Not enough power, can't see myself topping out at 70MPH

 

Top speed on the 1.4 is 106 mph, well over the legal limit.

This is an economy car, a K20 makes no sense at all. Would be cool for a project car or something though.

It might be interesting to note that the 1.4 iDSI engine I'm talking about is the top engine choice offered in the UK. There is also a 1.2 below that and they don't even get the 1.5 VTEC option.

Just for a bit of perspective, the original VW Beetle had about 45-50 hp and did 0-60 in 25 seconds.

The original Porsche 911 0-60 mph was about the same performance as our 1.5 liter Fit's, around 9 seconds. That was considered high performance not all that long ago.

 

I woulda thought more people would want the 1.4L.
I definitely would have gotten it.

The Fit makes 109HP at 5800RPMs; When I want to accelerate, I never pushed the car that hard. I think having a smaller engine would be nice.

Some trivia that I found out: The 1.4L Fit (Europe) is equivalent to the 1.3L (Japan). The actual displacement is 1,339cc. The 1.2L is 1,244cc.

 

what's the torque on the diesel guys??

that's a big factor.

 

There is no diesel.

DSI stands for "Dual and Sequential Ignition"

It's a gasoline engine with two spark plugs per cylinder that can fire independent of one another for more efficient and flexible ignition timing, more complete burn etc.

It's got 88 lb-ft of torque @ 2800 RPM versus 105 lb-ft @ 4800 RPM for our 1.5 VTEC engines.

Note the 2800 RPM part.

 

I would have chosen an iDSI engine if they had offered them in the states, but only with the 5 speed manual. With an auto, no way.

Of course because so many people in the U.S. only know how to drive automatics (or they want to be able to put on make-up, talk on the phone, etc. while they drive) most Fits sold here are autos. Out of the 3-4 Fits I've seen around my area, mine is the only manual. Enough people already complain about the Fit having "not enough power" with the highest spec engine, so you can imagine what they'd say about a 1.3L engine mated to an automatic tranny.

 

Agreed. Automatics suck. That's why the CVT is offered with the 1.4 overseas. CVT's don't have the power loss and lag caused by a torque converter. They get the power to the wheels about as efficiently as a manual transmission and they get about the same fuel economy while they are at it.

I really like the 1.5 VTEC motor, it's more fun I'm sure than the 1.4. All I am saying is that for city driving and for the kind of driving I do in Florida especially, where there are NO hills, I would have chosen the 1.4.

Only way I would need 109 hp in a car this size is if I lived somewhere with real mountains and I expected to carry cargo/passengers. The 1.4 iDSI would not cut it in the western states, but it would be just fine for most east coast urban driving for sure.

 

I would totally have gotten the smaller engine, particularly with a CVT. 50mpg?!