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 Buy Now, Or Wait For the 2008 Fit?
95 messages, Last post on Jul 19, 2007 at 5:51 PM
You are in the Honda Fit Forum. Your Host is pf_flyer
|
|
|---|---|
|
Replying to: hungarian83 (May 14, 2006 10:39 pm) However, beause i-SHIFT is essentially a clutchless manual, you also have the downside of most such units, namely very sluggish changes between gears in automatic mode. Volkswagen solved that problem with its revolutionary dual-clutch Direct Shift Gearbox but that is a very expensive solution. This is why I think the next-generation Fit for the North American market will have either six-speed manual or CVT automatic. |
|
|
Replying to: johnnyvj (May 11, 2006 5:03 pm) A problem I see with the hybrids are the battery paks. Somewhere I read that replacement is $3k-$4k currently. Honda has an 8 year/80k warranty on them. Don't know if that is prorated or not. However the battery pak age/condition will probably figure into the mix when trading or selling a used Hybrid. From a buyers standpoint, why would I want to buy a used hybrid that will need an expensive battery replacement, when I can buy a used conventional engine setup for the same or lower price? These are hypothetical numbers, so please bare with me. Say a given conventional engined car gets an average of 30MPG for all it's driving. Lets say the same car in hybrid gets 40mpg all around. Figure gas at $4 per gallon. In 80K miles of driving the conventional car will use 2666.7 gallon at $4 per gallon = $10667. The Hybrid will use 2000 gallons which will equal $8000. The Hybrid used $2667 less fuel but cost $1800 to $?? more to buy new. In fuel the hybrid saved $800-$900 in cost to run, but now that battery pak needs replacing. Has the hybrid technology really saved anything, or has it been more costly? The hybrid would need to average more like 50 mpg and no other HYBRID UNIQUE EXPENSES incurred to have a near break even point at $80K miles with gas at $4 a gallon. Of course these are assumptions. We don't know when gas will hit $4 a gallon or more. We don't know the price difference between hybrid and conventional, and we don't know the life or price of the battery paks. We don't know the real world mpg of the hybrids. Various test I've read said it was far below advertised. We don't know the problems and cost associated with hybrids hardware. For instance, when coming to a stop, if the conventional engine was running it will shut off. When ready to move again it will have to re start. How long before the starter needs replacing? What keeps the AC compressor working while sitting still and the engine not running?  If battery paks are a lot cheaper than above and 20+ better mpg is true for the hybrid, it may be worthwhile. Just something to think about! Kip |
|
|
|
Would be nice. 140 hp, better highway mileage. How about a center armrest/console?
|
|
|
|
|
Replying to: kipk (Jul 19, 2006 6:36 am) That was an excellent comparison. I concur.  Bubba |
|
|
|
|
Replying to: carfanatic007 (Jul 19, 2006 9:55 pm) |
|
|
Replying to: kipk (Jul 19, 2006 6:36 am) This article explores more on the topic of whether hybrids are worth the extra expense, especially in light of uncertain battery lifespan. Also, what happens to the dead batteries? Can/will they be recycled? (Think of the computer industry and all those toxic components that end up in landfills). Without cradle-to-grave programs to be sure those batteries are handled properly, the environmental argument for going hybrid is weakened.
|
|
|
Replying to: pueo (Jul 20, 2006 2:34 pm) Hybrids: The Great Battery Debate |
|
|
Excellent articles above. This one is a side bar of one of them. http://autos.aol.com/article/hybrid/v2/_a/hybrids-save-gas-lose-money/2006030909- - 3909990001 Go to RH box and click on Hybrids: Frugal or Costly? Going along the lines of a couple of the above posts, there is something to be said for the possibility of a larger engine option in the Fit. The NEW Rav-4 offers a V6 option. Its "EPA" ratings are very close to the I-4 ratings. Our '03 CR-V averages 3-5 better MPG than Our '03 Pilot under similar driving conditions. The Pilot weighs 1000+ pounds more than the CR-V. I've wondered if there would be any real world difference in mileage, if the CR-V had the Pilot's engine and a fuel conscience driver. I would think that the Civic's 1.8I would/could get as good or better mileage as the Fit's current 1.5 engine. That could/would depend on the weight of the two cars, how "slippery" they are, and of course driving habits. Kip |
|
From what I've read, the Fit has been in production for quite a while in other parts of the world. But since the intro to the US is new and there must have been some changes. Does anyone know if the changes are sufficient enough to cause first year production problems like other cars when they first get revamped? Also, are they going to be produced in the US or is the Fit an import? Important since they would have to tune a manufacturing plant for the Fit. And I'm thinking that would cause first year woes for the initial buyers. Okay, enough of me thinking out loud, if any of you vastly more knowledgeable people would be able to provide some answers for my questions. Thanks.
|
|
|
|
|
Replying to: ogre01 (Feb 27, 2006 9:25 pm) The Fit has indeed been produced for quite some time in other parts of the world. Japan in June 2001 is where it began. Most of the US market Fit is the same as the Fit/Jazz sold in other countries, but the US does have some unique features. Regardless, "teething problems" as you put it, should be at a minimum, if they occur at all. The current model has been receiving top marks for reliability all around the world. Production: Suzuka, Japan (along with Japanese and most European models) Engine: L15A 1.5L VTEC used in Japan and several other regions. Some modifications for US EPA, but all of the major specs are identical to other countries. Basically the same thing. Transmission: This is where the biggest difference lies...at least for the automatic. The manual is the same as the rest of the world, except for a few different gear ratios. However, US/Canada get a 5-speed "regular" automatic as opposed to the CVT or CVT-7 sold everywhere else. I believe it is related to the one used in the Civic. Safety: US Fit also gets side-curtain airbags. The Fit/Jazz can only be had with the two front and two side airbags in other markets. Other: larger front/rear bumpers (US 5mph standards), availability of cruise control There are also smaller "minor" things, but the above-listed items are the most important.
|
|
You are here:
Forums
Hatchbacks Honda Fit Buy Now, Or Wait For the 2008 Fit?
New? Join Now!
Forum Tools
Search Forums
Browse by Vehicle
2010 Honda Fit
Browse by Board
Browse by Topic
Today's Chats
