Runner Up to the Fit: Other small cars with clever space
 

So will be looking for another car and want to know if any of the other small cars out there have any sort of magic seat options to haul bikes, etc. I like the economy of the Fit, and its reliability, but I have been lazy about alternatives. While it may be best in class in terms of space and accommodating cargo, any other makes and models showing their own cleverness in terms of cargo space?

Boy, that's a great question! I think the Fit may be the only car with the "magic seat" type of utility. I think the Scion XB or Nissan Cube would offer pretty good cargo space but not sure if that's your style or not.

The Hyundai Accent has more cargo room with the seats up, and about the same with the seats down. It also offers a 6MT with a taller sixth ratio. However, it does not offer magic seats, or anything of that sort. Although is a Hyundai and they usually offer good value, I do not think in this case it offers better value than the Fit. It is a relatively silent, compliant ride, with good fuel mileage, good reliability, with an almost as big interior as the Honda (well, except the rear leg room, but who needs such a big leg room, who carries tall adults in the rear seats every day?).
However, in my opinion, except for the cargo volume (with the back seats up), and better gear ratio, it loses in every other respect against the Fit.

Certainly not the same class, but the Stow-n-go seats in the Dodge/Chrysler minivans come to mind. I mean, you could always fit a whole lot of cargo in a minivan, but to be able to do so without having to leave the seats in your garage is impressive.

But the MPG on a minivan...no where near the 40 mpg of the Fit. I had a Ford E-150 that you could take the seats out of, and that got around 14 mpg, on a good day. Our Honda Odyssey's third row seats drop into the floor, and the second row seats lean almost flat, but at best your looking at low 20's in the mpg category (highway), and loaded with cargo, even less. We really love the Honda Fit for it's cargo versatility and cargo capacity. Then you figure in the mpg capability, I don't know that there is another car that compares. If there is, we could never find it.

my father's 2013 accord v6 can hit over 40mpg with the 3cylinder mode.

I can imagine honda stuck the same system into the odyssey

Actually, the odyssey should get more gas mileage, it has an intake warmer and a few more tricks for better mpg's

Mine with only the third row folded. If I fold the second row I can carry a Fit as a spare.

Attachment 13553

I am going to try again to calculate the mpg on my Honda Odyssey, now that both my daughters are away at school, and I am the only one driving it. It should be getting better MPG. Perhaps what I have been seeing is "teenage girl driving" MPG.

Our '12 Routan (rebadged Town and Country) with the 3.6l Pentastar engine easily gets 30mpg on the highway...

es

Nissan Versa Note?


2015 Honda Fit EX-L vs. 2014 Nissan Versa Note SL Comparison

Didn't Chrysler withhold the fold-into-the-floor seats from the VW version?
As a VW enthusiast a little of me died when I heard that VW was going to sell a rebadged Chrysler as a VW van in NA. Really a bad decision.

Although I like my Scion xB1, it does lack cargo space with the rear seat occupied. It hauls four adults wonderfully and I love putting my SUV-driving friends in the back seat. The first thing they say is "This thing has more room than my [tahoe. suburban etc.]. the bad news is when luggage has to be carried as there is only a couple of feet behind the seat.

I'm really hoping that the Fit will be as accommodating of passengers, though it doesn't have the xBs headroom. It certainly holds more cargo with the seat up.

I don't see any other manufacturer stepping up when it comes to versatile cargo space. Fold-down seats are common, but they usually don't fold flat and nobody seems to have "tall mode."

Yes on the seats, although units from a Dodge or Chrysler are a bolt-in replacement...

I felt the same as you on the rebadge, and would never have considered one new. We bought ours a year old with 8,000 miles on it for slightly over half its new price. Couldn't resist.

es

Isnt that the one with 280 or 300 horsepower? some people say they are actually quite fun on the highway for a van lol

There's no such thing as 'fun' on the highway.

An Odyssey is also much heavier and worse aerodynamically.

I came up behind one of these yesterday on the interstate. Looks very much like a Fit. I like small practical cars.

Mitsubishi Mirage
 

I've been looking hard at the Mitsubishi Mirage. It is a little smaller, but not by much. The seats don't do anything fancy, but the rear seat is apparently pretty easy to remove with a socket set.

Here are some comparisons I made in another forum:

**edit - these numbers aren't really reliable, as I learned from a link on this forum: http://blogs.cars.com/kickingtires/2...the-truth.html The Fit is a foot longer, and it must be bigger in "real life".

Efficiency/Economy comparisons to Honda Fit

I've taken a few numbers from the Mitsubishi Canada and Honda Canada web sites, comparing the base models of each. By some measures, the Honda Fit is more "efficient", but the Mirage is more "economical". By that I mean the Fit can move more mass and produce more power for a given volume of fuel (winner in a physics class), but the Mirage can haul more cargo and people for a given volume of fuel (winner in an accounting class). I made no attempt to quantify how "nice" each car is in terms of comfort, ride/handling, looks etc.

Power - The Fit produces 176% of the power of the Mirage (130/74)
Torque - The Fit produces 174% of the torque of the Mirage (114/74)
Weight - The Fit is 126.4% heavier than the Mirage (1131/895)

Cargo volume - The Fit has 96.5% of the cargo volume of the Mirage (rear seat up - 487/470)
*the seat down maximum volume may be larger for the Fit, but Mitsubishi does not publish a number.
*Edited - Per Chrome Data - Mitsubishi's max cargo volume is 1331L to Honda's 1492 so the Fit has 112.1% of the maximum cargo volume of the Mirage.

Passenger volume - The Fit has 111% of the passenger volume of the Mirage (2710/2440)

Fuel use based on 2015 model published figures with manual transmission
City fuel consumption - The Fit uses 115.7% of the fuel of the Mirage in the city (8.1/7.0)
Highway fuel consumption - The Fit uses 112.2% of the fuel of the Mirage on the highway (6.4/5.7)
Combined fuel consumption - The Fit uses 114.1% of the fuel of the Mirage combined (7.3/6.4)

Price - rough calculation - the money saved buying a new Mirage at $14k over a new Fit at $19k would buy enough gas to go about 72,000km on the highway in the Mirage. (5000/1.21/5.7*100)

Efficiency/Economy comparisons to Honda Fit - MirageForum.com

Canoehead, I think resale value needs to be considered as well. This is a Honda strong point, and Mitsubishi isn't the healthiest car company in North America.

I agree. I looked for a used Honda Fit, and with the crazy-high prices they command (some Accords are cheaper!), it didn't seem worth it. Honda has always been a quality leader, and the legendary reliability of the brand keeps resale high.

However . . .

This 2015 Fit has a new unproven engine with direct injection - it remains to be seen how this will handle in real-life, cold climate, stop/start driving.
The Fit is made in a brand new facility with a brand new workforce.
The Fit was delayed for mysterious recall/pre-call reasons.
The Fit has a 15 page thread on quality issues.

Compare that to the Mirage which has been an international car for several years and so far does not seem to have any quality issues. It uses no fancy new tech (will a touch-screen perform for 12 years?) The Mirage has a 10 year powertrain warranty as well as a 5 year bumper to bumper warranty.

I'm sure the Honda will still hold more of its value longer - not disputing that (Honda reputation, Very poor journalist reviews of the Mirage) - but at the same time past performance is no guarantee of future performance, and it is possible that the Mitsubishi will be a rising star. I hope to buy a new car soon, and when I do I hope to keep it for as long as possible - 10 years or more. For that reason, resale isn't my prime concern. Obviously it is a much more important issue for those who like to drive new every 3-5 years.

The Mirage seems to be a lot less car than a Fit. It is built in Thailand. It does have a 100,000 mile warranty but you might have to go a ways to find a dealer to honor it.

It is indeed a lot less car. It is just under 2000lbs compared to the Fit's approximate 2500lbs, so 80% as much car. It is also $13,900 here in Canada, compared to the Fit's starting price of $18500, so 75% of the price.

I'm of course joking around regarding "less car". I do get confused when auto journalists use the term "more car for the money" though. More of what? Clearly the Honda has more horsepower, but the Mirage has enough (it will do 180km/h). The Honda has more space, but the Mirage may have enough (depending on your wants). As an efficient people hauler/grocery getter, I think the Mirage will return the lowest total cost of ownership. If one prefers a little more refinement and a back-up camera, the Fit may well be the way to go (but why stop there, Acura makes some nice stuff too).