newsun

A while back my wife and I were looking at the Fit vs Yaris hatchbacks and the Yaris is definately shorter and both were Fun to drive. I always like the compactness of the Smart cars, which were in their baby phase i.e hard to find anywhere in the states. I have seen a smart next to a yaris hatch and the smart makes the yaris look big which is smaller than the fit(more of a standard car length)

Rick@OCRR

Well, Insight wise, I didn't mean to imply that it would be easy! I ordered mine in mid-2005 and didn't get it until Spring 2006, and it wasn't even the color I'd ordered, . . . but whatever, it was worth it, and I my Insight now.

Used ones do pop up occasionally, and occasionally one at a super reasonable price!

Here's what mine looks like, if you've never seen one before:



Rick / OCRR

Gee3

Did you guys buy the Smart Car yet? You seemed pretty set on it.

Post the pics!!

ROJA

We just returned from a 2500+ mile road trip to WA and OR with our Fit and it performed flawlessly. We averaged about 37-38 mpg running the a/c more than 50% of the time (this was with our roof rack removed). Driving locally with the roof rack, we get about 31-32 mpg. I highly recommend the manual transmission for a car like this (if you can drive a stick)- it makes the car really fun to drive and it feels pretty quick!

sweetnsourbkr

We will ... as soon as we get it. Like the Insight or the Civic Hybrid, these cars have waiting lists about 6-8 months long.

djkenny

The Fit is great...IF you negotiate the price down to 13k or less, and avoid anything on the options sheet. I know of a few people who paid over 15k for one with an automatic and alloy wheels. Do you REALLY need anything more than AC on a car intended for economy and some fun??
Might as well buy a full major step up in class on a better all around car like a Subaru Impreza that loses only 3 mpg, and barely over 16k to purchase stock.

The best value out there is the Mazda 3. If you buy one with AC and negotiate with the dealer a cost below invoice, and dip into holdback...you should be able to get one of these excellent driver's cars for a mere $10,800. Over 35 mog reported by owners and the rear seat is more roomy then a Corolla.

The Smart...isnt so Smart. The front seats are impressive as are the crash test results...however, there is no rear seat, and it get's crummy gas mileage considering the size of car and performance you are getting. The Smart was supposed to be electric. It should be. This car's only major asset is the ability to park in the smallest spaces....something the Chevy Sprints, Geo Metros, Suzuki Swifts or yor achieved as well and got over 50 mpg with a 5 spd. They also had a real rear seat. But one for pennies instead of 11k for a Smart.

For all the years and development in auto engine design...we have not come very far.

bigbenaugust 

This is a great thread, but the Fit and the Smart are in two VERY different classes.

We bought a Fit for my wife (non-sport, auto trans) in June after we totaled her 2000 Civic (it was a BAD trip to Yosemite). It's a great car, and it's averaging 32mpg (29-30 city 36 highway) in a mix of city driving for my wife's job and our road trips. Our neighbor has a Versa and they seem about the same size.

I pulled up to a Smart today in Palo Alto and noticed that it's only about 2ft longer than my bike. Not sure I could drive something that tiny in actual traffic. I'm okay with cutting lanes once in a while on the bike, buuut... I don't know if I could take 280 in a Smart.

erliuic

Not to rain on the parade but I expect the resale for Smart cars to just plummet in two years. That aside, it's a nice looking car and a cool concept.

The Fit (sold in some countries as Jazz) is a proven and incredibly over-engineered car that is very cheap to maintain. The base model is one of the best deals out there.

erliuic

While the ForTwo performed well overall in the tests by these two organizations, the risk of death is high in crashes of smaller, lighter vehicles. "For vehicles 1-3 years old during 2006," reports IIHS, "minicars experienced 106 driver deaths per million registered vehicles compared with 69 driver deaths in large cars."

Make no mistake, both cars the OP is considering are great but dimunitive cars are MUCH more unsafe compared to large cars (of equal engineering). Although they crash well (under ideal conditions), they are at a significant height disadvantage.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=m_86R...eature=related

The SUV shown is hardly a monster truck. Although the car's engineering plays a crucial part in offering safety (in a head on impact between a Mini and a Ford F-150, the Mini fares much better), there's only so much you can do. In a head on collision, both cars experience the same amount of force, regardless of the size. Force is equivalent to mass times acceleration so the smaller car will experience a GREATER negative acceleration. Moreover, it also has less to work with in terms of crumple zones. Smaller cars are inherently at a disadvantage. At the same time, this also means that makers of small cars have more incentive to invest more R&D in safety.

Bikes (and motorcycles) are indeed significantly less safe than cars. However, consider the number of miles one rides a bike and the number of miles one drives. For most, the odds are much better for biking. Also, this means that it is easier to pay more attention while we are biking (given that you're not toast or cruising along on your iPod).

The number of accidents one experience on a bike = (probability per mile)(number of miles traveled)

Every responsible individual (giving us the benefit of the doubt here) pays as much attention as he/she can but accidents happen -- that's why their called accidents. All we can do is try to change our driving habits and keep vehicle safety in mind as much as possible.

God bless and stay safe

reidconti

True, but some vehicles are much easier to wreck than others. You couldn't pay me enough to have to commute in a truck.. even driving a large car is a chore, albeit not as unsafe to drive.

dogmom

"The Fit uses regular octane gas, but gas mileage is dismal, 24/30."

I don't know who reported that gas mileage, but it is wrong. I've had a Fit for almost 2 years (sport model). Traded in my luxurious Subaru Outback LLBean for a more fuel efficient car (I was commuting 90 miles a day at the time). The best mileage I've logged on the highway was 40. I average between 36-38 on highway. The few time I've driven in the city, the absolute worst I've logged is 30-32, and that was with a lot of stop and go. Overall, I love the Fit. It's roomy (roomy enough for my 3 dogs weighing in between 35 and 55 lbs). I can easily throw a bike or two in the back or lots of climbing/camping gear. Bottom line - great all-around car!

sweetnsourbkr

Are you guys talking stickshift or auto? We were only considering automatic transmissions. The mileage numbers for the auto Fit are in that low-30s neighborhood.

bigbenaugust 

Ours is an auto and it gets about 30/36 mpg with a 32 mpg average. So the average is low-30s, but the highway number isn't.

uspspro

Exactly. I have avoided a number accidents due to my car's brakes/handling/small size.

Personally, I would rather get in fewer accidents, then get hurt less in them. I personally think my odds are better with the fewer accidents.

I easily spend far more hours on my bike than I do in my car. I commute + ride on weekends, there are many who do. All those hours make my car choice seem trivial (any car is safer than riding a bike).

Also, should we look at time or distance? I think a large percentage of this forum spend more time on their bikes than they do in their cars. One 5-hour ride, and many will have surpassed their car time for the week.

buzzman

I know this is an old thread but worth reviving once in a while since people are always trying to decide between these cars.

I have a 2007 Honda Fit Sport (manual) and get anywhere from 32 mpg (the absolute lowest mileage we've gotten) to 41 mpg (highest).

I love this car. Love the way it drives and it holds a ton of stuff. Lots of room. I'm 6'3 and I'm comfortable in this car and my 86 year old mother-in-law has no problem getting in and out of the back seat, which she struggled with in our old Corolla. It sits up high.

A great car!

erliuic

Didn't think it was possible but I got 42 MPG on a 2006 Civic driving from Berkeley to LA. I was cruising at 80 for long stretches too.