newhondafitsport - Jalopnik

posts about #newhondafitsport more →
2009 Honda Fit Sport, Part Three
2009 Honda Fit Sport, Part Two
2009 Honda Fit, First Drive, Part Two

Your version of Internet Explorer is not supported. Please upgrade to the most recent version in order to view comments.

Dsmvwl Admin Promote to frontpage Approve user Ban user ×

iantm
01/30/09

In reply to 2009 Honda Fit Sport, Part Three
My first car was an 89 Integra (first gen) with an automatic. God, that was an amazing car. Unfortunately, I expect all cars to be as fun to drive or more. I tend to buy sporty hatches, and having learned how to drive stick some years later - I truly got to enjoy the focus.

The fit is a nice, fun, nimble car. It's a good illustration of fast car slow vs. slow car fast. Truth be told - I'm a slow car fast guy. A small hatch that's versatile, economical, and fun to drive - well it'll only sell in America until gas gets cheap and americans get complacent about it again.

Though, there is nothing wrong with the fit that Honda's corporate diesel engine couldn't fix ...
Reply

iantm was starred iantm was unstarred

MushyHeirloom
01/30/09

@iantm: I've never seen an engine fix styling before.

Oh, wait. Yes, I have.
Reply

MushyHeirloom was starred MushyHeirloom was unstarred

MushyHeirloom
01/30/09

In reply to 2009 Honda Fit Sport, Part Three
Hey, check out that water-and-dust pattern on the side! It's like The Matrix!
Reply

MushyHeirloom was starred MushyHeirloom was unstarred

MushyHeirloom
01/30/09

In reply to 2009 Honda Fit Sport, Part Three
Treehuggers, hairdressers, and tuner crowd: We made this car for you
Reply

MushyHeirloom was starred MushyHeirloom was unstarred

slackinfux
01/30/09

In reply to 2009 Honda Fit Sport, Part Three
Where's the "Sport" in this car? 117 HP, drum brakes in the rear, Torsion Beam rear suspension? Some sway bars and leather accents aren't so sporty.

I might as well buy another 1st gen Integra. About the same power, 4 wheel discs, similar beam rear suspension, DOHC, under 2400 lbs, 30MPG...and this was over 20 years ago.

When the motor finally dies, stuff a B16 in it and get another 40hp. Plus, it wouldn't cost $16 grand and look like a jelly bean with Down's syndrome.

Reason NOT to buy...1986 technology at 2009 prices.
Reply

slackinfux was starred slackinfux was unstarred

MushyHeirloom
01/30/09

@slackinfux: The only real upgrade you'd have would come in the event of a serious accident. Which you can probably avoid with a smaller, nimbler car...
Reply

MushyHeirloom was starred MushyHeirloom was unstarred

MaWeiTao
01/30/09

In reply to 2009 Honda Fit Sport, Part Three
I was expecting to read something informative on why I should or shouldn't buy the car and instead I get stupid, worthless propaganda crap. Like somehow I'm being wasteful by buying a more practical car than a Fit, like there aren't dozens of other more appropriate cars between a Fit and a Hummer.

My reason to not buy a Fit is that it's seriously overpriced for what you get. The Fit Sport starts at almost 15K. $15,000 for that! Buying a Fit is a waste. For little more you can get a far more practical Civic. Or get a far better deal with a Scion, Toyota, VW, Chevrolet, Ford or one of countless other cars.

And mileage is pathetic for the size of the vehicle. If they offered the smaller engines available elsewhere in the world I'd see value in the car. A 1.5L engine in this car is a bit ridiculous and defeats the purpose of being economical. Again, a Civic only marginally worse mileage and offers considerably more practicality.

But, if you want to be truly frugal and spend your money wisely buy a used car. As usual people are driven more by image than common sense.
Reply

MaWeiTao was starred MaWeiTao was unstarred

Mad_Science
01/30/09

@MaWeiTao: You open by saying you're looking for reasons why you should or shouldn't buy it, then proceed to rattle off a bunch of reasons why you shouldn't buy one.

If you're mind's already made up that you wouldn't want one, what's the problem here?

(BTW: I agree that used cars are obviously the better option, but within the context of a review, most auto-writers stick to comparisons with new cars).
Reply

Mad_Science was starred Mad_Science was unstarred

Number_Six
01/30/09

In reply to 2009 Honda Fit Sport, Part Three
I vote Versa. Blander but much more substantial and available at prices way below Fit. And Versa can haz 6M (just to make you feel sportier).
Reply

Number_Six was starred Number_Six was unstarred

theeastbaykid
01/30/09

@In Memory of Number_Six, Clad In Pleather: The Fit has much more lively handling for what it's worth. They're really different cars in the end. My overall impression is Fit=young people; Versa=old people.
Reply

theeastbaykid was starred theeastbaykid was unstarred

DoctorNine
01/30/09

In reply to 2009 Honda Fit Sport, Part Three
Mom said to say nothing, if you can't say anything nice.

Ummm...

The picture with that red and blue looks really sharp...
Reply

DoctorNine was starred DoctorNine was unstarred

JohnPi
01/30/09

In reply to 2009 Honda Fit Sport, Part Three
Why you shouldn't buy this car:

You think a vehicle that's 2600lbs, and has 117HP should get better then 33 MPG in the year 2009.
Reply

JohnPi was starred JohnPi was unstarred

Schweppes - Now with more school work
01/30/09

@JohnPi: Sounds reasonably close to my 12 year old Escort which is 2600lbs, 110hp and mid to high 20s in real world driving. Only 3 cup holders though.
Reply

Citroen_SM
01/30/09

In reply to 2009 Honda Fit Sport, Part Three
Why "working stiffs: No" ? This is a total working stiff car.
Reply

Citroen_SM was starred Citroen_SM was unstarred

Graverobber
01/30/09

@Citroen_SM: I don't know; I'm at work, and it doesn't make me stiff.
Reply

Graverobber was starred Graverobber was unstarred

Packa
01/30/09

In reply to 2009 Honda Fit Sport, Part Three
So much attention is paid to the Fit's fuel tank location under the front seat.

But the fuel filler is located at the driver side, rear three quarter panel.

Now how in the ham sandwich does the fuel get from the back of the car, under the back seat to the fuel tank under the front seat.

There must be some nasty routing issues going on underneath what we see.
Reply

Packa was starred Packa was unstarred

discontinuuity is tentatively testing the waters of Murlopnik Weekend before plunging again into the fridgid waters that are Jalopnik proper
01/30/09

@Packa: I think they use one of these things:

Reply

jduffy13
01/30/09

In reply to 2009 Honda Fit Sport, Part Three
This is like a serialized Dickens novel back in the day!

Is this car really worthy of that much attention?
Reply

jduffy13 was starred jduffy13 was unstarred

Mad_Science
01/30/09

@jduffy13: ???

All Jalopnik reviews come in three parts.

And we always have to explain this to someone every single time.
Reply

Mad_Science was starred Mad_Science was unstarred

mytdawg
01/30/09

In reply to 2009 Honda Fit Sport, Part Three
My only comment is that if this car was a domestic offering the Asian fanboys would have a fit (heh) about the rear drums.

(crickets)

Carry on.
Reply

mytdawg was starred mytdawg was unstarred

MushyHeirloom
01/30/09

@mytdawg: My badass car has four-wheel discs.

Unlike their shitty Civic.

Carry on, indeed.
Reply

MushyHeirloom was starred MushyHeirloom was unstarred

mytdawg
01/30/09

@Fluffy, Pushbroom: I liked Honda right up until about the second gen CRX and whatever that nasty little thing that replaced it was. Del Sol I guess. I think they lost a lot of character when the old man died.

I still got 3 XR's, best damn trail bikes ever.
Reply

mytdawg was starred mytdawg was unstarred

Jeb_Hoge
01/30/09

In reply to 2009 Honda Fit Sport, Part Three
For what it's worth, I'd take the Mazda 5 over this. Sizewise, the Five is just a smidge bigger as far as I can tell, but has that third row that makes kid hauling more friendly, and it really does drive just like my Six. Plus, sliding doors can't be banged into the car next to yours.
Reply

Jeb_Hoge was starred Jeb_Hoge was unstarred

Ash78, cube farmer
01/30/09

@Jeb_Hoge: Right on. Since the Mazda5 is functionally bigger on the inside, plus the sliding doors, it's a slam dunk. With new prices sub-$20k and 07-08 CPO prices hovering around $12k-$13k, the price is right.

Isn't there talk of Honda bringing a Mazda5 competitor based on the Fit? I could see that. Might need a wee bit more power.
Reply

Ash78, cube farmer was starred

Wes Siler
01/30/09

In reply to 2009 Honda Fit Sport, Part Three
And the Fit is more practical than any of those...
Reply

Wes Siler was starred Wes Siler was unstarred

RLJ676-LS3 Commuter Car - for the environment
01/30/09

In reply to 2009 Honda Fit Sport, Part Three
This thing is nearly 19K?

In this guise, I don't see how that's for "penny pinchers." Maybe if ammended to "penny pinchers that kinda like driving still".

For that kinda cash you're real close to getting a Fusion/Malibu, or even a Civic, etc.

I thought the appeal of these was the sub-15K price point?
Reply

brandegee
01/30/09

@rlj676-Carbon Footprint Size - Clownshoe: Cost of ownership over 5 years is about $32K, not much ahead of cars like the Scion xD ($31K) and wayyy ahead of truly fast cars, like the Mazdaspeed3 (I think it's $47K).
Reply

brandegee was starred brandegee was unstarred

Earlier discussions Other discussions Show all discussions Show featured discussions only Start a new discussion

#newhondafitsport

Jalopnik

SUBSCRIBE TO Jalopnik

2009 Honda Fit Sport, Part Three

2009 Honda Fit Sport, Part Two

2009 Honda Fit, First Drive, Part Two

Login

Reset Password

Register

Submit Your Comment