I'm interested in small cars that can haul lots of stuff and gets good gas
mileage.
The honda fit seems to fit the bill. However, 0-60mph performance is rated
at 12 seconds, which is way slower than average. Does the car have trouble
going up a steep hill or merging into freeway? Most review I read about this
car did not mention anything about the slow engine.

 

On Jun 17, 11:22 pm, "peter" <nos...@nospam.com> wrote:
> I'm interested in small cars that can haul lots of stuff and gets good gas
> mileage.
> The honda fit seems to fit the bill. However, 0-60mph performance is rated
> at 12 seconds, which is way slower than average. Does the car have trouble
> going up a steep hill or merging into freeway? Most review I read about this
> car did not mention anything about the slow engine.

the stick shift version reviewed by c&d did 0-60 sprint in 8.5 sec.
Unless the gearing was bastardized since then it should be around
that mark. I think even crap like prius does 0-60 in less than 12.
dunno about automatic though. It might be slower some.
which engine? us gets only 1.5 liter which should be plenty good
with the current gearing, maybe if smaller engine arrive
here they'd come up with tall gearing to compete with the
shitboxes from toyoda?

 

On Jun 17, 11:22 pm, "peter" <nos...@nospam.com> wrote:
> I'm interested in small cars that can haul lots of stuff and gets good gas
> mileage.
> The honda fit seems to fit the bill. However, 0-60mph performance is rated
> at 12 seconds, which is way slower than average. Does the car have trouble
> going up a steep hill or merging into freeway? Most review I read about this
> car did not mention anything about the slow engine.

the stick shift version reviewed by c&d did 0-60 sprint in 8.5 sec.
Unless the gearing was bastardized since then it should be around
that mark. I think even crap like prius does 0-60 in less than 12.
dunno about automatic though. It might be slower some.
which engine? us gets only 1.5 liter which should be plenty good
with the current gearing, maybe if smaller engine arrive
here they'd come up with tall gearing to compete with the
shitboxes from toyoda?

 

On Jun 17, 11:22 pm, "peter" <nos...@nospam.com> wrote:
> I'm interested in small cars that can haul lots of stuff and gets good gas
> mileage.
> The honda fit seems to fit the bill. However, 0-60mph performance is rated
> at 12 seconds, which is way slower than average. Does the car have trouble
> going up a steep hill or merging into freeway? Most review I read about this
> car did not mention anything about the slow engine.

the stick shift version reviewed by c&d did 0-60 sprint in 8.5 sec.
Unless the gearing was bastardized since then it should be around
that mark. I think even crap like prius does 0-60 in less than 12.
dunno about automatic though. It might be slower some.
which engine? us gets only 1.5 liter which should be plenty good
with the current gearing, maybe if smaller engine arrive
here they'd come up with tall gearing to compete with the
shitboxes from toyoda?

 

On Mon, 18 Jun 2007 06:22:12 GMT, "peter" <nospam@nospam.com> wrote:

>I'm interested in small cars that can haul lots of stuff and gets good gas
>mileage.
>The honda fit seems to fit the bill. However, 0-60mph performance is rated
>at 12 seconds, which is way slower than average. Does the car have trouble
>going up a steep hill or merging into freeway? Most review I read about this
>car did not mention anything about the slow engine.
>

It depends on whether you have a manual or an automatic transmission -
response is very different. I have a manual and it is adequate for
freeway merging and for climbing hills, and overall mileage is 41

 

On Mon, 18 Jun 2007 06:22:12 GMT, "peter" <nospam@nospam.com> wrote:

>I'm interested in small cars that can haul lots of stuff and gets good gas
>mileage.
>The honda fit seems to fit the bill. However, 0-60mph performance is rated
>at 12 seconds, which is way slower than average. Does the car have trouble
>going up a steep hill or merging into freeway? Most review I read about this
>car did not mention anything about the slow engine.
>

It depends on whether you have a manual or an automatic transmission -
response is very different. I have a manual and it is adequate for
freeway merging and for climbing hills, and overall mileage is 41

 

On Mon, 18 Jun 2007 06:22:12 GMT, "peter" <nospam@nospam.com> wrote:

>I'm interested in small cars that can haul lots of stuff and gets good gas
>mileage.
>The honda fit seems to fit the bill. However, 0-60mph performance is rated
>at 12 seconds, which is way slower than average. Does the car have trouble
>going up a steep hill or merging into freeway? Most review I read about this
>car did not mention anything about the slow engine.
>

It depends on whether you have a manual or an automatic transmission -
response is very different. I have a manual and it is adequate for
freeway merging and for climbing hills, and overall mileage is 41

 

"peter" <nospam@nospam.com> wrote in message
newswpdi.6204$Fw5.576@trndny02...
> I'm interested in small cars that can haul lots of stuff and gets good gas
> mileage.
> The honda fit seems to fit the bill. However, 0-60mph performance is rated
> at 12 seconds, which is way slower than average. Does the car have trouble
> going up a steep hill or merging into freeway? Most review I read about
> this car did not mention anything about the slow engine.
>
I bought a 5 five speed manual transmission Sport Fit about 10 days ago.
Consumer Reports recommended the manual trans. over the automatic because of
the slower performance of the auto. I am really pleased with both the
performance and the economy of the 5 speed. I drove up to the summit of Mt.
Wilson (5,710 feet elevation) just to test how in would perform in
mountainous terrain. I was more than satisfied. I knew it would not climb
in 5th gear, as the ratio is .757 (if my memory is correct), but 4th gear
was excellent for both the ascent and the descent.

As for freeway merges, that has not been a problem at all, in fact, it seems
to perform much better than the size of its engine would dictate.

Besides having greater fuel economy, and better performance, the 5 speed is
more fun to drive, IMHO.

Robert A. Cunningham

 

"peter" <nospam@nospam.com> wrote in message
newswpdi.6204$Fw5.576@trndny02...
> I'm interested in small cars that can haul lots of stuff and gets good gas
> mileage.
> The honda fit seems to fit the bill. However, 0-60mph performance is rated
> at 12 seconds, which is way slower than average. Does the car have trouble
> going up a steep hill or merging into freeway? Most review I read about
> this car did not mention anything about the slow engine.
>
I bought a 5 five speed manual transmission Sport Fit about 10 days ago.
Consumer Reports recommended the manual trans. over the automatic because of
the slower performance of the auto. I am really pleased with both the
performance and the economy of the 5 speed. I drove up to the summit of Mt.
Wilson (5,710 feet elevation) just to test how in would perform in
mountainous terrain. I was more than satisfied. I knew it would not climb
in 5th gear, as the ratio is .757 (if my memory is correct), but 4th gear
was excellent for both the ascent and the descent.

As for freeway merges, that has not been a problem at all, in fact, it seems
to perform much better than the size of its engine would dictate.

Besides having greater fuel economy, and better performance, the 5 speed is
more fun to drive, IMHO.

Robert A. Cunningham

 

"peter" <nospam@nospam.com> wrote in message
newswpdi.6204$Fw5.576@trndny02...
> I'm interested in small cars that can haul lots of stuff and gets good gas
> mileage.
> The honda fit seems to fit the bill. However, 0-60mph performance is rated
> at 12 seconds, which is way slower than average. Does the car have trouble
> going up a steep hill or merging into freeway? Most review I read about
> this car did not mention anything about the slow engine.
>
I bought a 5 five speed manual transmission Sport Fit about 10 days ago.
Consumer Reports recommended the manual trans. over the automatic because of
the slower performance of the auto. I am really pleased with both the
performance and the economy of the 5 speed. I drove up to the summit of Mt.
Wilson (5,710 feet elevation) just to test how in would perform in
mountainous terrain. I was more than satisfied. I knew it would not climb
in 5th gear, as the ratio is .757 (if my memory is correct), but 4th gear
was excellent for both the ascent and the descent.

As for freeway merges, that has not been a problem at all, in fact, it seems
to perform much better than the size of its engine would dictate.

Besides having greater fuel economy, and better performance, the 5 speed is
more fun to drive, IMHO.

Robert A. Cunningham

 

On Jun 18, 2:14 pm, "Robert A. Cunningham" <infojun...@dslextreme.com>
wrote:
> "peter" <nos...@nospam.com> wrote in message
>
> newswpdi.6204$Fw5.576@trndny02...> I'm interested in small cars that can haul lots of stuff and gets good gas
> > mileage.
> > The honda fit seems to fit the bill. However, 0-60mph performance is rated
> > at 12 seconds, which is way slower than average. Does the car have trouble
> > going up a steep hill or merging into freeway? Most review I read about
> > this car did not mention anything about the slow engine.
>
> I bought a 5 five speed manual transmission Sport Fit about 10 days ago.
> Consumer Reports recommended the manual trans. over the automatic because of
> the slower performance of the auto. I am really pleased with both the
> performance and the economy of the 5 speed. I drove up to the summit of Mt.
> Wilson (5,710 feet elevation) just to test how in would perform in
> mountainous terrain. I was more than satisfied. I knew it would not climb
> in 5th gear, as the ratio is .757 (if my memory is correct), but 4th gear
> was excellent for both the ascent and the descent.
>
> As for freeway merges, that has not been a problem at all, in fact, it seems
> to perform much better than the size of its engine would dictate.
>
> Besides having greater fuel economy, and better performance, the 5 speed is
> more fun to drive, IMHO.
>
> Robert A. Cunningham

I have an Automatic Sport. The engine does want to downshift when
going steep uphills, but it is nothing much -- best mileage has been
44 on freeway, part AC on. In city it consistently does way over 33
mpg including in winter.
I have noticed no inability to merge with traffic at highway speeds.
I do know that it is not a pocket rocket - but for the mileage I have
no complaints. My only complaint is that my wife likes to drive it
for her long commute and I get stuck driving a bigger vehicle.

 

On Jun 18, 2:14 pm, "Robert A. Cunningham" <infojun...@dslextreme.com>
wrote:
> "peter" <nos...@nospam.com> wrote in message
>
> newswpdi.6204$Fw5.576@trndny02...> I'm interested in small cars that can haul lots of stuff and gets good gas
> > mileage.
> > The honda fit seems to fit the bill. However, 0-60mph performance is rated
> > at 12 seconds, which is way slower than average. Does the car have trouble
> > going up a steep hill or merging into freeway? Most review I read about
> > this car did not mention anything about the slow engine.
>
> I bought a 5 five speed manual transmission Sport Fit about 10 days ago.
> Consumer Reports recommended the manual trans. over the automatic because of
> the slower performance of the auto. I am really pleased with both the
> performance and the economy of the 5 speed. I drove up to the summit of Mt.
> Wilson (5,710 feet elevation) just to test how in would perform in
> mountainous terrain. I was more than satisfied. I knew it would not climb
> in 5th gear, as the ratio is .757 (if my memory is correct), but 4th gear
> was excellent for both the ascent and the descent.
>
> As for freeway merges, that has not been a problem at all, in fact, it seems
> to perform much better than the size of its engine would dictate.
>
> Besides having greater fuel economy, and better performance, the 5 speed is
> more fun to drive, IMHO.
>
> Robert A. Cunningham

I have an Automatic Sport. The engine does want to downshift when
going steep uphills, but it is nothing much -- best mileage has been
44 on freeway, part AC on. In city it consistently does way over 33
mpg including in winter.
I have noticed no inability to merge with traffic at highway speeds.
I do know that it is not a pocket rocket - but for the mileage I have
no complaints. My only complaint is that my wife likes to drive it
for her long commute and I get stuck driving a bigger vehicle.

 

On Jun 18, 2:14 pm, "Robert A. Cunningham" <infojun...@dslextreme.com>
wrote:
> "peter" <nos...@nospam.com> wrote in message
>
> newswpdi.6204$Fw5.576@trndny02...> I'm interested in small cars that can haul lots of stuff and gets good gas
> > mileage.
> > The honda fit seems to fit the bill. However, 0-60mph performance is rated
> > at 12 seconds, which is way slower than average. Does the car have trouble
> > going up a steep hill or merging into freeway? Most review I read about
> > this car did not mention anything about the slow engine.
>
> I bought a 5 five speed manual transmission Sport Fit about 10 days ago.
> Consumer Reports recommended the manual trans. over the automatic because of
> the slower performance of the auto. I am really pleased with both the
> performance and the economy of the 5 speed. I drove up to the summit of Mt.
> Wilson (5,710 feet elevation) just to test how in would perform in
> mountainous terrain. I was more than satisfied. I knew it would not climb
> in 5th gear, as the ratio is .757 (if my memory is correct), but 4th gear
> was excellent for both the ascent and the descent.
>
> As for freeway merges, that has not been a problem at all, in fact, it seems
> to perform much better than the size of its engine would dictate.
>
> Besides having greater fuel economy, and better performance, the 5 speed is
> more fun to drive, IMHO.
>
> Robert A. Cunningham

I have an Automatic Sport. The engine does want to downshift when
going steep uphills, but it is nothing much -- best mileage has been
44 on freeway, part AC on. In city it consistently does way over 33
mpg including in winter.
I have noticed no inability to merge with traffic at highway speeds.
I do know that it is not a pocket rocket - but for the mileage I have
no complaints. My only complaint is that my wife likes to drive it
for her long commute and I get stuck driving a bigger vehicle.

 

I found a Fit that was turbo-charged and it actually didnt hurt gas
mileage by very much. I'll have to find the link somewhere.

 

I found a Fit that was turbo-charged and it actually didnt hurt gas
mileage by very much. I'll have to find the link somewhere.