I doubt that most people would want to own a Yaris. I saw a picture of the dashboard of the Yaris. Believe it or not--the speedometer and related guages are located in the center of the dash--directly below the overhead mirror. Imagine looking in that direction everytime you wanted to check your speed. That appears to me to be unsafe. I should note that there is an excellent article about the Fit in the current issue of Honda Tuning magazine. I wonder if Toyota has a brochure about the Yaris in their dealerships? If you know the answer--please post it. The center mounted dash cluster was one of the reasons that the Yaris came in 4th place in the Car and Driver comparison test. I found this statement in the article related to Yaris S: "All of our testers disliked the center mounted guage cluster." Jason
same as the scion xA and xB. same as the funky echo before that, too. pretty easy to get used to, and allows glove boxes on BOTH sides of the dash, which i think the yaris has. saturn thought it was so neat, they copied it for their saturn ion line. hmmm... "saturn ion"... "scion". kinda sounds the same, sorta! not enough to fool people. the upside is you can finance a saturn for 60mos at 0%. the bad thing is youd have to drive a saturn not a whole lot weirder than the double decker civic dash. tho my fave was the first gen prelude, with the tach sitting inside the speedo. or vice versa... i forgot. yet they loved the xB in the econoBOX test a month earlier. similar dash setup! which goes to show that even getting rid of brock yates has left a bunch of alkies on the staff. if you can get a 4 door scion for the same price as a yaris with similar options, it only makes sense to get the scion. thats going to be the yaris 3dr downfall. and 4 door, too. id bet a loaded yaris sedan is almost the same price as a scion xB, which is infinately cooler and has more room.
You are probably correct--only time will tell. I saw a scion xB on a parking lot today and thought it looked great. I only hope that it runs as well as it looks. I would prefer the Honda Civic Si over the scion xB. Jason
Thanks so much everyone for the advice. I test drove a 2004 Civic LX yesterday. The ride was smooth, but not _too_ smooth, the shifting tight, and the car didn't seem underpowered. A nice car for the price. The Fit will have to be _very_ impressive. Passed on that particular Civic, though, because my insurance company still hasn't given me an idea of what they think the old car is worth. Grrr. --Nan
If they have a Honda Civic Si--take a test ride in that car. That car is so poplular that the local Honda dealership can't keep them in stock. They sell them at quickly as they arrive on the car lot. I should have asked the salesman how many people are on the list waiting for their Honda Civic Si to arrive from the factory. I read an article indicating that Toyota has the same problem with the Prius Jason
I'll be picking up my brand new Civic LX sedan this afternoon Test drove the Fit yesterday. Great little car, lots of space, and it had more pick-up than I expected. Handling was very good, everything was solid, and it looked much better than it did in pictures. Came very close to getting it. But since the price was so close to a new Civic, I decided to play it safe. Over the long haul the Civic seemed the better choice. While the Fit is a much more fun car, I can see myself driving the Civic for many years. Thanks again, everyone. And I'll be lurking in the newsgroup -- time to enter Hondaland --Nan
--Nan, I believe that you made the best choice. The only down-side is that the MPG is better in a Fit. However, the upside is that you have an engine that has more power and a vehicle that has more space than a Fit. Jason
Well, the EPA says Fit: 33/38 Civic: 30/38 The mpg penalty for the Civic is quite small. Did anyone compare insurance premiums for these two cars?
Thanks for your post. I did not know that the Fit and Civic got the same "highway" MPG. I have not compared the insurance premiums for those two cars. However, I was correct in my post. The MPG is better in a Fit. Jason
Yup, 3 mpg difference is equal to about $100/year for these cars. So if the Civic insurance is more than $100 less than the Fit, the annual ownership cost may be less for the Civic (assuming same maintenance, depreciation, etc.) Of course, as the EPA says, YMMV.
Actually, Jason, you're wrong on the space as well as the EPA MPG estimates. Go to www.honda.com and click on the Honda page, select the Civic, then the 5 spd. LX sedan. Finally choose the comparison link and choose the 5 spd Fit for the comparison. The various measurements are within fractions of an inch/foot (or cubic inch/foot WRT volume) comparisons. The exception is the cargo volume where the Fit beats the Civic 6 ways to Sunday. Being a squared off hatch, the Fit has 21.3 cu. ft. compared to the Civic's 12.9. With the second row of the Fit folded flat, it has over 42 cu. ft. of cargo space. Of course that's an unfair comparison since the Civic sedan cannot fold the rear seats flat and it is a pass-through limiting the total capacity. The Fit is an amazing little car. It is about $ 2.8k cheaper, 240 pounds lighter, and about 19 inches shorter, yet it compares very well to its "bigger" brother, the Civic LX. Oh, and the lb/hp ratio is not all that different: Civic 20.5/1 vs. Fit 22.3/1. The difference is made up in the gearing, one of the reasons that the Fit "suffers" a lower mpg than on might expect.
Kent, I am sure your are correct. I visited the local Honda dealership today and picked up the brochures re: to the Fit, Civic and Accord. I compared the statistics that were mentioned in the brochures. I also took a look at the Fit. They actually had the Fit hood open and the engine running. They were showing it off to someone that may have purchased it. If I had my choice between a new Civic and a new Fit--I would choose the Civic. The main reason would be because the Civic engine has more power than the engine in the Fit. The Fit Sport engine has 109 HP and 105 Torque. The Civic LX engine has 140 HP and 128 torque. Those are the main statistics that concern me. I love the Civic Si--that engine has 197 HP and 139 torque. Jason Jason
If Honda decided to release a Hatchback version of the Civic into the N.A. market, it would probably be a death sentence for the Fit. Compared to the Civic, the Fit doesn't have any advantages, other then cargo capacity. The 2K price difference isn't enough to justify the Fit's inabiliy to perform at high speeds on the Hwy. While the Civic will be able to cruise comfortably at 100mph, the Fit would be a noicy mess at that speed and probably wouldn't have much left over to blast out of a situation, since it's already screaming along at it's limits. There is one advantages ot the Fit, I suppose the Japanese worker would appreciate the extra work vs a North American built Civic. I would like to see a home brewed, basic, Civic Hatch, like my old 98 DX Hatch that only cost 14K to purchase. Pars
Have you driven one, Pars? Have you even sat in one? Car & Driver gave it a glowing review in a comparison test with 6 others in its class. About that 1998 hatch of yours, can it match the content of the 2007 Fit, A/C, air bags, power steering, ABS, front disk brakes, AM/FM/CD? Then there's 9-10 years of inflation to deal with. Do you regularly drive at 100 mph? If so, you're breaking the law, endangering yourself and others. The top speed of the Fit (per C&D) is 114 mph, drag limited. It can reach the century mark in 31.1 seconds, 60 in 8.7 seconds. How about your vaunted DX (stripper)? How much have you spent in aftermarket goodies for comfort and performance? The last car I felt comfortable doing 100 in was my 2000 Si, which stickered at about $19k, and believe me it had more than 5k worth of content over your 1998 DX.
C&D said this about the Nissan Versa "If you're chiefly interested in commuting and errand hopping, this is the one." And pretty much that's what folks in this segment do with their cars. Someone interested in a sporty drive wouldn't buy a 109 hp car. Edmunds says a 2001 Integra Type R retails for about the same $$ as a new Fit Sport.
And with how many miles of wear and tear on the Integra? The Versa came in 25 points BEHIND the Fit. There's not enough difference in the prices to make that a decision point. If you want to pay $15k for a 6 or 7 year old Type R with 70,000 plus miles of likely flailing, be my guest. The Fit Sport (mostly handling, not additional hp or different gearing) beat its competition across the board. It looks like the Versa is a pretty decent car, but the Nissan most likely won't hold its value as well as the Honda.
I put 190K miles on my Integra (not an R) before some idiot hit me. I can assure you, I'd have raced a Fit for its pink slip any time. But you're probably right about the Type R. In fact, a quick Auto Trader search indicates there are no Rs available in my area right now. Yeah, I understand that. But still C&D says the Versa is the better car for mundane tasks. Frankly, I think C&D missed the boat by testing the highest trim levels rather than the lower trim levels where the bulk of the sales are going to occur.
In the Car and Driver comparison test of 7 economobiles, the Honda Fit Sport was first place and Nissan Versa was second place. Both of the cars could easily be used for commuting and errand hopping. The engine in the Nissan Versa has more power (eg HP and torque) than the engine in the Fit. Jason
The nearest Honda dealer (Trickett) got 5 Fits in the 1st of the week, 4 Base, 1 Sport. The 1st Base went almost off the truck, the 2nd went the next day. There is a hold on the black base, leaving a grey Base and the red Sport. Eye balling them, I'd say that they're about the same size, overall, as a mid-80s early 90s hatch. The Sport gets premium sound, fog lights, a hatch spoiler, lower body flares, 15 inch alloy wheels with all-weather tires and not much more than the base. A/C, electric power steering, air bags to let, all standard. The Sport that C&D tested came in a little lower than the Versa. The sticker price at Trickett was boosted by overpriced floor mats and mud guards, Base and Sport pricing out at about 15,100 to 15,800. Oh yeah, the Base models had fabric guard added in ... all three useless IMO. If I had the money (which I don't, far from it), I'd get the Fit Sport for everyday and a Civic Si for the pure hell of it on nice days.
I've been to two Honda dealership and couldn't land a test drive. In the first dealership, the sales guy didn't have any on the lot, except for the one in the show room, I gave him my phone number (1 week ago) to call me when one become availabe for a test drive. He never called back. The 2nd dealership also didn't have any available. The sales guy mentioned that they had recently recieved a shipment of 20 and they were all already sold. He also mentioned that there was a 3 month wait for the car. So, looks like I'm going to have to wait until the hype dies down before I can get a test spin on the Fit. I wasn't impressed with the abilities of the 06 Civic coupe (not the Si), when compared to my current 98 Hatch, so, I'm not expecting to be impressed with the Fit handling ability or power. My bare bone 98 DX Hatch has had alot of enhancements, mostly to do with handling and interior upgrades. I haven't done any engine upgrades and I'm glad of it, since the engine is still aggressive, even after 285,000km. So, the 5K to 7K extras that I've spent on the 98 Hatch in the form of enhancement could also be added on to a base Fit, but it probably wouldn't make the Fit drive any better, since that car already gotten it's share of tweaks from the manufactor. Unless you're going to put it 2inchs from the ground, which is stupid, my old Hatch has about 6 inchs and that's already too low. , Perhaps in the Fit 100mph is dangerous, but in my Hatch, I'm totally relaxed, the engine is only reving at about 4000rpm, the car tracks perfectly straight. If there's any surprise on the road and my reaction is fast enough (which thankfully it has been in several occasions), the car will match my abilities. According to the C&D reviews the Fit is also quick on its feet, when in comes to avoidance. The only thing is, the short wheel base and simplistic rear suspension would probably cause the car to go into a spin at high speeds in extreme situations, which hasn't happened in my 98 Hatch (thankful once again). Granted, 100mph is fast, but I wouldn't call it unsafe when you factor in road conditon and the cars ability. As for breaking the law, if that was an issue, every single motorist on the road would already be behind bars. The Fits 8.6 sec to 60mpg is good. I believe the Yaris has similiar 0-60mph stats. Like wise, my old Hatch takes about 8.6sec to reach 60mpg, but that's with gigantic 1st and 2nd gears (I can do 120km/hr in 2nd gear). Once my 98 Hatch is in 3rd gear and in the power band, I'm able to pull away from the 1.5L compatitions as if their standing still. Even with all my mis-givings, I still might end up getting a Fit, because with my current job, cargo capacity and fuel economy is a priority. But, I'm going to hate having to slow down on the highway because the car's weak in that department. Pars
