- #8 of 27
-
Re: Fit for Jazz [eldaino]
by alltorque
-
Jan 12, 2007 (2:24 pm)
-
|
|
Replying to: eldaino (Jan 11, 2007 7:13 am)
Well, not in a Fit but as stated, my wife has a Jazz and I get to drive that if I can sneak the keys away from her. Not decrying the Golf, it is a fine car but has got a bit bloated over the years and the seating flexibility isn't a match for the little Honda. It's all down to personal needs and preferences. However, if someone said I must drive a Golf then I wouldn't be crying about it. If I was told I must drive a Golf Mk1 GTi then I would be a happy bunny. Apologies for the bunny reference when talking about a car you know as the Rabbit............it's getting past my bedtime.
|
- #9 of 27
-
Re: Fit for Jazz [alltorque]
by shirotori
-
Jan 13, 2007 (5:07 am)
-
|
|
Replying to: alltorque (Jan 10, 2007 12:33 pm)
I'm living in Japan right now, and the Honda Fit (Jazz) is the Fit here in Japan.
|
- #10 of 27
-
Fit vs Rabbit
by bobw3
-
Jan 13, 2007 (6:46 am)
-
|
|
The 4dr Rabbit has more luxury options, but it costs more than the Fit, has worse mpg, and less interior space. I think of the Rabbit more of a low-cost Mini than a Fit competitor.
|
- #11 of 27
-
Re: Fit vs Rabbit [bobw3]
by mopsy
-
Jan 15, 2007 (5:44 pm)
-
|
|
Replying to: bobw3 (Jan 13, 2007 6:46 am)
? The Rabbit is not anywhere near a Mini so that is an...interesting...stretch. Keep in mind when comparing the Rabbit to the Fit (or any other vehicle) that it has more hp and low-end torque and is very responsive especially in a manual transmission. The mpg suffers but I'm currently getting 28-29 mpg at 6000 miles in a 4 dr manual with about 30% city/ 70% hwy miles. I've seen the Fit in person and own a Rabbit and the interior space is somewhat comparable.
|
- #12 of 27
-
Re: Fit vs Rabbit [mopsy]
by eldaino
-
Jan 17, 2007 (5:27 am)
-
|
|
Replying to: mopsy (Jan 15, 2007 5:44 pm)
agreed mopsy i'm averaging the same mpg with my rabbit but mine is a two door auto. For the size of the engine and weight of the car, its pretty similar to other vehicles even if they are not in the same class. I have sat in the fit, and while it felt 'taller' and had more head room, it didn't seem like it was roomier. The seats on the fit seem less adjustable as well. I do wish that i had a car with better mileage sometimes, but for now my rabbit does ok. Gotta love the low end on it though!
|
- #13 of 27
-
Re: Fit vs Rabbit [eldaino]
by bobw3
-
Jan 17, 2007 (2:56 pm)
-
|
|
Replying to: eldaino (Jan 17, 2007 5:27 am)
I believe that there's more cargo space in the Fit, which may or not be a factor for some folks. For me, with the baby in the back, max cargo space and 4dr was a must.
|
- #14 of 27
-
Re: Fit vs Rabbit [bobw3]
by eldaino
-
Jan 19, 2007 (10:31 am)
-
|
|
Replying to: bobw3 (Jan 17, 2007 2:56 pm)
the rabbit comes in four door guise. It has plenty of cargo room too, but maybe not as much, do to the fits magic seats.
|
- #15 of 27
-
Re: Fit vs Rabbit [eldaino]
by mopsy
-
Jan 19, 2007 (10:40 am)
-
|
|
Replying to: eldaino (Jan 19, 2007 10:31 am)
Yep. Mine's a 4 dr and I have one kid in a car seat and one in a booster seat. We have plenty of room 90% of the time. When we need a bit more, we have a RAV4. We mainly use it for things like trips to IKEA or hauling something on our utility trailer. Given the choice, I'd drive the Rabbit every time unless I needed A LOT of cargo space. I got to sit in a Fit the other day and it might eek out a little more cargo space but not much.
|
- #16 of 27
-
Re: Fit vs Rabbit [mopsy]
by bobw3
-
Jan 19, 2007 (2:39 pm)
-
|
|
Replying to: mopsy (Jan 19, 2007 10:40 am)
As far as space, http://www.cars.com/go/compare/trimCompare.jsp?acodes=USB70VWC122A0,USB70HOC081B- 0 shows the Fit to have 21CuFt as compared to the Rabbit's 15CuFt, or about 45% greater. The mpg is rated as 33/38 vs 22/30 for the Rabbit, so the Fit is about 50% better in the city and 25% better for highway. The 4dr Rabbit also costs about $2000 more than the Fit sport auto, although the Rabbit has more features. Also, while the Rabbit's warranty is longer, I think that the quality/reliability of the Fit is better, based on the fact that in general, Honda has one of the highest quality ratings around.
I think they're both great cars. The Fit seems more practical and economical, while the Rabbit has more luxury.
|
- #17 of 27
-
Re: Fit vs Rabbit [bobw3]
by bpeachee1
-
Jan 24, 2007 (10:34 am)
-
|
|
Replying to: bobw3 (Jan 19, 2007 2:39 pm)
Yes the Fit may have more over all interior room... but unless you plan driving it with the seats down all the time, it doesnt really matter.
The leg room in the Rabbit is far better than the fit, and much more comfortable for a tall person (6'6").
If of course you arnt tall... either is a great car.
I just rented a European Focus in the UK for a week, with a gutless 1.6 liter and 4spd auto.... what a peice of crap!
Not only was it slow, unresponsive...but didnt even get good mileage to make up for it... 26mpg, with 80% fwy miles.
With the Rabbit, I get 29-30 hwy, and its a blast to drive.
Also, given how small and underpowered the Fit engine is, shouldnt it get better mileage than the much larger, heavier, powerfull Civic? Just a thought.
|
![[F]](http://a332.g.akamai.net/f/332/936/12h/www.edmunds.com/media/townhall/webxicons/site.gif){kind=small}
Forums
Hatchbacks 
