My first Honda. My first bad car purchase
#81
07-16-2008, 09:12 PM
The fit retails for around the same amount as my 94 Civic SI did and is a way better, more refined and more fuel efficient car even though it has the aerodynamics of a billboard. Yes they did cheap out on the carpet and the rear suspension but it works quite well considering the design. not to mention the fact that's been around for a few years.
#82
07-24-2008, 09:46 PM
I guess in the end if he dont like it then he dont plus I guess he dont feel like he got his money worth plus alot of people think of the fir as this magical car who never need gas, I am happy with mine even though I would change a few cosmetic things but he dont like it and he paid for it so he should feel like he got his moneys worth. BUt Im glad I know I got my moneys worth, besides somepeople just ask for to much.
#83
07-25-2008, 09:33 PM
American Honda sold us all a Jazz that's been gutted out.
First of all I don't go by a fit alias because it' not real... Being a fan by no means will ever elicit an imparcial and honest answer from everyone who has bashed this guy for stating the truth.
American Honda introduced the fit to us all. Why change the name? Jazz to Fit, what difference could it had made? None!!
They put a bigger engine in and leave it with the same small tank originally intended for the 1.3 the Jazz has. Real smart or they simply could care less. Why sell us a quality car the Jazz is when it's not as expensive as the rest of the cars on the Lot. Change it to the Fit, gut it out, change the back hatch to create the ilusion the car has a bigger bumper. Even eliminate the alarm the sport version comes with, install an after market system and let our fans buy a Karr alarm sys or whatever gimik alarm they stiffed you up with.
You wrote a long article which honda mongers won't understand therefore don't waste time with them. Write up a Thread entitled "Anyone interested in filing a class action suit for honda's misrepresentation of the Jazz". I did a in depth investigation about the alarm system and believe me it was gutted out. But I'm certainly not going to entertain the monkey see monkey do honda fans in here. You do that, and you'll see. It only takes 3 to file a class action. When they rule recall the masses will change lanes.
I thought about upgrading in 2010 if I saw a sun roof, but it's not going to happen. American Honda is going to sell us another gutted out version of the original Japanese version of the Fit. Yeap, being a fan is like a dark night with no light, "You will never see the light". So I'm done with American Honda!! There a bunch of high class theive's who've deceived the masses.
American Honda introduced the fit to us all. Why change the name? Jazz to Fit, what difference could it had made? None!!
They put a bigger engine in and leave it with the same small tank originally intended for the 1.3 the Jazz has. Real smart or they simply could care less. Why sell us a quality car the Jazz is when it's not as expensive as the rest of the cars on the Lot. Change it to the Fit, gut it out, change the back hatch to create the ilusion the car has a bigger bumper. Even eliminate the alarm the sport version comes with, install an after market system and let our fans buy a Karr alarm sys or whatever gimik alarm they stiffed you up with.
You wrote a long article which honda mongers won't understand therefore don't waste time with them. Write up a Thread entitled "Anyone interested in filing a class action suit for honda's misrepresentation of the Jazz". I did a in depth investigation about the alarm system and believe me it was gutted out. But I'm certainly not going to entertain the monkey see monkey do honda fans in here. You do that, and you'll see. It only takes 3 to file a class action. When they rule recall the masses will change lanes.
I thought about upgrading in 2010 if I saw a sun roof, but it's not going to happen. American Honda is going to sell us another gutted out version of the original Japanese version of the Fit. Yeap, being a fan is like a dark night with no light, "You will never see the light". So I'm done with American Honda!! There a bunch of high class theive's who've deceived the masses.
#84
07-25-2008, 09:42 PM
Wtf
First of all I don't go by a fit alias because it' not real... Being a fan by no means will ever elicit an imparcial and honest answer from everyone who has bashed this guy for stating the truth.
American Honda introduced the fit to us all. Why change the name? Jazz to Fit, what difference could it had made? None!!
They put a bigger engine in and leave it with the same small tank originally intended for the 1.3 the Jazz has. Real smart or they simply could care less. Why sell us a quality car the Jazz is when it's not as expensive as the rest of the cars on the Lot. Change it to the Fit, gut it out, change the back hatch to create the ilusion the car has a bigger bumper. Even eliminate the alarm the sport version comes with, install an after market system and let our fans buy a Karr alarm sys or whatever gimik alarm they stiffed you up with.
You wrote a long article which honda mongers won't understand therefore don't waste time with them. Write up a Thread entitled "Anyone interested in filing a class action suit for honda's misrepresentation of the Jazz". I did a in depth investigation about the alarm system and believe me it was gutted out. But I'm certainly not going to entertain the monkey see monkey do honda fans in here. You do that, and you'll see. It only takes 3 to file a class action. When they rule recall the masses will change lanes.
I thought about upgrading in 2010 if I saw a sun roof, but it's not going to happen. American Honda is going to sell us another gutted out version of the original Japanese version of the Fit. Yeap, being a fan is like a dark night with no light, "You will never see the light". So I'm done with American Honda!! There a bunch of high class theive's who've deceived the masses.
American Honda introduced the fit to us all. Why change the name? Jazz to Fit, what difference could it had made? None!!
They put a bigger engine in and leave it with the same small tank originally intended for the 1.3 the Jazz has. Real smart or they simply could care less. Why sell us a quality car the Jazz is when it's not as expensive as the rest of the cars on the Lot. Change it to the Fit, gut it out, change the back hatch to create the ilusion the car has a bigger bumper. Even eliminate the alarm the sport version comes with, install an after market system and let our fans buy a Karr alarm sys or whatever gimik alarm they stiffed you up with.
You wrote a long article which honda mongers won't understand therefore don't waste time with them. Write up a Thread entitled "Anyone interested in filing a class action suit for honda's misrepresentation of the Jazz". I did a in depth investigation about the alarm system and believe me it was gutted out. But I'm certainly not going to entertain the monkey see monkey do honda fans in here. You do that, and you'll see. It only takes 3 to file a class action. When they rule recall the masses will change lanes.
I thought about upgrading in 2010 if I saw a sun roof, but it's not going to happen. American Honda is going to sell us another gutted out version of the original Japanese version of the Fit. Yeap, being a fan is like a dark night with no light, "You will never see the light". So I'm done with American Honda!! There a bunch of high class theive's who've deceived the masses.
#85
07-25-2008, 10:06 PM
Wrong! Wrong! Wrong!
So I have owned my car for almost a year now, with 16K miles on it, and I regret buying it every time I sit down in it. Honda, you should hear why so as to avoid the same mistake in another design.
I have absolutely no qualms about the dealership salespeople or repair facility. Motorcar Honda of Mayfield Heights is fantastic and I would not hesitate to recommend that dealer for anyone looking at Hondas.
Let’s start with the good bits. The car looks different from most other cars on US roads, and I think it looks great. Very interesting and well done color choices. The handling is certainly better than your average econobox. Surprising cargo space for such a diminutive exterior. That’s about it.
The brakes and suspension are competent enough, if you are the only one in the Fit. I honestly put my laptop bag (about 15lbs) into the back hatch and you can see it squat a bit. The weight capacity for the car is just over 700lbs total. It might be roomy, sure, but you can only hold empty boxes with a weight restriction like that. 4 average people fully clothed with purses or laptops and you are maxed out. Fully loaded the brakes are pretty much useless and the suspension tops out very quickly over bumps.
Next are the blind spots. The A pillar holds the curtain airbags (so don't get A pillar gauges unless you disable the bags). Unfortunately that makes the pillar very thick indeed creating a wicked blind spot. Also unusual is the small window just aft of that A pillar. This pushes the side mirrors (which are quite nice and large) back on the door forcing you to take your eyes off the road to use them. If they were at the base of the A pillar like in most cars, this wouldn't be an issue. If you position the seat (only two ways of movement, back and forth and the seat back angle) and you position the rearview mirror properly, you will notice the rearward visibility a bit obstructed. You will have to peer through very large rear headrests, a large secondary tail light, the rear window wiper (which does not feature an intermittent setting), very thick C pillars, high belt line for the rear hatch, and if the middle seat belt is "installed" the belt is right in the middle of site. It is like looking through a porthole.
The gauges are nice and very easy to read, but one fault is they stay lit all the time. Not only does this wear the lights in them faster but when it is dark out and you are expecting to turn on your headlights, you might forget to do so because the gauges are already lit. The only way you know you have your lights on is a small green light in the bottom of the gauges. If it is twilight out and you have been driving for quite a long time (unlikely with the short range this car has) you will forget to turn the lights on. I do that almost every time I leave from work near sunset.
Because the gas tank is underneath the front seats (the trick to getting that much interior space) there is no foot room for rear passengers. Since there is ample knee room, this might not be an issue.
Since the seats do cool tricks, they have to be quite small and agile. To do that Honda made the padding quite thin and firm. On long trips the car is very tiring. When you do push the front seats up to drop the back seats underneath them, there is no memory to return them back to their original position; more of an annoyance really.
Nice seats, though, nice use of space, nicely sized glovebox.
No armrest/center console, no dead pedal, no sunroof option, no overhead console.
To make it ready for North America, Honda had to put on new bumpers to meet crash requirements. These protrude out a lot and collect lots of dirt as you drive along, particularly the rear bumper. It is a shelf for dirt and grime. They also make it a bit trickier to put things into the rear hatch because of how far out they jut.
I understand you can't make a car fit all markets, but to bring the car to the states, Honda took out every addon feature like an armrest and roof console and turn signals on the side of the car and transmission options, and engine options, and brake configurations that would have helped some of these issues. Honda basically took the highest end model, gutted the features out of it (but it still has quite a few truth be told), tweaked the suspension for a softer ride (they didn't quite get that right), modify the front and rear to meet crash requirements, and put the For Sale sticker on it. That's not what I would have done with it. I guess for sampling the market that is good enough, though.
Tach is on the left side of the gauge cluster, blocked by your left arm as you use your right arm for shifting. Most cars have this issue, but I would still like to see a car maker do it right once, like in my old Mazda Protege.
I have a manual and shifting into 5th is an "adventure". All of the other gears snick into gear wonderfully. 5th requires me to backhand the shiftknob and do some interesting arm movements. Reverse is geared badly as well, forcing you to floor the gas and taking off much more aggressively than you want to in order to keep from stalling. 1st gear is very quick indeed (up to 25mph maybe) but 2nd gear is so deep, you have to rev in first very high before the shift to not lug. You cannot start from a standstill in 2nd very easily if at all.
Let me spend some time on the biggest gripe I have with this car, the fuel economy.
Gas mileage is quite awful. 109hp and I am barely getting more gas mileage than my 7yo Mazda with 130hp and 131K miles and the Fit is 400lbs lighter. In the Fit, I average 32mpg with 90% highway driving. That's appalling for an economy car from the most frugal and environmental car company on earth., specifically geared for economical driving. From the same manufacturer (Honda) you have a car with 82% more hp and 27% more weight and meets emissions tougher than LEV that gets only 10% less mileage. (Accord I4) Or even 28% more hp and 17% more weight and meets emissions tougher than LEV and gets almost exactly the same mileage? (Civic LX) Could you imagine what that engine in the lighter shell of a Fit would do; what the Fit should have got mileage-wise in the first place.
The engine platform was designed from the ground up to be independent from other cars in Honda's stable. It was to be a platform engine for the world-seller car (the Fit/Jazz) to go into as many countries as possible as an economy car. The design was fresh and new from the ground up which is rare for a platform engine; how many rehashings are there of the beloved LSx block? On the technology/economy front, what I was expecting was the latest gadgetry Honda had in their bag of tricks thrown into this new platform. That being the shutoff at idle and seamless restarts of the engine as seen in their hybrids, regenerative braking to charge the battery, easing the alternator a la hybrids, better gearing for economy (this only redlines at 6500, not very high at all especially for Honda), trick VTEC and fuel management maps.
Yet the engine is weak, thirsty for what little power it provides, and not-so-good with emissions. Were Honda engineers asleep during that platform design? They certainly weren't asleep for the B series or K series. My coworker's 1995 Civic with 422,000 miles on it (yes, that's 422K) with the AC on and 80mph gets 40mpg consistently, every day. That mpg measurement isn't out of ordinary, either, from the CRX or other cars of that vintage. What happened? There was no trickery then. No hybrid, no crazy lean burn, no regenerative braking, no trick valve timing. That Civic is the same weight as the Fit and with almost same hp, it gets MORE mpg, 10 years ago. Even today the Fit gets worse than a current Civic and the Civic weighs more. I don't like the excuse cars are heavier now so they are "allowed" to use more fuel. I don't buy it. A Civic then is the same size as a Fit now. An accord then is the same size as a civic now. Does the new civic get as good or better mileage than an old accord? Yes. Does a fit get better gas mileage than the old civic? No.
That is my issue. Honda should have taken just as much engineering and time that went into that trick interior and spent that money for the drivetrain technology.
When cars that are much bigger (at least a foot longer, 400 lbs heavier), more powerful (140hp vs 109), and better emissions (SULEV vs. LEV) are getting better gas mileage, the engineers of the 1.5L platform need to be replaced.
Shoehorn the old Insight engine in there for cripes sake. At least then after 20 people have asked me if the Fit is a hybrid I can say yes. And it would get the gas mileage an entry level economy car from Honda should get.
Of course my wishful thinking is for a very small turbo diesel hybrid running biodiesel but has been converted for SVO use in the future and I would have gladly paid $5000 over the purchase price for it.
Part of the issue is the gearing. 70mph is 3500rpm, just at VTEC band. This is just stupid high, making for a tiring drive listening to the spin of the hamster under the hood. And I am worried about longevity of this engine spinning that high because the maintenance minder only has you replace the oil every 6500 or so miles. If this engine is spinning that hard all the time, I don't feel comfortable with the first change of oil being that far into the cycle.
Also the gas tank is quite small. 10.8 gallons does not go very far at all.
The drive-by-wire is ridiculous as well. There is a delay every time you press the petal. Not only that, but the throttle doesn't even open all the way at WOT. Tests have shown on the Fit that pedal position is more or less an approximation. The same pedal placement can open the throttle body differently depending on speed, acceleration rate, and other characteristics depending on how the ECU wants to open it, almost independent of where the pedal is. Even at full on WOT in the best case people are seeing 72% opening of the throttle body intake.
The car is too narrow to have 3 people in the back shoulder to shoulder comfortably.
Liftoff at 75mph. Anything faster than about 70 the car feels like it is ready to take off. Above 75 the car is very squirmy because of aero lift.
The paint is really thin. I mean really thin. Scratching is really easy and rocks thrown up while driving nick all the way through the paint to the metal, which is barely thicker than foil. I have tons of dents everywhere on my doors. It looks like I have hail damage. There are also places near the wheel wells that actually collect dirt and salt and water. This is a bad combination for rust prevention.
Because the car is light and high, crosswinds are brutal. A slight gust on a bridge and you are inadvertently doing a lane change. This is only exacerbated when it is icy or snowy on the road. This car is the pits in the snow, too. It has unusually wide tires for such a small car, and since there is no weight to push through the snow, the car acts like it has snowshoes on, just skimming over the top of snow instead of pushing down into it to get traction from the road.
The AC is anemic. Barely able to cool such a large cabin with lots of glass area on an 80F overcast day. I couldn't imagine a 100F+ day in Arizona.
I have also had one recall and 3 recommended fixes as well as Honda's misrepresentation of mileage on the odometer. Keep in mind, however, that this car has been on the market for 6 years already in other countries so these issues should have gotten fixed prior to it reaching North American shores. I have had the fuel filler light come on as well without any advice from the service department as to what it was from; they just reset it and sent me on my way.
Now keep in mind I am quite a negative person. I am a software tester for a living so I am quite critical. I have similar critiques for any car I drive. It is just that I am beyond frustrated with this car because of what I read and the promises this car gave me. It has not lived up to any of them. My 7 year old Protege was a better car in every way over this Fit. My insurance even went up with this car.
I wanted a car by Honda for reliability, cheap price, high resale value, terribly gas efficient, and a bit of fun every so often on a corner. I don't need the car to handle like it is on rails. I don't care if the car doesn't ride like a Lexus. I couldn't care less if it has AC or power anything. If it does, I will critique it. I was hoping the Fit would at least be reliable (1 recall and 3 recommended fixes + long interims between oil changes + thin paint + spots for water and salt to collect + fuel filler issues != reliable), cheap (the Mazda3 is $1000 more and much more substantial, the civic is the same price), frugal (the Fit is not compared to every other small car), and one part interesting. It has the interesting part right with the size of the interior for the given exterior, but it is unusable. That vast interior can only hold 700lbs of material which isn't much at all. Why have such a big space and limit what it can hold? Make the body lower so it is more aerodynamic for more efficiency and less likely to get blown to the side. I didn't complain that it didn't have GPS. I didn't complain that it didn't have leather option. I am complaining it didn't meet very simple requirements for affordable transportation such as a cheap price and cheap running costs.
A $13K Kia gets similar gas mileage and seat comfort and it doesn't promise anything more than basic transportation. The Fit promises a bit more than that with more equipment and lots of reviews expressing awesome handling and cargo room and such. It is $5K (at least) and isn't worth that price difference over a Rio. The Fit isn't $5K better than a Rio.
I have absolutely no qualms about the dealership salespeople or repair facility. Motorcar Honda of Mayfield Heights is fantastic and I would not hesitate to recommend that dealer for anyone looking at Hondas.
Let’s start with the good bits. The car looks different from most other cars on US roads, and I think it looks great. Very interesting and well done color choices. The handling is certainly better than your average econobox. Surprising cargo space for such a diminutive exterior. That’s about it.
The brakes and suspension are competent enough, if you are the only one in the Fit. I honestly put my laptop bag (about 15lbs) into the back hatch and you can see it squat a bit. The weight capacity for the car is just over 700lbs total. It might be roomy, sure, but you can only hold empty boxes with a weight restriction like that. 4 average people fully clothed with purses or laptops and you are maxed out. Fully loaded the brakes are pretty much useless and the suspension tops out very quickly over bumps.
Next are the blind spots. The A pillar holds the curtain airbags (so don't get A pillar gauges unless you disable the bags). Unfortunately that makes the pillar very thick indeed creating a wicked blind spot. Also unusual is the small window just aft of that A pillar. This pushes the side mirrors (which are quite nice and large) back on the door forcing you to take your eyes off the road to use them. If they were at the base of the A pillar like in most cars, this wouldn't be an issue. If you position the seat (only two ways of movement, back and forth and the seat back angle) and you position the rearview mirror properly, you will notice the rearward visibility a bit obstructed. You will have to peer through very large rear headrests, a large secondary tail light, the rear window wiper (which does not feature an intermittent setting), very thick C pillars, high belt line for the rear hatch, and if the middle seat belt is "installed" the belt is right in the middle of site. It is like looking through a porthole.
The gauges are nice and very easy to read, but one fault is they stay lit all the time. Not only does this wear the lights in them faster but when it is dark out and you are expecting to turn on your headlights, you might forget to do so because the gauges are already lit. The only way you know you have your lights on is a small green light in the bottom of the gauges. If it is twilight out and you have been driving for quite a long time (unlikely with the short range this car has) you will forget to turn the lights on. I do that almost every time I leave from work near sunset.
Because the gas tank is underneath the front seats (the trick to getting that much interior space) there is no foot room for rear passengers. Since there is ample knee room, this might not be an issue.
Since the seats do cool tricks, they have to be quite small and agile. To do that Honda made the padding quite thin and firm. On long trips the car is very tiring. When you do push the front seats up to drop the back seats underneath them, there is no memory to return them back to their original position; more of an annoyance really.
Nice seats, though, nice use of space, nicely sized glovebox.
No armrest/center console, no dead pedal, no sunroof option, no overhead console.
To make it ready for North America, Honda had to put on new bumpers to meet crash requirements. These protrude out a lot and collect lots of dirt as you drive along, particularly the rear bumper. It is a shelf for dirt and grime. They also make it a bit trickier to put things into the rear hatch because of how far out they jut.
I understand you can't make a car fit all markets, but to bring the car to the states, Honda took out every addon feature like an armrest and roof console and turn signals on the side of the car and transmission options, and engine options, and brake configurations that would have helped some of these issues. Honda basically took the highest end model, gutted the features out of it (but it still has quite a few truth be told), tweaked the suspension for a softer ride (they didn't quite get that right), modify the front and rear to meet crash requirements, and put the For Sale sticker on it. That's not what I would have done with it. I guess for sampling the market that is good enough, though.
Tach is on the left side of the gauge cluster, blocked by your left arm as you use your right arm for shifting. Most cars have this issue, but I would still like to see a car maker do it right once, like in my old Mazda Protege.
I have a manual and shifting into 5th is an "adventure". All of the other gears snick into gear wonderfully. 5th requires me to backhand the shiftknob and do some interesting arm movements. Reverse is geared badly as well, forcing you to floor the gas and taking off much more aggressively than you want to in order to keep from stalling. 1st gear is very quick indeed (up to 25mph maybe) but 2nd gear is so deep, you have to rev in first very high before the shift to not lug. You cannot start from a standstill in 2nd very easily if at all.
Let me spend some time on the biggest gripe I have with this car, the fuel economy.
Gas mileage is quite awful. 109hp and I am barely getting more gas mileage than my 7yo Mazda with 130hp and 131K miles and the Fit is 400lbs lighter. In the Fit, I average 32mpg with 90% highway driving. That's appalling for an economy car from the most frugal and environmental car company on earth., specifically geared for economical driving. From the same manufacturer (Honda) you have a car with 82% more hp and 27% more weight and meets emissions tougher than LEV that gets only 10% less mileage. (Accord I4) Or even 28% more hp and 17% more weight and meets emissions tougher than LEV and gets almost exactly the same mileage? (Civic LX) Could you imagine what that engine in the lighter shell of a Fit would do; what the Fit should have got mileage-wise in the first place.
The engine platform was designed from the ground up to be independent from other cars in Honda's stable. It was to be a platform engine for the world-seller car (the Fit/Jazz) to go into as many countries as possible as an economy car. The design was fresh and new from the ground up which is rare for a platform engine; how many rehashings are there of the beloved LSx block? On the technology/economy front, what I was expecting was the latest gadgetry Honda had in their bag of tricks thrown into this new platform. That being the shutoff at idle and seamless restarts of the engine as seen in their hybrids, regenerative braking to charge the battery, easing the alternator a la hybrids, better gearing for economy (this only redlines at 6500, not very high at all especially for Honda), trick VTEC and fuel management maps.
Yet the engine is weak, thirsty for what little power it provides, and not-so-good with emissions. Were Honda engineers asleep during that platform design? They certainly weren't asleep for the B series or K series. My coworker's 1995 Civic with 422,000 miles on it (yes, that's 422K) with the AC on and 80mph gets 40mpg consistently, every day. That mpg measurement isn't out of ordinary, either, from the CRX or other cars of that vintage. What happened? There was no trickery then. No hybrid, no crazy lean burn, no regenerative braking, no trick valve timing. That Civic is the same weight as the Fit and with almost same hp, it gets MORE mpg, 10 years ago. Even today the Fit gets worse than a current Civic and the Civic weighs more. I don't like the excuse cars are heavier now so they are "allowed" to use more fuel. I don't buy it. A Civic then is the same size as a Fit now. An accord then is the same size as a civic now. Does the new civic get as good or better mileage than an old accord? Yes. Does a fit get better gas mileage than the old civic? No.
That is my issue. Honda should have taken just as much engineering and time that went into that trick interior and spent that money for the drivetrain technology.
When cars that are much bigger (at least a foot longer, 400 lbs heavier), more powerful (140hp vs 109), and better emissions (SULEV vs. LEV) are getting better gas mileage, the engineers of the 1.5L platform need to be replaced.
Shoehorn the old Insight engine in there for cripes sake. At least then after 20 people have asked me if the Fit is a hybrid I can say yes. And it would get the gas mileage an entry level economy car from Honda should get.
Of course my wishful thinking is for a very small turbo diesel hybrid running biodiesel but has been converted for SVO use in the future and I would have gladly paid $5000 over the purchase price for it.
Part of the issue is the gearing. 70mph is 3500rpm, just at VTEC band. This is just stupid high, making for a tiring drive listening to the spin of the hamster under the hood. And I am worried about longevity of this engine spinning that high because the maintenance minder only has you replace the oil every 6500 or so miles. If this engine is spinning that hard all the time, I don't feel comfortable with the first change of oil being that far into the cycle.
Also the gas tank is quite small. 10.8 gallons does not go very far at all.
The drive-by-wire is ridiculous as well. There is a delay every time you press the petal. Not only that, but the throttle doesn't even open all the way at WOT. Tests have shown on the Fit that pedal position is more or less an approximation. The same pedal placement can open the throttle body differently depending on speed, acceleration rate, and other characteristics depending on how the ECU wants to open it, almost independent of where the pedal is. Even at full on WOT in the best case people are seeing 72% opening of the throttle body intake.
The car is too narrow to have 3 people in the back shoulder to shoulder comfortably.
Liftoff at 75mph. Anything faster than about 70 the car feels like it is ready to take off. Above 75 the car is very squirmy because of aero lift.
The paint is really thin. I mean really thin. Scratching is really easy and rocks thrown up while driving nick all the way through the paint to the metal, which is barely thicker than foil. I have tons of dents everywhere on my doors. It looks like I have hail damage. There are also places near the wheel wells that actually collect dirt and salt and water. This is a bad combination for rust prevention.
Because the car is light and high, crosswinds are brutal. A slight gust on a bridge and you are inadvertently doing a lane change. This is only exacerbated when it is icy or snowy on the road. This car is the pits in the snow, too. It has unusually wide tires for such a small car, and since there is no weight to push through the snow, the car acts like it has snowshoes on, just skimming over the top of snow instead of pushing down into it to get traction from the road.
The AC is anemic. Barely able to cool such a large cabin with lots of glass area on an 80F overcast day. I couldn't imagine a 100F+ day in Arizona.
I have also had one recall and 3 recommended fixes as well as Honda's misrepresentation of mileage on the odometer. Keep in mind, however, that this car has been on the market for 6 years already in other countries so these issues should have gotten fixed prior to it reaching North American shores. I have had the fuel filler light come on as well without any advice from the service department as to what it was from; they just reset it and sent me on my way.
Now keep in mind I am quite a negative person. I am a software tester for a living so I am quite critical. I have similar critiques for any car I drive. It is just that I am beyond frustrated with this car because of what I read and the promises this car gave me. It has not lived up to any of them. My 7 year old Protege was a better car in every way over this Fit. My insurance even went up with this car.
I wanted a car by Honda for reliability, cheap price, high resale value, terribly gas efficient, and a bit of fun every so often on a corner. I don't need the car to handle like it is on rails. I don't care if the car doesn't ride like a Lexus. I couldn't care less if it has AC or power anything. If it does, I will critique it. I was hoping the Fit would at least be reliable (1 recall and 3 recommended fixes + long interims between oil changes + thin paint + spots for water and salt to collect + fuel filler issues != reliable), cheap (the Mazda3 is $1000 more and much more substantial, the civic is the same price), frugal (the Fit is not compared to every other small car), and one part interesting. It has the interesting part right with the size of the interior for the given exterior, but it is unusable. That vast interior can only hold 700lbs of material which isn't much at all. Why have such a big space and limit what it can hold? Make the body lower so it is more aerodynamic for more efficiency and less likely to get blown to the side. I didn't complain that it didn't have GPS. I didn't complain that it didn't have leather option. I am complaining it didn't meet very simple requirements for affordable transportation such as a cheap price and cheap running costs.
A $13K Kia gets similar gas mileage and seat comfort and it doesn't promise anything more than basic transportation. The Fit promises a bit more than that with more equipment and lots of reviews expressing awesome handling and cargo room and such. It is $5K (at least) and isn't worth that price difference over a Rio. The Fit isn't $5K better than a Rio.
#86
07-25-2008, 10:43 PM
The Car is only good for look... but it's nothing else
I see, you lowered you car got it painted, got flares. You probably put a bad ass air intake, headers the sport muffler the rims the works it all good!! Your happy I understand you, cause I was like that too.
You Love your car? of course you do. When I was young I had 3 RX-7's and Mazda its 100% Japanese. When I use to put the foot on the pedal it was Arigato, Siyonara for sure and believe me the car was a bad ass. But it was like it still is, 100% Mazda Japanese version with no one gutting it out for the goods. Now let me ask you a question?
Why buy Japanese when you can buy American? Ford, Chevy, and all the rest of the watered down versions of what a car is suppose to be like sold by American Car Makers who by the way are in the cellar as in last place.
American Car Makers!!! Last place, worst quality, vehicles you lease because they die fast and hard.
Now, what makes you think American Honda wouldn't do the same thing with Jazz. I'm telling you they did!! Our Fit is nothing but a cheap American watered down replica of the Japanese high quality Jazz. End of story... you have a good looking car by the way and good night..
You Love your car? of course you do. When I was young I had 3 RX-7's and Mazda its 100% Japanese. When I use to put the foot on the pedal it was Arigato, Siyonara for sure and believe me the car was a bad ass. But it was like it still is, 100% Mazda Japanese version with no one gutting it out for the goods. Now let me ask you a question?
Why buy Japanese when you can buy American? Ford, Chevy, and all the rest of the watered down versions of what a car is suppose to be like sold by American Car Makers who by the way are in the cellar as in last place.
American Car Makers!!! Last place, worst quality, vehicles you lease because they die fast and hard.
Now, what makes you think American Honda wouldn't do the same thing with Jazz. I'm telling you they did!! Our Fit is nothing but a cheap American watered down replica of the Japanese high quality Jazz. End of story... you have a good looking car by the way and good night..
#87
07-25-2008, 11:24 PM
puerto rico???
I see, you lowered you car got it painted, got flares. You probably put a bad ass air intake, headers the sport muffler the rims the works it all good!! Your happy I understand you, cause I was like that too.
You Love your car? of course you do. When I was young I had 3 RX-7's and Mazda its 100% Japanese. When I use to put the foot on the pedal it was Arigato, Siyonara for sure and believe me the car was a bad ass. But it was like it still is, 100% Mazda Japanese version with no one gutting it out for the goods. Now let me ask you a question?
Why buy Japanese when you can buy American? Ford, Chevy, and all the rest of the watered down versions of what a car is suppose to be like sold by American Car Makers who by the way are in the cellar as in last place.
American Car Makers!!! Last place, worst quality, vehicles you lease because they die fast and hard.
Now, what makes you think American Honda wouldn't do the same thing with Jazz. I'm telling you they did!! Our Fit is nothing but a cheap American watered down replica of the Japanese high quality Jazz. End of story... you have a good looking car by the way and good night..
You Love your car? of course you do. When I was young I had 3 RX-7's and Mazda its 100% Japanese. When I use to put the foot on the pedal it was Arigato, Siyonara for sure and believe me the car was a bad ass. But it was like it still is, 100% Mazda Japanese version with no one gutting it out for the goods. Now let me ask you a question?
Why buy Japanese when you can buy American? Ford, Chevy, and all the rest of the watered down versions of what a car is suppose to be like sold by American Car Makers who by the way are in the cellar as in last place.
American Car Makers!!! Last place, worst quality, vehicles you lease because they die fast and hard.
Now, what makes you think American Honda wouldn't do the same thing with Jazz. I'm telling you they did!! Our Fit is nothing but a cheap American watered down replica of the Japanese high quality Jazz. End of story... you have a good looking car by the way and good night..
Their weed apparently is quite good, however, since this guy's grasp of reality is obviously impaired.Edit: I'm ashamed for continually getting sucked back into this thread! It's like an intellectual black hole!
Last edited by feddup; 07-26-2008 at 12:11 AM. Reason: addition
#88
07-26-2008, 03:25 PM
This thread is just a giant troll attraction
little FYI for captain "I-hate-el-Americana" up there, my Fit was made in Japan.
#89
07-26-2008, 07:19 PM
Original Security System 08E50-SLN-100 is missing on all fits?
Weed? Drugs? a Kansas City Sissy Boy in a cheap replica of the Jazz.
I do not hate Americana!!! I served 4 active 2 reserve US NAVY. I don't agree with the stupid war that's got us in this high fuel crisis. America's foundation is a solid one with good principles and justice for all. I'm not pissed at anyone in here either. Except for the idiots who voted the same texan in twice. Did you know Bush was born headless and America is so sophisticated in the medical field they put a pumkin as his head filled it up with shit and he's your president. "Amazing American story" You guys sure you got something to be proud of?
I'm convinced that American Car Makers don't want to be # 1 either, and the reason why I say that is because if they really wanted no one could compare. Yes, I said that. I believe in that America, not in idiots like yourselves but in the decent one's.
Now if some of you want to, look up the alarm system. You don't fine. Me I'm hanging out at the UK site, where the real Jazz roams.
I do not hate Americana!!! I served 4 active 2 reserve US NAVY. I don't agree with the stupid war that's got us in this high fuel crisis. America's foundation is a solid one with good principles and justice for all. I'm not pissed at anyone in here either. Except for the idiots who voted the same texan in twice. Did you know Bush was born headless and America is so sophisticated in the medical field they put a pumkin as his head filled it up with shit and he's your president. "Amazing American story" You guys sure you got something to be proud of?
I'm convinced that American Car Makers don't want to be # 1 either, and the reason why I say that is because if they really wanted no one could compare. Yes, I said that. I believe in that America, not in idiots like yourselves but in the decent one's.
Now if some of you want to, look up the alarm system. You don't fine. Me I'm hanging out at the UK site, where the real Jazz roams.
#91
07-26-2008, 08:41 PM
Dude you live in PR, troll where you please, the UK model has dick to do with anything in PR. Yeah right Ford, GM and Chrysler are all wanting to be belly up. Such a silly thing for you to say, who in there right mind is satisfied with a smaller market share each year?
Save your political rants for a different website, we are car people and could care less about politics on this website.
Sell the Fit if you hate it so much, really take action and mention to the Jazz group how awful we are, tell them please. I for one, cannot understand what you write half the time anyway. We all know you are a troll and trolls always check back for an ego boost. You're different though, right?
Save your political rants for a different website, we are car people and could care less about politics on this website.
Sell the Fit if you hate it so much, really take action and mention to the Jazz group how awful we are, tell them please. I for one, cannot understand what you write half the time anyway. We all know you are a troll and trolls always check back for an ego boost. You're different though, right?
#92
07-26-2008, 08:58 PM
Why?
Why do Honda haters buy Hondas? Why do they hang out at Honda forums? Why do they care what Honda owners think? It's just puzzling! Hondas, in general, are well thought out. The marketplace proves it! These freaks should buy Kias or some other Honda wantabe.
#93
07-27-2008, 12:20 AM
no sense of humor
Last edited by gimme; 07-27-2008 at 10:41 AM.
#96
07-27-2008, 12:43 AM
translation?
Does that mean he's a retarded homosexual? By the way there's nothing wrong with those things (they have no choice!) but I'd just like some straightforwardness!
#97
08-30-2008, 11:11 AM
I drove my civic for the last 8 of its 12 years with the headlights (therefore dashlights) on all the time. Even with motor mount inserts that rattled the rest of the dash apart I never blew a gauge cluster bulb. Not one. Doesn't the Fit have electroluminescent lighting like the other new Hondas anyway?
The tall 1-2 shift transition is to allow closer 2-5 shifting. It tends to lug that once as a sacrifice to not bog down the engine or require excessive revving the rest of the shifts once air resistance comes into play.
1995 Civic getting 40 mpg highway. Since that's nigh impossible on the Z6 engine and S20 transmission without a minimum of a chipped ecu and a good lean tune, that car would have to have the 92 hp D15B7, non-vtec, economy cam profile, dual-point fuel injected. It is bolted to a tranny with LONG gearing to get good highway mileage. 2nd gear on that car can exceed highway speed in most states, and I don't know about you but it's a pain in the neck shifting to 3rd at 75 mph when you need to speed up to merge into traffic. I don't own one because I like to do 60 mph faster than the average Geo Metro. Guess what, 5th gen civic had much much higher ground-level emissions than the Fit.
The Fit sacrifices aerodynamics to let you sit up straight. It's simple physics. More air has to be moved out of the way because of the higher roofline. That's why my MT only gets 38 mpg with the cruise at 75 mph whether the ac is on or not. If it were as short as an older civic, without that extra 5 inches or so of height, it would easily break 40 mpg at that speed.
3500 rpm isn't a bad cruising rpm. It's not new for Honda. Even the Civic Si that came out in 1990 spun that fast. Sure it would be nice if it cruised lower, but which would you prefer: having to shift at every large hill with a lower 5th gear ratio or addition of 6th; giving up what little acceleration you have with a lower final drive ratio; or letting it rev a little higher. Myself I'd prefer the option of 6th but Honda decided we don't need the cost or friction of that luxury. As for longevity, I saw a 1995 Honda Civic EX for sale a few months ago with 944,000 miles on it. Know what? It had the original S20 transmission with the .702 5th and 4.25 FD that yields 3400 rpm at the highway speed it was driven at. My old civic had the S40 with identical gearing with the y8 motor, and it was still running as strong as the day I got it with 173k miles on it. When the motor parts are as small as ours -- the connecting rods are as big around as your pinky finger, and the piston is as big around as a coke can -- even with the icky rod-to-stroke ratio of both d-series and L-series blocks, despite the side loading on the cylinder walls and higher piston speeds relative to a long-rod motor the thing still tends to last a long long time before egging the cylinders or wearing out the rings.
Want to make the Fit less squirmy at highway speeds? Employ a little trick I used on the Civic and its loose suspension. Recommended pressure is 32 psi for the Fit, so that's the lowball of what you use. Higher pressure causes instability. Putting 34 psi in the front and 32 psi in the rear all but eliminates that super annoying highway wander you get at factory pressure.
It's not that hard to wash out the wheel wells. If you're really worried take off the rear bumper and clean that area out once a year. It's an annoying Honda thing, but thankfully the vast majority of those places are plastic and cannot deteriorate.
Cargo capacity is set by the spring rate. Spring rate is chosen primarily for when the car is not fully loaded, unless you're talking a truck. You know how bouncy this car can be on even a relatively smooth road, and it's not the fault of the shocks. The spring rate is already high for this light car, and increasing it to increase payload would result in a punishing ride. Sacrifice sucks, don't it?
I know Hondas aren't for everyone. They have a certain feel to them, a certain personality. Fords drive their way. GM cars feel different. The people that design them prefer to concentrate on certain strengths, feel that others can be pared back, and their cars reflect that. If the Honda doesn't fit you, well that's just how it goes. I know I do NOT fit well with a new Civic Si, that is the most uncomfortable car I've ever been in save the Chevy HHR. The next guy may think just the opposite. I know people that are perfectly comfortable in their HHRs. So, don't take this as a "you gotta love Honda because they're awesome" post, because it isn't. If your preference is Mazda (and yes I'm partial to Mazda too) more power to you.
Now for drive by wire... go to a toyota dealer and drive a new Corolla with the new 132 hp 1.8L and manual transmission. When done, get in your Fit and drive. The Fit will feel as if you're on a cable throttle. Personally I've learned to live with it to the point I don't even notice it anymore, maybe because I got tired of fine-tuning the cruise throttle cable on the Civic. Never did get it just right.
The tall 1-2 shift transition is to allow closer 2-5 shifting. It tends to lug that once as a sacrifice to not bog down the engine or require excessive revving the rest of the shifts once air resistance comes into play.
1995 Civic getting 40 mpg highway. Since that's nigh impossible on the Z6 engine and S20 transmission without a minimum of a chipped ecu and a good lean tune, that car would have to have the 92 hp D15B7, non-vtec, economy cam profile, dual-point fuel injected. It is bolted to a tranny with LONG gearing to get good highway mileage. 2nd gear on that car can exceed highway speed in most states, and I don't know about you but it's a pain in the neck shifting to 3rd at 75 mph when you need to speed up to merge into traffic. I don't own one because I like to do 60 mph faster than the average Geo Metro. Guess what, 5th gen civic had much much higher ground-level emissions than the Fit.
The Fit sacrifices aerodynamics to let you sit up straight. It's simple physics. More air has to be moved out of the way because of the higher roofline. That's why my MT only gets 38 mpg with the cruise at 75 mph whether the ac is on or not. If it were as short as an older civic, without that extra 5 inches or so of height, it would easily break 40 mpg at that speed.
3500 rpm isn't a bad cruising rpm. It's not new for Honda. Even the Civic Si that came out in 1990 spun that fast. Sure it would be nice if it cruised lower, but which would you prefer: having to shift at every large hill with a lower 5th gear ratio or addition of 6th; giving up what little acceleration you have with a lower final drive ratio; or letting it rev a little higher. Myself I'd prefer the option of 6th but Honda decided we don't need the cost or friction of that luxury. As for longevity, I saw a 1995 Honda Civic EX for sale a few months ago with 944,000 miles on it. Know what? It had the original S20 transmission with the .702 5th and 4.25 FD that yields 3400 rpm at the highway speed it was driven at. My old civic had the S40 with identical gearing with the y8 motor, and it was still running as strong as the day I got it with 173k miles on it. When the motor parts are as small as ours -- the connecting rods are as big around as your pinky finger, and the piston is as big around as a coke can -- even with the icky rod-to-stroke ratio of both d-series and L-series blocks, despite the side loading on the cylinder walls and higher piston speeds relative to a long-rod motor the thing still tends to last a long long time before egging the cylinders or wearing out the rings.
Want to make the Fit less squirmy at highway speeds? Employ a little trick I used on the Civic and its loose suspension. Recommended pressure is 32 psi for the Fit, so that's the lowball of what you use. Higher pressure causes instability. Putting 34 psi in the front and 32 psi in the rear all but eliminates that super annoying highway wander you get at factory pressure.
It's not that hard to wash out the wheel wells. If you're really worried take off the rear bumper and clean that area out once a year. It's an annoying Honda thing, but thankfully the vast majority of those places are plastic and cannot deteriorate.
Cargo capacity is set by the spring rate. Spring rate is chosen primarily for when the car is not fully loaded, unless you're talking a truck. You know how bouncy this car can be on even a relatively smooth road, and it's not the fault of the shocks. The spring rate is already high for this light car, and increasing it to increase payload would result in a punishing ride. Sacrifice sucks, don't it?
I know Hondas aren't for everyone. They have a certain feel to them, a certain personality. Fords drive their way. GM cars feel different. The people that design them prefer to concentrate on certain strengths, feel that others can be pared back, and their cars reflect that. If the Honda doesn't fit you, well that's just how it goes. I know I do NOT fit well with a new Civic Si, that is the most uncomfortable car I've ever been in save the Chevy HHR. The next guy may think just the opposite. I know people that are perfectly comfortable in their HHRs. So, don't take this as a "you gotta love Honda because they're awesome" post, because it isn't. If your preference is Mazda (and yes I'm partial to Mazda too) more power to you.
Now for drive by wire... go to a toyota dealer and drive a new Corolla with the new 132 hp 1.8L and manual transmission. When done, get in your Fit and drive. The Fit will feel as if you're on a cable throttle. Personally I've learned to live with it to the point I don't even notice it anymore, maybe because I got tired of fine-tuning the cruise throttle cable on the Civic. Never did get it just right.
#98
09-01-2008, 05:15 PM
Well I read the first post all the way through and while I dont agree with the OP on many points the one that really got me was the lack of visibility. To me this was the one stand out feature that really amazed me. I cannot think of a car with better visibility then the fit.
#99
09-02-2008, 01:00 AM
I agree with some of what he says. Especially the part about gas mileage. My 2000 civic si when it had the stock b16 got around 32mpg where my fit is doing an average of 240miles per tank (about 26mpg). The fit cost me 15k out the door with the options I wanted where the si cost me 16.2k out the door new in 2000....im rather disappointed in honda with the fit.
Overpriced underpowered and doesnt handle well at all.
Also my 03 accord v6 averages 30mpg....what is wrong with the fit?
Overpriced underpowered and doesnt handle well at all.
Also my 03 accord v6 averages 30mpg....what is wrong with the fit?
#100
09-02-2008, 01:41 AM
Dare I suggest you might be what is wrong? 
My fit has about a two dozen mods that should be affecting my MPG in a bad way, it is and is loaded with one kind of gear or another at almost all times, 50lbs worth of hitch & rack on the back without any bikes... I don't know how you are getting such low MPG. I can't get under 30mpg if I try... and by try I actually mean track days and pedal stomping madness in city traffic. How are you people getting 26mpg???
My regular city mileage is about 33-35mpg easily, I can get all the way up to 45mpg on the highway. I don't do hypermiling and I am not exactly easy on the throttle either.
Overpriced and does not handle well? I smell a funk, stinks like Troll...
My fit has about a two dozen mods that should be affecting my MPG in a bad way, it is and is loaded with one kind of gear or another at almost all times, 50lbs worth of hitch & rack on the back without any bikes... I don't know how you are getting such low MPG. I can't get under 30mpg if I try... and by try I actually mean track days and pedal stomping madness in city traffic. How are you people getting 26mpg???
My regular city mileage is about 33-35mpg easily, I can get all the way up to 45mpg on the highway. I don't do hypermiling and I am not exactly easy on the throttle either.
Overpriced and does not handle well? I smell a funk, stinks like Troll...
Last edited by Sugarphreak; 09-02-2008 at 01:44 AM.