fit wins car and driver comparison
#3
03-26-2006, 07:21 PM
Yeah,
Its the May issue of Car and Driver, The Fit was rated #1 over all and tied for Fastest 0-60 time of 8.7 seconds and best handling.
Comparison Test Review: Dodge Caliber SE vs. Honda Fit Sport vs. Hyundai Accent GLS vs. Kia Rio5 SX vs. Nissan Versa 1.8SL vs. Suzuki Reno vs. Toyota Yaris S
$15,000 Cheap Skates: Seven economobiles seek fame (but no one’s fortune) on the trail of seven presidents from Ohio.
BY JOHN PHILLIPS
BY AARON KILEY
May 2006
Our goal was to drop monofilament line and sharpened hook into the vehicular stream, then wait to see how many bottom feeders would rise to the bait. Actually, “bottom feeders” proved an unfair descriptor. We’re talkin’ $15,000 entry-level economobiles here, a niche recently stirred into vibrancy by the threat of three-dollar fuel. What we learned is that this species is no longer the domain of the “penalty box,” a term previously applied to the desperate duds of yore.
Remember the Yugo?
Today, there exist econoboxes aplenty with base prices in the $15,000 region, including the Chevy Cobalt, Ford Focus, and Honda Civic. Properly equipped, though, those models can easily empty wallets to the tune of 18 grand. And the truth is, we were more curious about the extra-petite newcomers — the Dodge Caliber, the Honda Fit, the Nissan Versa, and the Toyota Yaris. We asked for a new Aveo sedan, but Chevy says it won’t be ready for months. Then we fleshed out our school of guppies with more familiar fish — the Suzuki Reno, the Hyundai Accent, and the Kia Rio.
With that, we had an artful group of seven, perfect for touring the birthplaces of the seven Presidents who hail from Ohio. This 1000-mile clockwise trek, during which our contestants averaged an honorable 31 mpg, led us across the top of the state and down through the steel triangle of Niles, Youngstown, and Akron. We raced past the capitol in Columbus, then along the muddy Ohio River from Portsmouth to Cincinnati. And then we beat it north, in a straight shot paralleling the Indiana border. In all, we spent four days zinging front-drive inline-fours connected to manual transmissions, stopping every few hours to explain ourselves to not-very-amused museum curators with blue hair.
Suzuki Reno
Seventh Place
The Suzuki Reno is actually a rebadged Daewoo, but at least it possesses one jet-set attribute: styling by Italdesign-Giugiaro. Whether the Reno was named after a crusty city in western Nevada or after a former attorney general is unclear, but the car remains largely flavorless. We carped about its gooey shifter, which felt like a hemp rope attached to plastic forks. Ditto the lifeless steering, which tracked okay but never telegraphed road surfaces, nor did it reveal much about the poor front Kumhos, which were yowling by the time we reached the end of each President’s driveway. In the Reno’s favor were swift performance (best top-gear acceleration, and it tied the Fit for quickest sprint to 60 mph), vast suspension travel, and a pillowy ride. The downside was dive, squat, roll, yaw — an encyclopedia of body motions.
This Suzuki too vociferously advertised its modest roots, from the cheap rubber accordion surrounding its wiper and turn-signal stalks, to the tinkling of pebbles striking its undercarriage, to the six shades of gray in its cockpit. What’s more, the Reno tied for the worst braking and greatest engine NVH.
At least it was fitted with a wide, firm front seat, with a long cushion and superb adjustability. The commodious driver’s footwell was distinguished by a dead pedal both fat and perfectly positioned. And the Reno was also quick, with a flexible powertrain that minimized the need to row its ropy shifter. Otherwise, the Reno deserves a place on airport rental lots, where it will serve reliably and economically and be forgotten by check-in.
Dodge Caliber SE
Sixth Place
The Caliber is the longest, widest, and heaviest vehicle in this comparo, but its 1.8-liter engine (two larger sizes are available) makes the most power. What’s more, the Caliber may be the most macho economobile extant, what with its upright, cubist deportment, implying sport-utishness. But as our test wore on, the Caliber wore thin. For starters, the beltline is high and the windshield is perched way out on the hood. Match that with a too-low driver’s seat and you feel like you’re sitting in a tub. We judged the Caliber’s interior surfaces to be a little too cheap and hard, and its high-effort shifter required a two-step jog from second to third and from fourth to fifth.
All that power didn’t win us over, either. There’s torque steer and axle tramp in hard launches, helped not at all by abrupt clutch takeup. It took 9.7 seconds to achieve 60 mph, 1.3 seconds longer than the last manual-trans Neon we tested. And the engine edges into thrashiness at high revs, the noisiest at WOT. We’d tell you exactly where the racket began, but our Caliber had no tach.
On our handling loop, the Caliber felt heavy and clumsy, with ambiguous steering that required midcourse corrections. It wasn’t until day four that we could predict how its dampers would react to Ohio’s expansion joints and frost heaves. The Caliber was slowest through our lane-change test.
This Dodge does offer one of the most spacious back seats, although with three adults back there, hump boy must contend with a driveshaft tunnel — there for four-wheel-drive versions. With the rear seats folded, the Caliber’s cargo area proved plentiful, more spacious than the Suzuki’s.
Dodge hopes to sell the Caliber in 98 countries. But as it stands, this sharp-edged box feels like it’s seven-eighths of the way through its development — as if it needs more Caliberation.
Hyundai Accent GLS
Fith Place
If you haven’t sampled this third-gen Accent, give it a whirl. Its wheelbase has grown 2.3 inches and its track has been widened 1.4 inches. The Accent now noses down interstates with far more authority, and the new driver’s seat — raised two inches and adjustable eight ways — means that freeway slogs are less wearing. Sightlines in all directions are excellent. Moreover, the 1.6-liter twin-cam now features variable valve timing, which has broadened the power band. Let out the smooth clutch and the Accent snaps to attention right off idle. That idle, by the by, was the quietest in this group, and the Accent was quietest at a 70-mph cruise, too.
Like the Suzuki, the Hyundai was hobbled by a sloppy shifter, and it has been tuned first and foremost for a creamy ride. The ride earned praise until we reached the hills, where the springs went into full oingo-boingo mode in Turn One and hadn’t settled by the onset of Turn Two.
Although we wished for a firmer brake pedal, the Accent stopped in a superb 167 feet, and ABS comes standard. The IP was clean and simple, with legible white-on-black gauges. And the Accent boasted the lowest base price in this group.
Thing is, if you like this sedan, you should know that it works far better as a five-door hatch. (See the Kia Rio5 SX.)
Toyota Yaris S
Fourth Place
For years, the Yaris has earned raves overseas, winning 2000 Car of the Year honors in Europe and Japan. Since then, it has benefited from a longer and wider platform, in part to satisfy U.S. tastes. And any replacement for the Echo, which was about as exciting as mud, is fine by us.
In this bunch, the Yaris was the lightest contender and felt like it, especially in crosswinds. Although its little 1.5-liter engine produced the least power and torque, the Yaris’s 0-to-60 time was still a half-second quicker than our group’s average. Its brake pedal came suddenly to life halfway through its travel, but any 166-foot stop from 70 mph is terrific. And the Yaris’s lightness paid off not only in errand-running agility but also in economy — 36 mpg, the best we observed.
So why did it finish midpack? First, the Yaris is tiny, offering the most cramped back seat (for both two or three riders) and a front seat whose cushion is too short, leaving thighs unsupported. Second, its body rolls and wallows — not as badly as the Suzuki’s or the Hyundai’s, but you’re ever aware of the motions. Third, its steering, impressively light in town, is overassisted at speed and directional stability suffers — you’ll want to keep both hands on the wheel above 55 mph. All our testers disliked the center-mounted gauge cluster.
The Yaris is refined and offers an accurate shifter, a rarity in this class. But as new Toyotas go, it’s less a home run than a nice little bunt down the third-base line.
Kia Rio5 SX
Third Place
A Kia beats a Toyota? What’s next, Dick Cheney mistakes a lawyer for a quail?
The Rio and the Accent share the same drivetrain and platform, and thus should have felt like the Doublemint twins. They did not. Although they have identical wheelbases, the Kia’s body is 10.4 inches shorter, it benefits from tiny suspension tweaks, and it rides on Hankooks instead of Kumhos. Every tester felt the difference. The Rio tracked better than the Accent, offered better on-center feel, was slightly less sensitive to crosswinds, and its struts and springs mustered a modicum of discipline in the snaky byways above U.S. Grant’s cottage — all without compromising ride.
At the test track, we proved we weren’t hallucinating: The Kia’s skidpad grip surpassed the Hyundai’s, and the Rio5 zipped through the lane change 1.3 mph faster. What’s more, the Kia’s braking distances were the shortest in this comparo.
We even preferred the upstart’s styling, and its cockpit benefits from subtle dabs of more youthful textures and shades. Small differences, to be sure, but in this class you grab sportiness wherever it’s offered.
What the Kia couldn’t do was change gears any less awkwardly than the Hyundai. What is it with the shifters in this group? How much can a decent linkage add to the overall price? Thirty bucks? The Rio5 is a five-door hatch and thus proved far more practical than the Accent sedan. With its seats folded, the Kia eats an amazing 50 cubic feet of groceries. But it mostly brushed aside its sibling for this
Nissan Versa 1.8SL
Second Place
The Versa is known as the Tiida elsewhere in the world and arrives in the U.S. first as a hatchback, assembled in the same Mexican plant that builds our Sentra. A Versa sedan follows later this year. [This is true — Ed.] It’s intended for gamblers and prostitutes and will be called the Vice Versa. [This is not — Ed.]
On the road, what you notice first about the Versa is that it feels large, “like a real car,” noted one driver. It’s as tall as the Dodge, in fact, with a commanding view forward. Its shifter proved as accurate as the Toyota’s, but not the Honda’s. The light steering was informative, and the wheel was fat and soft. And it was the lone contestant here to offer six gears, making the most of the power band.
Our complaints were few. The front footwells were narrow, and the front seats were flat, with short cushions. The door panels so intruded on the sides of the seats that the recline levers had to be inconveniently placed under the center armrest. The all-black center stack could use whiter, more legible markings. And someone needs to fiddle with the throttle calibration so the engine doesn’t hang onto revs so long.
Nonetheless, at least two of us judged the Versa the best all-around value here. It can’t match the Honda’s overt sportiness, but its ride-and-handling trade-off may be just the ticket for buyers mainly interested in commuting and errand hopping. Moreover, the Versa won our back-seat test, with perfect scores for two or three riders. It proved an exemplar of packaging efficiency — with the rear seats folded, it tied with the Rio5 for greatest cargo capacity. And it came standard with a buffet of amenities. That makes it, uh, Versa-tile.
Honda Fit Sport
First Place
The Fit is sold in more than 70 countries and is known in Europe as the Jazz. It debuts at C/D in typical Honda show-off fashion, winning by 25 points — a cakewalk.
Our little red Fit was the quickest to 60 mph (tied with the Reno) and the quickest in the quarter-mile yet offered the least engine NVH and the second-best observed fuel economy. It came equipped with the most supportive seats, the most expensive-looking interior, an Acura-grade gauge cluster, and the ergonomics of an Accord.
What truly set the Fit apart was its handling — not a pretense of handling but the real deal, with springs and struts that allowed one gentle rebound and no more, the only car here that felt happy storming the switchbacks. We later confirmed this when the Fit sailed through our lane-change test 6 mph faster than anything else here — faster, in fact, than a Corvette Z06.
Abetting the handling was linear, direct steering — you could pick out a pebble at an apex and reliably place the Fit’s inside-front wheel directly atop it — a shifter that Hyundai and Suzuki would do well to copy, and pedals for real heel-and-toeing.
Despite its midget proportions — the least width and length, riding on the shortest wheelbase — the Fit will swallow an amazing 42 cubic feet of household miscellany when its rear seats are toppled. And they fold quite cleverly, without removing the headrests, into a deep well, making the cargo floor as flat as a trailer park.
We wish the Fit had a true dead pedal and that its rear-three-quarter visibility were better. Otherwise, we elect it president of the economobiles. Unlike Ohio’s Presidents, this one is alive. Very alive.
Highs: Overtly sporty handling, classy interior, quick-witted in all its moves.
Lows: Mediocre rear-three-quarter visibility, no dead pedal.
The Verdict: The go-kart of economobiles.
Its the May issue of Car and Driver, The Fit was rated #1 over all and tied for Fastest 0-60 time of 8.7 seconds and best handling.
Comparison Test Review: Dodge Caliber SE vs. Honda Fit Sport vs. Hyundai Accent GLS vs. Kia Rio5 SX vs. Nissan Versa 1.8SL vs. Suzuki Reno vs. Toyota Yaris S
$15,000 Cheap Skates: Seven economobiles seek fame (but no one’s fortune) on the trail of seven presidents from Ohio.
BY JOHN PHILLIPS
BY AARON KILEY
May 2006
Our goal was to drop monofilament line and sharpened hook into the vehicular stream, then wait to see how many bottom feeders would rise to the bait. Actually, “bottom feeders” proved an unfair descriptor. We’re talkin’ $15,000 entry-level economobiles here, a niche recently stirred into vibrancy by the threat of three-dollar fuel. What we learned is that this species is no longer the domain of the “penalty box,” a term previously applied to the desperate duds of yore.
Remember the Yugo?
Today, there exist econoboxes aplenty with base prices in the $15,000 region, including the Chevy Cobalt, Ford Focus, and Honda Civic. Properly equipped, though, those models can easily empty wallets to the tune of 18 grand. And the truth is, we were more curious about the extra-petite newcomers — the Dodge Caliber, the Honda Fit, the Nissan Versa, and the Toyota Yaris. We asked for a new Aveo sedan, but Chevy says it won’t be ready for months. Then we fleshed out our school of guppies with more familiar fish — the Suzuki Reno, the Hyundai Accent, and the Kia Rio.
With that, we had an artful group of seven, perfect for touring the birthplaces of the seven Presidents who hail from Ohio. This 1000-mile clockwise trek, during which our contestants averaged an honorable 31 mpg, led us across the top of the state and down through the steel triangle of Niles, Youngstown, and Akron. We raced past the capitol in Columbus, then along the muddy Ohio River from Portsmouth to Cincinnati. And then we beat it north, in a straight shot paralleling the Indiana border. In all, we spent four days zinging front-drive inline-fours connected to manual transmissions, stopping every few hours to explain ourselves to not-very-amused museum curators with blue hair.
Suzuki Reno
Seventh Place
The Suzuki Reno is actually a rebadged Daewoo, but at least it possesses one jet-set attribute: styling by Italdesign-Giugiaro. Whether the Reno was named after a crusty city in western Nevada or after a former attorney general is unclear, but the car remains largely flavorless. We carped about its gooey shifter, which felt like a hemp rope attached to plastic forks. Ditto the lifeless steering, which tracked okay but never telegraphed road surfaces, nor did it reveal much about the poor front Kumhos, which were yowling by the time we reached the end of each President’s driveway. In the Reno’s favor were swift performance (best top-gear acceleration, and it tied the Fit for quickest sprint to 60 mph), vast suspension travel, and a pillowy ride. The downside was dive, squat, roll, yaw — an encyclopedia of body motions.
This Suzuki too vociferously advertised its modest roots, from the cheap rubber accordion surrounding its wiper and turn-signal stalks, to the tinkling of pebbles striking its undercarriage, to the six shades of gray in its cockpit. What’s more, the Reno tied for the worst braking and greatest engine NVH.
At least it was fitted with a wide, firm front seat, with a long cushion and superb adjustability. The commodious driver’s footwell was distinguished by a dead pedal both fat and perfectly positioned. And the Reno was also quick, with a flexible powertrain that minimized the need to row its ropy shifter. Otherwise, the Reno deserves a place on airport rental lots, where it will serve reliably and economically and be forgotten by check-in.
Dodge Caliber SE
The Caliber is the longest, widest, and heaviest vehicle in this comparo, but its 1.8-liter engine (two larger sizes are available) makes the most power. What’s more, the Caliber may be the most macho economobile extant, what with its upright, cubist deportment, implying sport-utishness. But as our test wore on, the Caliber wore thin. For starters, the beltline is high and the windshield is perched way out on the hood. Match that with a too-low driver’s seat and you feel like you’re sitting in a tub. We judged the Caliber’s interior surfaces to be a little too cheap and hard, and its high-effort shifter required a two-step jog from second to third and from fourth to fifth.
All that power didn’t win us over, either. There’s torque steer and axle tramp in hard launches, helped not at all by abrupt clutch takeup. It took 9.7 seconds to achieve 60 mph, 1.3 seconds longer than the last manual-trans Neon we tested. And the engine edges into thrashiness at high revs, the noisiest at WOT. We’d tell you exactly where the racket began, but our Caliber had no tach.
On our handling loop, the Caliber felt heavy and clumsy, with ambiguous steering that required midcourse corrections. It wasn’t until day four that we could predict how its dampers would react to Ohio’s expansion joints and frost heaves. The Caliber was slowest through our lane-change test.
This Dodge does offer one of the most spacious back seats, although with three adults back there, hump boy must contend with a driveshaft tunnel — there for four-wheel-drive versions. With the rear seats folded, the Caliber’s cargo area proved plentiful, more spacious than the Suzuki’s.
Dodge hopes to sell the Caliber in 98 countries. But as it stands, this sharp-edged box feels like it’s seven-eighths of the way through its development — as if it needs more Caliberation.
Hyundai Accent GLS
Fith Place
If you haven’t sampled this third-gen Accent, give it a whirl. Its wheelbase has grown 2.3 inches and its track has been widened 1.4 inches. The Accent now noses down interstates with far more authority, and the new driver’s seat — raised two inches and adjustable eight ways — means that freeway slogs are less wearing. Sightlines in all directions are excellent. Moreover, the 1.6-liter twin-cam now features variable valve timing, which has broadened the power band. Let out the smooth clutch and the Accent snaps to attention right off idle. That idle, by the by, was the quietest in this group, and the Accent was quietest at a 70-mph cruise, too.
Like the Suzuki, the Hyundai was hobbled by a sloppy shifter, and it has been tuned first and foremost for a creamy ride. The ride earned praise until we reached the hills, where the springs went into full oingo-boingo mode in Turn One and hadn’t settled by the onset of Turn Two.
Although we wished for a firmer brake pedal, the Accent stopped in a superb 167 feet, and ABS comes standard. The IP was clean and simple, with legible white-on-black gauges. And the Accent boasted the lowest base price in this group.
Thing is, if you like this sedan, you should know that it works far better as a five-door hatch. (See the Kia Rio5 SX.)
Toyota Yaris S
Fourth Place
For years, the Yaris has earned raves overseas, winning 2000 Car of the Year honors in Europe and Japan. Since then, it has benefited from a longer and wider platform, in part to satisfy U.S. tastes. And any replacement for the Echo, which was about as exciting as mud, is fine by us.
In this bunch, the Yaris was the lightest contender and felt like it, especially in crosswinds. Although its little 1.5-liter engine produced the least power and torque, the Yaris’s 0-to-60 time was still a half-second quicker than our group’s average. Its brake pedal came suddenly to life halfway through its travel, but any 166-foot stop from 70 mph is terrific. And the Yaris’s lightness paid off not only in errand-running agility but also in economy — 36 mpg, the best we observed.
So why did it finish midpack? First, the Yaris is tiny, offering the most cramped back seat (for both two or three riders) and a front seat whose cushion is too short, leaving thighs unsupported. Second, its body rolls and wallows — not as badly as the Suzuki’s or the Hyundai’s, but you’re ever aware of the motions. Third, its steering, impressively light in town, is overassisted at speed and directional stability suffers — you’ll want to keep both hands on the wheel above 55 mph. All our testers disliked the center-mounted gauge cluster.
The Yaris is refined and offers an accurate shifter, a rarity in this class. But as new Toyotas go, it’s less a home run than a nice little bunt down the third-base line.
Kia Rio5 SX
Third Place
A Kia beats a Toyota? What’s next, Dick Cheney mistakes a lawyer for a quail?
The Rio and the Accent share the same drivetrain and platform, and thus should have felt like the Doublemint twins. They did not. Although they have identical wheelbases, the Kia’s body is 10.4 inches shorter, it benefits from tiny suspension tweaks, and it rides on Hankooks instead of Kumhos. Every tester felt the difference. The Rio tracked better than the Accent, offered better on-center feel, was slightly less sensitive to crosswinds, and its struts and springs mustered a modicum of discipline in the snaky byways above U.S. Grant’s cottage — all without compromising ride.
At the test track, we proved we weren’t hallucinating: The Kia’s skidpad grip surpassed the Hyundai’s, and the Rio5 zipped through the lane change 1.3 mph faster. What’s more, the Kia’s braking distances were the shortest in this comparo.
We even preferred the upstart’s styling, and its cockpit benefits from subtle dabs of more youthful textures and shades. Small differences, to be sure, but in this class you grab sportiness wherever it’s offered.
What the Kia couldn’t do was change gears any less awkwardly than the Hyundai. What is it with the shifters in this group? How much can a decent linkage add to the overall price? Thirty bucks? The Rio5 is a five-door hatch and thus proved far more practical than the Accent sedan. With its seats folded, the Kia eats an amazing 50 cubic feet of groceries. But it mostly brushed aside its sibling for this
Nissan Versa 1.8SL
Second Place
The Versa is known as the Tiida elsewhere in the world and arrives in the U.S. first as a hatchback, assembled in the same Mexican plant that builds our Sentra. A Versa sedan follows later this year. [This is true — Ed.] It’s intended for gamblers and prostitutes and will be called the Vice Versa. [This is not — Ed.]
On the road, what you notice first about the Versa is that it feels large, “like a real car,” noted one driver. It’s as tall as the Dodge, in fact, with a commanding view forward. Its shifter proved as accurate as the Toyota’s, but not the Honda’s. The light steering was informative, and the wheel was fat and soft. And it was the lone contestant here to offer six gears, making the most of the power band.
Our complaints were few. The front footwells were narrow, and the front seats were flat, with short cushions. The door panels so intruded on the sides of the seats that the recline levers had to be inconveniently placed under the center armrest. The all-black center stack could use whiter, more legible markings. And someone needs to fiddle with the throttle calibration so the engine doesn’t hang onto revs so long.
Nonetheless, at least two of us judged the Versa the best all-around value here. It can’t match the Honda’s overt sportiness, but its ride-and-handling trade-off may be just the ticket for buyers mainly interested in commuting and errand hopping. Moreover, the Versa won our back-seat test, with perfect scores for two or three riders. It proved an exemplar of packaging efficiency — with the rear seats folded, it tied with the Rio5 for greatest cargo capacity. And it came standard with a buffet of amenities. That makes it, uh, Versa-tile.
Honda Fit Sport
First Place
The Fit is sold in more than 70 countries and is known in Europe as the Jazz. It debuts at C/D in typical Honda show-off fashion, winning by 25 points — a cakewalk.
Our little red Fit was the quickest to 60 mph (tied with the Reno) and the quickest in the quarter-mile yet offered the least engine NVH and the second-best observed fuel economy. It came equipped with the most supportive seats, the most expensive-looking interior, an Acura-grade gauge cluster, and the ergonomics of an Accord.
What truly set the Fit apart was its handling — not a pretense of handling but the real deal, with springs and struts that allowed one gentle rebound and no more, the only car here that felt happy storming the switchbacks. We later confirmed this when the Fit sailed through our lane-change test 6 mph faster than anything else here — faster, in fact, than a Corvette Z06.
Abetting the handling was linear, direct steering — you could pick out a pebble at an apex and reliably place the Fit’s inside-front wheel directly atop it — a shifter that Hyundai and Suzuki would do well to copy, and pedals for real heel-and-toeing.
Despite its midget proportions — the least width and length, riding on the shortest wheelbase — the Fit will swallow an amazing 42 cubic feet of household miscellany when its rear seats are toppled. And they fold quite cleverly, without removing the headrests, into a deep well, making the cargo floor as flat as a trailer park.
We wish the Fit had a true dead pedal and that its rear-three-quarter visibility were better. Otherwise, we elect it president of the economobiles. Unlike Ohio’s Presidents, this one is alive. Very alive.
Highs: Overtly sporty handling, classy interior, quick-witted in all its moves.
Lows: Mediocre rear-three-quarter visibility, no dead pedal.
The Verdict: The go-kart of economobiles.
Last edited by Dojo; 04-19-2006 at 02:03 PM.
#6
03-26-2006, 08:29 PM
Sorry,
It tied the Suzuki Reno for fastest 0-60 time, but the Suzuki only returned 28 mpg while the Fit averaged 35mpg just under the Toyota Yaris avg of 36 mpg.
The Fit Sport:
Highs: Overtly Sporty Handling, Classy interior, quick witted in all its moves.
Lows: Mediocre rear-three-quarter visibility, no dead pedal.
Verdict: The go kart of economobiles.
My favorite quote" What truley set the Fit apart was its handling-Not a pretense of handling but the real deal, with springs and struts that allowed one gentle rebound and no more, the only car here that felt happy storming the switchback. We later confirmed this when the Fit sailed through our lane change test 6 mph faster than anything else here-faster in fact, than a Corvette Z06."
It tied the Suzuki Reno for fastest 0-60 time, but the Suzuki only returned 28 mpg while the Fit averaged 35mpg just under the Toyota Yaris avg of 36 mpg.
The Fit Sport:
Highs: Overtly Sporty Handling, Classy interior, quick witted in all its moves.
Lows: Mediocre rear-three-quarter visibility, no dead pedal.
Verdict: The go kart of economobiles.
My favorite quote" What truley set the Fit apart was its handling-Not a pretense of handling but the real deal, with springs and struts that allowed one gentle rebound and no more, the only car here that felt happy storming the switchback. We later confirmed this when the Fit sailed through our lane change test 6 mph faster than anything else here-faster in fact, than a Corvette Z06."
Last edited by Dojo; 04-19-2006 at 02:11 PM.
#11
03-26-2006, 10:27 PM
We later confirmed this when the Fit sailed through our lane change test 6 mph faster than anything else here-faster in fact, than a Corvette Z06.
#12
03-27-2006, 04:46 PM
I just don't get it. Why does everyone compare the Fit to the Yaris and not the xA? Hmmm ... maybe I'll write a letter to C&D. I mean, I know the Yaris is new, but it, especially the sedan, isn't even a hatch, and the hatchback version is only a two-door. The xA is much more similar than the Yaris.
#13
03-27-2006, 05:00 PM
Originally Posted by FaceYogurt
This is interesting. I need to get a copy of C&D to get the details of this lane change test.
#14
03-27-2006, 06:46 PM
Someone that spends his life on FitFreak.net
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Ottawa, Ontario
Posts: 1,110
Originally Posted by Ginza Wagon
I just don't get it. Why does everyone compare the Fit to the Yaris and not the xA? Hmmm ... maybe I'll write a letter to C&D. I mean, I know the Yaris is new, but it, especially the sedan, isn't even a hatch, and the hatchback version is only a two-door. The xA is much more similar than the Yaris.
#16
03-28-2006, 11:42 PM
I went to the library and read that article. I thought it was interesting that the Fit was the quickest car in the 1/4 mile testing - went 16.7 at 81 MPH, if I remember right. I was surprised it went 16 seconds, thought it would only go 17 seconds. When I had my 86 Civic Si, it had the same size engine, but only 91 HP. The Fit has roughly 20 more HP, and it's a lot quicker than my old Si. According to the article, the Fit just does everything better than the other cars and that's why it won the competition. They didn't care for the Yaris, and the Nissan was 2nd. Thought that was interesting. I still wanna see the Xa Vs Fit; but now I think the Fit is faster.
#17
03-29-2006, 01:36 AM
I'll have to pick that article up. If anyone finds any other well written reviews please let the community here know. I really like getting a good feel of what everyone thinks before I go and get blinded by the shiny new car.
#18
03-29-2006, 01:43 AM
Someone that spends his life on FitFreak.net
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: san francisco, ca, USA
Posts: 1,092
How do u know if its the "may" issue? i went to grocery store and they had a magazine and the only hint which issue it was was "remove from stands after june XX". I don't think this was the may issue b/c i didnt' find this section.
#19
03-29-2006, 09:14 AM
I went to the library and read that article. I thought it was interesting that the Fit was the quickest car in the 1/4 mile testing - went 16.7 at 81 MPH, if I remember right. I was surprised it went 16 seconds, thought it would only go 17 seconds. When I had my 86 Civic Si, it had the same size engine, but only 91 HP. The Fit has roughly 20 more HP, and it's a lot quicker than my old Si. According to the article, the Fit just does everything better than the other cars and that's why it won the competition. They didn't care for the Yaris, and the Nissan was 2nd. Thought that was interesting. I still wanna see the Xa Vs Fit; but now I think the Fit is faster.
#20
03-29-2006, 09:35 AM
I think people would notice the difference between a car that ran 16.7 Vs 17.0. At the drag strip, the rule of thumb is that .10 of a second equals one car length, so in a race between the 17.0 second car and the 16.7 car, you'd see about a 3 car length difference. It would be enough of a difference where I think you'd be able to feel the extra power.
The article I read was in the May 2006 issue of Car & Driver. I looked at the cover to be sure it was the right article. They basically took the 7 cars on a tour of the state of Ohio, and measured gas mileage, acceleration, etc etc. The new Dodge Caliber was next to last, and their comment was that it was 7/8 finished. heh
The Fit was the most non-car like of the bunch. When you see all the photos, the Fit almost seems out of place, because it looks like a mini-mini van, not a car. The stubby hood contributes to that, I think.
The article I read was in the May 2006 issue of Car & Driver. I looked at the cover to be sure it was the right article. They basically took the 7 cars on a tour of the state of Ohio, and measured gas mileage, acceleration, etc etc. The new Dodge Caliber was next to last, and their comment was that it was 7/8 finished. heh
The Fit was the most non-car like of the bunch. When you see all the photos, the Fit almost seems out of place, because it looks like a mini-mini van, not a car. The stubby hood contributes to that, I think.