(Anecdotal) Fit only getting 27 MPG?

Discussion in 'Fit' started by Hachiroku ハチロク, Jul 15, 2007.

  1. Hachiroku ハチロク

    Jim Yanik Guest

    One of my neighbors had a rear end collision,and the bumper bar underneath
    was mounted on crushable spacer brackets;the bar withstood the crash,but
    the spacers need to be replaced,along with the urethane plastic bumper
    cover.(that was already removed when I saw the car)
    Jim Yanik, Jul 17, 2007

  2. But a lot of carmakers, esp the Japanese, responded quickly and designed
    the *car* around the *bumper*.

    My 1978 Corolla looked kind of awkward with these big bumpers 'tacked on'
    to it, the 1980 that replaced it was nice!!
    Hachiroku ハチロク, Jul 17, 2007

  3. Where are you?
    Hachiroku ハチロク, Jul 17, 2007
  4. Hachiroku ハチロク

    Tegger Guest

    Canada is the only country in the world that has 5mph bumpers (and one
    of only TWO countries in the world with any sort of bumper standards at

    There are no hydraulic rams anymore, just styrofoam atop a rigidly-
    mounted steel beam. The rams were too heavy and were a casualty of CAFE-
    derived weight-saving measures.

    The whole point of the energy absorbing bumpers was to protect the car's
    "safety systems" from damage in a collision at that speed. "Safety
    systems" primarily means the headlights.

    The automakers were able to have the US standard reduced in the mid-'80s
    because they were able to show that there wasn't much practical
    difference in damage between 2.5mph and 5mph bumpers.

    2.5mph bumpers were supposed to be able to be less costly to produce and
    carry less of a weight penalty.

    Also, rigid bumpers tend to carry more of the stress of the collision to
    the body shell, meaning damage is more likely to go deeper than just the
    cosmetic. The old non-impact bumpers tended to keep the damage out at
    the cosmetic sheet metal.
    Tegger, Jul 17, 2007
  5. Hachiroku ハチロク

    mjc13 Guest

    Upstate NY. Here's the as:

    mjc13, Jul 17, 2007
  6. Well, I'm not the guy that you posted the question to about the RPMs at 70
    MPH, but I purposely ran my Fit up to 70MPH, which is not easy to do on
    L.A.'s crowded freeways, and the tachometer indicates around 3,400 RPM at 70
    MPH. My Fit is a 5 speed manual transmission. Hope this helps.

    Robert A. Cunningham
    Robert A. Cunningham, Jul 17, 2007

  7. WHOA! Very Nice!

    If I ever get a job that *PAYS* again, I might be interested!
    Right now I'm doing newspapers in between and am looking for ~$250 beaters.

    I certainly would NOT use that on a paper route!!!

    And I know where mechanicsville is. I used to live in Pittsfield MA and
    used to go to Lebanon Valley a lot. Also, many trips through to Toronto
    ans Selkirk and Waterford when I worked for GE.
    Hachiroku ハチロク, Jul 17, 2007
  8. Hachiroku ハチロク

    JXStern Guest

    I don't think nhtsa has any weight or material requirements.

    Maybe there are damage-at-speed requirements or even just ratings that
    would make the composites look bad, until and unless a whole lot more
    engineering was done as I suggested, with modular replacement.

    Never look to the government to help, though they can always get in
    the way, I just don't know what might be in place right now that's

    JXStern, Jul 18, 2007
  9. Hachiroku ハチロク

    jim beam Guest

    damned straight! a good deal of the modern so-called "safety" agenda
    does little more than add massive weight to a car, and thereby ruins gas
    mileage. now, how many oilco lobbyists are there in d.c? a good deal
    more than there are engineers experienced in matters of vehicle design
    and safety i'll wager.
    jim beam, Jul 18, 2007
  10. Hachiroku ハチロク

    mjc13 Guest

    I don't know where that intermediate comment came from, but I'm the
    one who suggested short gearing, and I think I'm right. A car geared for
    freeway cruising in overdrive should be running at about 2500-2800 RPM
    at that speed. This reminds me of something that Volvo pulled with the
    140 series, way back when: you could get an optional overdrive unit for
    the manual shift cars, but if you got stuck with a basic 4 speed, it
    would be running 3500RPM at *60* MPH. Honda obviously wanted the car to
    be responsive in 5th, even at the expense of fuel economy.
    mjc13, Jul 18, 2007
  11. Hachiroku ハチロク

    jim beam Guest

    which is a crock.
    also a crock. whatever the propaganda that was used to rationalize this
    downgrade, it came down to one simple thing. corporate welfare.

    5mph bumpers meant that the usual parking lot dings and bumps weren't
    causing damage, thereby causing a sudden and substantial loss in revenue
    for repair shops, and most importantly, manufacturers. so it was
    reduced, with b.s. reasons cited like you say, but they're untrue.

    and "deeper" damage, is by design, not accident. the initial yield
    point of a crumple zone is easily designed, as is the point at which it
    occurs. frod are ruthless exploiters of this. where's the first point
    to buckle behind the bumper at 5mph on frontal impact? the bit /behind/
    the radiator perhaps? no. the bit in front of the engine perhaps? no.
    the bit behind the engine and suspension, where repair becomes
    uneconomic? youbetcha. a necessity of design? no way. profitable?
    amazingly so.
    indeed. and they reduced write-offs substantially too. not as
    profitable to detroit repair as it is to sell a new car.
    jim beam, Jul 18, 2007
  12. Hachiroku ハチロク

    mjc13 Guest

    A somewhat similar '86 was up on Ebay last month: nicer body but
    original clutch, which must be worn. It was also the least desirable
    color - white. The bidding stopped at $2500, the reserve not met. I may
    go that route, and put up a 'buy it now' price of $1995. People don't
    seem to appreciate these cars enough around here. Anyway, if anyone here
    wants to buy it and restore it, or at least treat it gently, I'm
    flexible on the price, as long as it's cash. The biggest problem with
    the car is a driver's side rainwater leak that the dealers could never
    even find, much less fix...

    I'm still amazed that this 91HP car would outdrag the 125 HP EX
    Sedan I replaced it with.
    mjc13, Jul 18, 2007
  13. Hachiroku ハチロク

    jim beam Guest

    did you ever do the power/weight ratio calculation?
    jim beam, Jul 18, 2007
  14. Hachiroku ハチロク

    jim beam Guest

    "should"??? rpm's depend on the ratio that best balances motor output
    with the best point on its economy curve with the wind resistance/weight
    for that vehicle. so the number varies from car to car, motor to motor!!!
    jim beam, Jul 18, 2007

  15. If I ever get a real job again...

    Can I fit a matress in it?

    I have an '85 Corolla GTS (I'd like to put them up against each other...)
    an '88 Supra
    an '89 Mazda 626
    an '89 Subaru GL Hatch
    and an '05 Scion tC.

    I got told "One more friggin car, and it better be something you can
    *sleep* in!" ;)
    Hachiroku ハチロク, Jul 18, 2007
  16. Consider the collisions you have known. Some of them have been at very low
    speeds - parking lots, creeping traffic that suddenly jolted - but the rest
    have probably been at much more than 5 mph. Except for the 1-2 mph dings I
    can't think of a single collision I've ever witnessed that was under 15 mph.

    Proposed bumper height standards were the rage for a while because bumpers
    are pointless if they aren't used. Dunno if any standards were actually
    passed. The big problem there was (and is) that rear end collisions are
    notorious for bumper heights not matching. Each car in line nosedives as it
    brakes, so the lead car raises its rear bumper and the following car lowers
    its front bumper.

    Michael Pardee, Jul 18, 2007
  17. I had one of those! A 1970 145 with a 4-speed. Seeing the tach hover around
    4000 rpm in top gear on urban freeways was strange. However, responsiveness
    is relative....

    Michael Pardee, Jul 18, 2007
  18. Hachiroku ハチロク

    mjc13 Guest

    I had a '71 145 for a while: rusty body but the best suspension I'd
    even driven. No, it wasn't a powerhouse, but I still think they should
    have done what they did with the P1800, and put a higher final gearing
    on the 4 speeds... Another interssting factoid: the 4 speed P1800S was
    faster than the 5 speed, precisely because they had a higher final
    gearing, and would redline at 120 in 4th. The 5 speed would top out at
    about 110 in 4th, and go no faster in O/D.
    mjc13, Jul 18, 2007
  19. Hachiroku ハチロク

    mjc13 Guest

    I've had several 5-10 MPH 'bumps' in cars with 5MPH bumpers, and was
    glad of those standards. Instead of serious damage I just had to replace
    a mounting bracket or two.
    mjc13, Jul 18, 2007
  20. Hachiroku ハチロク

    mjc13 Guest

    Maybe a kid's mattress. I've tried to sleep in the car, and it's
    about 1' too short.
    I think the GTS would win. 16 valves and, what, 120HP? vs 12 valves
    and 91HP, in a body only slightly heavier. But with the set of
    Bridgestones I ran for 9 years, I think my car would have won in the
    mjc13, Jul 18, 2007
Ask a Question

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

You'll need to choose a username for the site, which only take a couple of moments (here). After that, you can post your question and our members will help you out.