2nd Generation (GE 08-present)The New Fit... Generation specific talk and questions here.
Welcome to Fit Freak!
Welcome to Fit Freak,
You are currently viewing our forum as a guest, which gives you limited access to view most discussions and access our other features. By joining our community, at no cost, you will have access to post topics, communicate privately with other members (PM), respond to polls, upload content and access many other special features. Registration is free, fast and simple, so please join our community today!
agree 100% in that Ford is miles ahead of Chevy and Dodge... Dodge continues to make bullshit small cars and huge v8's... They are now selling the Viper brand and want to put the Viper engine into their crewcab duallies... Now that is stupid.
Chevy, they've been making nice smaller suv's that can compare to the honda crv, however honda crv gives you 400+ miles to the tank, my bro proved it to me from l.a. to oklahoma this year. Chevy will hopefully make a nice comeback as I have always been a fan of american cars, however since 1996 we've had nothing but honda's in a family of ford/chevy cars.
Why isn't anyone making mini-trucks anymore? They got bigger and bigger, and now aren't all that mini. The Ranger isn't that small. And it's gas mileage isn't so great. Nor is it's price: http://www.edmunds.com/ford/ranger/2010/index.html
Does anyone even trick out Rangers? There used to be all kinds of small trucks, slammed or jacked up. That whole segment of vehicles seems to be gone.
That's something Ford could do. Make small, economical trucks. If they could come up with a smaller than Ranger size, at a great price with excellent fuel economy, I think that would help.
People don't always need a full-size truck or the mid-size versions of small trucks available now.
A lot of jobs that require trucks, like construction, you have to travel to jobs. When gas prices are high, and construction is lagging, it's too costly to use a full-size truck to get to a day job (like a house fix-it).
They could corner the market if they did it right.
I love the way the Fit comes fully loaded. But I still want the leather seats, and if the Fiesta will be coming with leather and that sways some people towards the Ford, you can bet that Honda will indeed begin to offer that option in this country too.
They WON'T do it unless pushed by competition
I do agree with those thoughts. That same kind of approach can be applied to another current event these days- you know, spurring on competition? Hmm, what else could that be applied to successfully?
Hopefully Ford will push them to bring out a more "luxury" version of the Fit.
I know it's an econo-car, and that kinda defeats the purpose....
But I would've spent the extra money for heated side mirrors w/ blinkers, projector headlights, moon-roof, and leather seats.
(I know I can take the time and money and do these myself... but had the options been there when I bought the car, I would've opted for them)
I don't think it defeats the purpose at all, any more than putting on side skirts, different front bumpers, different wheels does. Or adding on Nav/VSA on top of the previous Sport grouping.
I would have gone for the Base model with the blinkers on the side mirrors (don't really need the heated mirrors), the moon roof, and leather or vinyl seats.
The blinkers on the side mirrors is a nice option, adds safety and visibility.
The vinyl or leather is for a practical purpose, cleaning ease. I hate the fabric seats and really dislike the weird fabric headliner. Yuck. Can't wipe down the headliner. How are we supposed to clean that?
And the moon roof is for light, ventilation, would be very useful in hot climates to vent out that hot air.
I'd pass on all the options, though, if they could only be included in a Sport with Nav.
Just because THEY think someone might not buy a base model with leather, doesn't mean that a person won't buy a base model with leather. The Argentina Fit doesn't have a Sport model and does come with leather. It looks great.
1. I would love to see how that test would have gone had the Fit had summer only tires. People don't realize how big a difference tires make. A super sticky summer performance tire can cut braking distances by up to 13 feet if not more, can add many 10ths of a g to skidpad performance, and can get a car through a slalom much faster. The Fit has a lot of potential that is being held back by super skinny all-season tires.
2. Not only do I not trust Ford not to botch the car when they bring it here, but I don't trust Ford's reliability record. Let's see, do I want to buy a made in Japan Fit, or a first year made in Mexico Ford? That's an easy decision for me. There would have to be at least five years of data showing it has the solid reliability track record of the Fit before I would even consider it.
3. The Fit has a much bigger hatch area and back seats that lay completely flat when folded down.
4. The Fit gets much better gas mileage on regular unleaded. If Ford doesn't do something about the requirement for 91 octane sales will be seriously affected. No one wants to buy an econo car and have to fill it with premium.
I'm happy America is getting hip to much smaller cars that get great mileage and I'm pulling for Ford to be successful with this one. Just one less giant gas sucking suv or pickup truck on the road when someone buys a Fiesta. But regardless of how that test went I'm not at all regretful with my decision to buy a Fit.
__________________
2009 white sport w/manual trans & navi
OEM accessories: all-season floor mats, cargo tray, cargo net, door edge film, body side molding, door sills, window tint, and soon the center armrest with storage
1. I would love to see how that test would have gone had the Fit had summer only tires. People don't realize how big a difference tires make. A super sticky summer performance tire can cut braking distances by up to 13 feet if not more, can add many 10ths of a g to skidpad performance, and can get a car through a slalom much faster. The Fit has a lot of potential that is being held back by super skinny all-season tires.
QFT.
You could add "better brake pedal modulation" to your list of maladies that a better set of tires can cure.
I drove a 5MT Fiesta at one of the fiestamovement ride and drive events, and I think the Edmunds comparison is fairly accurate on the pros and cons of each car. For me it went:
-Ride/handling: Fiesta, it felt more composed. I'd call steering a tie, I didn't sense better feedback than my Fit.
-Shifter: Fiesta, definitely. Though I don't hate the Fit shifter as much as others
-Engine: Fiesta? I couldn't judge power because I had too many passengers, but the engine was very smooth and all parts of the drivetrain felt like they were on the same team.
-Fit/finish and perceived quality: Tie? At least on par with the Fit and way nicer than Yaris, Versa, etc.
-Utility: Fit. Duh.
I actually think Ford will listen and not change the car much- they put the Euro car so far out there for the press that it would otherwise be a letdown.
I hope they pull it off. We've been complaining for so long that US automakers either can't or won't build the right car to compete. This has the potential to be it. The Fit will always find an audience due to it's great blend of utility and fun-to-drive, plus its loyal owner base. But competition can only improve the breed.
For reference I have a 100% Japanese built Honda garage right now- 96 Integra, 04 S2000, and 09 Fit
One thing about the test that surprised me was that the Fiesta uses premium gas. I've been following Fiesta reports on other sites and this is the first I'd heard of that. Argh I really hope that Ford gets it right with the Fiesta, especially for those who keep cars a long time (like me). I actually had a 1978 Fiesta that I bought new. Loved the way it drove and handled (had the Sport suspension), but at 110,000 miles, it was junk. Bought a 1986 Honda Civic Si new and at the end of it's life (almost 200,000 miles) it still ran better than the Fiesta at 110,000 miles. Ford is the best American car right now, but if they don't have cars that last, they're shooting themselves in the foot.
There is no way that Ford will bring the car here requiring premium fuel. Nothing even close to its market segment requires it. The Euro models brought here for testing are tuned to run on what they have in their home market, which happens to correspond to our premium. They probably just need to tweak the software.
Will it lose a couple HP and/or mpg? Possibly. I would wait for the final figures as it's too early to tell what the US equivalent fuel mileage is based on the demo fleet. Remember that fleet has been in the hands of the automotive press who typically get around 30mpg in the Fit, nevermind that many owners are doing 35mpg or better.
You could add "better brake pedal modulation" to your list of maladies that a better set of tires can cure.
agree with you, dgs and tork. my statement about the craptastic tires is not an exagerative one, its well documetned how long the fits brakingd distancesare, and how much slower the ge's slalom speed is than the gd, (which rides on less crappy stock tires.)
my point was that its impressive how the fit managed to meeet or only fall ever so slightly behind the fiesta, which wore MUCH more aggresive summer spec tires. imagine what the ge could have accomplished, had it been wearing similar shoes.
__________________
if i could travel through time sometime....
pep pep?
Originally Posted by Btrthnezr3 Say Wha??? You mean, there's another reason to have a suspension?
sup bro, I agree, mini trucks aren't so mini anymore. They actually became medium sized trucks, usually all carrying a v6 which spends more gas than a v8. I have a f250 single cab with a 460 ci engine in it. Now that mofo has been parked in my backyard for three years now. I have probably used it around 12 times in 3 years. I keep it because a mini truck will not suffice what I have to carry when I do use it. What companies like ford/gm are scared of is manufacturing another 4 cylinder engine and it going bad, bringing more of a bad rep to them. My thing would be, why not cut the ls1/ls2/ls7 engine in half, and now you have one bitchin 4 cylinder, which is something they did around the newer turbocharged cobalt engine. Eh, regardless, ford/gm needs to stop buying 4 cylinder engines from hyundai, etc... and needs to start casting and manufacturing their own engines like they use too.
Quote:
Originally Posted by TaffetaWhite
Why isn't anyone making mini-trucks anymore? They got bigger and bigger, and now aren't all that mini. The Ranger isn't that small. And it's gas mileage isn't so great. Nor is it's price: http://www.edmunds.com/ford/ranger/2010/index.html
Does anyone even trick out Rangers? There used to be all kinds of small trucks, slammed or jacked up. That whole segment of vehicles seems to be gone.
That's something Ford could do. Make small, economical trucks. If they could come up with a smaller than Ranger size, at a great price with excellent fuel economy, I think that would help.
People don't always need a full-size truck or the mid-size versions of small trucks available now.
A lot of jobs that require trucks, like construction, you have to travel to jobs. When gas prices are high, and construction is lagging, it's too costly to use a full-size truck to get to a day job (like a house fix-it).
They could corner the market if they did it right.
One thing about the test that surprised me was that the Fiesta uses premium gas. I've been following Fiesta reports on other sites and this is the first I'd heard of that. Argh I really hope that Ford gets it right with the Fiesta, especially for those who keep cars a long time (like me). I actually had a 1978 Fiesta that I bought new. Loved the way it drove and handled (had the Sport suspension), but at 110,000 miles, it was junk. Bought a 1986 Honda Civic Si new and at the end of it's life (almost 200,000 miles) it still ran better than the Fiesta at 110,000 miles. Ford is the best American car right now, but if they don't have cars that last, they're shooting themselves in the foot.
That is not so surprising since in many European countries 92 octane gas is the lowest quality you can get. In Germany, they are discontinuing this low octane gas and you can have 95 (it's called Super) 98 (Super plus) or 100 (has different names depending on the gas company, e.g. V-Power).
__________________
Mods & accessories:
blue interior trim kit
cargo tray
rear bumper applique
Aspec axleback exhaust
Pioneer DEH-P6000UB with painted Metra dash kit
I JUST DON'T THINK IT WILL BE A THREAT TO THE fIT. fACE IT..hONDA VS fORD. WHICH ONE HAS THE BEST QUALITY?
dont be such a honda elitist. what do you mean by quality? if its interior materials...well, the fiesta is just as nice as the fit on the inside. in fact many claim it has a more 'premium' feel.
but the only car i'd really pay more for in this segment would be a polo gti which has all the premium feel you need.
__________________
if i could travel through time sometime....
pep pep?
Originally Posted by Btrthnezr3 Say Wha??? You mean, there's another reason to have a suspension?
dont be such a honda elitist. what do you mean by quality? if its interior materials...well, the fiesta is just as nice as the fit on the inside. in fact many claim it has a more 'premium' feel.
I will be very curious to see what kind of corners Ford has to cut to get that car here and turn a profit. I think a lot of what makes the Euro Fiesta so special will be eliminated in this market. Heated leather seats, rain sensing windshield wipers, automatic climate control, heated exterior mirrors, moonroof, etc. I see that stuff going the way of the dodo. I also see them softening the suspension for the American market, meaning the car that was compared to the Fit in this test will not be the same car Americans will be able to buy next year.
I certainly would have no problem paying for a $23,000 micro car all decked out like the Euro Fiesta but in this country unlike Europe too many people equate small with cheap. That's why Honda couldn't deck the Fit out with more stuff, like the panoramic moonroof, heated mirrors, auto climate control and other goodies they get in other markets. People already bitch about the "high" price of a Fit with navigation, can you imagine what they would do if a whole bunch of other stuff was added in to jack the price up?
__________________
2009 white sport w/manual trans & navi
OEM accessories: all-season floor mats, cargo tray, cargo net, door edge film, body side molding, door sills, window tint, and soon the center armrest with storage
eldaino..Honda elitist? I don't think so. I have had 4 new Mustangs since 1999. 3 of the 4 had bad transmissions, 2 5 speeds and 1 auto, all in warranty period. Ford refused to fix any of them. Claimed there was nothing wrong. Later, a friend who works at a dealership said they knew there were problems, just did not want to pay for the warranty claims.
Besides, Ford always takes a good euro car and screws it up when they bring it here.
I didn't get Dunlops. (but I do like Dunlops... I've had great, long-lasting, great handling Dunlops) Mine got the Bridgestones Turanzas. Trust me, I don't say this because I got Bridgestones, but I've heard more than my share from people claiming the opposite of what you're saying.
Fact is, I've heard the Dunlops are better, and I've heard the Bridgestones are the better of the two. I'll let everyone know how the Bridgestones are after putting a few thousand on them. I've had excellent results with Bridgestones on my SUV... over 40,000 miles and tons of tread left. They are all-seasons, they make my HUGE SUV drive almost like a sports car (except the things vehicle height and weight take away from handling), and they got me through fairly deep snow as if it were dry pavement.
For snow, the Dunlops I've had in the past were only fairly good, and that was only within the first 15,000-17,000 miles of usage.
Anyway, some Fit owners are claiming Bridgestone best, some are claiming Dunlop best. Whatever.
For what it's worth............
My parents bought an 09 with the Bridgestones. They have a softer ride as I drove it myself.
The car mag reviews for the Fit always have the Bridgestones and they pull anywhere from .80-.82g grip. Temple of Vtec tester Jeff had a Fit with the Dunlops for extensive drives and both he and I strongly feel the car pulls much more than .80-.82g. I have yet to break grip with my car. It makes sense if you look at the tread pattern and design of both tire models. The Bridgestones seem to be more skewed for wet conditions, the Dunlops for dry.
My parents bought an 09 with the Bridgestones. They have a softer ride as I drove it myself.
The car mag reviews for the Fit always have the Bridgestones and they pull anywhere from .80-.82g grip. Temple of Vtec tester Jeff had a Fit with the Dunlops for extensive drives and both he and I strongly feel the car pulls much more than .80-.82g. I have yet to break grip with my car. It makes sense if you look at the tread pattern and design of both tire models. The Bridgestones seem to be more skewed for wet conditions, the Dunlops for dry.
i personally think they are both awful. (but i'm a tire nut.)
i dont think there is anything particularly special about the dunlops either...they are the same tires slapped on the civic hybrid.
__________________
if i could travel through time sometime....
pep pep?
Originally Posted by Btrthnezr3 Say Wha??? You mean, there's another reason to have a suspension?
I will be very curious to see what kind of corners Ford has to cut to get that car here and turn a profit. I think a lot of what makes the Euro Fiesta so special will be eliminated in this market. Heated leather seats, rain sensing windshield wipers, automatic climate control, heated exterior mirrors, moonroof, etc. I see that stuff going the way of the dodo. I also see them softening the suspension for the American market, meaning the car that was compared to the Fit in this test will not be the same car Americans will be able to buy next year.
I certainly would have no problem paying for a $23,000 micro car all decked out like the Euro Fiesta but in this country unlike Europe too many people equate small with cheap. That's why Honda couldn't deck the Fit out with more stuff, like the panoramic moonroof, heated mirrors, auto climate control and other goodies they get in other markets. People already bitch about the "high" price of a Fit with navigation, can you imagine what they would do if a whole bunch of other stuff was added in to jack the price up?
EXACTLY! everyone wants to eat the cake too. give me all these crazy features but dont charge me for em.
if a small honda with navigation and bluetooh at 19k is so outrageous, the afformentioned equipment on the fiesta will be downright ludicrous price-wise for the segment if it gets here as such.
__________________
if i could travel through time sometime....
pep pep?
Originally Posted by Btrthnezr3 Say Wha??? You mean, there's another reason to have a suspension?
a little clue on how much they're gonna water the euro spec fiesta...
the autoblog.com article shows the green euro fiesta prob going around to every auto media source...
"Optioned out, it carried a UK market price tag of £16,000. That's close to $26,000 in U.S. dollars"
"And when you consider the Fiesta promises to deliver all that with fuel economy surpassing just about every (non-hybrid) on the market for a price tag of around $15-$20k, there's good reason to be excited."
FitFreak Fossilized Fuddy-Duddy 
Linear Mode
