Proven engine already from the Cruise, several tuners getting 180+ hp and 205 ft lbs...no grenades...will there be people going too far...for sure...but so far the ecotech 1.4 is proving to be a tank. Regardless, I loved my 07 Fit...but I wanted more power, considering 20% altitude loss here in the Mile High City..it was insanely poky slow. Turbo, small engine, hatchback? Yep, Chevy got my $$ and I don't miss the Fit one bit.

 

it's been voted best in class, consumer reports gave it the most reliable for it's class, PLUS honda fit's have incredible resale value.

it's a good idea for a first car. reliable, cheap to maintain, good on gas, insurance cost isn't too bad.

 

Agreed actually...my 07 fit was an appliance...started, ran every day and got me from A to B. I took a chance on my first ever US car with the Sonic...and if you guys want will keep you up to date if it bitches out on me. So far...lovin it. (but again, see altitude comment, Fit has MAYBE 80 hp up here, the Sonic turbo is making its full 138 hp).

 

wow, the altitude was that bad?

i know there was an issue with the honda fit engines, something to do with an engine spring (valve spring or something, cant remember off the top of my head, it was a while ago i read).

it would cause the motor to suffer power wise.....

 

This is mechanical energy 101 Nicotine. Get yourself to a mile high in altitude and the air is thinner and less oxygen content...generally around 20% loss in rated HP for non-forced induction engines. Turbos make up around 18-19%, superchargers around 10-12%.

Advantages | TurboDriven.com - BorgWarner Turbo Systems

 

I bought a Fit because I wanted a car that can get over 30 MPG and carry two road bikes upright inside with some cargo. So far I am getting about 35 MPG average. It was cheap to buy, cheap to run and I've heard that the resale value is pretty decent. It was nominated as Car and Driver's 10 Best list and it is highest rated car in it's class on Consumer Reports test on small cars.

There are things I don't really like about the Fit. Low end torque is nonexistent. A/C is weak. The ride is choppy. It's not very stable in strong crosswinds. And the cabin is pretty noisy. Other than that it's a nice appliance car. It will get you there but it's not overly exciting.

I think the the Chevy Sonic is a nice alternative to the Fit. I have not driven one so I can't compare. I really like the instrument panel of the Sonic, it is well laid out. The Tach and speedo is nicely designed. I like how the warning lights are arranged. I also like the exterior styling. The seats are also comfortable. I would like to see how the 1.4L turbo holds up.

 

i know why the altitude makes a difference (i'm a chemestry and biology major), i know how oxygen density can change due temp and altitude, but for it to make THAT much of an impact is significant. i just wonder if you had the issue stated in the TSB?

I noticed a good drop in mpg when i tossed a jrsc/race header/exhaust/intake on the k20 of the si :P

 

Mile high city?

I drove up to the top of Pikes Peak, which is 14,000 ft up... two miles up. During the same day and the previous day, I drove around Colorado Springs, which is 7,000+ ft up... so I guess that would classify as mile high city. While I did feel a little bit of the effects... I got over it quite easily and forgot about it.

But I have a manual GE... so, I dunno.

 

Yeah I've driven up Mt. Fuji, roads only go to like 2500m, that is just over 1.5 miles up and the car felt fine to me as I was blasting up the winding road with a huge grin.

MT definitely plays a part in this, even at sea level. OP, first if you don't really have a feeling for the Fit, then stay away from it. To try and have others coax you into it, just sounds as if you really have no desire for it. Go get the Sonic at another dealer close by so you can have your fake leather heated seats.

I will just say if you are to get a Fit, stay away from the AT and put some fun into your drive with the MT. You will have owners of the AT say it is fun to drive the AT, but they really haven't driven the MT in the Fit if they say so. The AT is a boring, watered down version of fun the Fit offers when driven properly. If you have no plans, except to do strictly A to B driving with an occasional C involved, I would still say get the MT. I just have no love for AT in very small displacement vehicles that rob even more the already anemic power output that is on tap.

 

It's an awesome car and it does a lot of things well. I bought it for the gas mileage and it has yet to let me down as I'm getting 30 mpg in town. I also wanted a car that can haul my bicycle, camping gear, and fishing gear all at once and it does that easily. Here are the things I don't really like about it: it has very little torque and requires high revs to get going but I knew that already because I test drove it! The cabin is noisy and the suspension is rough. There are limited choices in tires in the Sport size if you wanted to stay with the stock size. With that said and done I will keep this car for a year or two longer and plan on leasing a VW GTI. I usually keep my cars for about 3 years so it makes little sense to buy for me. And I have a business so part of the lease can be written off.

 

Argghhhhhh

 

I have a friend who just traded in his Matrix for the Sonic and he misses the Matrix. I've had my Fit since 2007 and I have to say even with all the little things that makes it unique - it still puts a smile on my face every time I get behind the wheel. My car has been modified to make it my own and I love that I purchase a tank of gas every 2 weeks - love my short commute!