Page 1 of 4 123 ... LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 34

Thread: Efficiency/Economy comparisons to Honda Fit

  1. #1
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2013
    Location
    Manitoba
    Country
    Canada
    Posts
    468
    Thanks
    158
    Thanked 73 Times in 52 Posts

    Efficiency/Economy comparisons to Honda Fit

    ***Edit - I've been reading more about how cargo volume is measured - in short, these numbers may be meaningless as each company decides how they are going to measure cargo volume and it may not be consistent. Best to look at/measure/test load any car with whatever load you need as these numbers don't tell the whole story. See "Cargo Volume" thread***

    I've taken a few numbers from the Mitsubishi Canada and Honda Canada web sites, comparing the base models of each. By some measures, the Honda Fit is more "efficient", but the Mirage is more "economical". By that I mean the Fit can move more mass and produce more power for a given volume of fuel (winner in a physics class), but the Mirage can haul more cargo and people for a given volume of fuel (winner in an accounting class). I made no attempt to quantify how "nice" each car is in terms of comfort, ride/handling, looks etc.

    Power - The Fit produces 176% of the power of the Mirage (130/74)
    Torque - The Fit produces 174% of the torque of the Mirage (114/74)
    Weight - The Fit is 126.4% heavier than the Mirage (1131/895)

    Cargo volume - The Fit has 96.5% of the cargo volume of the Mirage (rear seat up - 487/470)
    *the seat down maximum volume may be larger for the Fit, but Mitsubishi does not publish a number.
    *Edited - Per Chrome Data - Mitsubishi's max cargo volume is 1331L to Honda's 1492 so the Fit has 112.1% of the maximum cargo volume of the Mirage.

    Passenger volume - The Fit has 111% of the passenger volume of the Mirage (2710/2440)

    Fuel use based on 2015 model published figures with manual transmission
    City fuel consumption - The Fit uses 115.7% of the fuel of the Mirage in the city (8.1/7.0)
    Highway fuel consumption - The Fit uses 112.2% of the fuel of the Mirage on the highway (6.4/5.7)
    Combined fuel consumption - The Fit uses 114.1% of the fuel of the Mirage combined (7.3/6.4)

    Price - rough calculation - the money saved buying a new Mirage at $14k over a new Fit at $19k would buy enough gas to go about 72,000km on the highway in the Mirage. (5000/1.21/5.7*1


    Last edited by Canoehead; 10-14-2014 at 02:10 PM. Reason: typo on hwy fuel consumption - 112.2% is correct.

        __________________________________________

        click to view fuel log View my fuel log 2014 Mirage SE 1.2 manual: 45.0 mpg (US) ... 19.1 km/L ... 5.2 L/100 km ... 54.1 mpg (Imp)


  2. The Following User Says Thank You to Canoehead For This Useful Post:

    MetroMPG (09-30-2014)

  3. #2
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2014
    Location
    New-Brunswick
    Country
    Canada
    Posts
    151
    Thanks
    24
    Thanked 10 Times in 9 Posts
    7.0 for city? I am doing 6.1 when delivering pizza (Turning on and off car each 5 min/miles) and about 5.0 when i'm not working...

    The mirage is probably one of the few cars doing better than it's EPA ratings.

        __________________________________________

        click to view fuel log View my fuel log 2014 Mirage ES 1.2 manual: 40.8 mpg (US) ... 17.4 km/L ... 5.8 L/100 km ... 49.0 mpg (Imp)


  4. #3
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2013
    Location
    Manitoba
    Country
    Canada
    Posts
    468
    Thanks
    158
    Thanked 73 Times in 52 Posts
    Quote Originally Posted by DirectNova View Post
    7.0 for city? I am doing 6.1 when delivering pizza (Turning on and off car each 5 min/miles) and about 5.0 when i'm not working...

    The mirage is probably one of the few cars doing better than it's EPA ratings.
    The new 5-cycle testing is much less optimistic than last year's methods. I agree the Mirage can do much better, but thought it only fair to compare the 2015 ratings against the Honda since there is no 2014 Honda rating available (new engine for this year).

    From what I have read, both cars are capable of exceeding their ratings if driven well. Time (and Fuelly) will tell!

        __________________________________________

        click to view fuel log View my fuel log 2014 Mirage SE 1.2 manual: 45.0 mpg (US) ... 19.1 km/L ... 5.2 L/100 km ... 54.1 mpg (Imp)


  5. #4
    Senior Member VespaGoGo's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2014
    Location
    Alabama
    Country
    United States
    Posts
    153
    Thanks
    13
    Thanked 50 Times in 23 Posts
    I can tell you that a Honda Fit on the interstate doesn't get anywhere near its published highway mpg. If you only do 65 it will, but go with the flow at 75-80mph and watch the economy nose dive.

  6. #5
    Administrator MetroMPG's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Location
    1000 Islands, Ontario
    Country
    Canada
    Posts
    5,802
    Thanks
    1,706
    Thanked 1,459 Times in 903 Posts
    One other wildcard: manufacturers are free to understate but not overstate their fuel economy when submitting EPA ratings.

    I honestly believe Mitsu was slightly conservative with the Mirage's numbers. The proof in the pudding comes from the 60 Mirage 1.2's in our fuel log: the fleet average is above the "combined" rating. (Well above the rating for the manuals.)

    I've heard in the past that Honda has been conservative with its ratings. I've got an '07 Civic 5-speed, and it's surprisingly easy to beat the ratings in both city/hwy. It'll be interesting to see how the new Fit does.

    Remember: when looking at Fuelly, you have to watch for smaller engines & hybrid drivetrains skewing the results in the Fit numbers.

        __________________________________________

        click to view fuel log View my fuel log 2014 Mirage base ES 1.2 manual: 54.0 mpg (US) ... 23.0 km/L ... 4.4 L/100 km ... 64.9 mpg (Imp)


  7. #6
    Senior Member VespaGoGo's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2014
    Location
    Alabama
    Country
    United States
    Posts
    153
    Thanks
    13
    Thanked 50 Times in 23 Posts
    Quote Originally Posted by MetroMPG View Post
    One other wildcard: manufacturers are free to understate but not overstate their fuel economy when submitting EPA ratings.
    Tell that to Hyundai. They got caught overstating once already, and that was my only complaint with my Elantra (2013- post revised estimate), the mpg was way below stated. I wasn't alone. If you go into a hyundai dealership and complain about mpg they will usually (very easily) fork over a prepaid gas card. I know for a fact this happened a year after they had Ended the card program they were forced to do because of the previous over statement. $100 gas card to shut you up.

  8. #7
    Junior Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2014
    Location
    maine
    Country
    United States
    Posts
    19
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked 10 Times in 3 Posts
    Quote Originally Posted by Canoehead View Post
    I've taken a few numbers from the Mitsubishi Canada and Honda Canada web sites, comparing the base models of each. By some measures, the Honda Fit is more "efficient", but the Mirage is more "economical". By that I mean the Fit can move more mass and produce more power for a given volume of fuel (winner in a physics class), but the Mirage can haul more cargo and people for a given volume of fuel (winner in an accounting class). I made no attempt to quantify how "nice" each car is in terms of comfort, ride/handling, looks etc.

    Power - The Fit produces 176% of the power of the Mirage (130/74)
    Torque - The Fit produces 174% of the torque of the Mirage (114/74)
    Weight - The Fit is 126.4% heavier than the Mirage (1131/895)

    Cargo volume - The Fit has 96.5% of the cargo volume of the Mirage (rear seat up - 487/470)
    *the seat down maximum volume may be larger for the Fit, but Mitsubishi does not publish a number
    Passenger volume - The Fit has 111% of the passenger volume of the Mirage (2710/2440)

    Fuel use based on 2015 model published figures with manual transmission
    City fuel consumption - The Fit uses 115.7% of the fuel of the Mirage in the city (8.1/7.0)
    Highway fuel consumption - The Fit uses 116.4% of the fuel of the Mirage on the highway (6.4/5.7)
    Combined fuel consumption - The Fit uses 114.1% of the fuel of the Mirage combined (7.3/6.4)

    Price - rough calculation - the money saved buying a new Mirage at $14k over a new Fit at $19k would buy enough gas to go about 72,000km on the highway in the Mirage. (5000/1.21/5.7*100)
    Canoehead, You STILL have not gone out and bought that Mirage? I remember you and I were both comparing the Fit and Mirage and both hadn't made up our minds. Well I bought a Mirage in August and Ive been really happy with it thus far. I have 2000 miles on it because I drive 1 hr to work every day all highway and I have averaged 50 mpg with the 4 times Ive fueled up since I bought it. Its comfortable economical and affordable. I feel like I made the right decision thus far, bite the bullet,you wont regret it. good luck.

  9. #8
    Administrator MetroMPG's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Location
    1000 Islands, Ontario
    Country
    Canada
    Posts
    5,802
    Thanks
    1,706
    Thanked 1,459 Times in 903 Posts
    Quote Originally Posted by VespaGoGo View Post
    Tell that to Hyundai.
    True! They're now sending annual payments to owners of affected cars.

    Tell it to Ford, also. They had to revise the ratings down on a bunch of their cars a few months ago.

    And Honda was sued successfully over the mileage rating of one specific car -- the Civic hybrid.

        __________________________________________

        click to view fuel log View my fuel log 2014 Mirage base ES 1.2 manual: 54.0 mpg (US) ... 23.0 km/L ... 4.4 L/100 km ... 64.9 mpg (Imp)


  10. #9
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2013
    Location
    NE
    Country
    United States
    Posts
    528
    Garage empty: add car
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked 77 Times in 59 Posts
    +

  11. #10
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2013
    Location
    Manitoba
    Country
    Canada
    Posts
    468
    Thanks
    158
    Thanked 73 Times in 52 Posts
    Quote Originally Posted by ironhead View Post
    Canoehead, You STILL have not gone out and bought that Mirage? I remember you and I were both comparing the Fit and Mirage and both hadn't made up our minds. Well I bought a Mirage in August and Ive been really happy with it thus far. I have 2000 miles on it because I drive 1 hr to work every day all highway and I have averaged 50 mpg with the 4 times Ive fueled up since I bought it. Its comfortable economical and affordable. I feel like I made the right decision thus far, bite the bullet,you wont regret it. good luck.
    Thanks Ironhead! If I keep obsessing about it I'll have to spend some of my car money on Lucy's 5c psychiatry help! Really I've come to the conclusion that either would be a fine car, and the Mirage is the clear winner for economy/long term cost of ownership. Now that it is fall I'm just going to hold off until spring (I live in a place where winter beats on cars like they were rented mules!) and then go to both dealers and see what offers are available.


        __________________________________________

        click to view fuel log View my fuel log 2014 Mirage SE 1.2 manual: 45.0 mpg (US) ... 19.1 km/L ... 5.2 L/100 km ... 54.1 mpg (Imp)


Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •