3rd Generation (2015+) Say hello to the newest member of the Fit family. 3rd Generation specific talk and questions here.

Cargo Space

  #1  
Old 01-15-2014, 01:37 PM
Member
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jan 2014
Location: Fort Lauderdale
Posts: 35
Cargo Space

Hi, obviously I'm a newbee to the site and looking to join the fit family this year. I have read what seems like some contradictory information regarding the new Fits cargo space. I've read where they claim the new Fit has more space with the seats folded than the old Fit did. But when I researched the actual specs. I found:

The new Fit 52.7 Ft.
The old Fit 57 .3 Ft.

Space and fuel efficiency are the two most important things to me. I am impressed with the higher MPG rating of the new Fit. But concerned about the seemingly conflicting things I have read on the cargo space. Any help would be appreciated.
 
  #2  
Old 01-15-2014, 04:02 PM
Wanderer.'s Avatar
Member
iTrader: (1)
Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: Hayward, CA
Posts: 4,364
After some research in the subject i've concluded that the 57 cu/ft number for the 2009-2013 Fit is mostly bullshit. There are many things contributing to that number including window height, and the GE Fit's windows start pretty high up. If the new Fit has a lower window it will change the number, but not the ACTUAL amount of storage space you will have.

This is because of the STANDARDS used to determine cargo space in the automotive field. You're not supposed to stack cargo to block the windows, but we all do and will.
 
  #3  
Old 01-15-2014, 04:36 PM
Member
5 Year Member
iTrader: (1)
Join Date: May 2006
Location: NYC
Posts: 2,422
Originally Posted by Wanderer. View Post
After some research in the subject i've concluded that the 57 cu/ft number for the 2009-2013 Fit is mostly bullshit.
Most of those #'s (from manufacturers)are bs. The pics showing what people can fit (from the commercials/ads) are probably more useful... lolol..



One of my first posts on this site back (way back when) was a post which compared measurements of space between the then GD3 & the Toyota Matrix.. The #'s have quite a bit of variance depending on where you or the manufacturer would measure. That helped me more than the published #'s... that and real world experience, for example I figured out that we could carry 4x8 sheets of plywood, but they have to be cut in hald (4x4), and put in to the rear passenger area, it won't fit in thru the hatch. Also I dropped the seats & carried wood floor supplies & tiles on different occasions. Not to mention the ~14 FOOT pieces of trim molding I've fit with the hatch closed, but those probably don't count since they were bendable.


In my case, I just convert the rear seats to cargo since I rarely drive around with more than 2 people in the car (myself included).


According to the press release for the Detroit Auto Show, the USDM version shrunk 1.2 inches, and cargo space are the # posted above (yet has overall more space)... so that could only mean that they increased the cabin area. Hopefully that wasn't to accommodate the "super-sized" market it's in... they did that with the GE8 refresh mode, which is why we don't get it in the states.




OP, I'd suggest bringing a tape measure when the new Fits hit the dealerships, and see if the cargo space is enough for you... one thing about the Fit is it may look small but it can sure hold a lot more than one would think (search those old "what did you fit in your fit" threads, theres several on here and I think even on the Fit fb page).




Oh, wow.. new forum...
 
  #4  
Old 01-15-2014, 04:37 PM
New Member
Join Date: Sep 2013
Location: New Haven, CT
Posts: 6
I think I read this in the Car and Driver article on their website, but there is also a real-world reason there is less cargo space-

The new fit has 5 inches more passenger legroom than the previous version. Moving the seats back and up a little bit apparently is the reason that the cargo volume is reduced. Overall, it looks like a pretty good trade-off and not one that will have a huge impact on carrying things around.




Originally Posted by Wanderer. View Post
After some research in the subject i've concluded that the 57 cu/ft number for the 2009-2013 Fit is mostly bullshit. There are many things contributing to that number including window height, and the GE Fit's windows start pretty high up. If the new Fit has a lower window it will change the number, but not the ACTUAL amount of storage space you will have.

This is because of the STANDARDS used to determine cargo space in the automotive field. You're not supposed to stack cargo to block the windows, but we all do and will.
 
  #5  
Old 01-15-2014, 04:45 PM
Wanderer.'s Avatar
Member
iTrader: (1)
Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: Hayward, CA
Posts: 4,364
Originally Posted by Pedro S View Post
I think I read this in the Car and Driver article on their website, but there is also a real-world reason there is less cargo space-

The new fit has 5 inches more passenger legroom than the previous version. Moving the seats back and up a little bit apparently is the reason that the cargo volume is reduced. Overall, it looks like a pretty good trade-off and not one that will have a huge impact on carrying things around.
Ah that's good to know. So I can conclude then that there is less actual hatch room in the new Fit over the GE since the seats are moved back a few inches? There's already not much room in the hatch in my GE... enough for stacks of suitcases and bags but anything sizable it seems I need to drop at least one seat.
 
  #6  
Old 01-16-2014, 09:49 AM
Member
5 Year Member
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: Toronto
Posts: 108
Question

According to the specs in the Honda link below, the 2007 Fit has 41.9 cuft of cargo space. Is this a different way of measuring interior cargo space? The cargo space in the 2007 doesn't seem to be that much smaller than that of the 2013, but according to the Honda site, the 2013 has 57.3? That is a whopping 15 cuft larger. Doesn't make sense!

2007 Honda Fit Interior - Honda.com

2013 Honda Fit - Specifications - Official Site
 
  #7  
Old 01-16-2014, 07:05 PM
Member
Join Date: Oct 2013
Location: Osaka
Posts: 207
Originally Posted by EMC2 View Post
According to the specs in the Honda link below, the 2007 Fit has 41.9 cuft of cargo space. Is this a different way of measuring interior cargo space? The cargo space in the 2007 doesn't seem to be that much smaller than that of the 2013, but according to the Honda site, the 2013 has 57.3? That is a whopping 15 cuft larger. Doesn't make sense!

2007 Honda Fit Interior - Honda.com

2013 Honda Fit - Specifications - Official Site

yeah something is seeming funny there, the new fit also has more interior width compared to the GE8.

How ever the Japanese measure it has the new fit having miles more cargo space :-/

*Edit: think Ive posted these a while ago, Honda Japan sales crap to show what it can hold. Im sure the old GE8 would be similar, so far I havent found the storage space to be an issue.







 

Last edited by Japan Tragic; 01-16-2014 at 08:43 PM.
  #8  
Old 01-17-2014, 10:30 AM
Member
Join Date: Jan 2012
Location: AL
Posts: 509
It looks like the space between the two front seats has been made wider, by maybe an inch or two. That would be a nice change. It seems like they could have moved the front seats in our GE8's further apart as there is at least an inch or two to spare between the doors and the seats and still give plenty of wiggle room. Maybe it's some kind of crash regulation that there has to be a certain amount of clearance from the seat to the outside of the car to give enough of a "crumple zone"?

-Dustin
 
  #9  
Old 01-17-2014, 11:46 AM
Member
Join Date: Aug 2012
Location: Detroit, MI USA
Posts: 22
The sapce reduction could also be a result of the lower roof height, too. A 1.6" reduction over the entire rear cargo area could account for about 2 cubic feet of space reduction (I'm estimating, here -- no precise calculation).

We'll have to see what that translates to to behind-rear-seat space but it doesn't look like it's that significant a reduction the way it is packaged.
 
  #10  
Old 01-17-2014, 12:47 PM
camivill's Avatar
Member
Join Date: Sep 2011
Location: Shanghai, China
Posts: 155
Space...

we'll, I have used Fit moving homes couple of times, once with GD another time with GE current.... We have those mods in the fit. And that's the best of this car I must say.... I remember when I purchased the old 46 inches TV, and the box was huge,... Bump! It went in like nothing.... I remember buying a discounted sofa in IKEA ( two times already) bamp! Pieces went all the way in... Or when I got my flat plants at the market.... Bamp! They went all way in.... When I got the 60 inches plasma I just put it in with boxing... Oh good memories ....

it was just when I disasembled the whole vehicle for the sound deadening that I realize how spacious It is!

I am sure Honda is using this feature very well, squeezing more space out eh?
 
  #11  
Old 02-15-2014, 11:40 PM
vtecfit1's Avatar
Member
5 Year Member
iTrader: (7)
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Salt Lake City, UT
Posts: 1,619
don't know if it's been pointed out but the rear seat 60/40 configuration is the same world wide with the 60% being on the left side, therefor since we in the US and Canada sit on that side get screwed when wanting to carry long things as we only get 40% pass thru - this sucks
also I didn't think the legroom in my GE was bad so I don't see the reason for the change, I hope the 15 still has a relative flat floor when rear seats are down as it was sweet to sleep in with a 3" memory foam mattress, if there is more than the slight bump it may be a pain in the back upon waking in the morning
 
  #12  
Old 04-01-2014, 11:36 PM
New Member
Join Date: Apr 2014
Location: OK
Posts: 8
Car and Driver is saying there will be 16.6 cu ft. of cargo space with the rear seats up, down from 20.6 in 2013.

2015 Honda Fit Reviews - Honda Fit Price, Photos, and Specs - CARandDRIVER
 
  #13  
Old 04-02-2014, 12:42 PM
xorbe's Avatar
Member
5 Year Member
iTrader: (1)
Join Date: May 2006
Location: Bay Area, CA USA
Posts: 1,069
Originally Posted by Orrin Hatchback View Post
Car and Driver is saying there will be 16.6 cu ft. of cargo space with the rear seats up, down from 20.6 in 2013.

2015 Honda Fit Reviews - Honda Fit Price, Photos, and Specs - CARandDRIVER
Probably means the rear seats were pushed back 2". Remember they can't count the volume over headrest/seat and all that, so they "lose" the space all the way to the roof.
 
  #14  
Old 04-02-2014, 08:54 PM
Member
Join Date: Oct 2013
Location: Osaka
Posts: 207
Originally Posted by xorbe View Post
Probably means the rear seats were pushed back 2". Remember they can't count the volume over headrest/seat and all that, so they "lose" the space all the way to the roof.
something like that sounds right, they made a big deal about the "extra" space it had over the GE here. So measurements coming out smaller doesnt sound correct.
 
  #15  
Old 04-02-2014, 11:03 PM
xorbe's Avatar
Member
5 Year Member
iTrader: (1)
Join Date: May 2006
Location: Bay Area, CA USA
Posts: 1,069
Also in Europe I believe they get to count "all the free volume inside" (interior volume - seat volume) and not "cargo volume" (designated volume just for cargo)
 
  #16  
Old 04-02-2014, 11:28 PM
New Member
Join Date: Apr 2014
Location: OK
Posts: 8
I agree that the smaller rear seat cargo volume is likely due to the rear seats being moved back. Max cargo space is probably because the car is a touch less long (it;s the same height, at 60 inches).

There is more space, for people: passenger volume (95.7 cu ft., up from 90.8 in 2013) and rear seat leg room (39.3 inches, up from 34.5 inches in '13). The marketing I saw trumpeted their (still) best-in-class max cargo volume, although this was down (52.7 cu. ft., down from 57.3).

I'm torn. I've got a teen and a tween who will need to fit back there as they grow, so legroom is a plus, but we take long trips and need the cargo space. Not sure 16.6 will cut it. We've got a Vibe now with 22 cu ft behind the rear seats, but it's a 2006 with a lot of miles, and there are more efficient options now.
 
  #17  
Old 04-03-2014, 12:50 AM
xorbe's Avatar
Member
5 Year Member
iTrader: (1)
Join Date: May 2006
Location: Bay Area, CA USA
Posts: 1,069
Yeah I don't know if a Fit will cut it for a family-of-4 vacation plus luggage. You could always rent and slap the miles on a rental.
 

Thread Tools
Search this Thread

Contact Us - Archive - Advertising - Cookie Policy - Privacy Statement - Terms of Service

© 2019 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands

We are a participant in the Amazon Services LLC Associates Program, an affiliate advertising program designed to provide a means for us to earn fees by linking to Amazon.com and affiliated sites.