120-130 kph seems to be a speed the Fit likes. I make the run down 401 to Brampton and back (100km each way) at those speeds each week in my AT at a few less rpms(28-3000) I have average 38 mpg(Cdn) in the first year.

I am getting use to the high revs as well. Seeing 6,000 is scary still. My old Austin Healey Bugeye was redlined at 4500 and cruise was 55mph at around 3500.

 

isnt this why they have the speed adjusted volume control

 

The road noise drove me crazy when my car was stock, the wind noise isn't all that bad but adding music to the two plus after market exhaust is too much at highway speed... I prefer hearing the droning sound of the loud exhaust over all other sounds.... My Goldwing has a better sound system and is quieter than a stock Fit but the Fit is cheaper to operate and more fun as well.

 

For comparison, consider my 2002 Honda S2000. Granted, the engine is built to tolerate a 9000 rpm redline. Cruising in 6th gear at 60 mph, the engine runs 3300 rpm. That would equate to roughly 4400 rpm at 80 mph. Noisy? Somewhat. However, the engine can handle the rpm's without undue wear - and so can the Fit's engine. Higher rpm capability is very typical of Honda, perhaps indicative of their motorcycle heritage.

 

You have a Goldwing, what year? Wonderful cruising bike that nobody could say otherwise about, well they could, but they could/would be considered a liar.

 

The s2000 however has absolutly no end torque so it's normal that you are at 3300 at 60mph, in the fit, almost 3000rpm at 60mph has no point except to burn more gas and make noise.

 

.

For the record, the ratios in top gear for the Fit are somewhat different automatic transmission vs. manual. The automatic runs about 2100 rpm at 60 mph, while the manual is shorter geared and runs about 2800. For this reason, the automatic version is a bit more suitable for high speed cruising, although I would agree that the manual is more fun, and gives better control and stronger overall acceleration.

 

What I am curious about - in 4th, the ratio on the Auto is about like 5th with the standard. Would my fuel economy be worse if I left it in 4th on my auto and kept it from engaging overdrive.

 

.....

Probably would be worse. The torque converter will not remain locked if you give the accelerator pedal any push. Unlocked torque converter translates into additional losses as the fluid is churned and generates heat. I have observed that when you are in fifth, even fairly subtle accelerator pedal adjustments cause the rpm's to surge by a few hundred rpm.

 

They ruined the m/t to please those who don't know how to downshift/didn't buy the right tranny.

 

vash- you're fine at 3500rpm+.

 

I don't think so, from what I've read, the 5AT downshifts quite often when the car gets to a hill. If the 5MT had the same gearing in 5th, it would require a lot more work for the driver in a gear that you rarely want to have to "work". Drivers would also likely lug the engine more. 5th gear should be for cruising and if you have to constantly shift down, then back up, that's not cruising. It's the lack of torque which causes this and with a 1.5L, there's no real way around this.

I think Honda had two choices. Force the majority of manual trans drivers to shift more often from 5th to 4th, or lower the gear ratio and increase the RPM's.

If you look at the CR-Z 6MT, 6th gear isn't even as high as 5th in the 5AT FIT but it is better than the 5MT FIT. I'm thinking that's because the extra torque from the Electric Motor allows the car to handle hills better at 60+mph.

Granted 5MT drivers do expect to have to shift but for those that travel hilly highways (such as RT 88 in New York), regular shifting is not some thing to be expected.

It's a trade-off and I think Honda made the right move even though I'm not a fan of the noise at 60+ in my 5MT. Still wouldn't trade it (unless all I drove was highway - then I'd be wanting a CVT or in our case, the 5AT).

~SB