Just got my FIT Sport and put 600 miles on it varying the driving, town,freeway, & Taos mountain 10,000 ft. elevation, and averaged 38.3 mpg using the airconditioner. A Great Car!

 

I would have to go back and look, and I'm too lazy.

Is it my imagination, or are the folks at higher elevations not getting better fuel economy?

Perhaps the decreased pull of gravity?

Maybe we ought to post our elevations.

 

Just calculated my gas mileage. Didn't bother with the dealer tank. After I filled up my second tank I set the trip odometer to zero. Today, after 341.5 miles, I put in 9.016 gallons of gas. 37.87 mpg. Not bad. Not bad at all. 60 percent highway (70-80 mph) and the rest city stop and go.

 

Whoa, that's really good. I've been averaging like 29-30 mpg. (50 percent highway going 80mph, and the rest stop & go) Stupid California gas...

Out of curiosity, what octane do you use?

 

Sunoco 87 Octane (Regular). Your right. It could be the SOCAL gas. When I lived in San Diego I didn't get as good mileage.

 

Going 80MPH isn't the best way to get squeeze the great gas mileage out of the car either...

 

How about ppl post what gas station you guys fill up at?
So far the best gas station I've gotten the best gas mileage with is 76.

Shell = 240 (10% Ethanol)
Chevron = 224 (10% Ethanol)
76 = 280 (no listed % Ethanol)

All city driving and no heavy foot. Im on Mobil gas right now but I didnt get to fill it up all the way. I've notice alittle more *umph* with Mobil gas than 3 gasses I've used.

 

Awesome...........well worth it.

 

I see all this gas mileage stuff and no wonder people are getting 30 to the gallon and im getting 43 its all driving style end of story. The people that are getting these low numbers have to be reving the crap out of their fits higher elevation does have an impact maybe for another thread but geeze people dont obsese over your mileage if you drive 80 and have the AC running am i missing something here?

Coop

 

coopula you are a lucky person. I wonder what the difference is. Are you using synthetic oil? It is impressive stuff. Ive tried really hard to break 40 mph but its been 37.5 at best. I know shifting and correct speeds are important but maybee it is just not a 40 mph car. Hopefully things will change with more break in time.

 

double post, forum is sloooooow.

 

Yikes!

The Fit should be able to break 40 mph no problem. Even 100 mph should be easy. Better take it to the dealer. I hope you are at least staying in the right lane.

 

had a round trip drive up to Templeton on Sunday. Went 287 miles and was on the way home when I decided to pull over since there was going to be a looooooong stretch with no gas stations. Filled it up with 7.5 gallons.

287 miles / 7.5 gallons = 38.27mpg

That's with 95% highway driving and even hitting cruising speeds of 85mph.

 

i drive alot of city miles with some trips on the highway...I still get to more than 300 miles from Full to Empty...i do hit the gas a little harder

 

I noticed that too (i htink) but if it's true, it's more cuz of less air pressure up there than graivty. Less air pressure= less air drag.

 

A car at higher elevation will make less power. Less power = worse MPG.

 

BS. Explain this from an engineering standpoint.

Less air density requries less fuel to maintain proper combustion for which the engine computer can take care of. You may have less hp but the fuel/air ratios are still the same. The cylinder pressures will be lower since the air density is lower and the engine will be a little freeer to spin faster. I not sure what this all dose to the mpg. I have found from riding my dirt bikes in the Colorado mt. that mpg improves with proper jetting of the carb for the high elevation. At high elevations you can run lower grade of fuel also since the cylinder pressures are lower.

I will look into this some more and gets some answers to what higher elevations do to fuel consumption.

 

If I'm not mistaken, it's because because of having less power, you have to downshift and give it more gas, so the increased fuel consumption (if there is any) would be due to higher RPMs and having to give it more gas. That said, it seems this would only apply going up hills and not just cruising. There's gotta be some techy out there who knows it all though.

 

The amount of work (time x distance) it takes to get up a hill at sea level vs. high altitude is the same. If the engine is running the correct fuel/air ratios at all altitudes then the same amount of fuel will be used. Granted the throttle will be open more but each stroke of the pistons will be using less fuel then at sea level since the air density is lower.

 

Im no engineer either, but its a fact that a car at a higher elevation makes less horsepower due to lower air density than one at sea level. That said, its going to take more "throttle" to go up the same hill that would be at high altitude vs an identical hill at sea level, ie the engine will have to work harder. BC of that, you will consume more gas.

Im just saying that would be a larger factor IMHO of cars at higher elevations than the other reasons mentioned in this thread (gravity, less air drag).