The fit may not be loaded with power but it is mighty tossable. The GTI with more power and torque also comes with a hefty amount more weight. tipping the scales at over 3000lbs (500 more than a FIT), it's a bit more vehicle to haul around and while the additional hp helps, it hurts mileage a bit and doesn't help with performance as it is just under 7 seconds to 60. The fit is just over 8 so it's about 1.3 Seconds faster than the fit.

Oh, and it's about $8K more... which could buy a used Miata which would be MUCH more fun on the track than either.

Fun is subjective. Power is fun for some. I like a lightweight tossable car, so for me, the fun comes in the "twisties" and tossing the car around. I traded a 270hp 3.5L V6 Altima SE for the FIT. The Altima became the car I rode to work in after less than one year of ownership. The FIT is the car I DRIVE to work still, even after 1.25yrs of ownership.

Better is also subjective. For Some... Faster is better, for others... fuel economy is better. For most of us here, a balance of both... is better.

~SB

 

I'm quite happy with my base model M/T '10 Fit. Granted, I've never driven a GTI, but the Fit certainly handles well, and it has no problems keeping up with traffic. Freeway merges that made me nervous in my old Saturn are a snap with the Fit.

The transmission has a very smooth action with no rubbery feel, and the clutch is also smooth.

As for multi-point injection, that seems to be pretty common - many if not most recent GM models have one form of it or another. The 4.3 Vortec V6 in my dad's '95 Sonoma is a good example... and that's a pretty sweet motor.

 

don't get me wrong, i'm thrilled with my fit and would absolutely make the same decision all over again but...

really???

the only way i see this happening is if your perception of fun is capped at what the fit can deliver. for me, the fit can't even come close to replicating sensations generated by my ap2, never mind a serious sports car.

 

not sure what an ap2 is but I think it is possible the fit might be fun but just fun in a diff way. the way that I could see a MT fit being fun would be that you could really wind it up between every gear and not be breaking the law as often. otherwise yeah, it's not going to compete with sporty cars that are nearly $10k more expensive. in it's price class it's doing pretty well though.

 

GTI 0-60 = 6.8 seconds
Fit 0-60 = 8.9 seconds

So we are actually talking about over 2 seconds diff. Now 0-60 isn't everything but you can't really compare these cars in terms of acceleration or power.

skidpad:
GTI = 0.84g
Fit = 0.78g

again - advantage GTI. I don't think it's really a fair comparison. they are very different cars trying to meet different goals. the fit is much more practical while the GTI is practical but sacrifices some of that for performance.

 

I don't really understand the comparison with the GTI....Of course its going to out handle and accelerate better than the Fit. :R32>GTI>GOLF, the Fit compares more with a base model Golf 2.5l, which still feels like it has much more torque and is very precise in its handling. The gas mileage is the main strength of the Fit in this comparison.

 

I didn't either - I stand by what I said which is that they are very different cars with different price points trying to reach different goals. I was mostly just trying to get a sense of how fun you guys thought the MT fit was to drive. I only brought up the VW b/c it's another car I'm considering.

 

I's say drive both the Fit and Golf 2.5 in a manual and see which one does it for you. I have had both and they each have their own charms. My vote would still be the Golf. The 500lb weight difference from the Fit gives it a less floaty feeling and you won't feel like you are endangering lives trying to get up to 60 on the freeway.

 

How does that engine feel? If I was going to do that I'd probably get a jetta wagon for the extra space.

 

I should have said about 1.5 seconds, not 1.3. the Fit sport is a low 8 second car with an 8.3 0-60 time
- Motor Trend
- Car & Driver

Also, it's not too far behind the GTI with a skidpad of .81
- Motor Trend

The Fit isn't a sports car and it's not going to beat a GTI in acceleration, but it is a Tossable fun vehicle. With a tad bit of upgrades for only a few $$, it can be even more fun (lighter wheels, & Better Tires, add-on Sway bar) and the numbers get even closer to a GTI. On a twisty road, it will likely keep up with a GTI without much issue. (someone put a Civic Type R against a Veyron and the Civic was right with they Veyron through the twists & turns - albeit the Veyron was gone on the straight-a-way) back to the FIT/GTI; This all comes in a more reliable package that still gets much better gas mileage and costs $6K less(after the upgrades). It doesn't have the 2L turbo and the 0-60 times of the GTI, but it also doesn't come with the repair bill and rental car costs either.

The Fit is quite the capable performer and not as far off from the GTI as the specs might suggest.


Sidenote... AP2 is the Chassis Code for an S2000. The DC2 was the Integra, DC5 the RSX, & the GE8/GE6 the FIT/Jazz

~SB

 

I personally love the 2.5, some say it's loud at start-up and more whiny than the more fancy 2.0fsi but its torque makes the Golf feel lighter than it is. As far as "maintenance costs," I put 40k on mine with nothing but oil changes- it does take 6qts of oil though (?!) Acceleration is smooth up to the fuel cut, it feels like it has more hp than it does. Again its a bit hard to make a call- it's all based on your opinion so I'd try out both cars before buying.

The Golf wont reach Fit fuel mileage or look as good (I love the exterior styling of the GE's) but I don't think I'd have 2 Fits if it were my choice. Its nice to have the option to switch off cars when you need something different.

 

I didn't look that hard for 0-60 times but since you brought up motor trend they managed 5.8 seconds with the GTI so again - more than 2 seconds diff. The cars have very diff goals so a direct comparison doesn't make sense. I think the specs are misleading - but not in the way that you apparently do. peak hp and torque means something sure but look at the curves over RPM. the 2.0t has power all over the place, any time you want. when I'm driving my wife's fit on the highway and I really want to get on it I have to down shift and even then it's struggling a little bit. that's the trade off for getting ~40mpg on the highway!

As for me that's less of an issue - my commute involves no highway driving. Just a bunch of backroads. I rarely get to enjoy the power that my VR6 has now.

 

This is where the lockout comes into play. Try and make a direct shift from 5 to R without letting it center. It won't even get far enough into the gate to grind.

 

Golf 4motion 2.0 TSI R DSG ... 5.5 s/250 km/h/29.40 mpg (mix driving)/40k €
Golf 2.0 TSI GTI DSG ........... 6.9 s/238 km/h/33.60 mpg (mix driving)/30k €
Golf 1.4 Highline TSI DSG ...... 9.5 s/200 km/h/39.20 mpg (mix driving)/22k €
Golf 1.2 Highline TSI ........... 10.6 s/190 km/h/47.04 mpg (mix driving)/19k €
Jazz 1.4 (mine) .................. 11.4 s/182 km/h/47.04 mpg (mix driving)/15k €

Jazz is a practical little (big) car. To get from A to B.
Though golf is not no premium car, in my opinion, all together, Jazz is out of his league.
Jazz can be compared with VW Polo (little Golf) but this car is probably not for sale over the sea. It costs 14k € or less. Jazz 1.4 ex costs 17k €.
www.Avto.net

Huh, for mine 15k € I could almost get a GTI over there.

 

correct - no polos over here (although I wish we had them).

 

I saw that 5.8 as well but omitted that because it was a 2dr GTI and a DSG. the 6.8/6.9 is more comparable as it is a 4dr with a 6MT. I picked the closest match. Both 4 DR "sporty" hatches.

I drove VW's back years ago (learned to drive on a Diesel Rabbit Pickup & Bus - Westfalia - both 4MT) and switched over to Hondas. It's a driving style change which for me means more fun. The VW's definitely had more torque because of the larger engines used, but getting on the gas, shifting, and revving the engine; that's half of the fun. My previous Honda was an Integra GS-R with an 8100rpm redline. It took a bit more to squeeze the max performance out of it but when you did, it was exhilarating. That's the Fun factor that I've gotten back with the fit when coming from the altima and why I no longer Ride to work but Drive. It has far less power but is much more fun to drive.

~SB

 

I think specboy hit the nail on the head by the above statement. Better or best depends on individual's lifestyle and what they are brought up with and what they like in life.

There is no wrong or right answer. A person who prefers speed and acceleration will unlikely to recommend FIT while another person who put economy first above all else would heap praises upon praises for the gas sipping qualities of FIT.

As a famous saying goes "Beauty lies in the eyes of the beholder"

Someone in this forum thinks that my 86 year old mother-in-law is a hottie.
You have to respect one's opinion

If you are interested, it is discussed in another thread below if you have time to follow

https://www.fitfreak.net/forums/gene...ners-here.html

 

2dr vs 4dr shouldn't be a big weight diff. you are correct that the DSG makes a little bit of a difference but it usually seems to be one or two tenths difference in 0-60 time and with a manual obviously the driver in question makes a big diff.

 

I get that it's a diff kind of fun - I was just a little surprised that people would say that performance would be similar to a car that is $7k more expensive. Other than that my wife's 09 fit is an auto I really like it. At first I was kind of meh but it's really grown on me. I can't believe the things I've fit in there and the interior is really nice for a car in this price range.

 

i had forgotten about the push into the base to shift to reverse part of those shifters... thanks for the reminder.

as for this whole two pages of which is better various VWs or the Fit... bleh. its been said before, it's entirely subjective.

(man, i've typed/erased/typed something else over and over... but i think i'll not comment about it anymore. i hate "debates" over subjective opinions.)