So ROTTBOY, this one is for you. I went out and drove the car.

I'll begin with little annoyances that have nothing to do with the driving experience:

-Front passenger seat does not go far enough back, I couldn't comfortably stretch out.

-Rear seats have less headroom than GD/GE, significantly less. I (6' tall) can't sit in the rear seats with them reclined without bashing my head on the headliner.

-Sunroof is uselessly far back, especially for a shorter driver (My 5'4" GF will be the primary driver)

-Lack of physical volume controls are rather annoying, did not expect to be so intrusive

-Armrest is way too low for driver (as others have noticed), however its nicely placed for the front passenger.

-Door panels feel/look cheap

-Seating position is still not 100%, slightly better than GE, still not great though.

-I didn't like the steering wheel controls, GE setup looked/functioned better IMO.

-GF didn't like the steering wheel, she felt it was too small.

-Magic seats do not fold 100% flat as in the GD/GE.

-Lack of functional storage/cubbies in the front of the vehicle. Cupholder too low on the passenger door, strangely shaped/placed spaces in the center console, lack of secondary glovebox.

-Car is just plain ugly in black.


Things I did like (again, not directly related to vehicle dynamics):

-MPG readout on central display is cool.

-Gauges are gorgeous, seems to be Honda's greatest strength in their current line-up

-HVAC dials looked/felt great, very upscale.

-Driver centric vehicle layout was nice, with the screen angled toward the driver, cupholder next to steering wheel, etc.

-Rear seats themselves were comfortable, huge amounts of leg room (at expense of headroom of course)

-Rear headrests are greatly improved over the GE.

-Touch screen looks great, did not play with its functionality.

-HDMI input is cool to have.

-Appreciate the hidden plug-ins within the armrest.

-Butt load of airbags. A+

Driving dislikes:

-CVT is LOUD under heavy acceleration

-Steering is way too light for my tastes (though still heavier than my Fiesta's)

-Paddles will not give me total control of what gear I'm in. If I want to lug along in "7th" I should be able to do so, IMO.

-Never felt "special" or "soul-ful," where the GD felt like it was more than just an economy car, the GK just feels like a nice small car. Nothing more, nothing less.

Driving likes:

-Engine is peppy

-Ride is slightly improved

-Slightly quieter over previous models (still louder than Fiesta EcoBoost)

-LaneWatch is awesome, GF loved it.

-Brake/Gas pedals felt linear and smooth, no jumps/touchiness.

-First new car my GF has felt comfortable driving, not a plus for y'all....huge plus for me/us.

Summary:

The GK does not feel like a Fit. Its much more a mix of a Versa Note, a Fiesta and a Fit. Its quieter/more comfortable, like a Fiesta; huge in back like a Note; fairly decent along the lines of a Fit of yesteryear.

Is the car an improvement over the GE? Dynamically, not at all. For the average person? It is a much nicer appliance.

Would I buy one for my own daily driver? No. Just didn't feel 'alive' enough, even in relation to my box of boredom.

 

"Hopefully that old anti-semite Henry Ford is rolling in his grave".

Well, one thing for certain, he is spending less time thinking about you, than you are of him.

 

Great review. Thanks to take the time to share with us. I appreciate the opinion of a person that thinks on its own, not like a person with interests in a Corporation (like Honda-fan boy, or Honda-hate boy).

I am a MT guy. However, after knowing the problem with the high rpm 6th gear, I am researching the CVT. You said that the "CVT is LOUD under heavy acceleration". How do you feel it is under "normal" acceleration, like when you are not stressing the gas pedal? Thanks!

 

Under 'normal' acceleration (for me 1/3 pedal or less), it is quite quiet. From about 1/2 pedal travel up is when it really starts getting loud.

I think it would actually help to improve one's fuel economy; something along the lines of, "Oh, the engine is getting loud, I must be hitting the gas harder than normal."

I also noticed that, from a stop, the CVT feels/sounds kind of like a manual car that is just modulating the clutch from a stop; really caught me off guard.

BTW, I too am an MT guy, I think in this case, you'll really need to test drive the two back-to-back.

Sure.

 

I suspect your gal will be even more happy in a CR-V.

 

Nope, she hates anything bigger than subcompacts...as do I.

She believes there are few greater sins than inefficient uses of space...just one of the many reasons a ring will soon be on her finger.

 

First off, I 100% agree with all of your complaints about the Fit, they are what made me not buy one. They are complaints that CAN NOT just be overlooked because you are a Honda "fan boy", I feel they are complete deal breakers. I was so glad you made mention of how insanely far back the sun roof was, I thought people would laugh at me if I brought that up. I could go on and on about what I felt were "deal breakers" but I won't.
Now, a couple things you said that I find absurd. The first is that you say the HVAC controls "looked great/felt great/very upscale", VERY UPSCALE, what are you talking about?? Did you not see the 1970's recirculate switch, if these are very "upscale" to you, then you must not drive very modern cars, no offense. Next, you seem to want to bash the car in black, and I think you really need to understand the meaning of personal choice, I felt that black was the only color that looked good, so color is in the eye of the beholder. As for Henry Ford, it is hard to judge people from way back then as we sit in our big lazy boy chairs today, Ford did some incredible things in his life time.
I am sure your great grandparents weren't angels, neither were mine, the world was a much smaller place back then and most people were raised to hate other people that were not the same as them. My parents were born Methodist and raised to hate Catholics, is that right, of course not, well now I'm just rambling, sorry.

 

This is what makes the world go round: One of the things that particularly appealed to me ( and still does) about the Fit EX is where the sunroof is overhead. I'm 5'8" if it matters.


I also don't find it at all loud, although my experience is only a zillion rental cars from National Emerald Aisle. Then again, they're all one size up.

 

It was okay for me, but for her, the air just flows right behind her seat.

In normal driving, it is not a loud car, only when accelerating briskly; this is all largely in comparison with my Fiesta EcoBoost. Although, at wide open, the stock CVT seemed louder than my old GD with RS*R C&K axle back. That is most likely caused by the relative absence of ambient noise.

I'm talking about the spinning rotary knobs.

I drive many modern cars, too many as a matter of fact.

Times were different, yes. However, did your parents/grandparents influence millions with their views? I doubt it. Enough OT, talk about the car.

 

Very fair and honest review Mike!

 

"Its quieter/more comfortable, like a Fiesta"

I traded in my 2011 Fiesta in M/T for the Fit M/T. The Fiesta was a very good car but my wife got rid of her van for a car so it gave me the good excuse of getting a "minivan" (Fit) for our dogs and such.

Yes, the Fiesta was quiet for what it is, but the seat comfort was bad. Both my wife and I had to add things to the seat to make them just bearable. With the Fit, we both sit in complete, supported comfort, as is.

MANY complaints about the Fiesta CVT was the noise and choppy gears. From what I've read, that's part of the CVT personality. Since the dealer didn't have a M/T in, I test drove the CVT Fit. It was "OK" but it didn't flip my skirt like the M/T does that I ordered after driving the CVT. The M/T shifts so easy I call it a "paddle shifter M/T".

 

I drove an EX CVT as well. I concur that it lost it's character and is now a nice small appliance car. Shame. The steering is much lighter than my GE, also is much more disconnected than the GD/E's. Still, at least it's quick, responsive and even. Ride is MUCH improved compared to GD/E. It sophisticatedly absorbed brittle bumps and kept noise to a minimum. After my drive, I drove my GE on the same roads I had taken the new Fit. Big difference. But at the expense of handling? No, not me. Some other let-downs...dash and cowl are further from driver and higher, which I don't like. Space...the only area where the GK has more space than the GE is rear knee room. Headroom front and rear are much less. Cargo space with rear seats up and down are visually (and technically) much less. That's a big shame. I would think that Fit owners would value cargo space more than rear seat space, which was excellent in the GE to begin with.

Anyway, this only makes me love my 2009 Fit even more.

 

I find the seats in the Fiesta mega comfy. I found the GK 'fine.'

Fit CVT you mean? I didn't find it choppy at all, just loud under hard acceleration. I wouldn't want a 6MT that shifts that easily.

Agreed. If I were buying a new car and I HAD to get a brand new Fit...I'd be on the hunt for a left over 2013 Sport 5MT.

 

He's referring to the 6 speed select shift ford transmission, which is god awful.

If you were comparing an automatic fiesta to an automatic fit, the fiesta would lose on the basis of transmission performance. I personally also dislike the ford interior on the fiesta. Too many buttons and the display is too high up.

I also find the fit loud at higher rpm. I spent the morning putting $100 of MLV on the firewall and now all is well again.

 

"Agreed. If I were buying a new car and I HAD to get a brand new Fit...I'd be on the hunt for a left over 2013 Sport 5MT".

That would be the model Consumer Reports said it could no longer recommend, due to it's miserable failure of the frontal offset crash test. In fact, they went out of the way to mention the fact it did worse than any other car in it's class. Here was the articles exact quote:

"Consumer Reports especially singles out the Fit here, saying it and the Fiat 500 performed the worst in the test".

This was what motivated me to sell our 2008 Fit and replace it with the new Honda 2015. Honda expects the new 2015 to ace the crash tests, and I bet they crashed quite a few themselves to make sure.

 

Thanks for the thoughtful review. I'm not a buyer for the '15 model either but that's simply because we don't need one at this point and (like the OP) we really like our '09.

Just one observation about the CVT: We just returned from Washington, DC in our '13 Accord with a CVT. The last time we made the trip was in our MT Fit. Going through the mountains in the Accord was less dramatic since you don't really notice the RPMs increasing to pull uphill. With the MT and cruise control, the accelerator would be on the floor and we'd have to downshift to keep any power to the wheels.

We noticed that with the CVT, on the long downhills, the car doesn't hold the speed we set but feels like it's coasting and gaining a little on the hill. That is something I have not encountered since our '71 Saab 99 with a free-wheeling manual transmission (don't buy one of these unless you own a flatbed tow truck).

I agree that these cars are becoming more and more like appliances. Everything works and when the weather is nice there really isn't much to think about. Even navi woman will wake me up when it's time to turn.

Cheers.

 

"I couldn't care less what Consumer Reports says".

Thank god Honda cares, and now we have the 2015 Honda Fit.

"When I'm in the market for a vehicle for myself, safety is not a top priority, that's why I happily drove a 1991 Civic Si without any airbags for a year or so...and still regret selling that car EVERY DAY".

When your a few years older, married, and have children of driving age, I would speculate you will change your opinion on cars you purchase, as demonstrated by your next comment:

"I/We are going to buy a 2015 Fit EX WITH a CVT, for the person I care about most in the world. If I didn't think it was a very good car, I would not let her buy/drive it; the safety being a huge bonus because it is for her".

Finally, as for your comment:

"I'm going to say this, to clarify things for the couple of you who seem to think I'm trying to tear the car apart:"

The only negative statement directed at your posts, that I can find in this thread, is a reaction to your comments regarding Henry Ford, which in my opinion were uncalled for and have no place on this forum.

 

Nice review. I agree, there's a lot of chips and refinement issues w/ the GK, but it wasn't enough to deter me in getting one either. Comparing it to the others in it's class, there was no competition, imo.

 

Hmm, I feel like the CVT has a lot of engine braking on hills. Granted, I haven't taken it to mountains yet, but I do live in a hilly area. I'm definitely using the brakes less than I would in a traditional automatic.

Mostly replying to your post because of your Saab comment-- I did a fair amount of driving in a 1970 Saab 96 with the free-wheeling "feature" (ha!) and it was a terrifying way to learn to drive! I do still have a soft spot for that death trap, though, because it taught me A LOT about engines, even if it meant I spent more time fixing than driving.

 

Agree-- anyone who says it's perfect is deluded or a fanboy. I totally agree that it is the best in class. I'd go so far as to say it's probably the best value even amongst the compacts.