Not sure about getting a fit now
#21
08-08-2009, 09:26 AM
Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: West Coast, USA
Posts: 1,448
The 1.5L four-cylinder, breathing via VTEC, spins to its 6600-rpm power peak (117 hp) like a puppy on the loose, urging the Fit from 0 to 60 mph in 8.3 sec. Sports-car thrust it isn't, but the Fit is so happy at its work you almost don't care. The five-speed manual (a five-speed auto with paddles is optional) works better than units in cars costing twice the price; it flicks through its gates with a light touch and, even better, clutch take-up is syrup-smooth. The pedals are even well-positioned for heel-and-toe work. Despite its economy-car label, the Fit clearly radiates the passion of racing-seasoned engineers.
2009 Honda Fit Sport - Quick Test - Motor Trend
------
The first time you row through the gears of the five-speed manual transmission, you'll think that somewhere there must be a Honda S2000 missing its gearbox - such is the Fit's crisp feel.
With a 1.5-liter i-VTEC-equipped inline four delivering a modest 117 hp, the new Fit is no rocket ship, but it does move pretty well, with a 0-60 time of 8.5 sec. and a top speed of 114 mph.
Shifting gears in the Fit is satisfying and an integral part of the fun. Choose the optional five-speed automatic, though, and you'll still have a good time shifting via paddles fitted behind the steering wheel.
And then there's the handling: Softer and more compliant than its firm-riding predecessor, a quick romp through the twisty bits erases any thoughts about the new Fit's cornering capabilities.
2009 Honda Fit Sport Quick Test - OnCars
---------
Test Results:
0 - 30 (sec): 3.0
0 - 45 (sec): 5.5
0 - 60 (sec): 8.9 (9.8 with traction control enabled)
0 - 75 (sec): 13.7
1/4 Mile (sec @ mph): 16.6 @ 81.6 (17.1 @ 81.0 with traction control enabled)
0-60 with 1-ft Rollout (sec): 8.6 (9.4 with traction control enabled)
2009 Honda Fit Sport: Track Tested! | Long-Term Road Tests Blog on Edmunds' Inside Line
---------
The Fit has developed enough of a reputation that, when we jumped into the new model to rush to La Guardia, motorcycle designer JT Nesbitt recognized the car and looked forward to riding in it. That feeling lasted as we loaded it up with three six-foot plus biker badasses, a week’s worth of winter luggage and hit the road at 6pm on a snowy weeknight with only an hour to go to catch a departing flight.
Once we got going, it was a different story. With a redline bumped up from 6,300 to 6,800 RPM and a ready willingness to kick down from the paddle shifters (we were sadly lumped with an automatic transmission) the Fit makes you very aware that its engine is working hard to deliver its 9-second 0-60 time. Heading out of Greenpoint and up the challenging off-road course that doubles as the Brooklyn Queens Expressway I was using every one of those revs to push the car hard through traffic. Realizing that JT had stopped asking questions about the car I looked over to seem him white knuckled and wide-eyed, fearing for his life not on a land speed record motorcycle, but a friendly-looking hatchback.
2009 Honda Fit Sport, Part One - 2009 Honda Fit - Jalopnik
-----------
The new Fit comes in two versions; a regular and “sport,” both powered by a 1.5 liter four-cylinder i-VTEC engine that produces 117 horsepower and 106 lb-feet of torque. This is a marginal, though welcome, increase of 8 horses from the previous Fit. Transmission
choices are either a five-speed manual, an automatic, or an automatic with a dual-mode paddle shifter system in the Fit Sport. With any choice, reviewers have only positive things to say about the Fit, which despite a seemingly low amount of power, is aptly described as “peppy.” While the engine produces a slightly buzzy quality, as we’ve come to appreciate with Honda, it is indefatigable. 0-60 mph times are in the 8-second range, not exactly rocket-like, but sufficient none the less.
2009 Honda Fit – Review
--------------
The 16-valve, 1.5-liter four-cylinder i-VTEC engine returns to the '09 Fit, with larger intake valves and revisions to the intake manifold. The updates add 8 horsepower for a total of 117 hp, and the 106 lb-ft at 4,800 RPM torque rating is up one point from 2008. Rated as ULEV-II compatible, the Fit maintains Honda's reputation for outstanding fuel economy by averaging 27/35 mpg, with some owners claiming they get nearly 40 mpg on the highway. A 5-speed manual and 5-speed automatic represent the transmission choices, both of which have been slightly tweaked for quicker gear ratios. Automatics in the Sport trims feature paddle shifters on the steering wheel with Normal and Sport modes.
Around town, the '09 Fit can feel surprisingly powerful, with immediate pedal response from a standing stop. Credit can be given to its lightweight frame, weighing just under 2,500 pounds. Test drives measure 0-60 times of 8.9 seconds – not a speed demon, but impressive for a four-cylinder subcompact. Both transmissions earn high marks from critics. The manual offers short-throw excitement with precise gear transitions for satisfying driver feedback. Both owners and reviewers mention some acceleration noise and struggle at high revs, most noticeably during highway merging.
2009 Honda Fit - Overview for Honda Fit - CarGurus
-----------
Next question, please?
2009 Honda Fit Sport - Quick Test - Motor Trend
------
The first time you row through the gears of the five-speed manual transmission, you'll think that somewhere there must be a Honda S2000 missing its gearbox - such is the Fit's crisp feel.
With a 1.5-liter i-VTEC-equipped inline four delivering a modest 117 hp, the new Fit is no rocket ship, but it does move pretty well, with a 0-60 time of 8.5 sec. and a top speed of 114 mph.
Shifting gears in the Fit is satisfying and an integral part of the fun. Choose the optional five-speed automatic, though, and you'll still have a good time shifting via paddles fitted behind the steering wheel.
And then there's the handling: Softer and more compliant than its firm-riding predecessor, a quick romp through the twisty bits erases any thoughts about the new Fit's cornering capabilities.
2009 Honda Fit Sport Quick Test - OnCars
---------
Test Results:
0 - 30 (sec): 3.0
0 - 45 (sec): 5.5
0 - 60 (sec): 8.9 (9.8 with traction control enabled)
0 - 75 (sec): 13.7
1/4 Mile (sec @ mph): 16.6 @ 81.6 (17.1 @ 81.0 with traction control enabled)
0-60 with 1-ft Rollout (sec): 8.6 (9.4 with traction control enabled)
2009 Honda Fit Sport: Track Tested! | Long-Term Road Tests Blog on Edmunds' Inside Line
---------
The Fit has developed enough of a reputation that, when we jumped into the new model to rush to La Guardia, motorcycle designer JT Nesbitt recognized the car and looked forward to riding in it. That feeling lasted as we loaded it up with three six-foot plus biker badasses, a week’s worth of winter luggage and hit the road at 6pm on a snowy weeknight with only an hour to go to catch a departing flight.
Once we got going, it was a different story. With a redline bumped up from 6,300 to 6,800 RPM and a ready willingness to kick down from the paddle shifters (we were sadly lumped with an automatic transmission) the Fit makes you very aware that its engine is working hard to deliver its 9-second 0-60 time. Heading out of Greenpoint and up the challenging off-road course that doubles as the Brooklyn Queens Expressway I was using every one of those revs to push the car hard through traffic. Realizing that JT had stopped asking questions about the car I looked over to seem him white knuckled and wide-eyed, fearing for his life not on a land speed record motorcycle, but a friendly-looking hatchback.
2009 Honda Fit Sport, Part One - 2009 Honda Fit - Jalopnik
-----------
The new Fit comes in two versions; a regular and “sport,” both powered by a 1.5 liter four-cylinder i-VTEC engine that produces 117 horsepower and 106 lb-feet of torque. This is a marginal, though welcome, increase of 8 horses from the previous Fit. Transmission
choices are either a five-speed manual, an automatic, or an automatic with a dual-mode paddle shifter system in the Fit Sport. With any choice, reviewers have only positive things to say about the Fit, which despite a seemingly low amount of power, is aptly described as “peppy.” While the engine produces a slightly buzzy quality, as we’ve come to appreciate with Honda, it is indefatigable. 0-60 mph times are in the 8-second range, not exactly rocket-like, but sufficient none the less.
2009 Honda Fit – Review
--------------
The 16-valve, 1.5-liter four-cylinder i-VTEC engine returns to the '09 Fit, with larger intake valves and revisions to the intake manifold. The updates add 8 horsepower for a total of 117 hp, and the 106 lb-ft at 4,800 RPM torque rating is up one point from 2008. Rated as ULEV-II compatible, the Fit maintains Honda's reputation for outstanding fuel economy by averaging 27/35 mpg, with some owners claiming they get nearly 40 mpg on the highway. A 5-speed manual and 5-speed automatic represent the transmission choices, both of which have been slightly tweaked for quicker gear ratios. Automatics in the Sport trims feature paddle shifters on the steering wheel with Normal and Sport modes.
Around town, the '09 Fit can feel surprisingly powerful, with immediate pedal response from a standing stop. Credit can be given to its lightweight frame, weighing just under 2,500 pounds. Test drives measure 0-60 times of 8.9 seconds – not a speed demon, but impressive for a four-cylinder subcompact. Both transmissions earn high marks from critics. The manual offers short-throw excitement with precise gear transitions for satisfying driver feedback. Both owners and reviewers mention some acceleration noise and struggle at high revs, most noticeably during highway merging.
2009 Honda Fit - Overview for Honda Fit - CarGurus
-----------
Next question, please?
Last edited by TaffetaWhite; 08-08-2009 at 09:30 AM. Reason: Fixed weird html stuff
#22
08-08-2009, 10:04 AM
I too test drove the A/T and M/T and I agree with the comments saying that they are night and day.
Acceleration on the M/T is quicker (feels quicker at least) compared to the auto. When I did drive the auto, it worried me that I wouldn't make it easily on overtakes when necessary while the manual was very easy to control. One thing that may help is the paddle shifter since it does give you a little bit of control on the gears for the auto - I just didn't like how it felt in my hands and felt so much like a gamepad (and I'm not a gamer - lol).
And like what others have said, the Honda stick shifts are pretty smooth. I've only owned 3 m/t cars, 2 hondas (00 Civic SI and now the Fit) and the other was an Infiniti G20. The Hondas definitely had better M/T to learn on. I actually learned how to with the 00 Civic SI on the way home from the dealer. :-)
Acceleration on the M/T is quicker (feels quicker at least) compared to the auto. When I did drive the auto, it worried me that I wouldn't make it easily on overtakes when necessary while the manual was very easy to control. One thing that may help is the paddle shifter since it does give you a little bit of control on the gears for the auto - I just didn't like how it felt in my hands and felt so much like a gamepad (and I'm not a gamer - lol).
And like what others have said, the Honda stick shifts are pretty smooth. I've only owned 3 m/t cars, 2 hondas (00 Civic SI and now the Fit) and the other was an Infiniti G20. The Hondas definitely had better M/T to learn on. I actually learned how to with the 00 Civic SI on the way home from the dealer. :-)
#23
08-10-2009, 09:25 PM
My first choice was MT, but 75% of my driving is work commute - 55 mile daily round trip, lots of traffic lights, many hills, a handful of congested areas, some rural, but primarily suburban 2 two and 4 lane roads. I need all the peace and calm I can get...MT on 2hr +/- daily drives gets old very fast.
I learned several years back that 4-wheel speed just isn't worth pouring money into...especially considering my love for motorcycles. I get all the speed and manual shift thrills i want outta my $3700 dual sport. Insurance, mods, and tires all dirt cheap (pun intended) and will do 0-60 in 5.2 seconds stock...a handful of relatively cheap mods has taken a second off that...and that's just a single cylinder 650cc.
Nothin against MT or speed demons, just my two cents on going automatic....I can live with the 1 or 2 sec slower Fit AT...or is it more than that? I did some searching, but got annoyed after the 8th or 9th link quoting MT times.
I learned several years back that 4-wheel speed just isn't worth pouring money into...especially considering my love for motorcycles. I get all the speed and manual shift thrills i want outta my $3700 dual sport. Insurance, mods, and tires all dirt cheap (pun intended) and will do 0-60 in 5.2 seconds stock...a handful of relatively cheap mods has taken a second off that...and that's just a single cylinder 650cc.
Nothin against MT or speed demons, just my two cents on going automatic....I can live with the 1 or 2 sec slower Fit AT...or is it more than that? I did some searching, but got annoyed after the 8th or 9th link quoting MT times.
#24
08-10-2009, 09:42 PM
If you like the manual, the Fit is plenty quick enough. If you have to have an automatic instead, make the leap up to a Mazda 3s. It's an extra US$3k, but if you want a quick hatchback with automatic I think it's your best bet.
Me? I bought the Fit, with a manual. I'm not ready to become shiftless yet. But my wife's next car is probably the Mazda. She just doesn't know it yet.
Me? I bought the Fit, with a manual. I'm not ready to become shiftless yet. But my wife's next car is probably the Mazda. She just doesn't know it yet.
#25
08-10-2009, 11:08 PM
Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: West Coast, USA
Posts: 1,448
------
With a redline bumped up from 6,300 to 6,800 RPM and a ready willingness to kick down from the paddle shifters (we were sadly lumped with an automatic transmission) the Fit makes you very aware that its engine is working hard to deliver its 9-second 0-60 time.
-------
YouTube, 0-60 in an automatic:
YouTube - Honda Fit 0-60 MPH
-------
I read in one of the articles a great comment:
"MPG is the new HP"
--------
Compare the FIT with a review of the 2009 Prius:
Of course, the Prius has its limitations. Does it go around corners? Yes. Does it accelerate from zero to 60 mph? Yes. Does it do either of the above with the slightest bit of enthusiasm? If you have to ask, then don't buy one. The only fun you'll have in a Prius is when you're playing the "maximize my MPG" game with the dash-mounted energy monitor.
and:
Due to varying peak outputs, maximum combined hp is 110. During performance testing, our 2009 Prius test car cantered from zero to 60 mph in 10.3 seconds. That's about a second slower than the typical four-cylinder family sedan's performance, but it's downright quick compared with the Honda Civic Hybrid's 13.5-second stroll.
2009 Toyota Prius Test Drive on Edmunds.com
-------
The Fit does a little bit of everything. It accelerates well, without sacrificing mpg. It gets good mpg without being a hybrid (and doesn't require a $2,000-4,000 battery).
Hybrids: The High Cost of Low Batteries | Newsweek Voices - Keith Naughton | Newsweek.com
It adapts to carrying people or cargo without being a massive van. And what car is featured on this intro page, hmmm?:
The Most Fuel Efficient Cars | Newsweek Business: Cash for Clunkers | Newsweek.com
#27
08-11-2009, 07:22 AM
why are 0-60 times even relevant for a small car? you're buying a car for fuel economy, if 0-60 is important to you maybe a top fuel dragster might be a good idea. 
#28
08-11-2009, 10:49 AM
man taffeta, there you go again.
you posted every link possible, though i think he was just looking for a/t times. (thanks for posting the links regardless.)
to the op: if your civic takes 12 seconds to go from 0-60, than a 10 second fit will be night and day. 2 seconds is a huge difference.
everyone note that the 9 second 0-60 time on japonlink was done with three large people in the car, and luggage.
from what it seems the a/t fit, at least the new one, is not THAT much slower, at least not as bad as people are making it seem. it felt peppier than my gd3, and that was with somone else test driving it with me, and i drove the navigation equipped 5at, which is the heaviest model.
just dont delve into edmunds times....their test of a manual equipped fit sport was 10.9 seconds to sixty...almost 3 seconds slower than every other magazine/car reviewer who has tested the fit. i dunno what the issue is with them.
you posted every link possible, though i think he was just looking for a/t times. (thanks for posting the links regardless.)
to the op: if your civic takes 12 seconds to go from 0-60, than a 10 second fit will be night and day. 2 seconds is a huge difference.
everyone note that the 9 second 0-60 time on japonlink was done with three large people in the car, and luggage.
from what it seems the a/t fit, at least the new one, is not THAT much slower, at least not as bad as people are making it seem. it felt peppier than my gd3, and that was with somone else test driving it with me, and i drove the navigation equipped 5at, which is the heaviest model.
just dont delve into edmunds times....their test of a manual equipped fit sport was 10.9 seconds to sixty...almost 3 seconds slower than every other magazine/car reviewer who has tested the fit. i dunno what the issue is with them.
#29
08-11-2009, 11:18 AM
Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: West Coast, USA
Posts: 1,448
------
2009 Honda Fit Sport: Track Tested!
Car of the Week can be such a tease. Day after day of driving impressions, liveability issues, comfort, blah blah blah. I know what you've been clamoring for: test data from the 2009 Honda Fit Sport!
0-60. 1/4 mile. Braking from 60. Slalom. Skidpad. We did it all.
Vehicle: 2009 Honda Fit Sport 5MT
Odometer: 1,150
Date: 02/03/09
Driver: Josh Jacquot
Price: $18,780
Specifications:
Drive Type: Front Wheel Drive
Transmission Type: 5-speed manual
Engine Type: inline 4
Displacement (cc / cu-in): 1,497cc (91cu-in)
Redline (rpm): 6,600
Horsepower (hp @ rpm): 117 @ 6600
Torque (lb-ft @ rpm): 106 @ 4800
Brake Type (front): Ventilated disc
Brake Type (rear): Drum
Steering System: Electric power steering
Suspension Type (front): MacPherson strut
Suspension Type (rear): Torsion beam
Tire Size (front): 185/55R16
Tire Size (rear): 185/55R16
Tire Brand: Bridgestone
Tire Model: Turanza EL470
Tire Type: All-season
Wheel Size: 16 X 6.0 front -- 16 X 6.0 rear
Wheel Material (front/rear): Alloy
As tested Curb Weight (lb): 2,516
Test Results:
0 - 30 (sec): 3.0
0 - 45 (sec): 5.5
0 - 60 (sec): 8.9 (9.8 with traction control enabled)
0 - 75 (sec): 13.7
1/4 Mile (sec @ mph): 16.6 @ 81.6 (17.1 @ 81.0 with traction control enabled)
0-60 with 1-ft Rollout (sec): 8.6 (9.4 with traction control enabled)
30 - 0 (ft): 35
60 - 0 (ft): 137
Braking Rating: Poor
Slalom (mph): 65.8 (62.9 with traction control enabled)
Skid Pad Lateral acceleration (g): 0.78 ( .75 with traction control enabled)
Handling Rating: Good
Db @ Idle: 42.0
Db @ Full Throttle: 77.1
Db @ 70 mph Cruise: 68.0
Acceleration Comments: Ultra-light control feel, minimal power and little grip mean there's little technique to launching the Fit...just get her moving and shift fast. Fortunately, the shifter works well.
Braking Comments: No fade, but the pedal feels a bit flimsy / floppy and 137 feet won't win the Fit any awards.
Handling Comments: (Skid pad) Heavy understeer is the Fit's preferred balane around the pad and there's little that can be done to change it. (Slalom) The Fit does little wrong here as it assumes a "safe" attitude when it comes to changing directions. But it also isn't terribly engaging with little grip and low limits.
Mike Magrath, Vehicle Testing Assistant
2009 Honda Fit Sport: Track Tested! | Long-Term Road Tests Blog on Edmunds' Inside Line
#30
08-11-2009, 11:23 AM
Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: West Coast, USA
Posts: 1,448
No I didn't. There are many more links. Why, I didn't even get to Road and Track, Car and Driver, Guns and Ammo... 
No it wasn't. It was a comparison. 
Last edited by TaffetaWhite; 08-11-2009 at 11:23 AM. Reason: Why can't I insert a poke emoticon?
#31
08-11-2009, 11:25 AM
Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: West Coast, USA
Posts: 1,448
#32
08-11-2009, 11:43 AM
the Fit will always be slow. But the MT will help. I don't know about the paddle shifters, have never used them. But pretty sure the AT base w/o paddle shifters would be slower. I stay in 3rd gear going on the on ramp, and when i get into the freeway im going about 70mph already so never had a problem getting up to speed. Although going up hills with the Fit full of people does get quite frustrating. LOL
#33
08-11-2009, 11:43 AM
i don't care about a car's 0-60 times as long as it gets there eventually.
#34
08-11-2009, 11:49 AM
No it wasn't. I posted the link. Where are your figures from? Link?
------
2009 Honda Fit Sport: Track Tested!
Car of the Week can be such a tease. Day after day of driving impressions, liveability issues, comfort, blah blah blah. I know what you've been clamoring for: test data from the 2009 Honda Fit Sport!
0-60. 1/4 mile. Braking from 60. Slalom. Skidpad. We did it all.
Vehicle: 2009 Honda Fit Sport 5MT
Odometer: 1,150
Date: 02/03/09
Driver: Josh Jacquot
Price: $18,780
Specifications:
Drive Type: Front Wheel Drive
Transmission Type: 5-speed manual
Engine Type: inline 4
Displacement (cc / cu-in): 1,497cc (91cu-in)
Redline (rpm): 6,600
Horsepower (hp @ rpm): 117 @ 6600
Torque (lb-ft @ rpm): 106 @ 4800
Brake Type (front): Ventilated disc
Brake Type (rear): Drum
Steering System: Electric power steering
Suspension Type (front): MacPherson strut
Suspension Type (rear): Torsion beam
Tire Size (front): 185/55R16
Tire Size (rear): 185/55R16
Tire Brand: Bridgestone
Tire Model: Turanza EL470
Tire Type: All-season
Wheel Size: 16 X 6.0 front -- 16 X 6.0 rear
Wheel Material (front/rear): Alloy
As tested Curb Weight (lb): 2,516
Test Results:
0 - 30 (sec): 3.0
0 - 45 (sec): 5.5
0 - 60 (sec): 8.9 (9.8 with traction control enabled)
0 - 75 (sec): 13.7
1/4 Mile (sec @ mph): 16.6 @ 81.6 (17.1 @ 81.0 with traction control enabled)
0-60 with 1-ft Rollout (sec): 8.6 (9.4 with traction control enabled)
30 - 0 (ft): 35
60 - 0 (ft): 137
Braking Rating: Poor
Slalom (mph): 65.8 (62.9 with traction control enabled)
Skid Pad Lateral acceleration (g): 0.78 ( .75 with traction control enabled)
Handling Rating: Good
Db @ Idle: 42.0
Db @ Full Throttle: 77.1
Db @ 70 mph Cruise: 68.0
Acceleration Comments: Ultra-light control feel, minimal power and little grip mean there's little technique to launching the Fit...just get her moving and shift fast. Fortunately, the shifter works well.
Braking Comments: No fade, but the pedal feels a bit flimsy / floppy and 137 feet won't win the Fit any awards.
Handling Comments: (Skid pad) Heavy understeer is the Fit's preferred balane around the pad and there's little that can be done to change it. (Slalom) The Fit does little wrong here as it assumes a "safe" attitude when it comes to changing directions. But it also isn't terribly engaging with little grip and low limits.
Mike Magrath, Vehicle Testing Assistant
2009 Honda Fit Sport: Track Tested! | Long-Term Road Tests Blog on Edmunds' Inside Line
------
2009 Honda Fit Sport: Track Tested!
Car of the Week can be such a tease. Day after day of driving impressions, liveability issues, comfort, blah blah blah. I know what you've been clamoring for: test data from the 2009 Honda Fit Sport!
0-60. 1/4 mile. Braking from 60. Slalom. Skidpad. We did it all.
Vehicle: 2009 Honda Fit Sport 5MT
Odometer: 1,150
Date: 02/03/09
Driver: Josh Jacquot
Price: $18,780
Specifications:
Drive Type: Front Wheel Drive
Transmission Type: 5-speed manual
Engine Type: inline 4
Displacement (cc / cu-in): 1,497cc (91cu-in)
Redline (rpm): 6,600
Horsepower (hp @ rpm): 117 @ 6600
Torque (lb-ft @ rpm): 106 @ 4800
Brake Type (front): Ventilated disc
Brake Type (rear): Drum
Steering System: Electric power steering
Suspension Type (front): MacPherson strut
Suspension Type (rear): Torsion beam
Tire Size (front): 185/55R16
Tire Size (rear): 185/55R16
Tire Brand: Bridgestone
Tire Model: Turanza EL470
Tire Type: All-season
Wheel Size: 16 X 6.0 front -- 16 X 6.0 rear
Wheel Material (front/rear): Alloy
As tested Curb Weight (lb): 2,516
Test Results:
0 - 30 (sec): 3.0
0 - 45 (sec): 5.5
0 - 60 (sec): 8.9 (9.8 with traction control enabled)
0 - 75 (sec): 13.7
1/4 Mile (sec @ mph): 16.6 @ 81.6 (17.1 @ 81.0 with traction control enabled)
0-60 with 1-ft Rollout (sec): 8.6 (9.4 with traction control enabled)
30 - 0 (ft): 35
60 - 0 (ft): 137
Braking Rating: Poor
Slalom (mph): 65.8 (62.9 with traction control enabled)
Skid Pad Lateral acceleration (g): 0.78 ( .75 with traction control enabled)
Handling Rating: Good
Db @ Idle: 42.0
Db @ Full Throttle: 77.1
Db @ 70 mph Cruise: 68.0
Acceleration Comments: Ultra-light control feel, minimal power and little grip mean there's little technique to launching the Fit...just get her moving and shift fast. Fortunately, the shifter works well.
Braking Comments: No fade, but the pedal feels a bit flimsy / floppy and 137 feet won't win the Fit any awards.
Handling Comments: (Skid pad) Heavy understeer is the Fit's preferred balane around the pad and there's little that can be done to change it. (Slalom) The Fit does little wrong here as it assumes a "safe" attitude when it comes to changing directions. But it also isn't terribly engaging with little grip and low limits.
Mike Magrath, Vehicle Testing Assistant
2009 Honda Fit Sport: Track Tested! | Long-Term Road Tests Blog on Edmunds' Inside Line
#35
08-11-2009, 11:58 AM
Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: West Coast, USA
Posts: 1,448
2008 Smart:
The penalty is a sluggish 91-mph top speed and approximately 12-second 0-to-60 time.
2008 Smart Fortwo - Newcomers - Motor Trend
------
And this is hilarious, Bike beats Smart:
My favorite blogger right now is a bike blogger–the hilarious, anonymous fixie-riding BikeSnobNYC. Recently, our buddies at 0-60 Magazine challenged BikeSnob to a race from Brooklyn to Madison Square Park. The full writeup can be found in the latest issue of 0-60 Magazine, but I can tell you that the BikeSnob, who ran red lights, bunny hopped curbs and weaved through pedestrians, managed to win by over three minutes. Be sure to watch the video.
http://blog.cardomain.com/2008/09/23/bikesnob-beats/
------
But that little car is not meant for fast highway stunts...it's a City car. It will get a person from here to there, with great mpg, and squeeze into small parking spots. That's it's specialty.
Some cars are fast and only fast. Etc. The Fit does a bit of everything.
#36
08-11-2009, 12:06 PM
Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: West Coast, USA
Posts: 1,448
Why wait for next year? Schumacher's out. Ferrari needs a driver.
Michael Schumacher Cancels Return to Formula 1 ? Automotive News & Car Rumors at Automobile Magazine
Michael Schumacher Cancels Return to Formula 1 ? Automotive News & Car Rumors at Automobile Magazine
#37
08-11-2009, 12:31 PM
Fit is pretty quick with MT. it's fast enough for your daily driving needs imho. it's a very easy car to drive too.
the AT doesnt feel as quick as the MT but it's not that much slower. unless you're very familiar driving MT you'll be slower than AT guaranteed. cause there's less room for error vs a higher performance car. that's why it's fun driving this car.
the AT doesnt feel as quick as the MT but it's not that much slower. unless you're very familiar driving MT you'll be slower than AT guaranteed. cause there's less room for error vs a higher performance car. that's why it's fun driving this car.
#38
08-11-2009, 12:45 PM
Smart car is pretty slow, though. Shouldn't need a riding crop to encourage the car to merge.
2008 Smart:
The penalty is a sluggish 91-mph top speed and approximately 12-second 0-to-60 time.
2008 Smart Fortwo - Newcomers - Motor Trend
------
And this is hilarious, Bike beats Smart:
My favorite blogger right now is a bike blogger–the hilarious, anonymous fixie-riding BikeSnobNYC. Recently, our buddies at 0-60 Magazine challenged BikeSnob to a race from Brooklyn to Madison Square Park. The full writeup can be found in the latest issue of 0-60 Magazine, but I can tell you that the BikeSnob, who ran red lights, bunny hopped curbs and weaved through pedestrians, managed to win by over three minutes. Be sure to watch the video.
http://blog.cardomain.com/2008/09/23/bikesnob-beats/
------
But that little car is not meant for fast highway stunts...it's a City car. It will get a person from here to there, with great mpg, and squeeze into small parking spots. That's it's specialty.
Some cars are fast and only fast. Etc. The Fit does a bit of everything.
2008 Smart:
The penalty is a sluggish 91-mph top speed and approximately 12-second 0-to-60 time.
2008 Smart Fortwo - Newcomers - Motor Trend
------
And this is hilarious, Bike beats Smart:
My favorite blogger right now is a bike blogger–the hilarious, anonymous fixie-riding BikeSnobNYC. Recently, our buddies at 0-60 Magazine challenged BikeSnob to a race from Brooklyn to Madison Square Park. The full writeup can be found in the latest issue of 0-60 Magazine, but I can tell you that the BikeSnob, who ran red lights, bunny hopped curbs and weaved through pedestrians, managed to win by over three minutes. Be sure to watch the video.
http://blog.cardomain.com/2008/09/23/bikesnob-beats/
------
But that little car is not meant for fast highway stunts...it's a City car. It will get a person from here to there, with great mpg, and squeeze into small parking spots. That's it's specialty.
Some cars are fast and only fast. Etc. The Fit does a bit of everything.
#39
08-11-2009, 12:45 PM
Why wait for next year? Schumacher's out. Ferrari needs a driver.
Michael Schumacher Cancels Return to Formula 1 ? Automotive News & Car Rumors at Automobile Magazine
Michael Schumacher Cancels Return to Formula 1 ? Automotive News & Car Rumors at Automobile Magazine
#40
08-11-2009, 02:55 PM
Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: West Coast, USA
Posts: 1,448
Next year is a no-brainer. That's when they add in the Home Depot and Costco challenge.
Yes, it will be exciting to see drivers racing around the streets and then racing into Home Depot for a dual sink, garden hose, and 5 fence boards. Then over to Costco for for 50# of ground round and the man-pack of 25 identical socks (who cares about pairs when you have 25 identical socks?).
For safety reasons, the required baby in the baby seat is a crash test dummy.
Yes, it will be exciting to see drivers racing around the streets and then racing into Home Depot for a dual sink, garden hose, and 5 fence boards. Then over to Costco for for 50# of ground round and the man-pack of 25 identical socks (who cares about pairs when you have 25 identical socks?).
For safety reasons, the required baby in the baby seat is a crash test dummy.
