Simple question for the Americans and Canadians in the audience

If Honda also offered us the 1.4 iDSI engine choice, say in a base model around $800 or so less, would you have chosen it?

Just FYI, the 1.4 iDSI has about 87 horsepower versus 109 hp for the 1.5 VTEC.

You'd go down to about a 12 or 13 sec 0-60 time versus 9.5 for the VTEC we have now, but in return you get about 42/55 mpg versus what we get now.

I think I might have done it personally. I live in a flat area, I don't need more than 80-90 hp in a car this size and I would love to get 45-50 mpg. I would opt for the bigger engine if I lived out west, needed to drive in the mountains still, but I think the 1.4 would have been perfectly adequate for me.

What do you all think?

 

I wouldn't have picked it. We do too much highway driving with the Fit and, even with the 1.5, it's pokey up at speed. I hate when I'm half way passed a big truck and all of a sudden he wants in my lane. I've grown accustomed to just zipping by and letting him in. With the Fit it takes an eternity to accelerate from say 75 to 80 to let someone in.

 

is the iDSI deisiel powered? cause if it is I might have picked up one cause you can make your own deiseil

 

It is not diesel powered, but if they offered a diesel I would be interested. Having more low end torque and a longer range on 10 gal would be worth the cost imo.

I probably would not have chosen the 1.4 L though. I think the 1.5 is the right balance between economy and power (at least for me).

 

i would not...

 

i wouldnt either.

 

The 1.5L has a good balance of power and economy with the 5 speed manual. I drove the automatic and it seemed to be noticeably slower, I don't know how much slower it was but I could tell a big difference so the 1.4L would more than likely feel like the 1.5L with the automatic.

 

they have those mileage numbers because the fits in other countries are much lighter. if the exterior of the euro fit was available, i'd have gone for that though

 

Hell yes I would have. I’m a realist in heart. The Fit is not a sports car, it’s a tiny lil car that’s (while best in its class) is meant to be high gas mileage rock bottom cheap economy car. Honda did good in giving it some good handling (for it class). The 1.5 liter engine *has no power* and it really has no potential (outside its sub $17K class). Having a lower hp engine with more HP perfectly targets this car and I would have bought it. The Fit already has what a 9.5 second 0-60 so dropping down to 12 doesn’t really matter, it people are really racing people around town in the thing off the line, I have no idea why you are owning a Fit. I specifically bought the Fit so that I would finally be limited in my ability to drive like a maniac and the Fit “fits” the bill. The Fit is simply the best car on the market that you can buy for MPG vs price tag and that’s how it should be treated. Throw in 45+ mpg with a Diesel and its even more so.

 

Where did you get that idea?

It's pretty much 99% the same car. It's just that the DSI motor is 8 valves and it is designed purely for fuel economy. Any weight difference is just the difference between the two motors (too little of a difference to even be a factor.

I'm not 100% sure I would have gone with the 1.4 DSI choice but I think I might have. If a turbodiesel were offered I would have taken it hands down. Even if it were $1000 more, but Honda has never made a diesel Fit for any market.

 

hahaha the sound of LOSING hp in a fit is just wrong...

 

the other fits are lighter because they don't come with crash bars and that junk. plus they are physically SMALLER. iirc, from front bumper to rear bumper the US fit is 6.5 inches longer.

 

Ummm....

UK model Honda Fit "L" manual 1.4 liter = 2390 lbs
US model Honda Fit manual 1.5 liter = 2432 lbs

Thats a 42 pound difference dude.

 

yea dude you are trippin.

cars in other countries get better gas mileage because usdm cars must meet a very harsh emissions standard. with the stricter emissions standards, the more restrictive the cat is, the air box has to meet a certain standard, the ecu is different. etc. the difference in weight is minimal.

 

Holy crap guys.

It's not the catalytic converter or the airbox design.

Two different engines we are talking about here first of all. I am talking about the 8v 1.4 iDSI motor versus the 16v 1.5 VTEC.

Second, when you are comparing the same engines in other countries they measure fuel economy differently than the EPA method (what we get is EPA estimated) AND you also have to convert from imperial to U.S. gallons depending on what country we are talking about..

 

so you are saying 40lbs is nothing? lol. that's SOMETHING! and, yes, other countries measure mileage differently.

 

I dunno man. Corners look so tempting for a car that turns so well.

I wouldn't buy the DSI model unless engine was a 1.8L rather than a 1.5 VTEC. It seems more like bigger engines will be better off with DSI than smaller ones since DSI optimizes an engine at lower RPM where gas is least used, but power is still good. The fit is not a power car so fuel efficiency is the priority.

I'm assuming that Honda made the Fit to handle well because they been paying attention to how some hypermilers drive without brakes?

 

yea sorry. i was speaking generally. not comparing the 1.4 idsi to the 1.5 vtec. i apologize

 

Think we get such different fuel economy cause our fuel over here is at least 95RON. Wish I could have got the 1.5vtec, still quite nippy though for a 1300, especially since intake, manifold an decat's gone on I've noticed a lot of difference in performance an the fuel economy's round about the same!

 

helll...to the no


it's not as if it's slow enough as it is.We need a K20 trim option damn it!!