Well, yes and no. There are still consumers like me who do their research and demand the "best of." The 2015 Fit is a very good car for the money. If horrible cars win and the masses "don't care" everyone would have bought a Versa Note already. For nearly the same money you get a lot less of everything with that car, and poor crash test ratings. But many people will opt for the Fit once it's readily available because they get more for the same money. So the carmakers still have to compete and make a better car for the same money if they want to win.

 

The best part of the Versa Note is that if you want a manual, you get even less of everything else!

 

Go Amy Go!!!

Am another one who wants to spend the least amount of money for the best car I can get!!!!!!!! Hard to beat the Fit given these two criterea!!! Let me add one more - less depreciation/yr. vs. the competition!!!

 

Good crash ratings and features don't a good car make.

 

$16k doesn't buy that good of a car anyway.. if you want everything, you have to pay for it. You could say on the same note that a new bumper, spoiler, rims, etc. don't make a commuter car into a sports car.

Good crash test ratings, features available, good MPG, flexible seating/cargo, a physical appearance that appeals to many people, and a small price tag do a good commuter car make.

 

Those two you mentioned alone, right.

But add price, mpg, residual value, rate of depreciation, reliability - in the sub-compact category, what is better?????

 

Fun to drive.

What is better than the GK? I have no idea, I have yet to drive one.

Better than the GE? Nothing, there's a reason for that.

 

Eric Peters is a total tool. He presents facts in a way that is misleading. Many people chose MT because of the fun factor yet he chooses gridlock, the single most joyless part of driving, as a main argument for an auto tranny.

He is also correct about modern sports cars being clutchless but I wouldn't think they have torque converters, they probably are electronically controlled gear boxes. A kind of auto manual if you like however, if you don't have 100k $ and more to drop on a supercar, the best bang out of an engine can be had with MT, without the shadow of a doubt.

I don't think he brings up too much of a discussion about tiptronic/paddle shifting. Being a purist I'm not such a fan myself but for some it's the best of both worlds.

To me the biggest argument against manual is resale value. It probably is harder to sell a manual transmission car since you'll find less potential buyers. On the flipside, when dealing with hardened manual drivers like me, the rarity of a MT car could even be a selling point.

 

Correct as usual Mike but considering that small cars tend to do rather poorly in a crash (because of the laws of physics) it's nice to have the added side curtain airbags. I've seen the Yaris in a crash test and yikes, I wouldn't wanna crash in one of those.

 

Yup, you have a reason alright. You haven't driven a GK!!!!!

From the looks of it, you have no intention of ever trying one out. The massive emotional attachment to your GE (have been corrected: its a GD) is respected. But that's your take.
Others like me, will update what we currently have (GD in my case) for what we think could be the leader (a GK) in the sub-compact category.

Only time will tell whether this turns out to be as "horrible" as you have alluded!!!

 

I have a GD.

I've driven thousands of miles in a GE though.

I will try out the GK, I just don't hold high standards for it.

 

GD owner? Smart man just like me and I've had mine since new.

Try out the GK? That's comforting to know and am glad your flexible enough to at least try one.

....don't hold high standards for it. Will await your post after the test-drive. Hell, the standards may even go lower and will be curious to find which areas it will fail further. A "horrible" car without driving it??? That's pre-mature dude!!!!

Drive it first, then your conclusions with hold credibility.

 

Thus far, my opinion of the car is aimed at the (still) imperfect driving position and lack of rear seat head room/shortage of cargo space.

I look forward to driving the car though.

 

Any opinion, always welcome. Its the pre-mature conclusions that don't sit well when a test drive hasn't occurred. But that's just me.

Some people knock the space loss in the rear area (1/4" with rear seats up). But as Japan Tragic's post (on another thread) indicates the GK (at least the JDM version) is comparable with the GE in overall space capacity.

Am sure nothing will be better in your eyes other than the GE - for now. As mentioned, will be looking for your assessment after the drive.

 

Voted for manual, but while holding my nose. I wish honda had done a tall 6th gear.

 

I'm back from 4 hours at the auto show.


I'm bloody exhausted, but I'm happy, too. At least from seat time in about a dozen competitors, even those at a higher price point, there is almost no possibility I'd buy anything but a new Fit EX.


I'm not a handy person, but I had the seats in all possible configurations in 5 minutes. I love that you can flip down the rear headrests.


Likewise I'm no techie, so it's beyond me how anyone complains about the utterly intuitive infotainment system. (P.S. to the poster who prefers fixed to dynamic line in the back-up camera: it's a setting. I found it immediately.)


The visibility is brilliant, the materials and execution are a cut above (I really like the Jetsons fabric pattern), and the sunroof is overhead, unlike so many swoopy cars where it's behind me.


The only things I didn't like were the way you could see the seat rails under the front seats, and that the tailgate was a tad rattly when closed...but then every other one was too save the Golf. Big whoop.


The Kia Soul felt more claustrophobic even with that gorgeous panoramic sunroof, and the doors clang. The Sonic was woeful. The Buick Encore was way too expensive. The Ford Focus' interior suddenly seems baroque, and not very airy. I loved the Fiesta ST, but, not having owned a car in decades, can only imagine the insurance and my inability to appreciate or control its performance (cheap if you get nothing but the moon roof at $21K, though). And it was truly very small inside. The interminable rest aren't worth mentioning.


I just loved sitting in that Fit seat, looking at that dash, and out those windows. In case you wonder, I work for the phone company, not Honda.


(Oh, and there is an insane amount of space, even seats up.)


Anyway, my 2 cents, and I'll post in other threads for convenience.

 

Great post! I love touring a big auto how like NYC's where every conceivable model is there for your to see and sit in.

This post should be put into its own thread so that others can ask you questions unrelated to the transmission poll of this thread. You can copy it and paste into a new thread and then go back and delete your original post.

 

I'm too tired...

 

Honda used to do that. My 87 Civic hatch had no power steering, no A/C, no passenger side mirror, no radio and other things I don't remember. The manual was only 4 speed. You needed to goto a higher trim to get 5. It was about $6K new.

 

I don't think anyone is arguing the merits of DSG or an automated manual or even a good CVT or regular auto, but it's still the transmission that actually changes the gears, not the driver, which is the point driving enthusiasts here are making. A true manual might be a bit slower, but it is more fun to use three pedals and row a stick. At this price range (remember the Fit is an economy car) the cost, weight, and complexity of current DSG's isn't worth it, especially to the majority of a consumers who would't even know why there even needs to be more than 1 gear.