/51, so it is fairly comparable in that respect. Also, US EPA and Canadian equivalent do not use the same testing procedures to determine economy.
If you drive with slightly higher octane fuel, the engine might adjust (advance timing) and return slightly better fuel economy.
Anyway, I would like to see an independent test of the car before I decide how disappointed I am. The real world MPG may surprise you.

 

But it's also based on a Yaris that is highly-decontented--features like side airbags and ABS are optional on the Yaris, and frankly, many reviewers have expressed concern about the Yaris' power-sapping 4AT automatic. Load up a Yaris to be like the standard content on a Fit and the Yaris three-door hatchback will probably end up weighing almost as much as the Fit!

I can almost guarantee that the 5AT Fit in "real world" driving will get better fuel mileage than the 4AT Yaris, mostly because given that the 5AT is an adaptation of the same excellent 5AT from the 2006 Civic the Fit will offer better acceleration, definitely way smoother shifts, and likely better real world in-town and freeway mileage.

 

thank you. like i said, real world numbers are not EPA numbers. in fact Honda was talking about trying and get in line with real world MPG numbers. Maybe the Fit is a testament to them doing that. 39 mpg in the real world would be better than almost any gas operated car without a hybrid system.

 

If that is true (Honda trying to get in line with real world numbers), and it's an actual 38 MPG, I would be much happier. My discontent was based on taking the reported mileage as an EPA rating which would obviously be less in real world driving.

 

I agree with you.

 

There is a simple reason why this car has such poor highway fuel economy. Its too flippin tall. Same goes for the Yaris. This has been a trend of late starting with the focus and Corolla of making small cars much shorter and length and taller. How are you supposed to fit 4 people in a car with wheel base of 96"? The taller you make the car, the further you have to push the air around the vehicle. This is how the Yaris produces more drag on the highway than the Passat sedan. Total drag is width X height X CD.
The yaris is 1.695m wide x 1.530m x .30 = .778 m square.
The passat is 1.820m wide x 1.472m x .28 = .749 m square.

Both the Yaris and the Fit are essentially city cars. If you think of them in that context they are excellent transportation. But for frequent highway use they will be inadaquite. I'm sure the decision to switch from the CVT7 to 5AT also hurt fuel economy.
Now I won't have any excuse to to keep me back from buying a much larger car like the Civic or Mazda3 since I know the fuel economy is essentially the same as the Fit/Yaris.

 

I am glad to see such a response in this rant based thread.

I must admit that I was immediately disappointed when I saw the figures of MPG.

It wasnt so much that 38 is bad fuel economy, I actually think that is impresseive for a non hybrid. It was more so that I felt ripped off, that the rest of the world had these super fits that do 48 mpg. I actually thought that Honda was just giving us the stick, and stupiding up the car for some other reason, political or line placement, Japan supremecy, what have you.

But this Imperial gallons explaination makes me feel much better. I feel a little dumb that I did not think of it before but it makes me feel better about Honda and the fit. We have the same fit (minus a weight gain becuase of air bags). And get the same gas mileage as the rest of the world. Honda didnt dumb it down. They put on the table what they had.

This understanding puts the fit back on my list.

 

I agree that gasoline costs are going up again. I noticed a 2 cent increase in 2 days already. I think that a car like the Fit will be a good car to own, especially driving in the city. Almost all of my driving to and from work is now on surface streets, just because the freewys are so clogged with traffic at that time of day that I make better time on surface streets. I'd want a dependable car that does well in stop and go traffic, and I would be way happy with 30 MPG under those circumstances - especially if gas goes back to $3 a gallon.

 

I don't think anybody is confusing imperial gallons with US gallons.
Honda gave us the worst possible drive train combination for fuel economy. Vtec instead of i-DSI, 5AT instead of 7CVT.

 

The 5-door Yaris (here in Canada) has the same mileage as the 3-door. I am definitely going to buy a subcompact hatchback this spring, and the Yaris was at the top of the list before I heard that Honda was bringing one over. I like the utility space of the Fit, and with my driving patterns I can live with the mileage difference in exchange for that, but the poor highway mileage is still a strike against it. Honda can't now get much else wrong without losing me.

 

The average fuel economy posted for the 1.5L Honda Fit in Japan is 20.5Km/L. If you convert that into Mpg you should be around 46-48mpg. EPA-33/38mpg

The 1.3L Fit version is rated at 24Km/L, 58mpg.
EPA-N/A

The New 1.8L Civic is rated at 17Km/L, 39.8mpg
EPA-30/38-40mpg

The new DBW S2000 is rated at 11Km/L, 26mpg
EPA-20/26mpg

V-6 Accord, the Inspire in Japan is rated at 11.4Km/L, 26mpg
EPA-21/30mpg

The list goes on but most of the conversions of Japanese FE numbers result in numbers that are close to EPA Highway ratings. My question is why the US/Canadian spec car's ratings are off by such a large degree? My first thought is weight. The Japanese spec Fit weighs around 2200-2300 lbs, the US spec car weighs up too 2550 lbs.

So right off the bat its more than 200 plus pounds heavier.

 

Just to put things into perspective of how bad the FIT fuel economy is, the lager Nissan Versa with a 1.8 120hp engine with CVT gets a combined (city and highway) 38mpg. Its right there on nissanusa.com. So highway fuel economy should be well into the 40s.

 

Show me where Nissan's last as long as the average Honda though...

 

If you can afford to buy a new car now, you'll probably afford another new car in 3 years. You know that. Honda's make better used cars than nissans I'll give you that but frankly who cares?
While the versa carries a similar price to the Fit, its a much larger car. It should be compared to the more expensive Civic.
60,000 vehicles in the first years seems very optimistic. I think Honda will find that target very hard to achive. I'm glad the finally brought the car to the US, but with the bad fuel economy its too little too late. They should have brought over the IDSI/CVT7 4 years ago and this year we should be looking at a longer next gen fit designed with the US market in mind.

 

Why should anyone be disappointed?

The US Fit is slightly larger and heavier due to different bumpers, side and curtain airbags, wire by wire system then its JDM sister. The US Fit is probably also geared differently to allow for better acceleration and power. 33/38 MPG for city/hwy is still an amazing number for a non-hybrid. Also keep in mind that Honda usually underrates statistics. I wouldn't be surprised if the Fit got 35/42 MPG in the real world.

 

I also think you have to consider two factors:

1. The 2006 Honda Civic sedan's total drag is lower than the Fit (it's probably got a coefficient of drag well under 0.30 combined with a smaller frontal area).

2. The 2006 Civic uses the R18 SOHC i-VTEC engine, a far more modern engine design than the L15A VTEC on the Fit. If Honda had used the 1.5-liter variant of the SOHC i-VTEC engine from the 2006 Civic Hybrid (minus the IMA hardware) on he Fit, I think the fuel mileage could have been 2-3 mpg higher on both city and highway driving.

 

ok so they gave us not the best fuel economy. but if they had done that, you would complain about the thing only having 80 HP. do you WANT to get run over everywhere you drive???

 

i will drive my Fit until it dies 20 years from now. Some folks dont buy cars and sell them a year later. I'm glad we are getting the car we are getting.

 

Given that Honda UK states the L13A-powered Jazz has a 0-60 time of 12 seconds (slow by 2006 standards!), I don't think such a vehicle would have been acceptable to American drivers used to faster lower-end acceleration cars.

 

The problem is not just geopolitical, but geophysical: http://www.peakoil.net/