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 v. Scion xB
66 messages, Last post on Apr 14, 2009 at 6:00 AM
You are in the Honda Fit Forum. Your Host is pf_flyer
With the Fit hitting the market, many shoppers are comparing these two vehicles. How do you think they stack up?
|
|
|
|
|
Having mentioned earlier on that I almost bought a Scion xB, I thought I'd share what I thought the key differences are between that and the Fit, for anyone else trying to make the same decision. Background: I hadn't heard of the Fit, and I was close to buying the xB. I had two stumbling blocks: the cargo space was going to be really tight for me, possibly unworkable; and when I finally test drove it, it just didn't feel "fun" to me. But thinking there was unlikely to be any better choice for me, I intended to bring all the stuff I need to fit into it to the dealer and see if I could fit it all into the xB. (The dealership was very obliging about the idea.) Then I learned about the Fit, and have been hanging out in this forum ever since. Anyway, comparing the base models of each, which are priced almost the same ($14,570 xB vs. $14,400 Fit)... xB advantages: * stability control * traction control * better stereo (MP3 CD compatibility, 6 speakers, steering wheel controls) Fit advantages: * better cargo space (larger and flatter main cargo area, more flexible) * better fuel economy (EPA 33/38 vs. 30/33; edmunds real world test 32 vs. 28; Car & Driver 35 vs. 27) * side and side curtain air bags * from published reports, seems likely to be more fun to drive, though that's TBD, I haven't driven one yet Personally, I'd rather have the stability control and the traction control than the side and curtain air bags. Most accidents are not side impact disasters. Most are of other types, which could be better avoided in the first place with stability and traction control. I figure I'd be much more likely to "make use of" those. (Best to have it all, of course.) Other notes: I prefer a quieter car. In this case, cruising at 70 mph, Edmund's said the Fit was quieter, at 70 dB vs. 74 for the xB; but Car and Driver measured both at 69 dB. So that's not conclusive. A little thing that I liked is that the Fit monitors mileage and driving conditions, and will prompt you for when you should change oil, rotate tires, etc. Not everyone will care, but it's a good feature for someone like me who tends to forget about that stuff for long periods of time! Overall, my own weighting of the various factors lead me to the Fit, but I could easily see why someone might choose the xB. Any key differences I missed? |
|
|
|
|
Replying to: anotherscott (Apr 16, 2006 4:38 pm) Anyone know if they can track oil changes and possibly void your warranty? Just wondering. |
|
|
Re: the comparisons of the Fit to the xB. I just traded in my xB (05) for the black , fit sport mt. I drove my xB for 20k miles, just under a year. Very roomy, fun to drive, and really you get a lot for your money. But, you get even more with the Fit. The Fit is quieter - road noise, wind noise and engine noise, oh, and squeaks and rattles (despite earlier writer suggesting otherwise). The Stereo in the Fit Sport is better (except no steering wheel controls - which in a subcompact seem rather silly to me). The Fit handles better than the xB. The xB's actual gas mileage was a huge disappointment - I was lucky to average 27 mpg - totally unacceptable in a subcompact with a 1.5l 4cyl 105 hp motor. The interior fit and finish, placement of controls, quality of materials, is simply night and day better in the Fit. The drivetrain is far more refined than the xB (though the xB is no slouch for the price point). My kids lost some legroom with the Fit, but it's still quite spacious back there for my 6' tall 14 year old - and I now have far more useable room behind the back seat than in the xB - this comes to the heart of the matter regarding space between these two vehicles. The overall measurements in the two vehicles are nearly identical, but the Fit's space is simply more practical. Yes, the box offered lots of perceived space, but the fact is that most of that height was almost never needed - it is length and width that is more important. And, the truly flat folding seats in the Fit give almost the same height as the Fit. I believe gas mileage will be far better in the Fit according to some real life tests - avg. 32-35 (much better than 27). The Fit just looks better; while I enjoyed the uniqueness of the xB, in the end, after a year, I still felt a little odd in it (I'm 38 years old). The xB had too many rattles - that was totally unacceptable, and surprised me about a Toyota. In the end, I've always been a Honda person, but found the xB package to much of a value to resist. The Fit, though, just did a better job of everything, really. I'll miss stability control and traction control, but I think I'd rather have the side and side curtain airbags. And, in the end, the Fit's price is better too. Ultimately, I am totally impressed by what you get for your money in the Fit. The xB was quite a deal, but this is even more, which says a lot. I feel lucky to know that I can get most of what the SUV and horsepower folks are getting in space and amenities (and safety) for less than half the price, and way less gas. To any prospective buyers, jump on this vehicle. It's great. (yeah, I too wish it had height adjustable seats, armrest, 6th gear - but nothing is perfect - nothing). Thanks Honda!!
|
|
|
I got my xB firstly for the ease of entry provided by the upright A-pillar and high seat. I am 6'-2" and age 63, and have trouble bending and crouching to get in my wife's LeSabre, not to mention even smaller cars. The xB does have a mileage reminder for oil changes. It is reset after each change, and can be set to appear in increments of 1000 miles. I have from 33 to 40 mpg with my manual transmission in mixed suburban and hilly country driving. The low figure was using constant acceleration and deceleration during break-in. The high figure was driving very gently using minumum throttle and rpms to see how good the car could do. Most tanks are 35 mpg. The xB's ride was greatly improved by replacing the too-stiff rear shocks with Monroe SensaTracs. I also added a rear sway bar that flattened the already good cornering. I would still get the xB over the Fit, but only because I need the ease of entry. For a smaller, more agile person, the Fit sounds like the better choice. Certainly its styling is prettier.
|
|
|
|
|
Replying to: johnnyb11 (Apr 22, 2006 8:38 pm) Yes, the box offered lots of perceived space, but the fact is that most of that height was almost never needed - it is length and width that is more important. And, the truly flat folding seats in the Fit give almost the same height as the [Scion xB]. Actually, if the xB seemed to offer you more height, it was an illusion of the shape. I did some measuring, and the Fit actually offers more height in the cargo area than the xB does! WIth the seats down, the Fit has a storage area height of 40" over most of the area (it drops some for the back 5", and where the hump for the rear center seat belt retracts). The Scion xB height is 36" over most of the back half of the storage area, and then, since the seats don't fold flat, the height gradually drops to about 32" by the time you reach the front edge of the cargo area. In terms of length, the floor of the cargo area (seats down) is about 55-56" deep in the Fit, and 45" in the Scion, so again, the Fit is notiiceably larger. However, there is an overhang area in front of the cargo area in the Scion, so the difference may not be as bad as it seems, if you can make use of that. Width at the narrow section (between the wheel wells) is also better in the Fit, at a bit over 40" (the Scion is a bit under 38"); width at the widest section (between the rear doors) is 50" on the Fit, and slightly under that in the xB. So the Fit beats the xB in the size of the cargo area in all dimensions. The only thing I"m not sure about is how the amount of the cargo space that has a 50" width (or close to it) compares. |
|
|
|
|
Replying to: aatherton (Apr 24, 2006 5:01 am) The Honda version is a little more sophisticated. From their web site: The Maintenance Minder system automatically indicates when to have standard service performed based on actual driving conditions (tracked by the ECU) and minimizes the guesswork related to whether the vehicle is being used in standard or severe use conditions for maintenance interval purposes. The display indicates when to change the oil, air cleaner, transmission fluid, spark plugs or coolant, as well as when to rotate the tires |
|
|
Replying to: anotherscott (Apr 16, 2006 4:38 pm) And I don't know if you drive a stick or not, could someone who did compare the shifter and clutch between those two?
|
|
|
|
|
Replying to: nwng (Apr 25, 2006 6:21 am)
|
|
|
"... The display indicates when to change the oil..." Our Buick LeSabre Limited has that. At 3000 miles it indicated 70% oil life remaining, far longer than I like to go. But I guess the computer reminders would save a car from severe neglect. |
|
You are here:
Forums
Hatchbacks Honda Fit Honda Fit v. Scion xB
New? Join Now!
Forum Tools
Search Forums
Browse by Vehicle
2010 Honda Fit
2010 Scion xB
Browse by Board
Browse by Topic
