Edmunds.com | Inside Line | Auto Observer Your Account | Help | Directory
You are here:
![[F]](http://a332.g.akamai.net/f/332/936/12h/www.edmunds.com/media/townhall/webxicons/site.gif){kind=small}
Forums
Hatchbacks Honda Fit Honda Fit
4728 messages, Last post on Nov 06, 2009 at 4:57 AM
You are in the Honda Fit Forum. Your Host is pf_flyer
|
Replying to: aaykay (Oct 08, 2009 8:04 am) I am surprised the Fit was ok in the winter without snow tires - Consumer Reports in their tests indicated snow tire on a FWD car did equally as well as AWD with all season tires.. The thing I like about the stability control system on the Nissan Cube (and also apparently on the current edition Scion xB based on my research) is that if one wheel starts to slip on this FWD vehicle, the stability control can activate the brake only onthat slipping wheel, essentially pushing the power back to the wheel with traction - so that you get most of the benefits, at least for starting out on a slippery surface, of a limited slip differential. This is big since my friends cabin at Tahoe, like many cabins, has it's garage at the end of a driveway (downhill) and its tough trying to drive back out since the driveway gets snow plowed much less frequently than the street in front - and the street in front much less frequently than the minor highway servicing that development. Maybe Minnesota is flatter, and you didn't have to struggle up - or back out of - a sloping driveway. Still it does make you wonder why Calif requires chains at the first threat of snow, while the snow states go merrily on their way with all season tires on FWD and even RWD (small pickups etc.) vehicles.....
|
|
|
|
|
Replying to: micweb (Oct 08, 2009 8:26 am) 1. I like the handling of the Fit as is--it's nimble and tossable. I don't know how aggressively the stability control on the Fit intervenes, but on other cars I've driven, it seems too aggressive in cutting back the fun factor. 2. The stability control on the '09 model is only available in combination with the navigation system. So it adds a lot to the price of the car. For 2010, stability control is available only with automatic transmission--so if I were buying now, that would be another reason not to, in my opinion, as the autobox saps a significant amount of the car's delightful responsiveness. Our Accord has traction control (not stability control). It's a plus in very limited circumstances, and has never seemed like a hindrance. But somehow the idea of stability control, regardless of how effectively it might be implemented, just seems much more invasive to me. |
|
|
Replying to: ateixeira (Oct 08, 2009 8:16 am) But note that even though you may be able to do quite a bit of swapping between the Forester/WRX/Impreza and even between the Legacy and the Imprezas, the STI is a bit different (strange as that sounds). None of these other suspensions (including the one belonging to the WRX) will mount into the STI and vice-versa, since the front/rear geometries are different. The STI's stabilizer bars won't fit into any of the other Imprezas (mounting points are different). The STI's wheels are not swappable onto any other Impreza (or Legacy) based vehicle (totally different specs), which is because the STI has a totally different design of the hubs/axles (all other Subarus employ 5x100 speccd wheels that fit into the smaller hubs, while the STI employs different/larger sized 5x114.3 wheels/hubs and proportionately larger axles). PS: By "STI", these specs only refer to STIs after the 2004 model year. The 2004 model year STI was similar enough to the WRX to enable its wheels etc to be directly swapped onto the WRXs of that year and also every other WRX or Forester that have come since. Thus the 2004 model year STI wheels in particular, are in great demand by WRX and Forester owners, since they are forged and light, while not having the "aftermarket" look. |
|
|
Replying to: micweb (Oct 08, 2009 8:26 am) Agreed. Put snow tires on a vehicle like the Fit and it would be well nigh unstoppable in the snows - even without stability control. In the snow, having narrower tires (like the ones in the Fit) is actually an advantage, unlike say in good weather high-performance driving where a larger contact patch provided by the wider tires, is more advantageous. This is big since my friends cabin at Tahoe, like many cabins, has it's garage at the end of a driveway (downhill) and its tough trying to drive back out since the driveway gets snow plowed much less frequently than the street in front - and the street in front much less frequently than the minor highway servicing that development. Maybe Minnesota is flatter, and you didn't have to struggle up - or back out of - a sloping driveway. Under such conditions, a Fit with snow tires would scoot right up without even blinking an eye, as long as the snow is not too deep. Snow tires are designed to remain pliable, even when the temperatures drop to negative levels and the tread pattern is designed to dig in. IMO, snow tires would be the primary factor that will help under such conditions, even though having stability control will be an added plus. Ground clearance is another factor that comes into play, since in deep snow, these vehicles simply would not have the ground clearance to go through (even if the tire is able to dig in with adequate grip), since they would just "float" in deep snow. Under such conditions, vehicles like the Subaru Outback or Tribeca or Forester with adequate ground clearance will be needed (if not an SUV). The good thing about Minnesota is that since there is a lot of snow, the infrastructure of the cities are geared to swiftly clear them out, as soon as it snows. People tend to have snow plows (hand-operated or vehicles with snow plough attachments - depending on the size of the area or driveway that need to be cleared) and thus private driveways etc are pretty quickly cleared off too. Thus deep snows through travel roads etc are not very common and a Fit (especially with snow tires) would do just fine. |
|
|
|
|
Replying to: aaykay (Oct 08, 2009 1:38 pm) Another thing to consider when purchasing winter tires, maybe downsize your tire width and accordingly adjust the aspect ratio as contrary to popular belief, a narrower tire is better in snow than a wider tire. I run a 155/80-13 snow tire (pizza cutters) and my vehicle still performs great during wintery and colder dry conditions.
|
|
|
|
|
Replying to: funktion-el (Oct 09, 2009 5:24 am)
|
|
|
|
|
Replying to: stephen987 (Oct 09, 2009 5:29 am) |
|
|
Replying to: stephen987 (Oct 09, 2009 5:29 am) Still, I wouldn't be out there unless I had snow tires - at least. |
|
|
Fit is a great for short distance run or as a commuter car - if you're willing to live with the bouncy ride. The good mileage (33 mpg avg when driving around suburbs), fun-to-drive factor, and huge cargo space makes it a decent utility car, but not a great long-distance car. To quote my daughter' who suffered 8 hour ride on the back seat, the ride is very bouncy. To quote my wife, the passenger seat seems to be more uncomfortable than the driver's seat. BTW, if you drive a lot on long stretches of highway, buy auto tranny, not manual. The auto revs little below 3,000 rpm when you hit 80mph, but the manual will go upto 4,000. I did not like the engine noise if I sustained the rpm over 4000 for extended period. Here's what I "learned" when driving a Fit Sport (auto) on a long trip with total of 2 adults and two teenagers. - when trying to quickly accelerate to about 80mph, you have to force downshift to 4th gear. The rpm goes over 4,000 and the engine whines for a short while, but it's worth it. If you don't, the car WILL NOT accelerate - especially if you are already going about 70 mph and there's a big SUV tailgating you. - The engine noise at cruising speed ( 80 mph, and 3k rpm) is acceptable in my mind, but near 4000 rpm, it starts to bother me as the sound becomes more whinny. I think the road and wind noise is about "normal" for a compact car. - The car felt stable even at 90mph, though it took a while to reach that point. - it's easier to use cruise control to control speed and maintain the same speed. If not using cruise control, you often drop speed without realizing and it takes an effort to get it up there again. The cruise control will automatically drop the gear to 4th when you go up a hill. BTW, my GPS showed 81 mph, when the speedometer was slightly less than 80 mph. - imperfect road surface gives you very BOUNCY ride. - you really have to focus keeping the car in the lane when there's some cross winds. - front bumper area picks up all sorts of dirt and road grime, but the windshield is relatively free of bug spots. - driving through mild rain was okay. I haven't tried driving through heavy rain yet. - The sound from speakers somehow start bothering you after about 1 hour of listening. I think the sound quality lacks ... something... bass maybe ? |
|
|
|
| I do agree that the ride on a Honda Fit could be a bit bouncy, mostly because of the use of a torsion beam rear suspension to increase rear interior space (we're not talking the current Honda Civic, which uses a sophisticated and somewhat space-robbing multilink rear suspension). However, the current 2nd-generation Fit does ride WAY better than the original model, mostly because Honda redesigned the body structure so you don't feel every bump on the road like you get with the older model. | |
You are here:
Forums
Hatchbacks Honda Fit Honda Fit
New? Join Now!
Forum Tools
Search Forums
Browse by Vehicle
2010 Honda Fit
Browse by Board
Browse by Topic
Today's Chats
