You must be a longtime Colorado native.

 

I'm surprised nobody's quoted the numbers from TrueDelta yet. Let's see, according to them, the average number of repair trips per year / 100 vehicles is:

2010 Golf TDI: 44 Volkswagen Golf / Rabbit / GTI reliability comparisons

2010 Honda Fit: 18 Honda Fit reliability comparisons

On the other hand, having ridden in a friend's GTI, it's certainly a much more comfortable car.

 

I don't know jack about how the Fit performs at high altitudes, because I live in Chicagoland. That said, I DO know:

-that I wouldn't describe the Fit as gutless. For a car in it's class, it's actually pretty peppy. But you have to be in the right gear at the right time. I would actually wait for or order an MT if I were you.
-I never even considered a VW due to their reputation for poor reliability.
-You mention that the cost per mile of operation is similar, but 6 cents/mile is actually quite a difference. For instance, I drive 15K miles/year- thats 900 bucks.
-The price difference between the cars is huge. I'm a working-class guy, too, and those payments add up, you know?

 

I considered the TDI wagon along with the Fit.

After a lot of research, I concluded that maintenance on the TDI would take away any savings on fuel. If you read the boards, people have to take their TDI's out of state to specialists when it's time for major work.

The dealers and VW corporate are very difficult to deal with. Buying the Honda was so much easier.

This is speaking from experience with one VW in the garage now, and 30 years of VW ownership in my family. We try to put all the miles on the Honda we can. If we don't drive the VW, then it doesn't break. :-)

 

My Fit does pretty well. I live in GJ, and we have a house up on Grand Mesa around 9000ft and I take it back and forth all the time.

 

Get the 2011 v6 mustang instead! (hopefully I can turn this into a running joke)

 

Not much fuel savings to start with.
EPA Highway estimates for A/T:
Fit.............35 mpg
TDI Wagon..39 mpg
TDI Golf......42 mpg

With the price of diesel 3 to 5% higher than regular unleaded the gap narrows a little further. Adjusted Fit mpg would be ~37 mpg. When gas prices drop the percentage difference between unleaded and diesel widens even further for some reason.

_

 

Yikes, what happened to the 50 MPG TDI? A salesman said that the best reason to buy a TDI was resale value. So the best reason to the buy the car is that it's easy to get rid of? Hmmmmm.

 

I love my 2000 Golf TDI. That being said, I would never buy any make car from a dealer four hours away. Think of all the time you will be driving back and forth. I've had occasions where a CEL (check engine light) would come on and come back again, and it was a PITA. But, if it took 4 hours drive....no way.

Also...CRITICAL the 2009 and up TDI engines use a new type of fuel pump, which has a very bad reputation for throwing metal shavings thru the fuel system. A $5,000 repair job - as the whole fuel system needs to be replaced. VW does cover some of these cases under warrantly, but it's hit or miss. Google the forums at Fred's TDI Forum for more info.

If I had to buy a car tomorrow it would be a Golf with gas engine - due to fuel pump issues, and my commute is now very short. But, the Fit is number two or three on the list. Do check out the Hyndai Touring (station wagon). It's very nice and highly rated. Hope this helps.

 

Are people really having that many problems with their TDI's?

My roomates TDI has over 10,000 miles on it and has had zero problems.
A small cross section to be sure, but a real life example nontheless.

I drive this car on a regular basis, unlike most of you, who don't even own or drive one. This is not personal theory, conjecture or "groupthink", it is personal experience with a TDI.

As TDI driver, I have the opportunity to talk with many TDI owners. The overwhelming majority love their cars. They certainly don't whine about poor reliability and cost of ownership. Most used TDI's up here have over 200,000 miles on them and are one owner cars. I guess they were good enough to keep for a while.

I suspect the reliability issue is a bit overblown. If they were that bad, nobody would buy them.

I recall Lexus and Mercedes having less than stellar ratings in years past and nobody would call them bad cars.

I love my Fit and recommend it to others who ask about it.
I love the TDI and recommend it to others who ask about it.

Meh, what do I know?

 

I won't give you a long drawn out response but here is my take.

I owned a mkv gti, and all the newer vee dubs I have owned were very reliable, don't let disgruntled owners or ex owners of mkiv's tell you otherwise.

If maintenance costs mean anything to you, you'll get the fit. It costs nothing to maintain. The tdi is indeed a nicer car, and while reliable, it won't be as cheap to own.

The tdi is a nicer car, but I always felt that the fit was more fun to drive than my gti was. Not as refined,upscale or quiet, but more tossable. The vw does a good audi imitation, and if I was in a different financial position and diesel was a tad cheaper, id love one. But for now, the fit is go.

 

I need a VW TDI very badly.... I can't think of a thing that I would want to do to one in the way of changes other than putting on some high performance tire mounted on very light wheels... I have put more miles on VWs than on any other brand of car that I have owned.. Whenever something was to break it was always because of the abusive way that I drove them and the outrageous things I did in the way of modifications.. VWs are much more comfortable than Japanese made cars that you could realistically compare them to.. The Fit works for me now because I don't spend 60 to 80 hours a week behind the wheel like I had to with a few of my VWs... If I had to choose between the Fit and a TDI for long trips on the highway, freeway and commuting in heavy rush hour traffic, I'd take the TDI...

 

If your area is hilly at all then the TDI is your only choice. The fit struggles up hills and the MPG suffer with it. With the turbo diesel you'll have an easier time getting up the hills and the MPG won't suffer so much.

Except diesel is cheaper, here at least, by almost $.40 at some stations. Plus like I said, that 42mpg figure would be much easier to attain and surpass if the ground at all has any type of inclines.

 

For me, the question comes down to economics, and in that case the Fit is the clear winner. It's the whole reason I bought a Sport MT over the Civic SI that I originally went to get. I've never regretted that decision once.

It won't be as fancy or fun, but I think it would certainly satisfy your *needs*. That being said, I would recommend looking for an MT over the AT if you can get that past the wife. If you haven't driven an MT Fit, I think you might find that it adds to the fun factor. And it's considerably peppier than the AT Fit, even with the paddles. The manual tranny is probably the best thing about this car.

The interior materials are the worst, but that's another story...

 

Wow I feel sorry for you, Chicago area must be one of the highest gas prices in the US. I just searched and an average price of $4.70 per gallon for regular unleaded for zip code 60611. And it does shows diesel being cheaper like you said. That is a new one for me. Everywhere I've been in the US diesel has always been much higher. When your gas prices were still in $2 - $3 range per gallon was diesel also cheaper then?

I agree. If apples to apples the Golf TDI would be my choice but with MSRP being over $7K more than the Fit near impossible to get a fuel savings payback over the life of the car. For me I would have to drive the TDI over 500,000 miles to come close to payback. Then factor in TDI timing belt replacement required every 100K miles and that mileage payback point climbs to 1,000,000 miles.

_

 

The Fit with M/T satisfies my *needs* at the point in time that I purchased it and is a joy to drive thanks to the available after market kits and pieces that I've installed and the ease of loading and unloading all kinds of crazy stuff that appears much to large to Fit into the cargo area.. I'm certainly not about to swap it in on something else since I have done so much to it that would be a turn off to most intelligent people with money to spend.... Personally I find the ergonomics of the Fit to be inappropriate for of Northern European extraction especially ones that are losing there flexibility due to advancing age... My wife is 5' tall and weighs maybe 100lbs after a big meal and feels that the Fit is amazingly comfortable.. She chooses to drive a Forester which I feel the same way about, with me being 6'2" weighing 210lbs... I'm OK in the Fit for 3 or 4 hours with out a break but any longer and I become miserable, though I have driven for close to 10 hours straight on a few occasions... German and Swedish built cars along with Subarus seem to work out better for me on longer trips... I have never driven or ridden a Japanese car or motorcycle that was comfortable or performed well with an automatic transmission except for a little 70cc Passport motorcycle with step through frame and a 250cc Helix motor scooter with constant velocity belt drive transmission..

 

Thankfully I'm about 30 miles west of the city so 87 costs about $4.30. Diesel was more til about the $4 mark. Once regular gas reached $4, diesel just stayed there while reg kept rising.

 

Well, then you've answered your own question! VW's come from the factory with a busted tail-light and the CEL on (I joke, I keeed.) Guess who consistantly is WORST in reliability. Survey says....!



Seriously, when it comes to LONG-TERM reliability, no one touches Honda and Toyota. If you were talking about a lease, sure, why not, get whatever high MPG car you want. The Honda will not only cost less to maintain, it will hold its value WAY better than the VW.

The Fit feels a lot torquier than most Hondas. I'm in the North GA mountains and haven't had any problems. Actually, it pulls a LOT harder up hills than my Integra. It's so light, it doesn't require a massive amount of torque to get it uphill.

My $.02.

 

poopshovel,

Interesting graph. Do you have link of the source?

 

Living in Fort Collins, CO I understand your concern. Honestly if my goal included kids and I was planning to keep the car for a long time, I would go with the TDI if I could afford it. Just on the hills getting up to Horsetooth Reservoir I have to drop it from 5th to 3rd to accelerate up the hill. Granted I don't mind it considering my previous cars were an '01 CR-V and a '06 Element (all are/were manual) I'm used to having to get the revs up to 5k on inclines (I actually kinda like it). But road trips with wife, kids, dog, and luggage I would want the extra torque of the diesel.

It's a shame Honda won't bring their diesel over from the EU. A diesel Civic or Accord wagon would be the ultimate roadtripper.