Hello, I'm thinking of buying a 2011 Auto Fit in the next few weeks. I'm going to trade in my Tacoma. I drive a grip load of miles (60k/yr). So I'm mainly looking for a reliable car with good gas mileage and decent room in the back. The only modification i plan on doing is an Intake. I allready have my 98 Eclipse GSX that i've highly modified. So, My delema is of which model to get. The Base or Sport. So i have a couple questions.

1: Is the Sport really worth the extra $$?

2: I noticed the Base model gets an extra 3mpg over the sport.
Is that true?

3: Should i expect any issues for the first 100k miles?


Just to let you know. I do all my own maintance and i have a friend that is a mechanic at a Honda dealership.



Thank You

 

1 - whether or not it is worth it, is entirely up to you. The Sport comes with an integrated rear sway bar (its in the torsion beam). Fatter tires, bigger but lighter wheels. Fog lamps in a different style bumper from base, along with added side skirts. But really, aside from the RSB, it's mostly cosmetic. You can always add them to a base. Again, up to you.

I got a Sport... and it is worth it for me.

2 - I can't comment on the MPG difference, other than the Sport is heavier.

3 - Its a Honda, it touts not having any maintenance issues for 100k. So, aside from routine maintenance (oil changes, etc)... shouldn't expect anything.

 

Personally, for the 2011, I don't think so. They really upgraded the base model for 2011, and the only major differences is that the Sport Auto has body kit (which I don't even like), fog lights, paddle shifters. The 2011 Base now has remote entry, cruise control.

It's not 3mpg. It's 28/35 vs 27/33 for Autos (1 to 2 mpg diff). That also confused me quite a bit, since the Base and Sport have the same engine and weight. What I read was that the Base Auto has a more conservative shifting algorithm. That makes sense since the Base Manual vs Auto Manual is the exact same.

 

Buckyfit, I was figuring the difference on mpg was because the base has smaller wheels. So less rotaional mass = better mpg. Also the base weighs a bit less.

Since the base doesn't come with the integrated rear sway bar. Can i just add the Progress rear sway bar to substitute?

 

I don't think that's the reason, because otherwise the Base Manual would also get better mpg than the Sport Manual, but it doesn't. Both are 27/33. I read in a published review (don't remember which one) that it was due to algorithm for the Base Auto. They probably did it for some CAFE reasons.

That goes to show that the wheel rotational mass factor for mpg is overrated. People seem to think that if they switched to wheels with 10% less rotational mass, they'll get 10% better mpg. That would be true if your car was on a lift with its wheels spinning in the air. But in essence, you've got 2500 lbs of rotational mass at the circumference of the tires which is far outweighing the 20 lbs of rotational mass you've reduced in the wheel.