Well, I’m not sure you are responding to my tread, since I did nowhere mention about 45 mpg.

Anyway I did convert the figures according the factors found in following page.

Imperial and Metric Conversion Factors - Table - MSN Encarta

Please inform if factors stated there are not correct!

My calculation:

7977km / 479.85l = 16.624km/l

16.624km/l * 2.3521 = 39.101mpg (US)

16.624km/l * 2.824859 = 46.96mpg (imperial)

 

Great review.

For flat, terrain which Toronto streets are I have no quams. I have a DX 5sp Auto. The thing leaps off the line and gets up to speed quicker than expected -- seriously. It's hilarious I was thinking was going to be getting Corolla performance.

 

not entirely true. dropping 2 or more gears should be double-clutched if you have a fairly weighty drivetrain. it spares your synchros from a good deal of abuse. double clutching a fit, since it drives (for all intents and purposes) one wheel, is more a matter of convenience.

also, in many cars now you will have to dbl clutch into first. i'd rather not go into a long drawn out treatice on why, but just know that you do . this is especially critical with all the hondas i have driven/owned. bimmers can usually downshift into first while moving without much trouble if you revmatch properly, but honda transmissions just need everything moving before it slids in nice and comfy.

damn them!

never speak in absolutes in a situation with so very many possibilities.

my sti's dbw reacts better than a cable-driven tb. the dbw on the ford f150 and on the mustang gt both have a significant amount of lag. people have measured nearly a second of lag on the mustang. some tuning should help this, but yeesh...that's horrible.

audi a6 has over one second of dbw lag. why do you think people distrust dbw in economy cars? it's because dbw in more expensive cars has let so many people down already. thankfully i haven't noticed any lag in the fits i've driven.

on the mt/at debacle that went on/is going on: i'm a mt fan till the end. then again i shave with a straight razor and can pass for sasquatch while nude, so i'm just about the damn pinnacle of manliness *bites a cows ass off and swallers it whole*

yes...swallers.

 

This is true, and in fact I do double clutch under certain circumstances, but the greater context here was performance driving and double clutching is pretty worthless there. If you're dropping two gears at once, driving with a cold transmission, or worrying about your syncros while hunting for good lap times, you're doing something wrong.


That is a good recipe for being wrong but not in this case. Modern gear selection mechanisms simply aren't the bottleneck in shifting performance, the mechanics behind the actual change are.


Right, all I'm trying to say here is that the implementation alone should be evaluated, not the name of the technology or the cost of the car. There's going to be good and bad implementations of most designs and technologies; that doesn't make the design or technology itself bad as a whole.


Rock on.

 

My first honda was a 1990 Civic DX hatchback. I could shift the trany with out the clutch any time I choose to.

My most recient manual was a 2006 MINI and despite it having a Getrag transmission, it did not like to be shifted without the clutch.

I am older, 37 and when it comes time to order, I will be getting the 5speed AT. Then I will finally be able to live out my F1 dreams....

 

After reading many seemingly very different reports on fuel mileage i think part of the problem is tank filling.I just bought 08 Fit sport with AT.Left dealer with tank reading full.After 120 miles tank read about 1/2.I fueled up with nozzle held on lowest flow when getting near full
On starting out tank read a little over full and I drove 40 miles before it came down to full reading.This would make a big differance in ful mileage figures.I suspect the fuel flow at most service stations shuts off early on this car.Put the last of it in slowly to get tank full.40 miles is big diff.
Mack

 

Looking at which transmission to spec. Live at 8000 near Evergreen. How have you found the AT in the hills? and up I-70 and along I-25?
Thanks,
Jim

 

CVT's are nothing new..Honda has been using then since early 80's at least.
My Helix is an '04, but was designed in '85 and it has a CVT. It works fine, never a problem, people are just scared to try new things they don't understand. Otherwise CVT would be more common in the US, but give us time.

 

Great review!
But WOW this thread is old lol..

Tyler

 

reviving old threads ftw!

there are a lot of great posts in this thread by members who don't even seem to exist anymore!

 

Well, the ones they wanted to speak the CVT dead already in the past, my have disappeared, because Honda didn’t give them right with the new released Fit!

 

Does that mean you think it's faster than the Corolla?

I have an 06 Automatic Corolla and may be buying an '09 Manual Fit Sport. I love how the Fit has side airbags, ABS, power windows, etc... Way more than my Corolla has. Plus, the Corolla's suspension is so awful that it feels like I'm going to flip every time there's a turn on the freeway.

My biggest worry is going from a 126hp engine to a 118hp engine. This is because I've driven in a Toyota Yaris Automatic and it was SO UNBELIEVABLY SLOW. Will I have problems with the '09 Fit's smaller engine?

Thanks!!!

 

Just reached 20,000miles (32,296km) and did use 1895.8L gasoline.

This is 17.036 km/L or 40.07 mpg (US)

It could be better, since my working way is daily 4 x 5km, a lot of the distance is done in the warm-up sequence of the engine!

 

bump.......................

 

Crossed the 30,000miles (49,334km) and burned a total of 2871.9l of gasoline.

Now it's an average of 17.178km/l or 40.41mpg (US)

 

Great car. City and steady highway: 30-35 mpg. Hilly terrane with lots of coasting and minimum braking: 45+ mpg. Love the turbo-like power surge on regular gas (thanks V-Tec!) at 4,000+ rpm. So Cal's Angeles Crest Highway is a perfect drive for a Fit. A Mini Cooper S may be more fun to drive but has heavy expensive run flat tires, needs premium gas, is cramped, and tries too hard to be cute and trendy.

 

I love my 2010 Fit Sport with the manual. It's my first stick, and the gas mpg is unbelievable in the manual. Of course with no overdrive the engine might be louder at hwy cruising, but Honda engines are supposed to sound like that when they rev, it's part of the fun!

 

I'm still surprised when I read about the Fit being considered as underpowered. You do know you have to keep the revs high to go go go don't you? And I don't mean 3000rpms, I mean 4 - 5 - 6000! I'm always reading about how people don't like it's merging capabilities getting on the highway - by the time I'm in 4th with my 5spd M/T, I'm hitting 65 no prob. You really just need to rev the crap out of it. Of course, I'm always alone in the car too... maybe that's why it feels so spritely.

 

With a Honda it's more about the power to weight ratio. This car moves if it is just you in the car. And if you buy a 5spd MT then you will have a little more ability to wind it out (IMO the only way to drive a Honda! )

 

Question: I have A/X'd my AT GD3 (under Stock Specifications) for the past 2 years and I have never felt I needed to worry about tranny fluid temps even in 95 degree weather since 60 second runs are about the max we ever run on. In the Seattle area we don't have much Summer heat anyway. But now I am looking to explore tracking the car a bit this year and possibly building toward the new B Spec class that Mazda & Honda are trying to jump-start this year. I know there is a small transmission fluid radiator down there (I broke the inlet pipe shortly after I got the car and had the pleasure of paying for the replacement, since it was my own stupid fault! [Don't Ask, Please]).
My question, finally and obviously, is does anyone have experience in Road Racing or extended HPDEs with the 1st gen AT in longer runs w/ considerably more aggressive gear changing etc.? I do worry about this in any really hot weather.
Thanks for any help or insights!