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 vs Honda Civic
237 messages, Last post on Oct 29, 2008 at 2:15 PM
You are in the Honda Fit Forum. Your Host is pf_flyer
|
Replying to: bottgers (Dec 19, 2007 5:25 am) I find it interesting you would seemingly value a comparison such as this (your '99 Corolla to the current Civic, not driven under similar conditions) to a study such as done by CR which compared two current models on the exact same route that was a mix of city and highway driving designed to mimic real-world conditions.
|
|
|
Replying to: backy (Dec 19, 2007 7:44 am) |
|
|
Replying to: bottgers (Dec 19, 2007 8:00 am) If your theory conflicts with a finding that has a well-documented basis for comparisons, then the burden of proof shifts to you to disprove that finding with your own finding. And citing anecdotal evidence collected off the internet would not do it because there is no basis for comparison for such datum. You do not disprove a finding with a theory. You disprove a finding with a finding. You have not done that thus far. |
|
|
Replying to: bottgers (Dec 19, 2007 8:00 am) And FWIW, I've found that having "VVT" on a car doesn't mean it will get better FE than a car without VVT. There's several other variables that affect FE. I got excellent FE on several cars that did not have VVT, including Corollas, Civics, and Sentras. I don't think it's a good idea to assume one car will get better FE than another car because one has VVT and one does not. P.S. The difference in weight is nearly 10%, which I think is signficant; e.g. Corolla CE MT 2414, Civic DX MT 2628.
|
|
|
Replying to: backy (Dec 19, 2007 8:31 am) Civic AT - 30.9 mpg, 59 samples Civic MT - 31.5 mpg, 20 samples Fit AT - 32.8 mpg, 26 samples Fit MT - 35.4 mpg, 39 samples Something interesting though... the Fit Sport AT is averaging only 30.0 mpg with 47 samples. I wonder if this is an example of how driving style affects mpg, i.e. those who choose a "sport" model might drive more aggressively than those who drive the base model? Hmmm....
|
|
|
Replying to: backy (Dec 19, 2007 9:43 am) |
|
...of a power increase is the more powerful version Fit supposed to get?
|
|
|
Replying to: bottgers (Dec 20, 2007 1:26 pm) |
|
|
Replying to: mjoshi (Dec 16, 2007 6:55 am) From a rolling turn in second gear, I get to 60-65 by the end of the on ramp. The limit is 75 MPH were I live, but it really only takes another 5 seconds to get near that. And traffic in the right lane is never that fast anyway. I've never felt the car was underpowered to do anything remotely normal on the freeway. I cruise at about 80 mph for 10 miles. Yes, there is road noise. It's not like my wife's TSX, which itself has lower profile tires. Yes, there is some wind noise. I've never found either to be distracting or overwhelming. I've never found the handling or "weight" to be unsafe, up to 85 mph that is. Never gone over that. So 10 miles at 80 mph (3000 rpm on an AT), then the rest your typical rush hour freeway: pockets of 40 mph, then a 1/2 mile of bumper-to-bumper, then some 15 mph, etc. I get 36 MPG this way. If I do a whole tank at 65-75, I get 38 easily. 330 miles between fill-ups.
|
|
| all the light rail construction has created a rattle in the dash. Top center. Need to get that fixed, under warranty I hope. | |
You are here:
Forums
Hatchbacks Honda Fit Honda Fit vs Honda Civic
New? Join Now!
Forum Tools
Search Forums
Browse by Vehicle
2010 Honda Fit
2011 Honda Civic
Browse by Board
Browse by Topic
Today's Chats
