In light of Saint Patrick's Day, I've taken a look at our 2009 Honda Fit's green credentials.
Fuel Economy: As noted in last week's post, our Fit Sport has a 27 mpg city, 33 mpg highway estimate from the EPA. A base Fit with the automatic is a little better at 28/35 mpg.
Tailpipe Emissions: It's rated Bin5 federally -- Bin5 equals a "six" on the EPA's air pollution scale, with a "10" being the highest score for cleanliness. Fits sold in California and other California-emissions states are slightly cleaner with a ULEV rating (a "7").
Are these "green" numbers?
Objectively, I'd say the Fit's fuel economy is pretty good. But 27/33 mpg isn't any better than what the main competition can do, and you can certainly buy non-hybrid cars that are more efficient (a Mini Cooper being one).
The Fit doesn't stand out at all for emissions, either. Just about every significant small car is Bin5/ULEV. Also, some other cars, like the Hyundai Elantra and VW Rabbit, are PZEV-rated (a score of "nine") in California-emission states. VW's new diesel Jetta is Bin5 nationwide.
So, the Fit has pretty good fuel economy but doesn't do anything to advance the game. That's probably sufficient for most people. And maybe if you really want green Honda, you'd just get a new Honda Insight. But if your expectation was that the Honda Fit would somehow be better than everything else (because back in the day, you know, Civic VXs and CRX HFs really were better than everything else for mpg), then the Fit's "green cred" is probably a letdown.
Brent "O'Romans," Senior Automotive Editor
firstwagon says:
02:02 PM, 03/17/09
The Civic VX and CRX HF were also 500 to 700 pounds lighter and much smaller inside with less power.
The VX could get great mileage but I doubt it would in Edmunds hands. It had a clever motor that could give it good performance or great mileage but not at the same time.
I'd say the Fit ( and most small cars) are very green. The Fit easily beats 30 mpg and most of the cars in your long term fleet can't manage 20 mpg.
billt9 says:
02:16 PM, 03/17/09
Link to the nice EPA website.
http://www.epa.gov/greenvehicles/Index.do
It's actually pretty user friendly, just a little slow, and you can't sort stats by 2 columns like you can in MS Excel.
There's some nice SULEV II (score 9.5) cars, including Mazda6, Camry, Malibu, Accord, Altima, Mazda3.
Nonetheless, the Honda Fit still made EPA's SmartWay list due to its good combined Air Pollution/Greenhouse Gas score > 13.
So technically the Fit is green enough, offering a good balance.
The only SmartWay Elite (score 9+,9+) are still hybrids and CNG.
billt9 says:
02:40 PM, 03/17/09
Hey cool the entire list of vehicles on EPA's web site can be downloaded in Excel format 2000-2008.
Hours of number sorting fun for the environmentally addicted!
jaeger1 says:
04:18 PM, 03/17/09
I don't see where dashed expectations come into it at all. The Fit's mileage rating is not secret - it's posted by the EPA and widely reported by the automotive press. The Fit easily matches those numbers - and in some cases exceeds them - as both owners and your own staff report. Some cars do better - sure. But just try to stuff 4 adults and their gear into a Mini and let me know how it all works out. Mileage is not the basis upon which the Fit distinguishes itself within its class.
jm1212 says:
05:16 PM, 03/17/09
the fit isnt green at all.
its neon orange.
dgs4 says:
06:37 PM, 03/17/09
The EPA numbers are a joke. I have a steady average of 37 mpg in mixed highway/city driving. My shift points are between 3K and 3.5K RPM, with an occasional burst higher than that if I need to pass someone. My highway speed is between 60 mph and 70 mph at the fastest. I re-set the trip meter to 0 after every fill-up and then divide the mileage by the number of gallons it took to fill-up. My last three fill-ups have all been 37 mpg. I travel 40 miles per day round trip for my job in addition to the weekend driving and evening driving after work. Using the A/C as I did before my last fill-up made no difference on the average.
To get the kind of crummy mileage numbers the EPA got, they had to have tested the car as a typical Edmunds staff writer would drive it.
sabastian says:
05:03 AM, 03/18/09
I have to say that I'm a bit disappointed in the Fit's rating, especially in light of the fact that Honda's own Civic manages to do better on the highway and about the same in combined mileage. Anyone know how the Mini's tailpipe emissions compare to the Fit's?
jjong999 says:
06:34 AM, 03/18/09
As one of the European countries (Denmark?) banned advertising cars as 'Green', there is no such green car - just less harmful...
Let's just face it... Honda has been successful in making the company environmentally friendly. But, it is mostly because they don't put much emphasis on horsepower. Ulev/Pzev, BIN5, etc -> you need more catalysts/ precious metal. They typcially hurts horsepower not necessarily MPG.
greenpony says:
06:44 PM, 03/18/09
I don't track emissions. A car could rain out soot and sulfur and a steady stream of 80 weight oil, but if it could top every other competitor's mpg, it'd still be a winner. If they make it "green" that's fine, but I don't care if it's a bin-whatever something-lev; I just want low fuel cost.
mrnewsguy says:
08:38 AM, 03/20/09
Saw a 2009 Civic EX sedan in front of Costco the other day. The window sticker said it had a 1.8L engine and was rated at 36mpg hwy. How come it's rated better than the Fit? Doesn't make sense on paper, but I'm not looking at all the specs in context with HP, curb weight, etc.
nozferat says:
11:41 PM, 04/29/09
To all people defending the Fit.
It's a LIGHT CAR.
It's got a SMALL ENGINE.
The smog score on it is 0.39...where the average for a new car for 2009 is 0.37. Why should a car its size, mass, and engine size not be as clean as a GTI which is:
BIGGER
FASTER
HAS A BIGGER ENGINE
HAS 80 MORE HP?
The Fit should be scoring a 9/10 on emissions too...so why excuses?