Cool but biased article on Fit
#1
Cool but biased article on Fit
http://www.edmunds.com/insideline/do...ticleId=109580
Did I read right about 50% reduced NOx and HC emissions? I wish this article was better written. 1) doesn't say 50% reduced compared to waht 2 ) why is this LEV? I started a thread about emissions. if 50% less than a typical honda car (and most hondas are ULEV2) why is its grade worse? is it cuz it uses 2007 EPA standards, which are more strict?
how accurate is this article? 210% bend rigidity, twist 116%? I don't knwo what these numbers mean, but it sounds too impressive. This article is biased, but I hope these numbers are correct. They are impressive numbers. Still can't wait for real mileage numbers.
Did I read right about 50% reduced NOx and HC emissions? I wish this article was better written. 1) doesn't say 50% reduced compared to waht 2 ) why is this LEV? I started a thread about emissions. if 50% less than a typical honda car (and most hondas are ULEV2) why is its grade worse? is it cuz it uses 2007 EPA standards, which are more strict?
how accurate is this article? 210% bend rigidity, twist 116%? I don't knwo what these numbers mean, but it sounds too impressive. This article is biased, but I hope these numbers are correct. They are impressive numbers. Still can't wait for real mileage numbers.
Last edited by Gordio; 03-10-2006 at 12:27 AM.
#3
That was a really cool article.
Why would we automatically conclude that it was a biased review just because it's favorable? Am I missing something about the author, maybe a relation to Honda or something?
At any rate, it just makes me want mine more.
Why would we automatically conclude that it was a biased review just because it's favorable? Am I missing something about the author, maybe a relation to Honda or something?
At any rate, it just makes me want mine more.
#5
Its comparisons to a "sports sedan" and quick gear changes that make you feel like an "Indy driver" makes me laugh. Either the author has never driven a real sports sedan, like an Audi S4, or hes just making up the BS as he goes along.
#6
Originally Posted by Jonniedee
Mini van like space with sports sedan performance - YEAH!
#10
Originally Posted by Dañiel
Also, in some of the action shots, the car is a right hand drive.
#12
Have alook at this, Uk version but worth a look
http://www.whatcar.com/car-review-vi...x?MA=14&RT=358
http://www.whatcar.com/car-review-vi...x?MA=14&RT=358
#13
Originally Posted by smee123
Have alook at this, Uk version but worth a look
http://www.whatcar.com/car-review-vi...x?MA=14&RT=358
http://www.whatcar.com/car-review-vi...x?MA=14&RT=358
#14
It doesnt seem like that Beam rear suspension is winning over any fans as far as road driving is concerned. Vicky is the one doing that test drive from the UK Top Gear series and she definitely knows what shes talking about when it comes to cars. But depending on how the road's conditions where everyone lives, not everyone will have the same opinion on the car's ride harshness or there lack of.
#15
Originally Posted by JDMGD3
It doesnt seem like that Beam rear suspension is winning over any fans as far as road driving is concerned. Vicky is the one doing that test drive from the UK Top Gear series and she definitely knows what shes talking about when it comes to cars. But depending on how the road's conditions where everyone lives, not everyone will have the same opinion on the car's ride harshness or there lack of.
#16
They went with the torsion beam for a few reasons...
1) Torsion beam acts like a swaybar
2) Enables the Fit to have a flat floor and increased interior volume
3) Cost
4) Ability to move fuel tank under driver seat
My concern is how the rear beam reacts to lowering? I.E- Toe in, Toe out etc etc.
1) Torsion beam acts like a swaybar
2) Enables the Fit to have a flat floor and increased interior volume
3) Cost
4) Ability to move fuel tank under driver seat
My concern is how the rear beam reacts to lowering? I.E- Toe in, Toe out etc etc.
Last edited by Halo; 03-13-2006 at 01:53 PM.
#17
Too harsh, No way, I changed from a Xsara (very good french suspension) to the Jazz/Fit and would have to say that the ride is no more harder than any other in it's class, I also drive an Audi A2 and that shakes you apart.
Fitting larger wheels with low profiles on may make it abit bumpy.
Fitting larger wheels with low profiles on may make it abit bumpy.
#18
Originally Posted by Halo
They went with the torsion beam for a few reasons...
1) Torsion beam acts like a swaybar
2) Enables the Fit to have a flat floor and increased interior volume
3) Cost
4) Ability to move fuel tank under driver seat
My concern is how the rear beam reacts to lowering? I.E- Toe in, Toe out etc etc.
1) Torsion beam acts like a swaybar
2) Enables the Fit to have a flat floor and increased interior volume
3) Cost
4) Ability to move fuel tank under driver seat
My concern is how the rear beam reacts to lowering? I.E- Toe in, Toe out etc etc.
#19
"Torsion beam" is a misleading term. It refers to the way that the two sides of the rear suspension are linked to eachother. It essentially has nothing to do with how the wheels are suspended from the car itself (which, in this case, happens to be conventional coil springs), other than dictating the geomety of the linkage points to some degree.
Think of it this way - on a torsion beam rear, there is essentially a "beam" connecting the two suspension units on either side of the car. Contrast that to other types of rear suspension and you'll see the diffference. For instance, on a fully independant rear suspension (such as most AWD cars have, i.e. Audi or Subaru), the two suspension assemblies are tied together only by a rear swaybar (or not at all.)
A torsion beam has some of the benefits of a swaybar on a fully independant rear, but more or less all of the disadvantages get amplified quite a bit - rough riding over bad pavement in the twisties, "hoopping," etc.
Keep in mind also that many cars with torsion beams in the rear also have swaybars, to help link the rear wheels even more tightly.
Halo, the fact that the rear suspension is torsion beam shouldn't really play in to toe settings when the car is lowered. In fact, I'd venture to say that torsion beam suspensions take to lowering much better than some other types (mcpherson struts, for instance, which typically get really wild camber settings when compressed in a turn on a vehicle that has been lowered.)
Think of it this way - on a torsion beam rear, there is essentially a "beam" connecting the two suspension units on either side of the car. Contrast that to other types of rear suspension and you'll see the diffference. For instance, on a fully independant rear suspension (such as most AWD cars have, i.e. Audi or Subaru), the two suspension assemblies are tied together only by a rear swaybar (or not at all.)
A torsion beam has some of the benefits of a swaybar on a fully independant rear, but more or less all of the disadvantages get amplified quite a bit - rough riding over bad pavement in the twisties, "hoopping," etc.
Keep in mind also that many cars with torsion beams in the rear also have swaybars, to help link the rear wheels even more tightly.
Halo, the fact that the rear suspension is torsion beam shouldn't really play in to toe settings when the car is lowered. In fact, I'd venture to say that torsion beam suspensions take to lowering much better than some other types (mcpherson struts, for instance, which typically get really wild camber settings when compressed in a turn on a vehicle that has been lowered.)
#20
Thanks Illswitch for a very informative write up! But do you get the feeling that Honda is taking a step backwards? Going from double wishbone on the crx back 15 years ago to a rear beam in 06?
Last edited by Halo; 03-14-2006 at 11:43 AM.