If I ever get one, I would get an automatic. I already have my "fun" car so there's no need for the Fit to be a manual for me. Plus, MT+California traffic = NO FUN.

 

Word.

Moreover, I'm driving an AT, but my right knee still aches just from switching between the accelerator and the breaks during my work-home commutes. I can't imagine what'll happen to my knees if I drove the MT.

 

to defend manual, we have higher resale value

j/k. unlike most manual drivers, i really beleive wanting to drive manual is a phase, and since i'm in that age frame, i think i was smart to choose the manual for the sake of feeding my 'phase', even if i know that automatic is the smarter choice.

 

I find MT easier than AT in California traffic. In slow traffic, just put it in 2nd and let the gas pedal do all the work -- down to speed up, up to slow down (using engine braking). Works like a charm. With AT you don't have the engine braking, so you're forced to switch constantly between the gas and brake pedals. Tiring. However, sometimes the "manual mode" of an AT gives you good enough engine braking to use this technique.

 

You are probably right. My manual phase started with my first Civic in 1981, when I was 19, and has lasted to today. Someday, I might grow up, but I hope not, just growing old is tough enough.

 

Awesome write-up with street journalism from an actual test. I like your truthfulness and this is from myself, a MT die-hard.

I'm from an oldschool belief still that any 4cyl Japanese car does need MT gears for overall HP extraction. Once you get a second adult in most 4cyl cars, you notice a slight difference and more so with a smaller 4banger.

However, it's a lifestyle choice and preference of MT vs AT and how 90% of your driving is done.

I never knew that cruising speed and rpms were so drastically different. It really have to research my aftermarket muffler when I slap it on. This 6th gear on the MT seems to be a widespread wet dream that I would love to see in real life.

 

My "phase" doesn't seem to want to go away, either...I've been driving 30 years, probably had at least 20 cars and 90% of them have been manuals.

 

Thanks for taking the time to give us an in-depth review. I do live at sea level, at least for now (bought the Sport AT), but it's good to get a picture of how the Fit drives at more maxed out conditions.

 

I'd love to drive manual...but the reality is that I got too much going on when I drive...gotta play with the radio, gotta have a hand free for the 7/11 Big Gulp, gotta keep adjusting the temp, windows down / windows up, etc... You get the idea.

 

stupid schuylkill expressway will make me need auto. obsolete before it was built and that was decades before i was born. stupid schuylkill.

 

This must mean that your traffic doesn't include very many complete stops.

My commute (VA traffic) is 40 minutes of crawling stop-to-stop, maybe moving 10-30 ft at a time and then stopping again. Moving in traffic like this, AT is vastly preferable, simply because you ONLY use the brake. The car moves enough with zero accelerator input that you don't ever even hit the gas.

I can't NOT own a manual though, so up until now (when I'll have two cars), I've always endured this hell with a manual trans because I *need* it on the weekends.

 

First, Wessy, thank you for a superbly written post. You craft the English language well... knowing just where to put periods, capital letters, and well-selected verbs. Very rare in this online world...

We're at a fascinating time in the technology of automotive transmissions, and the appearance of the paddle shift automatic in a mass-produced economy car like the Fit heralds this trend.

As an enthusiast of primo power-to-weight ratios, and arriving there a tenth sooner than the other guy, I've always considered choosing an automatic for a small, light, car as bordering on morally corrupt.

After reading your observations however, I'd like to at least test drive the Sport with AT... just to see for myself...

Of course, what the Fit really needs (hey, hey, hey) is a true sequential manual gearbox...

...and maybe a small turbo...

... with all-wheel drive ?

 

Im a new member! Planning to get a fit by next month in the bay area. The first time I saw the fit, was at my work (Lemans<<Karting:fremont, CA) I didn't know we sponsered one until they brought it in to stay for awhile. I thought the car was cute and roomy. Plus knowing that the Spoon Fit was a race car, I was thinking this car must have good suspension. But, Hopefully I find a good price for just the fit, hardest part of all is finding a good dealership around. Does anyone know any around NOR*CAL?

 

Carting...now that is a blast. Nothing like not going really stupidly fast, but still putting a huge grin on your face.

 

Thanks, Toeside! (Psst...your check is in the mail. ) Wish I'd looked it over a little more carefully before posting, though; I wrote "shined" instead of "shone" -- d'oh!

And thanks for the many positive remarks, everybody. I'm honored that this thread of my little (okay, not so little) seat-of-the-pants (okay, not that little a seat, either) review got stickied!

Meanwhile, I'm still on the fence about the Fit. I actually took another (much shorter -- no, really! just around the block!) test drive today just to make sure I'd be happy long-term with the way it drives, and I was favorably impressed. It has ample power, feels nimble, responds directly and without delay to inputs from the steering wheel, pedals and paddle shifters, and that automatic? Is one smooth operator.

So I decided, yeah, I'd enjoy tooling around in a Fit as my next car...but will I actually buy one? Still not sure. One of the main reasons I'd get one is to enjoy really good fuel economy (obviously), but I'm still unconvinced that the automatic-equipped Fit is going to deliver highway MPG in the low 40s like I think it should, based on its relatively low RPMs at a relaxed cruise.

Yes, I'm expecting the automatic Fit to exceed its EPA highway estimate; only time will tell if that's merely wishful thinking on my part. In the meantime, reports by a small handful of new automatic Fit owners who are measuring MPG in the very low 30s on trips that consist mostly of highway miles are giving me serious pause. I mean, after an engine is broken in you might expect it to improve by 2 or 3 MPG, but 10? I don't think that's going to happen...so I'm still on the fence, and hoping to hear more encouraging real-world fuel economy reports from the fast-growing ranks of paddle-shifting FitFreaks out there.

 

Don't know if any of you guys visit TOV but they've got a really nice review. The guy who wrote this, is a die hard MT guy and what he said about the Fit was rather interesting. Have a look at it:

http://www.vtec.net/articles/view-ar...icle_id=532449

 

I hate to be contrary, but I bought the AT after too many years stuck in traffic with a quivering left foot. This car doesn't hunt uphill. It doesn't even surge between shifts on an 11% grade. It shifts so smoothly, in fact, that you actually have to pay attention to notice. Lead foots may feel differently, but if you drive smoothly, this is certainly a fine transmission. I know younger dudes may find a manual more sporting, but I'm getting older, enjoy the congested roads less and less, and can bow politely to machinery that can shift smoother than I can. I've had a car in the past that hunted for gears, but this one doesn't.

Steve

 

I should add that my first tankful of gas netted 42 MPG in mixed driving. Imperial gallon, so allow maybe 36MPG, or so, US Gal.

Steve

 

Awesome thread!!

This is the review I was looking for!

So I guess I might want to settle for AT rather than MT...

 

Replace the word settle with "UPGRADE" and you've got it right