No, I will never get an AT unless I have no choice. I am having too much fun driving MT and it's much cheaper/more effective. Well I adjusted my driving style to getting it smooth. If the car doesn't rattle, shake, lurch, make weird noises then I guess it's ok.

I really usually shift around 3k. Going as low as 2.5 and as high as 4k. I see no reason to shift higher because my cruising speed is usually not that fast (not slow either!). Or is it advised to shift at redline then taking the 2nd gear all the way up to my cruising speed and then shift to 5th while skipping 3rd and 4th?

You know I think the bus pass remark is really offensive. I know I am not the best driver in the world but you don't have to advise me to take the bus instead. And I am pretty sure that I can drive a manual transmission!

 

wilco - There's no reason to push the RPM's other than for the fun of it.

To 'clear out carbon' you need to take it to the limit in 2nd then, simply lift your foot off the gas and let the engine back pressure slow you and, at the same time, blow out the carbon. Idea is to get those rings chiming and loosen things up.

HOWEVER, I have seen no indication on this forum that suggests the FIT vtech is prone to carbon build up. The above is recommended for a 5L NorthStar engine commonly found in the Cadillac. A performance engine way beyond the 1.5L vtech. Like 175 ponies beyond.

I doubt I would ever scream my little FIT like that, but it will take it.

I see nothing wrong what-so-ever with what you are doing.
K_C_

 

I agree completely. It still accelerates faster using 1st.

 

man, using an iPod touch on forums is hard, so I'll try to be quick about this.

You are shifting too low in terms of 1st gear.

I've been relucatant to respond to this thread because it's been a while since I drove stick. So you'll have decide how valid my comments are.

IGNORE the tach, don't look at the RPMs when you drive. In the case of the Fit, you'll also have ignore the engine noise if you can, just make sure you recognize the actual redline.

When I used to drive a Ford Escort, it didn't have a tach. So I learned to push each gear until I felt it was LOSING power, then shift. Trust me there's a point where it feels like the engine feels like it's free spinning. Once you figure out where that is, you then learn to shift a little before that.

After a while you'll get used to the engine noise an recognize when to shift.

Downshifting is a slightly different matter. If I have to gradually slow down, which was rare, I'd slowly lift my foot off the gas until I fell like it's about to stall or if the car no longer slows down (which ever first), then down shift. Again, after a while you'll feel where this is and can do it a little earlier.

In terms of plain braking, that's a bit of an issue for me. I don't do the whole engine brake to stop deal. I just pop it in neutral and brake. Whether from 25 or 65 mph to 0.

But since you appear to make use of it, rumbling in 2nd means you should be in 1st, high RPM or not.

Basically, you have to feel out the car.

 

QFT (ten characters)

 

Simply put, you need all the gearing you can get because the engine has a surfeit of neither power or torque. That's why first gear is so huge.

I putter along in crawling traffic in first gear, no problems.

Second gear is great for overtaking, but it's not a good ratio to start off from.

 

First gear is intended only for starting off from a dead stop. Yes, it is synchronized so you can downshift into first while moving, but why? Due to aggresive gearing, starting in second is possible without lugging the engine on level terrain with only one or two people on board, but not uphill with a full load.

"Standard" transmissions on American cars and trucks used to have a non-syncro first gear that was, unless you double clutched, only selectable from a dead stop. I once drove an SS396 Chevelle with the close ratio four speed and it was easier to start in second and skip shift directly to fourth to avoid chirping the tires.

 

Honda engines have historically had less torque than the competition due to the engine size. While many other companies are using 2.0L and 2.4L engines (or a Turbo'd 2.0), honda has typically been at 1.8 or 2.0 and producing higher HP. The FIT is a great example of this. 1.5L Producing 117hp VS the aveo 1.6 Producing 106 So was the integra GS-R & type R. 1.8L producing 170hp or 195hp. The current K20 in the Civic Si Produces 198hp while the QR25 in the Nissan SER Spec-V produces 200hp.

The down side is torque... and to effectively have a usable 1st gear for downshifting to, you need to have it geared higher... which requires a higher torque engine. (which most hondas do not have). so 1'st gear in a honda 4cyl will never be as usable in downshifting as it will be in other cars because it MUST be geared lower to compensate for the lack of torque (compared to the competition).. BUT... because of the honda engine being smaller, you have better efficiency and you still end up with more power than the competition. It's a change of driving style that needs to be adopted by people switching to a higher revving 4cyl. It's most often noticed by People coming from German or American Cars.

~SB

 

if you find too many fools behind you it's because YOU R THE FOOL

if you keep right EXCEPT TO PASS you may find that all the fool magically disappear!!

 

it was merely easier for you

you defeated the whole purpose of the close ratio gearbox (performance, not ease of use)

 

I gotta say I agree.. no idea on the carbon build up thing.. but these cars are made to rev.. even the old pre v-tec d15 powered cars needed to have the piss reved out of them to move.

The earliest I shift is 4k unless I've hit cruising speed...