Dude, even your avatar is a Troll.

The funny thing here is, I'm actually the one being positive about everything...all cars in question...including the fit, yet I'm somehow the bad guy? Alright guys, Honda Fits are the only good car in existence and anyone that has anything else is to be laughed at. I'm glad there are so many open minded people here. My post on the BMW forum about buying a fit was nothing but positive. Everyone congratulated and said what a nice car it'll be for me. Some of you, however, don't seem to be very open minded. I'll take my positive attitude somewhere else. You all can win.

 

The best, most trouble free vehicle that I have ever owned is actually a toss up between a 1972, 1984 and 1995 BMW motorcycles..... The absolutely most boring car was an 82 Accord but it was also by far the most reliable.....My last Eurocar was a Volvo 760 I/C Turbo and except for the biodegradable wiring harness I loved it..... Since adding a wheel/tire combination weighing 26.5 lbs each and super charger to my Fit I am not missing my old 760 Turbo one bit, except maybe the sunroof just a little.... At lower ambient temperatures, cruising at 100MPH using less than 1/3rd of the throttle pedal travel and still able to watch the needle climb at 2/3rd is good enough for me.

 

This is the post of yours to which I originally responded.

We're talking about German cars that cost less than a Fit, not any German car at any age/price range.

 

I don't buy a car like the Fit to go racing. I buy it for cheap commuting and reliability. So that is what I look for. Cheap, reliable, and comfort would be nice. Looks like the fit is the best choice. Here is a review I found that compared the Fit to the Yaris, suzuki, and something else. Guess which one they though was best?

Review

Compact Car Comparison - Chevy Aveo vs. Honda Fit vs. Toyota Yaris vs. Suzuki SX4

 

I'm just giving you a hard time because you seem snotty about German cars and way too butt-hurt that someone was talking shit on VW. I'm glad you have the Fit for your throwaway car. And I'm glad you liked my avatar, I chose it just for you.

 

My IV 2.0 jetta is a bit boaty at times and I don't want to discuss repairs.

 

This thread exploded

The GD3 fit with a manual tranny is faster than these vehicles (have personally driven or ridden in them) in most real-world situations:
-any ford ranger with a 2.3L, 2.4L, 3.0L, pushrod 4.0L engine, or a 4.0L sohc on a 5spd auto
-previous-gen F250 super duty with the 5.4L 2V auto 2wd
-'92-up F150 with the 5.0L V8 auto in stock form
-6th gen civic with the 1.6L y8 sohc vtec on a manual
-2nd gen CR-V with the 2.4L vtec-e on a 4spd auto
-newest-gen Corolla with the 2ZR-FE 1.8L on a 4spd auto (almost not even a contest)
-1st gen Tacoma with the 5VZ-FE 3.4L 4spd auto 4x4

ah heck that's enough. Think about how many people live with the vehicles in that list without complaint. With the manual, the fit isn't slow, it's more average. Add 3 people and it falls back into the slow category.

Wait, I forgot the most important one. Every Civic with an automatic made by Honda, EVER.

I will concede the fit on an automatic is definitely slow.

 

Id have to say that the fit is one of the better handling cars in stock form that Ive driven.

Ive had a civic, Jetta, A4,late model Malibu and a whole slew of cars not worth the mention here

VW Audi cars FEEL nice but the "but Dino" is not always accurate The fit is light and has fairly stiff suspension so maybe it doesn't ride as good but I think the handling is up there.

Oh and by the way I drove a 2010 KIA Forte... What a hunk of crap the steering is enough for me to hate it. though I was gonna die twice in that thing once around a long fast interchange the power steering while turning at a steady 60 mph kept cycling high low basically felt like it was trying to pull the wheel straight every few seconds and it would if you wernt holding tight.
Then reversing uphill have to give it alot of gas before it goes then it lurches backwards then it you let off it feels like the torque converter releases and you roll forward while in reverse while applying gas WTH is that huh?
.........Sorry thats way off topic lol

 

Dude your smoking crack my Ranger 4.0L SOHC A/T Stock.
Could smoke any fit in stock form.
I got consistent 15.9s stock on all terrains...
What does the fit get stock?

 

He was talking about real world situations not 1/4 mile ETs..... In the real world there are slit second lane changes, right angle, turns high speed curves and things like that.... What is a Ranger governed to go like 94 MPH or something like that?..... A very close friend of mine who was safe driver lost control of his Ranger at 60 MPH killing him as well as two other people and crippling his wife.... In the real world you don't always drive in a perfectly straight line.

 

Agreed.... Also the D16y8 Civic was pretty quick for the engine size/output... and definitely faster than the Fit. We had a Strut Tower brace and it loved corners as much as my GS-R.

~SB

 

That's fairly interesting, last I read the 4.0L 5AT was good for a 17.0 1/4. I ride in one every couple weeks, it moves but it's definitely not 15s fast. Feels just like the 3.0L just the needles move a bit faster. Knowing the variances from one ford to another, yours may have a better built engine. I'm not calling you a liar at all, it's just what I've observed. (come to think of it, he may just not be pushing on the pedal all the way making me think it's slower than it is, maybe trying to curb that 14 mpg he usually gets). Example of the differences from one ranger to another... these people either can't drive or got a bad one because 17.95 sec @ 78.42mph on the 4.0L 5AT with the 4.10 rear?! There's something wrong there.

I put a LOT of miles on a y8 civic. Yeah it's peppy but in stock form it's near impossible to get under a 17 sec ET without a pro driver. Even with I/H/E and solid mounts I had an interesting time keeping it under. Its lack of midrange thrust just killed it on the line despite the 4.25 FD but it moves just nicely over 5500 when the high lifters kick in. The gears are a little too far apart even on the S40 tranny. 3.25-1.90-1.25 for the first three iirc. And it seemed heavy, I weighed in at 2800# sitting in the car, and I'm under 200# myself.

Whoops didn't see 2nd gen forum :foreheadsmack: got lost in the tabs of my browsing.

For all you GE8 automatic drivers... this is the car I was comparing to, mine, for the record.

 

I didn't see the 2nd generation thing either.... Sorry....

 

im not your homie.

apology accepted.

 

man i had this big awesome post then i realized that this was for the GE8.

sukkaz--GD3 prevails. j/k.

 

That is OK as it has just turned into a pissing match here anyways. They need to go write in the snow.

 

You guys wouldn't know a slow car if it bit you in the butt. Now my dad's '59 Kharmann-Ghia, THAT was a slow car! 36 HP at the crank and a top speed of "maybe" 80 MPH (downgrade with a tailwind).

 

I think I must be driving a totally different car than a lot of you.

 

Yessir. And that was 36 gross horses; probably more like less than 30 net. My '55 bug and my dad's '60 were powered (so to speak) with the same engine. Do you remember that you had to really run at hills, b/c there was that huge gap between 3d and 4th? Once you lost top gear, you usually couldn't get going fast enough to get it back. I can still follow a bug and know about when he is going to shift.
Moon
ETA-
You could use a brick on the gas pedal as a cruise control.
M

 

Is snow that cold white stuff that comes out of the sky and melts on the ground a few minutes later???..... Haven't seen that stuff in years around here.