Article Comments - 2008 Honda Fit vs. 2008 Toyota Prius

92 messages, Last post on Jan 25, 2009 at 10:36 AM

You are in the Honda Fit Forum. Your Host is pf_flyer

What is this discussion about? Honda Fit, Toyota Prius, Car Comparisons, Hatchback

2008 Honda Fit vs. 2008 Toyota Prius - Thanks to a proprietary function called Edmunds.com True Cost to Own, we can answer the $8,425 question when it comes time to determine the relative value of the 2008 Honda Fit and 2008 Toyota Prius. (more)

Outline

Messages Page 2 of 10: 1; 2; 3; 4; 5; 6; 7; ...; 10; Prev; Next; Last

#2 of 92 It depends by tiff_c Aug 04, 2008 (1:41 pm)
On what you need/want. I almost bought a Prius and my friend owned a Fit/Jazz. My concern with the Fit is that they generally are underpowered and do not get the economy they claim. The Prius is bigger and more expensive but does not have height adjustable seats nor does it have a telescoping steering wheel. For the money they charge and MSRP on a pkg 2 is over $24k No discounts! They'd rather die than give a discount on one. In fact the waiting list is 6 months long in my area for a Prius! The Fit is a good city car but we have very little city up here and while a good car it's a bit underpowered for all the highways we have up here. I drove sticks and autos and it just didn't have enough Oomph! for merging with big trucks and SUV's. Hopefully the 2009 will be better but the Fit really needs a bigger engine in it say 130hp or so to cope with the weight and merging. It's possible because the Prius is getting a 1.8L engine and still better fuel economy for 2010. That said The Fit has the big trunk easy to drive and yes you can spend more now or later but if you really need a bigger car the Prius is a better choice. The Fit is a bit cramped with 4 full sized adults. The Prius isn't. Replies to this message: fitman548 (Aug 05, 2008 11:52 am) tiff_c (Aug 05, 2008 2:26 pm) bobw3 (Aug 07, 2008 6:52 am) and 1 more...
#3 of 92 Pros and Pros by backy Aug 04, 2008 (2:18 pm)
Prius pros: * Much more rear legroom than the Fit * Much better FE than the Fit, especially in city driving * More "tech" available on the Prius than the Fit * VSC is standard on the Prius, and (apparently) standard only on the most expensive trim level of the 2009 Fit * Prius is much quieter inside than the Fit; a better highway cruiser * Leather is available on the Prius Pros for the Fit (2009): * Much lower price, especially when comparing base trims. (But when comparing trims equipped with VSC, the price difference is much narrower.) * Fit has a stick available * Fit has the "magic seats" and a taller cargo area * Fit has sharper handling, more tossable * Fit is easier to park * Fit doesn't have an expensive battery pack to replace (someday...) * Fit has a telescopic steering wheel
#4 of 92 Mismatched comparison by mrvfr Aug 04, 2008 (5:02 pm)
A Civic EX 4D auto would have been a fair comparison - all this shows is that smaller and more cheaply equipped is smaller and cheaper.
#5 of 92 I'm waiting for a reply... by kdhspyder Aug 04, 2008 (5:21 pm)
There is a HUGE factual error in the 2nd paragraph which somehow escaped the sleepy eyes of the various Editors, or was allowed to go through unchallenged in order to generate discussion and hits a la 'The Mechanic' article last week. Why would seemingly knowledeable auto people have allowed such an error to get front-and-center attention? Curious. It has never been an issue that a more basic vehicle, smaller, with less amenities and less capabilities would cost less in the long run. This is NOT news. To take this to its logical conclusion a 4 y.o. Matrix is a better buy yet looking at a 5 yr driving cycle. A bicycle is even better yet. And foot power is the best in terms of immediate and longterm fuel economy. However what all these alleged comparo's lack is a basic understanding of what motivates people to buy. I'm sure the understanding is there but it's not clearly stated. What is lacking at the beginning of these comparo's is this explanatory paragraph. "If one is looking simply to minimize the Total Cost of Transportation ( TCO if you wish ) then buying any NEW hybrid is not a 'good buy'. For that segment of the buying public that only wishes to own 4 doors, 4 wheels and an engine the least expensive NEW vehicle is a better choice than any NEW hybrid. A good USED vehicle is an even better choice here. However a USED hybrid is probably better than both of these. However if one is not looking to minimize the TCoT or TCO; if one refuses to buy a stripped vehicle with only very basic amenities; if one is simply looking to reduce the outlay of fuel costs then most current hybrids make perfect sense. It simply depends on which priority is most important."
#6 of 92 Battery still kill the hybrid by dodol1 Aug 04, 2008 (6:03 pm)
If Toyota install the new battery from Fuji Heavy industries (aka Subaru) , which now they partly owned and Fuji claimed that their new battery have longer life than then current battery Toyota using in their Prius. I bet Prius would have won this contest. But too bad Toyota only bought Fuji stock awhile back and thats mean the latest battery technology will come out on the next gen Prius not this generation. So for now Honda Fit won the battle but the war still continue with the next gen Prius and the rumored Honda fit hybrid.
#7 of 92 Figures don't lie but idiots can't figure by hondo13 Aug 04, 2008 (6:23 pm)
Like most car writers, this one is stupid when it comes to finances. When the Edmunds TCO shows an out of pocket difference of $5,351, that means that, after five years, you are ahead $5,351 if you buy the Fit. Subtracting it from the original price difference is like subtracting apples from oranges.
#8 of 92 False Comparison by 1stpik Aug 05, 2008 (6:27 am)
I can't believe Edmunds is trying to legitimize this blatantly false logic! Every hybrid owner has had to listen to a fraudulent comparison between their cars and a Hyundai Accent since hybrids first appeared. Some know-it-all always laughs at hybrid owners, saying they could've bought a tiny, noisy, econobox with a manual transmission and no air conditioning for half the price. Meanwhile, the know-it-all drives some generic OldsmoBuick with the V6 "sport" package. Claims it's the perfect balance between performance and economy. See, he's a genius. Comparing a Honda Fit to a Toyota Prius is simply false. If such comparisons were valid, car buyers would all buy Honda Fits or Hyundai Accents because comfort, convenience, and appearance are all meaningless indulgences. In other words, the car market proves every day that the comparison this article makes is invalid. A Honda Fit does not compare to a Toyota Prius, just as a Ford Focus does not compare to a Chevy Tahoe Hybrid. Why don't you try that? Compare a 30 mpg Ford Focus to the 20 mpg Tahoe Hybrid, and keep saying that the hybrid owner will NEVER recoup the $35,000 price difference? After all, one is a gas-powered car and the other is a hybrid. That's the only difference that matters, right? If you wanted to do a fair comparison, you would have compared the Honda Civic EX to the Honda Civic Hybrid. Those are the same cars, with the same options, same interiors, same design, same everything. The only difference is the propulsion system. Comparing an apple to an apple is fine. Comparing an apple to a mango, then saying that the apple is better simply because it costs less, does not hold up to logical scrutiny. Replies to this message: backy (Aug 05, 2008 8:17 am) kdhspyder (Aug 05, 2008 10:16 am) backy (Aug 05, 2008 11:12 am) 1stpik (Aug 05, 2008 10:43 am) backy (Aug 05, 2008 11:17 am)
#9 of 92 Re: False Comparison [1stpik] by backy Aug 05, 2008 (8:17 am)
Replying to: 1stpik (Aug 05, 2008 6:27 am) I don't understand what is unfair about the comparison. Both cars are small, fuel-efficient 5-door hatchbacks. It is very possible that they will be cross-shopped. Back in early 2004 I compared the Prius to the likes of the Elantra hatchback, Mazda6 hatch, Matrix, and Malibu Maxx. If the Fit had existed then, I would have compared it to the Prius also. Replies to this message: kdhspyder (Aug 05, 2008 10:16 am) backy (Aug 05, 2008 11:12 am) 1stpik (Aug 05, 2008 10:43 am) backy (Aug 05, 2008 11:17 am)
#10 of 92 No cruise control? by soultek1 Aug 05, 2008 (9:40 am)
Ummm. Shouldn't a comparison between two cars include vehicles with roughly the same features? You sound like car salesmen. 'Sure, I can save you $1,000 on that car, we'll just take out the cruise control, radio, etc.' I mean c'mon. I love my keyless remote and I would never buy another car without keyless remote - thus that feature has value and costs. To disregard such value and cost is simply ignorant and deceptive. Also, you might be making a very false assumption regarding the Prius battery. In 10 years, costs should not only go down, but capacity up. Thus, replacing the battery, after 10 years, might enable owners to create 100 mile plus plug-in hybrids for just a few thousand dollars - that alone could keep Prius resale value very high in the future. It might actually be financially beneficial to change the battery. Still, there is no doubt that a Fit with - BUT ONLY with similar features as the Prius - might make sense for some drivers. However, driving conditions are very important. Cars.com recently achieved an average 55.7 mpg in city driving. These are conditions which would probably push the Fit down to well under 25 mpg. That's pathetic for such a small car. The next gen. Prius will offer more room, more power and more fuel efficiency - the evolution of technology. At one time a calculator was a better deal than the Commodore 64. Good thing we didn't stop there.
#11 of 92 Re: False Comparison [backy] by kdhspyder Aug 05, 2008 (10:16 am)
Replying to: backy (Aug 05, 2008 8:17 am) If that logic holds that they are both small fuel efficient 5 door hatchbacks then why not shop two vehicles of equal price and then see which is the 'better buy' Shop a new FIT vs a 3 y.o. Prius..... Both will last 5 yrs of driving - at the minimum. Both will be about the same price to purchase outright. Both will cost the same to finance. However one will cost several thousand less to operate over 75000 mi of driving. Ahh but you say it's not fair to compare a NEW vehicle to a USED vehicle. Then is it any fairer to compare a strippie small vehicle to a well-equipped larger vehicle? All of these price and cost comparo's IMO are exercises in trying to prove one's pov. They all ignore the simple fact that buyers first and foremost classify themselves into price strata. A $15000 buyer might love to drive a $30000 vehicle but he knows that it's out of reach. A $30000-$40000 buyer might consider a $28000 vehicle ( BMW/Acura/Infiniti --->Prius ) but will rarely ever accept to drive/own a $15000 vehicle ( Fit ). A person now driving a $25000 midsizer might sacrifice some size for significantly better fuel economy ( Accord/Camry/Altima ---> Prius ) but likely wouldn't sacrifice size, room, amenities and performance for somewhat better fuel economy ( Yaris ). Ahhh but you say yes there certainly are those that will will to go down to the most basic and least expensive vehicle possible. I agree that yes there are many. What Toyota has discovered though is a HUGE vein of buyers who consider giving up ALL their amenities simply to save fuel. These buyers intend to spend $25000-$40000 on every vehicle they buy. They aren't phased by a $25000 Prius or a $30000 Prius. This is the normal price for any vehicle that they buy or lease. The benefit of the Prius is that it gets significantly better fuel economy than any other $25000, $30000 or $35000 vehicle that they might be considering. These buyers are NOT Fit buyers. It's not even a consideration. Replies to this message: backy (Aug 05, 2008 11:12 am)