Actually, JDM already had their MMC with their 2011 which was after the 3rd year (ok... maybe I should have clarified with (beginning with the 4th year... ). With the JDM fit beginning in 2008 and having their MMC in 2011, that means we will likely see the 2012 be the MMC for the USDM fit as it was introduced in the US as a 2009 model.

Actually, 2011 is the 4th year of production of the GE
08, 09, 10, 11 (I count 4 ) - couldn't resist.

and the hybrid won't make it here to the US... EV will be the 2012... so MMC is likely 2012... being location aware that is...

~SB

 

I'll second that!

 

Wow if I were you I'd compare skidpads results before you say anything negative about a flexible beam. Yeah you will need to change the rubber if you like to play at the limit.

 

@jondotcom - skidpad results? Sorry, those aren't as important to most people compared to real world driving. Going from driving a Mini/GTI/Mazda3/Fit in the same weekend, the other three have a much more refined, controlled manner on the road when compared to the Fit. On the Fit, when the rear right wheel hits a bump, it transfers it to the rear left wheel, which is not optimal for traction or comfort.

Don't get me wrong, I do like my Fit, but independent rear suspension will always be better.

 

Madsedan...where on Texas are you located? The fit is an awesome car!

 

If back seat room is your primary consideration you need to look at the Nissan Vesper, whatever, because it has much more room in the rear seat than Fit and gets equal mpg. It can be had cheaper as well but of cource doesn't drive as well.And if AT is also your need the Nissan AT is a CVT.
good luck.

 

Whatever I buy will be a manual tranny, no way I could stomach a sub 150hp car with an autotragic.

I'm in the DFW area, out in the burbs, Rockwall.

 

Quote:

Originally Posted by drumsauce

@jondotcom - skidpad results? Sorry, those aren't as important to most people compared to real world driving. Going from driving a Mini/GTI/Mazda3/Fit in the same weekend, the other three have a much more refined, controlled manner on the road when compared to the Fit. On the Fit, when the rear right wheel hits a bump, it transfers it to the rear left wheel, which is not optimal for traction or comfort.

Don't get me wrong, I do like my Fit, but independent rear suspension will always be better.

Oh sorry I assumed he'll be driving on paved roads. My bad.

 

Thanks for all the info on the car guys, I really appreciate it.
I'm strictly buying this for more utility and lower operating cost for a daily driver
-seating for the wife and 3 kids for around town stuff when we need it
-ability to haul small stuff on those trips with all 5, like groceries
-ability to run regular grade gas
-better gas mileage for a 25 mile drive to work at 60-65mph sustained

I am not concerned with skidpad results, 0-60 numbers, etc. Once I get into the car if the excessive body roll is a pain I might do some tweeking by way of stiffer springs/shocks or coilovers and a bar on the rear but thats highly unlikely.

I used to work with a BMW race team that runs in Grand Am series, I've been around BMW and Porsche hot-rodding most of my life. If I want a sports car I'd be buying another M3 or an older P-car.

 

Since when are bumps and paved roads mutually exclusive?

Where is this "smooth" paved haven you live in in the Bay Area? My commute is pretty bumpy in the East Bay.

Independent rear suspension > flex beam rear suspension.

You clearly don't agree? Although, it would be interesting to see someone offroad a fit...it just wouldn't be comfortable

OP - The Fit is a great economical, fun car, but not without its drawbacks. The more expensive cars have better suspension design (GTI, Mazda 3, etc) Also, the rear has no alignment adjustments for the GE Fit. Some cars are ok, but some, like mine, the toe is off in the rear. Knowledge is power!

 

I too have 3 kids, but all in car seats. Although i haven't tried it, it would be pretty tight to get all 3 in the back, but i suppose it would work, with some room for groceries. If at least one child was out of a car seat, it would be much roomier.

All of these requirements would point most logically toward the Fit. Reliability is another huge plus as well, compared to the Mini.

Cheers!

 

It's a little boring, but your best bang for the buck with 3 kids is the LX accord. They often do deep discounting on them toward the end of the model year.

I paid 17299 for one back in '05 and it msrp'd for around 19 if I recall correctly. It was an awesome car and very economical, but just too boring for me. The current model is slightly less boring and has a more upscale feel to it.

 

Hmmm, not always unless you are talking about those skid pad and lap times.Any rear wheel that strikes a obstruction will impart a rearward thrust no matter if its a solid axle or not though the suspension mounts. The value of an independent suspension is is hasmuch better improvement of the camber and caster. Thoise are important only on cornering.
But a solid axle is very consistent, cheaper, and MUCH easier maintenance. Those who have worked on deDion suspensions or some of the articulated suspensions can attest to that maintenance issue. And its far easier to design a poor independent suspension thahna poor solid axle.

 

@manout - i'm not familiar with deDion suspensions, but I'm sure there are cases where a solid axle is better in some respects (i.e. current Mustang). For what the OP is looking for and from my experience, there has never been a solid rear axle car that has made me not long for one that has independent rear suspension. I think you hit the nail on the head when you talked about the low cost of a solid rear. Clearly, this is what Honda was aiming for when designing the Fit.

 

I think everyone will agree that independent rear suspension is far superior to a solid rear.
I was having a smoke with a Ford engineer at Mazda Raceway several years ago when they were developing the customer car package for the Mustang race series with teh release of the retro-stangs around 2006. He said the ONLY reason they went back to a solid rear on the retro cars was to keep the price point of a gt under the $30k mark. The independent rear was better in all respects but it saved them a chunk to use the old design. I think they had just changed over to an independent rear the body style before the retro car, even sold conversion kits to adapt it to other years.

 

A good portion of the benefit of an independent rear suspension also dependent on the weight distribution. The more balanced the car is (f/r weight distribution) the more important the independent suspension becomes. In a car like the fit which is nose heavy, independent suspension in the rear will have less effect. (Much like drum brakes in the rear). also, I believe that the sold beam is a much lighter setup than Independent.

~SB

 

Isn't the Fit "semi-independent" by virtue of a rear torsion beam?

It seems based on all the favorable reviews Honda got the best of both cheap and good design...