Hey ryude--neato that you're in Ponchatoula. I have a bunch of family that lives there.

 

That's awesome

 

Ever heard of Cooper Wrecker Service?

 

Yup, is that your family?

 

Yes, sure is. I haven't been down there in a while. I live up near Dallas now. But my parents and grandmother live near Lake Charles.

Small world, eh?

 

Small indeed

 

The AT gearing is such that the Fit is turning considerably more RPM at any highway speed with the manual than the automatic. More rpm = less mpg but around town when lower gears are more often the mpg is better because the rpm is more efficiently used.

 

The Fit was also developed originally for the Asian market, and while the GE8 got considerably larger, it shares the same principle that it's primarily a compact city car, it's not meant to trek the autobahn on a daily basis. The AT and MT have both pretty good balance either way but it's still a better city car no matter the transmission.

If you want a good long hauler get a Lexus LS430 and sit back with the cruise on. The Fit is great for my quick little trips on the interstate, with the MT turning 3800 rpm @ 75mph is fine by me. I still get 37/38 MPG average on the interstate so it's really nothing to complain about it.

That being said I do take it on 300 mile interstate trips once a month to visit Family in Atlanta, doesn't seem to be an issue, and I plan on taking this car up to visit my family in Canada later this year as well.

I do like that the MT is geared when on the interstate that it's in the nice range of the power band so I can pass with considerable pull for a 1.5L without having to downshift. Not as fun as my previous car which was a MKIV VW GTI 1.8T it would spin about 3000 rpm @ 75mph but that is right in the sweet spot of the turbo boost, pulled like a monster, had lots of fun with that car on the interstate.

 

"on paper" but in real life, the manual transmission gets better city and highway mileage

 

And you can argue with SB all you want but he is right, if everyone would think for a second the simple reason why he is right, there would be far less arguing.

The AT transmission is a $1000 option, lets just say which in most cases that is what everyone is paying more for a AT Fit.

Now you AT drivers may think you are doing a lot better by achieving a little bit higher highway MPG than I do, but lets take the fact that plain and simple a MT gets far better city MPG, averaging both out lets say the AT gets average of 2mpg more overall than the AT, over a course of 5 years you will have saved around $340 hmm wait a minute didn't you pay $1000 for that transmission? Ok lets say you get 5mpg more average, which honestly just isn't happening, thats still just a cost savings of $800, none the less we will just give all you AT drivers the benefit of the doubt and say you get 10mpg more You will break even from purchasing the option of the AT transmission after 4 years..

But wait, lets go ahead and just for simplicity reasons of comparing lets go with the Hondas estimated EPA numbers that the AT gets a combined 1mpg more than the manual, have fun driving your AT for 17 years to break even

This is the same reason I laugh at Prius owners that try to argue the cost difference of their car over mine cause they got 50mpg, yeah good for you, you also have to drive it for 20 years to make up the difference, and way to go on polluting the environment more on the manufacturing.

 

Just checked KBB for trade in value of 2010 Fit with 24000 miles, with M/T and with A/T. Same exact options. A/T fetches $500 more in trade in value.

M/T or A/T. Honda Fit. Both are great!

 

You forgot to calculate in the clutch job that will undoubtedly happen before the MT Fit's Service Life is over. I'm sure that will cost you more than $1000.

 

Sure that very well may be true, but you also can't forget you have the buy the car first before you can trade it in And there is a higher cost difference regardless is thats what you are trying to make a point to

 

OH boy here we go again, I have a 1991 Mazda B2200 with edging near 300k miles, with the original clutch, nobody ever necessarily said everyone will have to replace a clutch, and unlike a lot of people I can change them myself for a couple hundred bucks if that, not to mention you can get a whole MT for like $500.

But I'm not going to go on with this cause it was already beat to shit in a similar thread. I have AT cars, I have MT cars, the only ones that seem to be really bashing MT cars probably don't know how to drive one properly.

Anyone that would pay $1000 to have a clutch changed on a FWD Honda is a freaking idiot. My GF got one changed out in a Mitusibishi Eclipse that she got from a guy who previously raced it, got it for $500 cause the guy hit a cop with the car, went to jail and his parents sold her the car, got a clutch put in it for $90 at the most reputable transmission shop in town, car still runs great today over 170k miles on it, over 100k miles later

EDIT: sorry my GF and I were laughing at this thread but she informed me that it was $140 for the clutch change with parts and labor, not $90. But still $1000 is a joke, turn around and run away.

 

I started wrenching fulltime In 1973, 300K on one clutch...your a lucky guy, I'm not saying it can't be done, but your numbers are far from the norm I have seen.

 

Probably helps that this thing only had like 80hp new, I haven't been the original owner but It's been in family and I know everything that's been done to it, I don't drive it much anymore, it's never been used to tow, just haul some stuff here and there.

The thing doesn't even burn oil, I change it once a year, retains fill level, quite amazing truck but it is showing its age in other ways.

 

Its a 9 labor hour job in the book, IIRC.. Easily $1k at a dealership.

I imagine it can be done in 5 on a lift, it'll probably take me half a day in the garage on jacks using a hoist.

That said.. I would still rather do that on a yearly basis than drive the miserable, soulless auto that comes in these cars.

I'll be doing the swap here in a couple months as I doubt the poor stocker would hold long enough to even let me fully spool the small turbo, let alone light up the big turbo. It saw enough abuse in the last 40k miles, already having put up with a GT2560R for a couple months before I sold it for the setup Im working on now.

The stock discs that came out of two of my previous DSMs had more than 100k on them. One of them was slipping admittedly, and under the service limit by about a 1/3, almost to the rivets. As soon as it saw 4-5psi which comes up pretty quick with a 14B compressor on a 2.0L, it would practically pin the tach

I have a picture of it somewhere around here..

 

I hope you aren't serious. You realize an automatic transmission is more expensive to service, right? You realize a clutch replacement doesnt cost anything near $1000, right? You realize you can't really service an automatic transmission when it "starts to go out", you replace it.

 

sol It would do wonders for your sanity and faith in the forum to put a good lot of the new members on ignore.

there has been some mind melting stupidity posted in the past couple months, from supposed mechanics and engineers no less. The "Honda Deception" thread and well this one, for example

 

It's so sad. I thought the "new" gd owners were bad but some of the GE owners make me want to strangle animals