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).

I think you will see a substantial reduction in resale value for cars without some new technology, once things like a back-up camera are mandated by law (2018, I think). Any used car without one will take a serious hit, just like cars without air bags did (who would want a car without an airbag? I don't even want a car with airbags, if they are older than 10 years).

This year we purchased two cars. My Wife got a new 2014 Mazda CX-5, and my Daughter decided on the new 2015 Fit. They both have the rear-view camera, and some sort of lane watch system. We sold a 2008 Honda Fit, not because we didn't like it, but because it had no rear view camera, and we wanted to recapture as much of the value as we could, while we could. The fact my daughter had a hard time with the 5-speed, played a role as well.

We are still left with our 2007 Honda Odyssey (with no rear view camera), but because this is the automobile we have taught our children to drive in (my son is next), there is something nice about having an automobile that has enough dings and dents already, that you don't freak out if the kids make more. We also use this to take our trash to the dump, so in a sense, it is our pickup truck as well.

I dont think a dumb thing like a rear-cam will hurt resale value.

If resale-value is decreased from something you shouldnt ever rely on, the economy is going even further into shit.

People have a tendency to want the latest and greatest. Try and sell a computer without the latest video card, or processor. You don't need those things to check email or post on this Fit Forum, but people won't pay much for an old pentium pro processor based computer anymore.

When people see nothing but car commercials with push button start, rear-view camera's, and lane watch systems, the car without these things is going to lose value in the marketplace. It may be a sad statement on society, but it is the world we live in.

Having a lot of bells and whistles might make the car a bit more salable in the end, but *only* if they are all working.

An EX with a malfunctioning lanewatch camera or flaky pushbutton start would be less salable than an LX without those features at all.

Considering that many of the problems that people are having with new Fits are related to the Display Audio system and Lanewatch, along with pushbutton start, I'm not of the mind to become an early adopter.

Given your example, between the LX and EX, I would agree with you. However, I would still feel much better with the current LX, than my previous 2008 Base, when it comes to future resale value.

I'm not sure the lane watch or push button start will be mandated by law anytime soon (although I could be wrong), but the rear-view camera will be.

I have mostly bought old used cars in the past (all I could afford) and after a certain age, I want basics. Lots of fancy bells and whistles are nice while they are working, but much of that stuff is the first to fail. If it isn't an important bit (my seat heater stopped working years ago and it made no difference) it doesn't matter. On the other hand, if some electrical ghost is drawing phantom power or shorting out other systems it can be a hassle. On a new car with warranty, sure, it is all great. After 8 years, I want manual everything that is easy to fix.

They might legislate back-up cameras (though I really don't know why), but I doubt very much they will make that legislation retroactive to vehicles already on the road.

I think the back up camera is something the insurance company's pursued. As for retroactive legislation, no, that won't happen. I also like the simplicity of basic. Having said that, we maintain anywhere from 2-4 cars at any given time, and just as we don't want them all grouped into one model year, we also try and maintain an upward trend in technology.

Interesting, useful thread. Even I was looking at alternatives, just to be sure this is the best or if there is anything better.

I found the Subaru Impreza hatchback pretty interesting. It has more trunk space with seats up and almost the same with the seats folded. Also considering, I live in the Northeast hilly region where an All wheel drive is useful (though making slightly more expensive), besides the fact Subaru is supposed to be safer and has similar brand value as Honda (i am really interested in EyeSight technology as a backup safety feature but unfortunately only the Limted edition has it).

As for the new tech, I too would prefer the LX model for its higher mileage, lower costs and Buttons (instead of the touch screen - when touch screen phones dont last for 5 years, i am not sure how car touchscreens going to last 10+ years)

The only thing I have ever seen mandated retroactively was EGR valves in California at the beginning of smog controls. That only lasted a year before they figured out that it was a Bad Idea as the fly-by-night aftermarket created a nightmare of shoddy retrofits.

If you buy a car now you can be fairly confident that its standard equipment will be enough to keep it legal for its entire life.

Regarding the Subaru Impreza.... I have a 2003. I absolutely love love love that car. It might have comparable cargo space but it cannot hold a candle to the cabin space for passengers in the back seat when compared to the Fit. If you don't need the rear seat room then it is an excellent alternative IMO. I'd keep mine or get a new one if it weren't for a growing family.

Amen to that. The old adage "KISS" (KEEP IT SIMPLE STUPID) absolutely applies to cars. I seriously doubt that today's cars will last as long as cars from decades ago. The irony is that today's cars are much more reliable mechanically; engines and transmissions are built better than ever before. But there are so many electronic gizmos that when one of them go out, it can render a car useless. Look at many touchscreens in some cars for example, when one of them freezes, the radio or ventilation can't be adjusted until the system gets refreshed, or even replaced. The whole Ford MyTouch had this issue


The toys are great to have on a brand new car, but can't be trusted years later. Give me manual windows, door locks, and real buttons anyday.


Back on subject for this thread, probably the only other small car that matches the Fit for space is the similar looking Versa Note. The back seat in that car is massive and the trunk is immense too. However, that rear seat doesn't fold completely flat and can be an issue if loading heavy items. The Note doesn't come close to the Fit's magic seat flexibility, and also feels very cheap inside.


The Hyundai Accent and Mitsubishi Mirage deserve an honorable mention as well. The Accent's trunk is huge too and the front seat space too shames the Fit's. Engine performance was strong, it felt very solid and upscale inside, and the rear seat wasn't bad either. However, handling has never been a Hyundai strong suit, the rear visibility is an embarrassment compared to the Fit, and why, oh why, does Hyundai neglect to put a spare tire in its small cars? The Accent was tied for second with the Fiesta as my choice behind the Fit


For its tiny size, the Mirage has an impressive amount of space. The flat-as-Kansas back bench seat is surprisingly comfy and front seats were spacious. I had the pleasure of renting one 800 miles and it really wasn't nearly as bad as the reviews say. It was a fuel efficient, affordable, and very solid small car that felt well built. Was it perfect? No. But it would be an easy car to live with

My suggestion would be a 2nd hand fit over the Mirage. Being I'm in Canada too, I honestly don't know how long Mitsu will be sold here.








How many dealerships do they have? How many does Honda.
If they do close, u know how much parts will be for the Mirage in the future.
Both cars are in 2 different categories, but since it seems ur a numbers guy....save a bit locate a used 2009-2013 fit and u'll be happy.


One thing specs can't tell you.....is how does it drive.
You MUST take the cars out for a drive and get a feeling if you like it or not.
For me the fit took out the mazda 3 hatch - why....ride, resale value, not many on the road (I like that), ease of drive, storage capabilities, dealership network. It did everything I needed, and thus far has surpassed what I can do in a car. Its really 2 cars in one - mini pickup, and family hauler.


Just my 2 cents but u must look long term and u must drive them for the feeling- don't go by numbers on paper alone

I had a fully loaded (leather, nav, sunroof, etc) 2014 Chevy Sonic Hatch as a rental car for a week about a year ago and I really liked it. I was on a business trip in San Fran and when I got back home and got into my GD at the airport, I decided I really wanted a new car. It had ALMOST as much space as my GD did, but the backseats didn't fold down completely flat. The build quality was decent and the engine has a nice growly note to it. I seriously considered it but I couldn't leave the Fit family.

Also note one reason I really considered the Sonic was because I get a pretty good discount through GM from my job. No Honda discount though :(

When the Mirage first came out, it was panned by almost everyone. One dealer with a sense of humor wrote an article that said the Mirage would outrun zombies, so it was a good car to have in case of a zopmbie attack. :D Motorweek did a test of the Mirage, and they were surprised to find that it was a nice little car for the city. I think the Mirage & the Mazda 2 are the two most "bare bones" cars you can buy, but both would be good as a "go to work car" in city driving. Just not as good as a Fit. :)

Agreed. The Fit is a more refined car than the Mirage in many ways, and the $2k or so that the Fit costs more than the Mitsu is still good value.

For what it is, the Mirage is an impressive little car. It's not perfect, but then again, it's all about keeping things in perspective. It's easy to make fun of it for the three-cylinder or the 90's styling. However, it's just an honest to goodness little car that does its job at being basic transportation much better than its predesesors (i.e. Geo Metro, Subaru Justy, Daihatsu Charade. etc.). With power windows, door locks, automatic climate control, airbags, ABS, and AUX for the base $12990 price, it's also a good value. I was pleasantly surprised by how good this car was and how roomy it was; much better than a larger Fiesta or Mazda 2. It does lack the refinement of a Fit and the marshmellow steering feedback could use some improvement, but all in all, it would be an easy (and dare I say enjoyable) car to own in the city

The Sonic is the first small car that GM has put a decent effort into. Each time I have rented one (which they are always on the rental lot), I've come away equally impressed as well. Decent room, fun handling, a solid feel, and that growly engine are Sonic strong points. Heck, I even like the offbeat motorcycle-inspired instrument panel and the outside styling. All-in-all, one of the best subcompacts out there.

However, as much as I liked it while looking at buying my Fit, I couldn't come to terms with buying a Chevy. My husband's Aveo has turned out to be a solid little car, but my family has been burned too many times by GM in the past. If the Sonic had a solid reliability rating (it's average on Consumer Reports), then maybe. But when it comes time to plunk down our hard-earned money, it just seemed too risky.

Too bad, it's a great little car and there's no reason to feel bad for anyone who bought one. Hopefully they will keep it equally competitive for the next generation and not let it fade away (as GM has often done in the past as well)

I do worry about car electronic tech and feel it is prone to fail. This is true for home appliances as well. Simpler is better, but these days it is difficult to find a car that is that simple.

We have been renting a car for the last 8 months and I've driven all the above cars for at least a weekend.

Nissan Versa Note: Second best car to my impression of the Fit. Good on gas, has enough power, but steering and maneuverability is lacking. As stated fold down rear seats do not give you a flat surface. 2015 has a rear view camera.

Hyundai Accent/Kia Rio: Nice cars, the Accent has really good gas mileage, but no rear view camera and a terribly small rear view window. With such bad rear view visibility the wife won't even consider buying it.

Mitsubishi Mirage: The best on gas, but really, really slow. Scary on the highway when you try to accelerate into traffic. Handling is not great.

Chevy Sonic: Good on gas, not great, drives well, handles well, has lots of tech, kids liked it, but due to past bad history about the company the Wife won't even entertain any American car.

Mazda 3: Really sporty ride, great cornering, a little thirsty on gas. If it was not for the rust issue, I'd consider one. They are more expensive than the Fit. No backup camera.

All these cars have pros and cons. The Fit seems best for our family's needs.

Also worth comparing are the backseat headrests. I really appreciate good visibility in a car and I love how the Fit's backseat headrests can be lowered flush with the top of the seat. the headrests in the Nissan Versa Note always block the rearward view.

A bit bigger than the Fit but, anyone have look at and/or have cooment on the honda HRV?

We looked at the HRV twice. When compared to the Fit we rejected HRV for these reasons:

1. first design year
2. 15% lower fuel economy
3. larger, harder to park
4. felt like an SUV