trip today in the fit resulted in 32mpg. it was 87.5% highway, total of 295 miles. the cruise control was set at 70mph and the car got 32 mpg. AT fit.

i expected more, though i'm curious how other fit drivers would think of 32mpg.

 

I would have gone no faster than 60 MPH if MPG's versus saving what little time was my main objective on this cruise. Too bad they didn't test a Fit here Consumer Reports Cars Blog: Tested: Speed vs fuel economy
but as you can see speed does make a difference. I wonder how much PSI you had in your tires too?

 

good find, thank you.

the camry and tsx appear to get very similar mpg in that range of 70mph. which makes me a little more disappointed. those cars are heavier and more powerful.

 

Base AT or Sport? If Sport, driving on the highway in Sport mode reduces the tendency to downshift on grades, and may net you 1 or 2 mpg. Driving at 65-70 in Sport mode, controlling speed with cruise control, and watching the instantaneous MPG bar, I expect to see 35-39 on the highway. City mileage falls off a cliff in stop and go traffic, an area where hybrid regenerative braking pays off big time.

 

use sport mode to keep it in 5th gear instead of letting it downshift as stated above. also, downshift early instead of just braking when coming up to stoplights. when you downshift, the fuel injectors shut off completely (using zero fuel), whereas when you coast/ brake to a stop, the injectors put enough fuel to keep the engine from stalling (using a tiny bit of fuel). doing that through 100% city driving netted me a 3 mpg increase over not downshifting.

 

this was in a AT gd fit, using s mode to keep it in gear.
after today, i have been seriously thinking about trading the fit for a small, modern suv or crossover. something like the forester.

 

I'm sure you've noticed me in every low mpg thread, but I was in the same situation as you with only getting 31 mpg after a 90% highway / 10% city drive at 70mph in my AT GD3. If you're bummed out by the constantly low mpg from your car, I'd trade it in for something that isn't inherently flawed like the % of AT GD3's are. I've spent a good 2 years now trying to get better mpg / figure out what is "wrong" and have only ended up spending alot of money and effort for nothing. It's either keep the car because you don't have a choice, and/or because you enjoy driving the car regardless of mpg... or get something that will give you the mpg you're looking for. You're not likely to improve your mpg unless you KNOW you're not driving efficiently to get better.

If your 1.5L 109hp fourbanger gets only slightly more MPG than the new Ford Mustang V6 305hp is likely to get, then is it really your driving habits & conditions or is there something else going on here?

 

If you are interested in gas mileage, don't get a Forester. I owned one for 7 years. It was a wonderful car, extremely reliable and easy to work on, with good handling, but gas mileage wasn't one of its strong points, due to AWD. I never got more than 28 mpg (with a tail wind) and 25 mpg was more typical for highway driving, 19-20 around town. Despite being a smaller car, a Fit has almost the same cargo volume as a Forester, or many other crossover SUVs.

 

We have a 2009 Forester and really like it but it doesn't have as much usable cargo space as the Fit and is harder to load due to the height.... 24.9 on a trip on U.S. highways and 22.5 rural and small town combination.... The shifter feels loose an notchy but works well.....It is very comfortable and handles nicely for a car as top heavy and mud, snow, and loose sand doesn't phase it.... It feels like an upscale European sedan compared to the Fit..... What surprised me about the Fit is that it isn't affected by high winds as the Forester is..... The AWD traction control light flashed for a split second only once since we got it in April while topping a sand hill that our other cars have always spun their tires getting over.

 

interesting indeed. i was surfing through the forester forum and a few individuals reported 30+ highway. they didn't say how slow they were driving, or what percentage of city that included.

for example, i just won't drive 55. i feel it's just dangerous to jam up traffic and force everyone else to go around. also, i've played the game where i get gas just prior to getting on the highway, then get gas immediately off of the highway, resulting in great mpg. i think we see why that's not reflective of how much it really costs to gas up the car.

at 25mpg hwy, what speed were you driving?

 

yeah, the forester really sounds like it would be a good choice for up-sizing from the fit. awd, softroading, a few more cubic feet of storage. obvious penalties being gas comsumption and a larger footprint when parking in the city.

interesting that you mention that the forester has less usable cargo space. i've kinda accepted that the forester will get worse mpg, no way around that, but the usable cargo space is my primary concern. to me, the fit has got to be the leader when it comes to usable cargo capacity relative to its footprint. i've parked the car in some incredible places, and carried all sorts of long, irregularly shaped items while still having people in the car.

i look at the forester as a bigger fit not only because it's physically bigger but also because i expect it to be able to more proportionately more stuff. in that light, what else do you think?

 

btw, i would be looking at an AT 09 or 10 forester, probably the NA version.

 

The Forester feels much larger than it is I think mainly due to the high seating position. The rear seats don't fold flat like the fit, but with the seats up for passengers there is more room behind them than in the Fit with the rear seat up.... With the rear seats down there is a lot more room between the floor and ceiling in the Fit.... We travel with our dog in a crate and end up taking the Fit because the one time we used the Forester we found we couldn't carry as much with the dog crate and it was harder to get the dog in and out when we would stop for him to relieve himself.

 

great insight, what MY forester do you have?

 

2009 Forester

 

Was your trip on a grade??? How cold was the weather??? How long have you actually had your Fit??? If you really want to trade it for something that gets even worse mileage because you don't like the Fit's mileage, there's something you're not being honest about. You got an econobox and figured if you get 40+ mpgs or something you'll prolly be able to live with it, but with mileage in the 30's it's just not enough car for you is it? Gotta have something a little less puny for your self-image.

 

nothing to do with self-image, more just out of sheer disappointment. my first car was an oldsmobile cutlass cierra, 1985, rated at 102hp. i used to keep track of my fuel economy because my parents only gave me 20 bucks a week and if i ran out of gas money, i ran out of things to do. that car was in the mid 30s, in san francisco where there is actual terrain to drive up and down. this is a fit on the east coast where it's a lot flatter than the bay area.

i figured that if i'm going to get 32 mpg in a fit in the best of conditions, and more often 24-26mpg (which is what my wife and i really get in combined driving) i might as well get a larger car that gets very similar mpg, but has other capabilities. more capacity for stuff, awd, for example.

(for some reason you sound offended)

 

excellent. i have a few more questions
1. why did you chose a forester over an outback?
2. which would you keep if you could only have one, the fit or the forester?

 

Around 70 mph, constant speed, using cruise control. I put 120,000 miles on the Forester, so I had a lot of experience with gas mileage, and it quite consistently delivered 25-26 on the highway, 19-20 city. Air conditioning made very little difference in fuel consumption. Same driver, same driving mix, I get 27 city and 35 highway with the Fit.

 

What was the outside temparature? I have noticed that the Fit gets between 5-7mpg less when the temp is below 40F.