How many of you who considered the FIT also had a look at the CR-V? ...what were the factors that swayed you in favor of the FIT?

-both vehicles are considered extremely reliable

-Fit weights ~2400 lbs vs the CR-V at ~3500 lbs
-Fit has 24 cubic ft cargo volume vs the CR-V at 25.5 cubic ft

Of course, purchase price of the CR-V is higher.

This is the bit of dilemma I am facing at the moment as I consider what to purchase this coming summer.

 

Fuel economy, comfort and features, maintenance costs...

 

My spouse and I went through a similar process but with the Element and Fit. Towing capacity and four wheel drive brought us to the decision to purchase the Element. But now we have both, so go figure.

 

I like both vehicles, but for me it would come down to driving characteristics. The Fit is simply a more toss-able car. If I'm only going to own one vehicle then I need something that's not only going to be versatile and efficient, but also somewhat fun to drive. The fit with a manual "fit" the bill for me.

Luckily, though, I've convince my fiance that we should get a CR-V as her car. So soon enough I'll have both in the garage.

 

I wanted a CRV but didnt feel like paying another $100 a month. I prob wouldnt have been to happy with the gas mileage either. I would have liked a loaded Prius but REALLY didnt feel like paying for that.

 

CR-V is a bigger and heavier car.
You can tow with it and it does have more space inside.

My wife likes her CR-V and I just got a fit as third car for winter
and potentially trips due to it's high mileage.

 

Both CRV and Fit are reliable vehicles and served different lifestyles and purposes as mentioned by various ones

We settled for the FIT for the following reasons which may or may not apply to your situation Paul, as you will be your own judge:-

1) There's only two of us, no kids and our back seats are normally empty 99% of the time... why lugged around a heavy car and pay more in gas. We learn our lesson after having driven around a heavy Accord for 10 years

2) We seldom go out of town.. may drive to Seattle on I-5 once a year... why do we need a bigger car when 99% of our driving is City driving

3) We never tow any camper etc and our lifestyle will not bring us to drive to any back country roads

4) The City we live in seldom snow.. may be once or twice a year of moderate snow fall.. we figure snow tires will be sufficient and FIT handles exceptionally well in snow due to its thinner profile tires

5) We love FIT"s magic seats that can fold backwards for groceries bags and need not open the tailgate often.. and the back passenger doors open nearly 90 degrees for easy access

6) Breeze to park

7) We love to fill up in gas stations to watch SUV folks squirmed at the pump prices $80 to $90 each time they had to cough up whereas a FIT full tank would be about $35 to $38

 

I went with the smaller hatchback class over the mini suv class because the small hatchback fits 95-99% of my needs. A CRV or other suv would have filled that last 1-5% of uses, but then kinda sucks for the everyday stuff.

I don't think its a bad think to occationally rent a vehicle for a specific purpose, rather than driving a larger vehicle for a once or twice a year purpose all year.

 

It's a smart choice. We tend to buy a car that meets 100% of our needs instead of one that suffices most of the time and would be more economical all-in even with rental costs.

Most of my driving is within a 50 mile radius and it'd make sense for me to buy an electric car and then switch with a family member when I have a longer drive... but people don't think that way (and it'd make sense only if electric cars weren't so darn expensive...).

 

For my life style the fit is it. The way I see it, the CRV only has towing and optional 4 wheel drive to its advantage. Both of which are really needed 1% out of the cars life. If you were really trying to tow a lot you would be buying a American truck. About storage space.... you're not going to really notice the 1.5 cubic feet of space the CRV has over the fit. Plus since the fit has magic seats, means that the fits storage space is more versatile then the CRV.

In my eyes I don't under stand why little SUVs even exist... I can guaranty that 90% of CRV owners drive their CRV 99% of the time in the same conditions I would drive the fit in and to be honest with you I would feel comfortable hooking up a single jet ski and tailor to the fit and hauling it 10 miles to the lake... which is exactly the same amount of towing a normal CRV owner would do...

At the end of the day, the FIT is a little SUV... without the 4wheel drive and ground clearance... however it has a lower price and better MPG

 

Being a new FIT owner myself, I totally agree on all counts and I never regret going for the FIT, the best decision I had ever made, apart from marrying my wife.

To be objective, the only thing FIT can't overcome is the law of physics. Some families who feel that they wanted a greater margin of safety for their young kids at the back seat may consider a bigger vehicle, ie CRV or Van. We may be extra careful FIT drivers but an oncoming SUV driver may be drunk or having medical problems or get distracted and they may veer into your lane and in a head-on collision, the vehicle with a bigger mass wins, period.

 

Thanks for all your feedback folks!

I feel the FIT is the best vehicle for me. I like the flexible interior, amazing amount of cargo room, driving position, economy and reliability... but I am still struggling with the safety issue.

I recently had the opportunity to drive a Ford Expedition. The thing weights 6000 lbs, driving position almost as high as in a tractor-trailer and you feel like you could roll right over smaller vehicles on the road like they were speed bumps... just an incredible sense of isolation and feeling safe.

In an accident with a FIT the Expedition is going to fair much better simply due to the mass... but, I don't need an Expedition to drive the 2 miles of rural/industrial park roads to get to the office and there is a price to be paid for all that mass (Expedition).

 

Well, if you're talking about which vehicle absorbs greater force, or how far each vehicle might bounce after the collusion, you're correct.

But that doesn't translate into how much each driver/occupant is injured, since different vehicles have different (and better/worse) ways of absorbing that force before it gets to you.

I'd rather be in a Fit with airbags than a 1950s car that's twice the size, for example.

All other things being equal, more mass is safer (for you, and less safe for the other guy) but some pretty heavy vehicles have tested poorly in crash tests, tests which try to replicate how badly you (not the car) will be bashed up. And crash test dummies are pretty sophisticated in how they measure injuries.

 

With those huge SUVs you also have a much higher chance of rollover.

That sense of safety often make people unaware of danger and makes them do unsafe driving moves. The extra mass also is much harder to stop or avoid impact.

 

dont know if this has been said, and not going to read everyones posts before i put this cause you guys wrote a lottt haha.

but it has always been my opinion that i would never own (might make an exception for leasing) a hybrid car until every local mechanic (not just the dealer) knew how to work and fix on a hybrid just as well as any other car. i think hybrid is a fad that seems to be taking off before it should..

 

Since we don't know what will eventually do us in, safety is best though about in probabilities. That's why it's overall safer to go out and exercise (even though we may be run over by a truck while doing so) than it is to stay on a couch and eat pizzas. The probability of getting sick and dying before our time from a sedentary lifestyle is much higher than being run over by a truck. The best way to avoid being in a serious auto accident is to drive less. Next up, some common sense regarding speed, hours of travel, etc. The type of vehicle is down the list and is complicated by other factors. For example, it is an accepted belief that the more bullet-proof you feel, the more risks you take. Rollover and other issues with an SUV may also do you in while you least expect it. A better-handling car may save your bacon at times by avoiding an accident altogether. There is simply no way to know which will provide the best odds for each individual case.

That said, there is overall good news in that US highway deaths went down significanly last year. Whatever the reasons (less people on the road due to a bad economy, safer cars, people driving slower to save on gas?), all of our odds just improved! Problem is, there is no way to know what may do us in. It may be a fall in the home and that sliding door. Or something completely unexpected that makes the nightly news. So, in my opinion, perceived additional safety is not a good reason to go with the CRV over the fit.

 

My wife drives a 2008 CR-V EX-L and I drive a 2009 Fit Sport. Two completely different vehicles, similar functions, but very different. What specific comparison would you like?

 

I went throught the same thing... Fit vs Element... :-/

I <3 that darn Element!!!

 

My wife has an '09 CR-V and I have a '10 Fit Sport. I like the CR-V because I prefer a taller ride-height. I also like having the sunroof more than I thought I would. I would have preferred an Element over the Fit, but I needed the least expensive, high-mileage, most reliable, roomiest interior vehicle I could get at the time. I personally think the Fit Sport is an extremely nice looking car as well. However, if I had not been in a bit of a financial bind at the time, I would have chosen something like an Element or possibly a Toyota Tundra. Honda BLEW-IT when they didn't design the sound system to integrate with iPod/iPhone/MP3 players far better than they did (most disappointing aspect of the car IMO and this applies to the CR-V too). I love the functionality of the Fit rear seat. I think the Fit is an excellent car and a fantastic value but be clear on your needs. Between the Fit and the CR-V, the mid-range CR-V (with sunroof, alloy wheels, etc) is worth the additional cost if it's within your budget.

 

Catdaddy, you will be in the best position to compare the two vehicles in real life because you (and your wife) owned them simultaneously.

I am very curious how much less fuel the FIT is compared to CRV.. rough estimates will do... I know this is difficult to quantify and gas spending differs from family to family and it is also dependent on the frequency and distance of driving, type of driving etc but roughly, do you have a sense of how much less fuel your FIT consumed compared to your CRV? eg 10% less than CRV or 20% less than CRV etc in terms of your actual gas expenses.

Thanks