2007 Honda Fit Sport: Fuel Economy Update

Whoops. That "worst tank" was a less-than-2-gallons fill-up. My bad. I've corrected it in the post. Thanks for calling it out, karjunkie.

That's it?? Sheesh, considering all the hoopla, this thing should be getting better mileage!

I manage to get 20-22 city & 27-30mpg in my 3.8L Hyundai Azera! And this in Houston traffic!!!

And, no one I know says that I drive like a grandpa. I'm 30 & according to my wife, I drive like a madman!

yup, like I said in the other post, same MPG as the Smart, MUCHHH better car.

"How in the heck did you get only 16 MPG on this thing???????????"

Doing a burn out or drifting? haha....

It's OK mileage, but not nearly good enough to get me to buy a car like that. I would rather buy a diesel Jetta and get 45 highway, 35 city. Slightly more expensive, but a much more substantial car than the Fit.

Stingray: me too! But I am tired of waiting for the Jetta Sportwagen that supposedly was going on sale here last spring!

I've heard they picked that 1.5 because it fits in the tiny engine bay. The Civic engine much smoother, more powerful, and a little more efficient. The Fit is still a good deal, IMO, because of all the features on the Fit Sport that the Civic DX and even LX are lacking. It's a nice ride. But not the ultilmate hypermiler that you would expect from the littlest Honda.

I know a fair amount of people getting 35+mpg in this vehicle. I think this reflects around town driving more than anything else.

Joe

P.s. I average about 28-30mpg in my 06 Civic SI with very aggressive driving.

It was the only engine they could pair with a conventional automatic for the US market. The offer smaller 1.2L, 1.3L, and 1.4L engines with CVTs in the rest of the world.

ahightower - I find my Civic engine about the same for NVH as the Fit's, albeit more sound-proofed, but I do agree that when compared to any Civic, the mpg results should be significantly higher.

joe - My fiance finally reached the 39 mpg mark in hers, without babying it (I'm pushing her to try for 40). I get 38.5 in the Civic, and make little sacrifice in my driving style. The only reason I mention this is because I don't see a huge dent in economy even when we factor in a lot of local driving, and I certainly don't understand the new EPA rating of 36 max. My '99 Si returned 28 routinely, and that was with 8,000 rpm to play with. (I don't miss buying premium fuel, though.)

Have a good one!

how the heck did you get only 22 mpg on one tank?!? that's impressive. my WORST tank is 31 mpg, entirely local driving! my best is 43.3. I never fill up until the fuel light comes on, so none of these "2 gallon fillups" that give inaccurate numbers.

my lifetime average over 32,000 miles is 37 mpg, but that's about 70% highway miles.

as for the diesel jetta, it's about $7K more expensive, not "slightly". $7K buys alot of gas - and diesel is more expensive anyway. try the EPA fuel calculator on fueleconomy.gov - it puts the annual fuel cost for the Fit BELOW the Jetta!

oh yeah, and how much longer is the Fit going to be in the fleet? i'm sick of checking this blog every day and never seeing Fit posts.

Edmunds mileage isn't really indicative of real-driver mileage... Remember the guy with the 1.5 mile "commute" in the M3? My worst tank was 30mpg, and that was in extremely cold temps driving through the Connecticut hills with many short trips. Summer mileage is always about 35mpg. I know four other people personally who own Fits, with averages ranging from 33-38mpg in the summer.

Definitely a better buy than a hybrid or a diesel, at today's prices. And more fun than both.

I have a 2007 Fit Sport 5-Speed manual. My worse tank is 33 and my best is 43; lifetime average is 37 mpg over the 20,000 miles that I put on the car in the last year. I drive briskly too.

People keep talking about how aggressive (or briskly) they drive in a quest to prove IL is crazy but that doesnt matter. What matters is how much of your driving is on the HWY and how congested your area is relative to LA. IL's mileage is very realistic in terms of true mixed driving. If you live in kentucky or accumulate 90% of your miles on the highway you will exceed ILs numbers. Most Americans are not fortunate enough to drive on open highways 80% of the time so they are not going to match the sky high mileage figures some people are quoting here. ILs numbers seem very close to the Fit's EPA combined mileage number.

Bring the Fit here and do 100% city driving and you will get 22mpg. Trust me. We have a Cobalt at my job and its liefetime mileage (all city) is 19.3 vs an EPA rating of 22. This car is driven by middle aged professionals, not hot rodding kids.

I would just get the civic and take the extra power. The mileage gain is too small to sacrifice 31hp.

PS- my cousin has a 2000 528 and was averaging 23mpg even though he cruises at 85+ on the highway. The reason? he does very little true city driving. A car will get better mileage on the highway regardless of how aggressive or fast the driver drives. Stop and go traffic will kill your mileage more than crusing at 100mph with the AC on max.

Kevlang, the new Jetta will be about $5K more than the Fit Sport not $7K. But you have to keep in mind it is a more substantial car with a lot more power than the Fit. Dealer Boston VW had the fuel economy on the 2009 Jetta TDI with DSG transmission independently tested by AMCI. The results were City: 38 Highway: 44 Combined: 41 MPG. This with a 2 liter diesel that pumps out 140 horsepower and 235 pounds of torque! I think that's pretty impressive. Hopefully, the Inside Line guys will buy one when they come out in late summer so we can see if the new Jetta lives up to expectations.

MSRP for a base model 5MT jetta TDI is $21990. Base price for a 5MT Fit is $13950. How is that not $7K?

http://www.edmunds.com/insideline/do/News/articleId=127427

Yeah, you can max out a Fit Sport 5AT at around $17K, but I guarantee you can get a loaded Jetta up way over $24K.

Yeah, I know it's a much bigger car, nicer interior, more features, blah blah blah. And I like the engine alot - but my point is there is zero economic argument to buying a jetta TDI over a fit. over the life of the car, it'll end up being more expensive.

"People keep talking about how aggressive (or briskly) they drive in a quest to prove IL is crazy" - Not really. What I'm reading are reports of owners' real-world findings.

"Bring the Fit here and do 100% city driving and you will get 22mpg. Trust me." - So? Presumed facts that serve to make no point. We all know strict city driving kills mileage. It doesn't take the only guy on the forum to enlighten us. Again, *yawn*.

"I would just get the civic and take the extra power. The mileage gain is too small to sacrifice 31hp." - The Fit is a bit lighter, so the net loss in hp doesn't impact performance all that much in the vast majority of driving situations. The overall feeling of capability is about equal unless both cars are really flogged. Truuust me.

The Fit's still looking brand new! You'd hardly believe it has over 26,000 miles.

"So? Presumed facts that serve to make no point. We all know strict city driving kills mileage. It doesn't take the only guy on the forum to enlighten us. Again, *yawn*."

If everyone knows that why are people complaining about IL's mileage? If you dont live in LA or another congested major city you probably will beat IL's mileage. Thats my point. I'm glad you got it but comments suggested you are in the minority.

"Not really. What I'm reading are reports of owners' real-world findings."

I am sure everyone is talking about real world findings but that means nothing unless you are comparing people who drive in similar conditions. The "real world conditions" in Iowa just might be different than LA. But you seem to know a lot so I'll let you be the judge of that.

All I know is that my 2006 Corolla S 5 speed got between 30 and 31 mpg, 90 percent city. On the highway i actually achieved the 42 mpg.

I don't understand why newer compacts and subompacts aren't blowing those numbers up. I mean the manual echo got 38 mpg combined. Yaris doesn't get better gas mileage than the previous generation Corolla.

Yea i know, the Fit are more fun to drive than those cars, bleah bleah bleah. I assure you, nobody buys a Fit because it's fun to drive.

If I'm buying a subcompact, I want it cheap and I want it to get good gas mileage. For crying out loud, my 04 GTO got 26 mpg on the highway (when I was able to refrain from shifting down a gear or two and giving people the business). Maybe it's jsut me, but I'm bitterly disappointed that cars five years ago got gas mileage better than today's. I understand that teh Fit is averaging as good as the Corolla....but it's a much smaller car than the Corolla. Why isn't it averaging mid to high thirties???

oh yea, and I got the corolla in January 07 for 15.5k otd....fully loaded with everything but the auto transmission. So essentially, today you're paying more money for less car. bleah. No thanks. Just my preference, anyway. At least the Corolla looks like a real car. the Fit just looks.....like a toy.

" I assure you, nobody buys a Fit because it's fun to drive. "

Evveryone I know who bought a Fit chose it because it's fun to drive. People who don't care about driving are the ones who buy Corollas and Yaris.

Firstwagon,

Touche, sir. I wanted to edit m post but could not. I was wondering who would touch on that.

I meant, between a corolla, yaris, aveo, etc., people sometimes choose a fit because it is the most fun of its class to drive.

But everybody I know who owns one said they bought the Fit because, "it's a Honda" and they couldn't afford the Civic, which has gotten fairly pricey.

Also, I bought teh Corolla in January of 06, sorry for the typo, so the Fit wasn't around. I personall haven't driven one to comment.

I just think subcompacts should be getting an average mpg in their mid-thirties.

Do not forget gas in CA gives worse mpg than other parts of the country due to it's special formulation.

People also forget that the Fits design as a whole is almost 8, yes EIGHT years of age as it was offered in other parts of the world long before being offered in the US. Im sure the larger more powerful 09 Fit will be more efficient than the current.

Whats wrong with inexpensive, efficient transportation thats actually fun to drive?

As for the Jetta TDI vs Fit debate...please try comparing apples to apples.

"The "real world conditions" in Iowa just might be different than LA."

It's rated 35 (100% hwy), and we're getting 39 (60% hwy, 40% city), and that's allowing for the fact that you lose [I believe it's] 5% mpg for every 10 mph of speed and we're not adhering to 55 mph. I think saying any Fit owner will get 22 (100% city) is a bit harsh. But if somebody out there has real-world experience that says so, then that's fine. That you flogged a Cobalt (heavier, bigger displacement, worse mpg ratings to begin with) in the city and got 22, and therefore no Fit can ever do better, is pretty lame, so yeah, I will be the judge, despite your bold sweeping statement of "fact".

But on to more fun things. I am considering a Fit over a Civic for my next commuter because for me, those things that some folks would call unrefined or crude work to make the Fit feel sportier. I like the more immediate steering and crisper suspension, and the shorter wheelbase. I consider the Civic's feel more sophisticated, but not sportier. Just my own driving impressions for anybody who hasn't driven them both. Even on the 175mm tires, I'd consider the Fit the more enthusiastic drive.

charleytampa:

despite your assurances, being fun to drive was one of the reasons my wife and i bought the fit, over the plethora of other cars in this segment. so theres that. don't ever deal in absolutes unless you know everything.

i average 32-34mpg mixed, but mostly highway driving. and that mostly highway driving is going about 80 most of the way.

Though I love my Fit, I am really disappointed by the mileage I'm getting. I have a 5-speed auto Fit Sport currently just under 3,000 miles.

I bought it in North Dakota and drove it all the way back to DC, only getting 34 mpg (at best) the entire way. Since I've been back in the city, I have yet to get better than 24 mpg. I realize I am dealing with the absolutely WORST drivers in the world, so it affects how I drive, which then impacts the mpg...however, I still feel like this is not what I should be getting for the car everyone has raved about.

Has anyone heard anything similar to this?

Mileage might get better with age. I've heard similar stories, but I've also heard of mileage climbing steadily after 10, even 25k miles.

Mileage might get better with age. I've heard similar stories, but I've also heard of mileage climbing steadily after 10, even 25k miles. Going easy on the throttle and driving smooter - not quicker - helps me.