Author Topic: Honda Fit discontinued for the US  (Read 7435 times)

Just Joe

  • Magnum Stache
  • ******
  • Posts: 3886
Re: Honda Fit discontinued for the US
« Reply #100 on: July 27, 2020, 08:52:10 AM »

Not to mention the fact that applying the same technology to a small or mid-size car, minus mostly-unnecessary AWD would produce a vehicle getting 50 or 60 mpg. I have to laugh at the mindset that brags about 20mpg or so in a modern vehicle. Yeah, that's impressive mileage. For 1976.

This is a critical point that many often seem to miss.  Due to physics, if a big/heavy vehicle can be made more fuel efficient . . . a small/light vehicle can be made WAY MORE fuel efficient.  40+mpg isn't terrible for a big truck, but it will always suck when you compare the same optimizations made for a smaller car.

Force = mass * acceleration
Power = Work/Elapsed Time
Work = Force / distance

It's physics people!  Reduce a vehicle's mass and you can get the same Force and Power with less energy.

Haven't you heard: science is no longer a valid topic for a portion of the population.
« Last Edit: July 27, 2020, 08:54:56 AM by Just Joe »

jinga nation

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1509
  • Location: 'Murica's Johnson
  • Left, Right, Peddlin' Shite
Re: Honda Fit discontinued for the US
« Reply #101 on: July 27, 2020, 08:54:18 AM »
last night watched the CarWow review of the 2021 Honda Jazz (EMEA name for the Fit). Outside of Japan and China, it is a 1.5L hybrid with dual electric motors (eHEV is what Honda calls it). At GBP 19,000 equivalent, that's USD 24,400, which is Honda Insight price territory, and gets you a larger car, more space, etc. Honda would rather push the Insight as it's entry-level hybrid. Also, I think the ICE Fit's sales were impacted significantly by the HR-V.

jinga nation

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1509
  • Location: 'Murica's Johnson
  • Left, Right, Peddlin' Shite
Re: Honda Fit discontinued for the US
« Reply #102 on: July 27, 2020, 08:55:07 AM »
.

Paper Chaser

  • Stubble
  • **
  • Posts: 231
Re: Honda Fit discontinued for the US
« Reply #103 on: July 27, 2020, 09:54:15 AM »

Ok, I agree that there's more to be gained from making larger vehicles more efficient, as small hybrids are already fairly efficient.
...and these changes would happen by necessity if we simply made the standards the same.  The appeal of modern SUVs and light Trucks has been that they have equivalent acceleration and handling as most sedans but with more cargo space and a higher vantage point.  The only reason they can offer this is because they don't have the same limitations.

Back as early as the 1990s it was accepted that a stock pickup or SUV (which were just becoming a thing) would not outpace a generic sedan - if you wanted/needed a pickup or SUV you sacrificed acceleration and top speed.  But as the fuel standards tightened the manufacturers lobbied to have their own category, ironically arguing that it would "hurt sales" if these larger vehicles could not match the performance of smaller vehicles.  And of course they were right, as they've collectively increased their market share over the last three decades.

The 'free-market capitalists' might argue that 'market forces' should dictate here, and I get the sentiment.  Large vehicle sales do track with gasoline prices.  But currently we're not even letting market forces decide, as we've given a big advantage in terms of lower standards for larger vehicles.

Don't disagree that here's a legislative bias at work. But I'll also point out that vehicles like today's CUVs have existed and sold in very good numbers for pretty much as long as there have been vehicles.


Look at that ground clearance, step in height, loading height, upright seating position, etc. It's pretty easy for me to see a direct lineage between that Ford Model A and a new Ford Escape. The combination of functionality and ease of use has been popular since long before the 90s.

Then consider that the majority of the new-car buying population is 55+ with all of the physical limitations that often tag along:


So the system may be rigged a bit, but buyers clearly want the SUV/CUV/Truck form factor because they deem it to be a reasonable compromise of functionality and ease of use. And as the drawbacks of the large vehicles are reduced (poor fuel economy, low power, minimal luxury features, etc) I'd expect that trend to continue.

nereo

  • Senior Mustachian
  • ********
  • Posts: 13084
  • Location: Just south of Canada
    • Here's how you can support science today:
Re: Honda Fit discontinued for the US
« Reply #104 on: July 27, 2020, 10:31:24 AM »

So the system may be rigged a bit, but buyers clearly want the SUV/CUV/Truck form factor because they deem it to be a reasonable compromise of functionality and ease of use. And as the drawbacks of the large vehicles are reduced (poor fuel economy, low power, minimal luxury features, etc) I'd expect that trend to continue.

This is the crux of the problem. 

First we have to decide where the acceptable limit is for "large vehicles".  Currently one cannot operate a passenger vehicle over 22.5' total length or 8' width or a gross weight of over 10,000lbs without a special permit (i.e. commercial driver's license). We could debate whether this should be kept the same or increased/decreased.

Second, how will the "drawbects of the large vehicles" be reduced.  In recent decades we've allowed them to be reduced at the expense of emissions and fuel consumption (i.e. different CAPE standards). 'Technological advances' can only close the gap so far, as physics will ultimately play a heavy hand at keeping a large heavy truck less efficient than a smaller, fuel efficient vehicle.


The Guru

  • Stubble
  • **
  • Posts: 237
  • Age: 64
  • Location: Great Lakes
Re: Honda Fit discontinued for the US
« Reply #105 on: July 27, 2020, 11:53:21 AM »

Ok, I agree that there's more to be gained from making larger vehicles more efficient, as small hybrids are already fairly efficient.
...and these changes would happen by necessity if we simply made the standards the same.  The appeal of modern SUVs and light Trucks has been that they have equivalent acceleration and handling as most sedans but with more cargo space and a higher vantage point.  The only reason they can offer this is because they don't have the same limitations.

Back as early as the 1990s it was accepted that a stock pickup or SUV (which were just becoming a thing) would not outpace a generic sedan - if you wanted/needed a pickup or SUV you sacrificed acceleration and top speed.  But as the fuel standards tightened the manufacturers lobbied to have their own category, ironically arguing that it would "hurt sales" if these larger vehicles could not match the performance of smaller vehicles.  And of course they were right, as they've collectively increased their market share over the last three decades.

The 'free-market capitalists' might argue that 'market forces' should dictate here, and I get the sentiment.  Large vehicle sales do track with gasoline prices.  But currently we're not even letting market forces decide, as we've given a big advantage in terms of lower standards for larger vehicles.

Don't disagree that here's a legislative bias at work. But I'll also point out that vehicles like today's CUVs have existed and sold in very good numbers for pretty much as long as there have been vehicles.


Look at that ground clearance, step in height, loading height, upright seating position, etc. It's pretty easy for me to see a direct lineage between that Ford Model A and a new Ford Escape. The combination of functionality and ease of use has been popular since long before the 90s.


I can't agree with the above rationale. Ground clearance and the associated ride height of a 1920's vintage vehicle was dictated not by consumer preference but by the roads of the time, many of which were unpaved and prone to turn to quagmires when rain and vehicle traffic combined. High ground clearance was a necessity ( though AWD would have been a useful option had it existed at the time!) That doesn't change the fact that "longer, lower, wider", whether or not it was articulated as such, has been the trend for most of the years since this photo was taken. I'm pretty sure that even the Model A pictured rode lower than the horse-drawn carriages it replaced.

While a higher-sitting vehicle has some obvious benefits, I suspect that the popularity of "big, tall and boxy" has more to do with the power of American advertising that a sudden realization on the part of the buying public that this is what they neeeeded all along- after decades of wanting the exact opposite.

Paper Chaser

  • Stubble
  • **
  • Posts: 231
Re: Honda Fit discontinued for the US
« Reply #106 on: July 27, 2020, 11:55:17 AM »

So the system may be rigged a bit, but buyers clearly want the SUV/CUV/Truck form factor because they deem it to be a reasonable compromise of functionality and ease of use. And as the drawbacks of the large vehicles are reduced (poor fuel economy, low power, minimal luxury features, etc) I'd expect that trend to continue.

This is the crux of the problem. 

First we have to decide where the acceptable limit is for "large vehicles".  Currently one cannot operate a passenger vehicle over 22.5' total length or 8' width or a gross weight of over 10,000lbs without a special permit (i.e. commercial driver's license). We could debate whether this should be kept the same or increased/decreased.

Second, how will the "drawbects of the large vehicles" be reduced.  In recent decades we've allowed them to be reduced at the expense of emissions and fuel consumption (i.e. different CAPE standards). 'Technological advances' can only close the gap so far, as physics will ultimately play a heavy hand at keeping a large heavy truck less efficient than a smaller, fuel efficient vehicle.

The drawbacks of large vehicles from a consumer standpoint used to be lack of luxury or features, poor power, poor road manners, poor safety (for occupants) and poor fuel economy. This meant that those who actually needed the large vehicles were the primary buyers as they had no choice but to put up with the many drawbacks. Now, those drawbacks are pretty much all gone now, with fuel economy being the last remaining deterrent (even though it's improved a lot in the last 10 years). The truck/SUV/CUV market is competitive enough that it's improving these vehicles very quickly. You can get trucks that are just as fast, luxurious, and docile on the street as many new sedans. They have all of the same safety features. Half ton trucks are nearing 30mpg highway, which a large sedan would've struggled with 10-15 years ago. Cheap gasoline has allowed sales of large vehicles to balloon already. If you can then improve fuel economy on top of that enough that the average consumer doesn't feel much if any financial hardship, then that's the tipping point.

For a very long time, if you wanted good fuel economy, you had to buy a small car.
Hybrid tech came along and made it so that large cars now get small car fuel economy (Camry hybrid vs Corolla hybrid example). A big drawback for driving a large car was reduced, or to look at it another way, a big advantage for the small car was negated.
PHEV tech is making it so that large CUVs can get the same fuel economy as hybrids (Lincoln Aviator/Ford Explorer PHEV, Toyota Rav 4 Prime, etc). When a Prius owner sees a new CUV that's more capable and easier to use getting the same fuel economy, they might rethink buying another Prius next time they're in the market.
Full electrification takes it even further and narrows the gap even more. (Full electric, mainstream pickups and CUVs are expected in the 2022-2025 range).

If a person is new car shopping, and the choice between a larger vehicle and a smaller vehicle comes down to the larger vehicle costing $50/yr more in electricity, most will shrug their shoulders and opt for the larger option. Yes, the larger one is less efficient, but the gap has narrowed enough that it's not a detriment for most buyers. Since we're MMMers, we can still benefit from this on the used market 3-10 years after these vehicles are sold new. That's why I'm not too upset about losing the Fit as an option over that same timeline. We'll have plenty of Mustachian options. They just won't offer manual transmissions or as much driver engagement as the Fit. But like the general public overall, most MMMers don't really care about those things in a vehicle.

Paper Chaser

  • Stubble
  • **
  • Posts: 231
Re: Honda Fit discontinued for the US
« Reply #107 on: July 27, 2020, 12:29:53 PM »

Don't disagree that here's a legislative bias at work. But I'll also point out that vehicles like today's CUVs have existed and sold in very good numbers for pretty much as long as there have been vehicles.

Look at that ground clearance, step in height, loading height, upright seating position, etc. It's pretty easy for me to see a direct lineage between that Ford Model A and a new Ford Escape. The combination of functionality and ease of use has been popular since long before the 90s.




I can't agree with the above rationale. Ground clearance and the associated ride height of a 1920's vintage vehicle was dictated not by consumer preference but by the roads of the time, many of which were unpaved and prone to turn to quagmires when rain and vehicle traffic combined. High ground clearance was a necessity ( though AWD would have been a useful option had it existed at the time!) That doesn't change the fact that "longer, lower, wider", whether or not it was articulated as such, has been the trend for most of the years since this photo was taken. I'm pretty sure that even the Model A pictured rode lower than the horse-drawn carriages it replaced.

While a higher-sitting vehicle has some obvious benefits, I suspect that the popularity of "big, tall and boxy" has more to do with the power of American advertising that a sudden realization on the part of the buying public that this is what they neeeeded all along- after decades of wanting the exact opposite.

Have you driven on American roads lately? Especially in a place that sees winter and frequent road salt use? They're not pristine ribbons of smooth asphalt. Having room for more suspension articulation can make a difference in ride quality. Especially as brakes and wheels grow larger and tire sidewalls shrink.

The car pictured was likely lower than the horse drawn carriages it replaced. I'd argue a big reason for that was because it was difficult for many to climb up into those carriages, just like it's difficult for most old, wealthy, new vehicle buyers to get into/out of modern sedans and small cars. They're just different extremes of the same issue: ease of use. The first rule of making a product is that it should be easy to use. If your buyer struggles to get in/out, and they have any other options, guess what they're going to choose?

If you look at a family sedan from the 50s or 60s (seemingly when sedans really took over the market), they sat higher than modern family sedans, and perhaps more importantly, the seating position was a more natural and upright one, rather than having your backside closer to the floor with legs extended far out in front. Vehicle designers call this an "H Point", and I think there's a pretty ideal range where if you go any higher (Ox carts) or lower (Modern small cars) they become a hindrance to usage. Modern cars have gotten so low, after decades of chasing performance and fuel economy that they're being largely rejected now by buyers for taller options that get worse fuel economy. Another unintended consequence of CAFE regulations that Nereo mentions.

That being said, I do agree with you that marketing, "image", and not wanting what was popular 20 years ago all come into play as well.

nereo

  • Senior Mustachian
  • ********
  • Posts: 13084
  • Location: Just south of Canada
    • Here's how you can support science today:
Re: Honda Fit discontinued for the US
« Reply #108 on: July 27, 2020, 12:55:30 PM »
why do you keep referencing vehicles built 50-89 years ago? How are those applicable to today?  I don't understand the point you are trying to make.

Yes, I have driven on American roads lately.  Yes in places with winter and salt.  As you one would expect given my profile.

Seating positions of sedans from decades past were not conducive for long-distance driving, or to survive an impact.

Paper Chaser

  • Stubble
  • **
  • Posts: 231
Re: Honda Fit discontinued for the US
« Reply #109 on: July 28, 2020, 04:56:01 AM »
why do you keep referencing vehicles built 50-89 years ago? How are those applicable to today?  I don't understand the point you are trying to make.

Yes, I have driven on American roads lately.  Yes in places with winter and salt.  As you one would expect given my profile.

Seating positions of sedans from decades past were not conducive for long-distance driving, or to survive an impact.

I guess I'm trying to illustrate that I think modern sedans and small cars have gone so far chasing fuel economy, handling, etc that they're no longer as easy to use as they once were. And that at least a part of the surge in CUV/truck popularity is because they took a lot of the best things that people like about old vehicles and put them into modern packaging. They had a comfortable ride. They were easy to use. You sat more upright which helped visibility. These are all areas where different vehicles in the past have performed well. These are also areas where most modern small vehicles and sedans receive frequent complaints.

Seating position has little to do with crash safety. Old cars had terrible crash safety because there was no engineering development of crash structures, not because driver's butts were higher off the floor boards. Most modern CUVs have crash safety on par with small cars because they share the same platforms as their sedan and hatchback counterparts. The IIHS crash testing for the Fit and the HR-V (which is just a taller Fit) are identical, with the HR-V undergoing more tests in more categories than the Fit. You can now get many of the same accident avoidance features and safety tech in big trucks that you'd find on other vehicles too.

So again, the loss of the Fit sucks for the small number of people that want a small, tossable hatchback with a manual trans option. But how many people here were buying them new in order to maintain strong demand for them? In order for us to buy cheap used cars that we want, somebody has to buy them new first. If you aren't willing to vote with your wallet in the marketplace, and buy a new vehicle now, then you get to take your chances with whatever is available on the used market in a few years.

nereo

  • Senior Mustachian
  • ********
  • Posts: 13084
  • Location: Just south of Canada
    • Here's how you can support science today:
Re: Honda Fit discontinued for the US
« Reply #110 on: July 28, 2020, 06:48:06 AM »
Well this be an example own cognitive biases at play, but this is the first time Iíve ever heard someone allege that new sedans are somehow less comfortable than cars of decades past, or that enhanced efficiency is somehow a net negative. Iíve even known a few classic car enthusiasts that spend their hours restoring antiques but will admit that in terms of comfort and reliability the newer models are simply better. I personally found the fit to be far more comfortable than other compact cars from the 80s or 90s

That said, this apples to oranges comparison of the Fit to larger vehicles makes little sense to me. I donít think anyone on this forum is arguing that Americans favor large cars,  particularly when fuel prices remain low. But weíve also actively encouraged this through favorable emission standards, and through not adjusting the gas tax, and by keeping gasoline prices low, by offering cheap financing and government bailouts, requiring minimum numbers of parking spaces, permitting 22.5í non commercial vehicles, etc.
In other words, vehicle demands largely matches the world weíve designed. Itís also telling that in countries which have taken a different approach smaller cats thrive. Generally, we get the results we have planned for.

As for blaming this forum and its members For the demise of the Honda Fit - that seems ludicrously out of line. As I outlined in another thread, fewer than a thousand members are responsible for the bulk of posts, and there is less than ten thousand who have made at least one post in the last three years (and About 40% of those are outside the US). Collectively we are such a negligible fraction of the car buying public.


Paper Chaser

  • Stubble
  • **
  • Posts: 231
Re: Honda Fit discontinued for the US
« Reply #111 on: July 28, 2020, 08:31:03 AM »
Well this be an example own cognitive biases at play, but this is the first time Iíve ever heard someone allege that new sedans are somehow less comfortable than cars of decades past, or that enhanced efficiency is somehow a net negative. Iíve even known a few classic car enthusiasts that spend their hours restoring antiques but will admit that in terms of comfort and reliability the newer models are simply better. I personally found the fit to be far more comfortable than other compact cars from the 80s or 90s

New cars are objectively better in all kinds of ways. I'm not suggesting otherwise. They're far more fuel efficient, but to achieve that they had to sculpt rooflines so much that it's easy to hit your head getting into/out of the front and rear seats. They can be very comfortable once you're in a seat, while at the same time they can also be difficult for people to get into/out of due to the low step-in height, and the relationship between the seat bottom and the floor of the vehicle. Thicker pillars (crash safety) and laid back windshields (Fuel economy) combined with raised beltlines (crash safety) and lower seating positions (packaging) can make visibility more difficult than in the past. These are all very noticeable drawbacks for old people with reduced mobility. And guess who's buying the largest percentage of new vehicles these days? They're also noticeable drawbacks for people with young kids in modern car seats to be loaded into the back of a sedan. Guess who has historically bought lots of new vehicles as family needs dictate? If it's a battle to get their pride and joy into the back of a vehicle, people will grow tired of it pretty quickly. It's easier to get kids into/out of things with larger door openings like vans, trucks and CUVs.

These people could be buying small cars or sedans that are more fuel efficient than the trucks and SUVs they ultimately end up with, and if something with a body shaped like the sedans of the 70s or 80s were still available I think you'd see some reduction in the migration to large trucks and CUVs. Instead, they're buying bigger things because they're easier to use than the smaller things. Or perhaps "bigger" isn't the right word. Maybe I should say "taller" ie the Fit ---> HR-V example. They're more comfortable to get into/out of, or load things into/out of for the majority of people buying them new. I'm not so sure why that's a controversial statement.

That said, this apples to oranges comparison of the Fit to larger vehicles makes little sense to me. I donít think anyone on this forum is arguing that Americans favor large cars,  particularly when fuel prices remain low. But weíve also actively encouraged this through favorable emission standards, and through not adjusting the gas tax, and by keeping gasoline prices low, by offering cheap financing and government bailouts, requiring minimum numbers of parking spaces, permitting 22.5í non commercial vehicles, etc.
In other words, vehicle demands largely matches the world weíve designed. Itís also telling that in countries which have taken a different approach smaller cats thrive. Generally, we get the results we have planned for.

I guess wording may be contributing to some miscommunication here. This tangent about larger vehicles kind of started when I brought up that the Fit is effectively being replaced in the US market by the HRV. The HRV isn't benefitting from any loop holes in regulations. They're classified the same as the Fit because they're largely the same thing. They're the same platform underneath. They get nearly the same fuel economy. The same is true for larger CUVs that share platforms with larger cars. Obviously, if somebody is going from a Fit to a Suburban, that's a huge change. But the market is shifting more subtly than that, and small, inexpensive and fuel efficient options still exist for buyers that want or need those things. They're just taller.
And ultimately, hybridization and electrification are greatly reducing the gap between smaller and larger vehicles too.


As for blaming this forum and its members For the demise of the Honda Fit - that seems ludicrously out of line. As I outlined in another thread, fewer than a thousand members are responsible for the bulk of posts, and there is less than ten thousand who have made at least one post in the last three years (and About 40% of those are outside the US). Collectively we are such a negligible fraction of the car buying public.

I'm not blaming those here specifically for anything. Sorry if it seemed like I was. My point was that the product being eliminated from our market was not purchased by enough people for it to remain on sale in our market. It's being replaced with a similar product with a slightly different set of benefits and drawbacks that appeal to more people. It's also more likely to increase profits for the manufacturer at the same time (yay shareholders).

It comes off the same way to me as people who don't vote, but then complain about elected officials. If you're going to have an opinion about these things, you need to do your best to influence the situation while you still have the chance. Complaining about the result of a situation that you did nothing to influence is just complainypants behavior that I find unproductive. If people here are ardent buyers of new, small vehicles like the Fit and they want to complain that seems totally fair to me. But I think we both know that's not the case. It's the same story on any car website anytime something for enthusiasts is cancelled due to slow sales, and poor profits. People that never had any intent to buy them new complain about having their options reduced. Cool. Did you do your part to prevent that thing you didn't want from happening?

alsoknownasDean

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 2187
  • Age: 36
  • Location: Melbourne, Australia
Re: Honda Fit discontinued for the US
« Reply #112 on: July 28, 2020, 09:08:33 AM »
New cars are objectively better in all kinds of ways. I'm not suggesting otherwise. They're far more fuel efficient, but to achieve that they had to sculpt rooflines so much that it's easy to hit your head getting into/out of the front and rear seats. They can be very comfortable once you're in a seat, while at the same time they can also be difficult for people to get into/out of due to the low step-in height, and the relationship between the seat bottom and the floor of the vehicle.

Are modern cars really all that much lower than cars from the 70s-90s?

I've just done a couple of comparisons. 2020 Corolla and 1990 Camry, close enough on most external dimensions, the Corolla is 35mm higher. 1995 Accord and a new Civic? The Civic is higher, and there's not much in the other exterior dimensions. The 1980's Ford Falcons that I was driven around in as a kid likely had a lower height than any modern passenger car. I don't remember very many SUVs on the roads back then, and people did just fine.
« Last Edit: July 28, 2020, 09:12:14 AM by alsoknownasDean »

NorthernBlitz

  • Bristles
  • ***
  • Posts: 441
Re: Honda Fit discontinued for the US
« Reply #113 on: July 28, 2020, 09:20:03 AM »
I'm not blaming those here specifically for anything. Sorry if it seemed like I was. My point was that the product being eliminated from our market was not purchased by enough people for it to remain on sale in our market. It's being replaced with a similar product with a slightly different set of benefits and drawbacks that appeal to more people. It's also more likely to increase profits for the manufacturer at the same time (yay shareholders).

It comes off the same way to me as people who don't vote, but then complain about elected officials. If you're going to have an opinion about these things, you need to do your best to influence the situation while you still have the chance. Complaining about the result of a situation that you did nothing to influence is just complainypants behavior that I find unproductive. If people here are ardent buyers of new, small vehicles like the Fit and they want to complain that seems totally fair to me. But I think we both know that's not the case. It's the same story on any car website anytime something for enthusiasts is cancelled due to slow sales, and poor profits. People that never had any intent to buy them new complain about having their options reduced. Cool. Did you do your part to prevent that thing you didn't want from happening?

It's OT, but this is the same for video games for me.

I like single player, story driven video games. Since video games depreciate faster than just about anything, and there is no real difference in playing a game when it releases or 6 months after release I buy games long after they release when prices are 1/3 or less of the original price.

Not surprisingly, the market makes fewer of the games I like because people like me make the rational choice to wait and buy at a fraction of the cost when the developer doesn't make much (if any) money at that point.

Also not surprisingly, they make a shit ton of FPS or annual sports games where young players play on line and pay ridiculous amounts of money on micro transactions. I'd imagine that these games have insane profits because they require less effort to make and must make so much money based on initial and recurring revenue.

Given these behaviors, it's rational for game makers to go against my personal interest in order to maximize profits. And my purchasing choices drive at least part of their decision.

TomTX

  • Magnum Stache
  • ******
  • Posts: 4120
  • Location: Texas
Re: Honda Fit discontinued for the US
« Reply #114 on: July 28, 2020, 11:26:52 AM »
Are modern cars really all that much lower than cars from the 70s-90s?

I drove a '67 Mercury Cougar in High School and it was quite low to the ground.

Paper Chaser

  • Stubble
  • **
  • Posts: 231
Re: Honda Fit discontinued for the US
« Reply #115 on: July 28, 2020, 01:17:13 PM »
New cars are objectively better in all kinds of ways. I'm not suggesting otherwise. They're far more fuel efficient, but to achieve that they had to sculpt rooflines so much that it's easy to hit your head getting into/out of the front and rear seats. They can be very comfortable once you're in a seat, while at the same time they can also be difficult for people to get into/out of due to the low step-in height, and the relationship between the seat bottom and the floor of the vehicle.

Are modern cars really all that much lower than cars from the 70s-90s?

I've just done a couple of comparisons. 2020 Corolla and 1990 Camry, close enough on most external dimensions, the Corolla is 35mm higher. 1995 Accord and a new Civic? The Civic is higher, and there's not much in the other exterior dimensions. The 1980's Ford Falcons that I was driven around in as a kid likely had a lower height than any modern passenger car. I don't remember very many SUVs on the roads back then, and people did just fine.

If you read the entire sentence that you quoted, I also mentioned aspects other than height that can make it more difficult to get into/out of modern vehicles. There's more to it than just height alone (I'm not sure if you're referring to ground clearance, or total vehicle height, but it doesn't really matter). It's not just a single factor, it's several factors and their relationship to one another. Step in height, the seat height, door opening, pillar/roof shape, pillar/roof thickness etc all come into play. I referenced "H points" once already in this thread, and it's a legitimate factor in modern vehicle design. But an ideal H point doesn't matter if the step in height is too low or too high, or if the door opening is a bizarre shape that requires people to contort themselves, or if the pillar shape and thickness mean tall people frequently hit their heads on it etc.

There are completely legitimate reasons why modern vehicles are shaped the way they are. There are engineering meetings and design briefings and tons of decisions made that impact this. None of those decisions are perfect. They all have trade offs. Most modern windshields are laid back much further than most older vehicles to improve aerodynamics. This has the benefits of reduced wind noise and better fuel economy. But it can have drawbacks too if it intrudes on the door opening or pushes the base of the A pillars too far into the driver's sightlines. Maybe that drawback can be reduced by changing the seating position, but that obviously has consequences too. Same for back windows, which if sloped too much can reduce rear seat headroom, make it tough to load/unload, and alter the trunk shape. Even hatchbacks aren't immune to this as tons of hatches have gone from pretty upright and functional to increasingly laid down/sloped forward for better aero.

Ichabod

  • 5 O'Clock Shadow
  • *
  • Posts: 45
Re: Honda Fit discontinued for the US
« Reply #116 on: July 28, 2020, 04:26:26 PM »
Large vehicles have other negative externalities besides emissions. Road maintenance, safety, sight-lines, and space. It would be nice if states counteracted this with registration fees by weight.

That said, replacing Fits with HRVs and Insights isn't a big problem.

I'm interested to see if the trend for larger vehicles persists if/when fully electric cars become mainstream. Large vehicles will have either less range or bigger batteries making them even more expensive and heavier. Consumers appear to be sensitive to range, so perhaps they will prefer smaller electric vehicles with longer range. Perhaps consumers will adjust range expectations or improved infrastructure will reduce range requirements.

Optimiser

  • Pencil Stache
  • ****
  • Posts: 677
  • Age: 37
  • Location: PNW
Re: Honda Fit discontinued for the US
« Reply #117 on: July 29, 2020, 09:40:58 AM »
Large vehicles have other negative externalities besides emissions. Road maintenance, safety, sight-lines, and space. It would be nice if states counteracted this with registration fees by weight.

That said, replacing Fits with HRVs and Insights isn't a big problem.

I'm interested to see if the trend for larger vehicles persists if/when fully electric cars become mainstream. Large vehicles will have either less range or bigger batteries making them even more expensive and heavier. Consumers appear to be sensitive to range, so perhaps they will prefer smaller electric vehicles with longer range. Perhaps consumers will adjust range expectations or improved infrastructure will reduce range requirements.

I am curious about this too. The Cybertruck and new Hummer don't make me very optimistic though. At least with the Hummer I expect the price to be outrageous, so that might help a little, but the Cybertruck will be large, have decent range, and a reasonable price (for non-mustachians).
« Last Edit: July 30, 2020, 02:59:01 PM by Optimiser »

Just Joe

  • Magnum Stache
  • ******
  • Posts: 3886
Re: Honda Fit discontinued for the US
« Reply #118 on: July 30, 2020, 02:33:44 PM »
Good discussion. Paper Chaser I understand the points you are trying to make.

I compare the mid-1930s cars to crossovers. The Model A was so small. The mid-1930s car had similar size, similar seating position, similar entry space if the running boards are ignored. Clearly the 2020 crossover is far better at everything but perhaps style. ;)

We chose a medium size crossover last time we needed a family vehicle b/c the sedan we were driving (still driving at 21 years old) is just not as comfortable or spacious. It requires more effort to enter and exit b/c the seating position is lower to the ground.

FWIW the crossover gets nearly the same gas mileage as the older sedan on the highway.

People don't want to compromise their wants for needs if they can afford to.

NorthernBlitz

  • Bristles
  • ***
  • Posts: 441
Re: Honda Fit discontinued for the US
« Reply #119 on: July 31, 2020, 08:54:21 AM »

Not to mention the fact that applying the same technology to a small or mid-size car, minus mostly-unnecessary AWD would produce a vehicle getting 50 or 60 mpg. I have to laugh at the mindset that brags about 20mpg or so in a modern vehicle. Yeah, that's impressive mileage. For 1976.

This is a critical point that many often seem to miss.  Due to physics, if a big/heavy vehicle can be made more fuel efficient . . . a small/light vehicle can be made WAY MORE fuel efficient.  40+mpg isn't terrible for a big truck, but it will always suck when you compare the same optimizations made for a smaller car.

Force = mass * acceleration
Power = Work/Elapsed Time
Work = Force / distance

It's physics people!  Reduce a vehicle's mass and you can get the same Force and Power with less energy.

Haven't you heard: science is no longer a valid topic for a portion of the population.

It's kind of all of the population, no?

We all just take it on an issue by issue basis.

Does it confirm my bias seems to be the only question most people care about these days.

alltheccdebt

  • 5 O'Clock Shadow
  • *
  • Posts: 15
Re: Honda Fit discontinued for the US
« Reply #120 on: August 01, 2020, 08:44:18 AM »
Easy button alternative to a fit is a post-dieselgate VW. They are coming off the fix and can be had very cheap with a 155k mile powertrain warranty. Combine that with their reliability and fuel economy and it's really a no brainer.

I bought a 2013 Golf with 104k miles on it for $7000, which means it's still under warranty for another 51k miles. All the maintenance is easily DIY-able including the upcoming 130k mile timing belt service. You can also buy all of your parts from FCP Euro which has a lifetime warranty on everything they sell, including oil. Just pay to ship the old stuff back which works out to ~$20 every 10k miles for oil changes, and my 260k mile timing belt service will basically be free.

Had mine for less than a month before I took it on a 7200 mile road trip out to California with the dog visiting a bunch of national parks. Credit card rewards covered all of the hotels so my only real cost was food and fuel. And fuel wasn't that bad despite cruising at 80mph the whole way and doing some off-road trails in Moab and northern California. 40mpg average for the entire trip. I have no doubt I can get 300k reliable miles out of this car, although I'll probably have to replace the DPF once.

RWD

  • Magnum Stache
  • ******
  • Posts: 4176
  • Location: Mississippi
Re: Honda Fit discontinued for the US
« Reply #121 on: August 01, 2020, 09:22:56 AM »
Easy button alternative to a fit is a post-dieselgate VW.
[...]
40mpg average for the entire trip.
Diesel has a higher energy density (and is more expensive) than gasoline so this is equivalent to 34 mpg in a normal vehicle.

This isn't really relevant to the discussion of what will be available new (and used in the future). VW is no longer selling diesel vehicles here.

facepalm

  • Bristles
  • ***
  • Posts: 369
  • Location: California
Re: Honda Fit discontinued for the US
« Reply #122 on: August 01, 2020, 12:41:19 PM »
So, I'm coming off a truck (Chevy Colorado) and the Fit is on my radar (as is the Camry). Local dealer seems to have more than a few on the lot. I'll be looking to buy new (NOT used--I'm retiring in two and will hopefully keep the vehicle a long time).

I'm all for saving money, but is there one trim that might be better than the next? I don't need a sunroof (don't even know if that is an option). Really all I need is Apple Carplay. I had that in my Civic Si and really loved the integration of Apple/Google maps.

RWD

  • Magnum Stache
  • ******
  • Posts: 4176
  • Location: Mississippi
Re: Honda Fit discontinued for the US
« Reply #123 on: August 01, 2020, 02:00:58 PM »
So, I'm coming off a truck (Chevy Colorado) and the Fit is on my radar (as is the Camry). Local dealer seems to have more than a few on the lot. I'll be looking to buy new (NOT used--I'm retiring in two and will hopefully keep the vehicle a long time).

I'm all for saving money, but is there one trim that might be better than the next? I don't need a sunroof (don't even know if that is an option). Really all I need is Apple Carplay. I had that in my Civic Si and really loved the integration of Apple/Google maps.
For the 2020 Fit you'll need to get at least the Sport model to get Apply CarPlay. If you want the manual transmission then you can't get any trims higher than the Sport (i.e. EX and EX-L only have the CVT automatic). The EX adds some safety tech, adaptive cruise (depending on your use case a must-have), moonroof, etc. The EX-L adds leather bits, heated seats, heated side mirrors, etc.

For a full list of features scroll down to Trims & Specs here:
https://automobiles.honda.com/fit

scottish

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1719
  • Location: Ottawa
Re: Honda Fit discontinued for the US
« Reply #124 on: August 01, 2020, 05:48:43 PM »
Easy button alternative to a fit is a post-dieselgate VW.
[...]
40mpg average for the entire trip.
Diesel has a higher energy density (and is more expensive) than gasoline so this is equivalent to 34 mpg in a normal vehicle.

This isn't really relevant to the discussion of what will be available new (and used in the future). VW is no longer selling diesel vehicles here.

Pretty sure that's backward.   The higher the octane number the higher the energy density.   Diesel is below regular gasoline which is below premium gasoline.



Diesel should be about 45 on this picture...

RWD

  • Magnum Stache
  • ******
  • Posts: 4176
  • Location: Mississippi
Re: Honda Fit discontinued for the US
« Reply #125 on: August 01, 2020, 07:12:21 PM »
Easy button alternative to a fit is a post-dieselgate VW.
[...]
40mpg average for the entire trip.
Diesel has a higher energy density (and is more expensive) than gasoline so this is equivalent to 34 mpg in a normal vehicle.

This isn't really relevant to the discussion of what will be available new (and used in the future). VW is no longer selling diesel vehicles here.

Pretty sure that's backward.   The higher the octane number the higher the energy density.   Diesel is below regular gasoline which is below premium gasoline.

https://imgs.xkcd.com/comics/log_scale.png

Diesel should be about 45 on this picture...

That image is for specific energy (energy per mass). For comparing miles per gallon (a unit of volume) you should be comparing energy density (energy per volume). Diesel is 38.6 MJ/L while gasoline is 34.2 MJ/L and E10 gasoline is 33.2 MJ/L (what you'd find at a normal pump). Premium gasoline doesn't contain more energy, it just burns at higher pressure/temperature which is more efficient.

LennStar

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1918
  • Location: Germany
Re: Honda Fit discontinued for the US
« Reply #126 on: August 02, 2020, 03:24:51 AM »
Pretty sure that's backward.   The higher the octane number the higher the energy density.   Diesel is below regular gasoline which is below premium gasoline.

Diesel should be about 45 on this picture...

Octane Number states how easy something will ignite. It has nothing to do with the inherent energy.
That is also the reason why this "ultra" "premium" or whatever the name does save fuel if you use it for a normal (unadjusted) engine, because that property is not used.
Contrary, if you use normal fuel in an high octane engine, you may get not fully burned fuel, which is bad. (Ask your local mechanic for the details, I don't know them.)

zolotiyeruki

  • Magnum Stache
  • ******
  • Posts: 3593
  • Location: State: Denial
Re: Honda Fit discontinued for the US
« Reply #127 on: August 02, 2020, 08:16:44 PM »
Actually, I believe both RWD and LennStar are incorrect, although LennStar.  Higher octane fuel is required for higher-compression engines (which usually correlates to high-performance cars), because lower-octane fuel will autoignite at the higher compression, and cause knocking in your engine.  Premium (higher-octane) fuel often comes with more additives for various purposes, but won't give you any additional fuel economy in a car that burns low-octane fuel.

One thing that hasn't been pointed out is how badly trunk lids have been affected by the push for higher fuel economy.  The smoothly-sloping roof line, plus a desire to retain rearward visibility, means that the rear glass has crept inexorably toward the rear of the vehicle, cutting into the space formerly used by the trunk.  Compare, for example, a good ol' Crown Vic to...well, just about any current sedan.  It's comical.

Paper Chaser's point about pillar size is a good one--I daily drive a '95 Corolla, and every time I sit in something newer, I am struck by how badly visibility has degraded over the last 25 years, due to tightening safety regulations (note: this is not a judgement on the value of these regulations, I'm just pointing out the cause for the change).

RWD

  • Magnum Stache
  • ******
  • Posts: 4176
  • Location: Mississippi
Re: Honda Fit discontinued for the US
« Reply #128 on: August 02, 2020, 08:31:27 PM »
Actually, I believe both RWD and LennStar are incorrect [...]
Where was I incorrect?

AccidentialMustache

  • Bristles
  • ***
  • Posts: 344
Re: Honda Fit discontinued for the US
« Reply #129 on: August 02, 2020, 10:32:48 PM »
Paper Chaser's point about pillar size is a good one--I daily drive a '95 Corolla, and every time I sit in something newer, I am struck by how badly visibility has degraded over the last 25 years, due to tightening safety regulations (note: this is not a judgement on the value of these regulations, I'm just pointing out the cause for the change).

You sound like DW. She longs for something like the mid-90s mazda mpv she/we had as a grandma hand-me-down in grad school and for a few years while we were first married. I have to admit it had great visibility -- it just wasn't very comfortable to drive for me. I never found a good position no matter how much I moved things around. The fit is much better in that reguard.

LennStar

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1918
  • Location: Germany
Re: Honda Fit discontinued for the US
« Reply #130 on: August 03, 2020, 03:33:18 AM »
Actually, I believe both RWD and LennStar are incorrect, although LennStar.  Higher octane fuel is required for higher-compression engines (which usually correlates to high-performance cars), because lower-octane fuel will autoignite at the higher compression, and cause knocking in your engine.  Premium (higher-octane) fuel often comes with more additives for various purposes, but won't give you any additional fuel economy in a car that burns low-octane fuel.

Oh yes, surely that way round. Sorry, I only had it exlained to me once I am far away from being a car freak ;)

 
Actually, I believe both RWD and LennStar are incorrect [...]
Where was I incorrect?

Where you stated that Octane is a measurement of fuel energy density, which it isn't.

RWD

  • Magnum Stache
  • ******
  • Posts: 4176
  • Location: Mississippi
Re: Honda Fit discontinued for the US
« Reply #131 on: August 03, 2020, 06:30:32 AM »
Actually, I believe both RWD and LennStar are incorrect [...]
Where was I incorrect?

Where you stated that Octane is a measurement of fuel energy density, which it isn't.

I definitely did not state that. That was scottish.

zolotiyeruki

  • Magnum Stache
  • ******
  • Posts: 3593
  • Location: State: Denial
Re: Honda Fit discontinued for the US
« Reply #132 on: August 03, 2020, 06:59:33 AM »
Actually, I believe both RWD and LennStar are incorrect [...]
Where was I incorrect?

Where you stated that Octane is a measurement of fuel energy density, which it isn't.

I definitely did not state that. That was scottish.
I believe you were incorrect in saying that the higher-octane fuel provides greater efficiency.  Unless I misunderstood you, which is certainly possible!

RWD

  • Magnum Stache
  • ******
  • Posts: 4176
  • Location: Mississippi
Re: Honda Fit discontinued for the US
« Reply #133 on: August 03, 2020, 07:21:53 AM »
Actually, I believe both RWD and LennStar are incorrect [...]
Where was I incorrect?

Where you stated that Octane is a measurement of fuel energy density, which it isn't.

I definitely did not state that. That was scottish.
I believe you were incorrect in saying that the higher-octane fuel provides greater efficiency.  Unless I misunderstood you, which is certainly possible!
Thanks for the response. Technically I said that burning at a higher pressure/temperature is more efficient not the higher octane itself. Higher-octane fuel allows for that without pinging/knocking but the vehicle itself needs to have higher compression to take advantage of the higher octane fuel. From the article I linked, emphasis mine (I think we can trust MIT on technical stuff):
Quote
It allows performance-oriented engines (specifically, those with higher compression ratios) to burn gasoline at higher pressures and higher temperatures. These conditions at the moment of combustion create better thermodynamic efficiency, so a greater percentage of the gasolineís heat energy gets converted into motive power.

nereo

  • Senior Mustachian
  • ********
  • Posts: 13084
  • Location: Just south of Canada
    • Here's how you can support science today:
Re: Honda Fit discontinued for the US
« Reply #134 on: August 03, 2020, 09:41:01 AM »
So, I'm coming off a truck (Chevy Colorado) and the Fit is on my radar (as is the Camry). Local dealer seems to have more than a few on the lot. I'll be looking to buy new (NOT used--I'm retiring in two and will hopefully keep the vehicle a long time).

I'm all for saving money, but is there one trim that might be better than the next? I don't need a sunroof (don't even know if that is an option). Really all I need is Apple Carplay. I had that in my Civic Si and really loved the integration of Apple/Google maps.
For the 2020 Fit you'll need to get at least the Sport model to get Apply CarPlay. If you want the manual transmission then you can't get any trims higher than the Sport (i.e. EX and EX-L only have the CVT automatic). The EX adds some safety tech, adaptive cruise (depending on your use case a must-have), moonroof, etc. The EX-L adds leather bits, heated seats, heated side mirrors, etc.

For a full list of features scroll down to Trims & Specs here:
https://automobiles.honda.com/fit

Just pointing out that you can install an aftermarket receiver that will give you Apple CarPlay for under $300, and it'll be a 'better' stereo than the OEM ('better' defined by potential audio quality, particularly if you replace the POS factory speakers with even a basic $40 pair). 

In other words, I wouldn't pay  several hundred extra for a trim line just to get ApplePlay.

RWD

  • Magnum Stache
  • ******
  • Posts: 4176
  • Location: Mississippi
Re: Honda Fit discontinued for the US
« Reply #135 on: August 03, 2020, 11:18:10 AM »
So, I'm coming off a truck (Chevy Colorado) and the Fit is on my radar (as is the Camry). Local dealer seems to have more than a few on the lot. I'll be looking to buy new (NOT used--I'm retiring in two and will hopefully keep the vehicle a long time).

I'm all for saving money, but is there one trim that might be better than the next? I don't need a sunroof (don't even know if that is an option). Really all I need is Apple Carplay. I had that in my Civic Si and really loved the integration of Apple/Google maps.
For the 2020 Fit you'll need to get at least the Sport model to get Apply CarPlay. If you want the manual transmission then you can't get any trims higher than the Sport (i.e. EX and EX-L only have the CVT automatic). The EX adds some safety tech, adaptive cruise (depending on your use case a must-have), moonroof, etc. The EX-L adds leather bits, heated seats, heated side mirrors, etc.

For a full list of features scroll down to Trims & Specs here:
https://automobiles.honda.com/fit

Just pointing out that you can install an aftermarket receiver that will give you Apple CarPlay for under $300, and it'll be a 'better' stereo than the OEM ('better' defined by potential audio quality, particularly if you replace the POS factory speakers with even a basic $40 pair). 

In other words, I wouldn't pay  several hundred extra for a trim line just to get ApplePlay.

The Sport trim also adds two speakers (6 vs 4) over the LX model. And has alloy wheels instead of hubcaps. Whether that's worth the $1,410 premium depends on you.

Paper Chaser

  • Stubble
  • **
  • Posts: 231
Re: Honda Fit discontinued for the US
« Reply #136 on: August 04, 2020, 04:47:39 AM »
Easy button alternative to a fit is a post-dieselgate VW. They are coming off the fix and can be had very cheap with a 155k mile powertrain warranty. Combine that with their reliability and fuel economy and it's really a no brainer.

I bought a 2013 Golf with 104k miles on it for $7000, which means it's still under warranty for another 51k miles. All the maintenance is easily DIY-able including the upcoming 130k mile timing belt service. You can also buy all of your parts from FCP Euro which has a lifetime warranty on everything they sell, including oil. Just pay to ship the old stuff back which works out to ~$20 every 10k miles for oil changes, and my 260k mile timing belt service will basically be free.

Had mine for less than a month before I took it on a 7200 mile road trip out to California with the dog visiting a bunch of national parks. Credit card rewards covered all of the hotels so my only real cost was food and fuel. And fuel wasn't that bad despite cruising at 80mph the whole way and doing some off-road trails in Moab and northern California. 40mpg average for the entire trip. I have no doubt I can get 300k reliable miles out of this car, although I'll probably have to replace the DPF once.

Sorry to bring this back up as it's a bit off topic to the original point of the thread, but as a counter point to anybody considering these, for the same money you can get a hybrid or even PHEV Ford of similar vintage with similar miles. It will use a more common, and less expensive fuel. Being hybrid, it will have lower maintenance costs and frequency. It will have a timing chain instead of a belt that needs maintenance. It will not be a complex German car with German car needs. And you don't give your money to a company that lied to consumers, cheated the competition, and knowingly harmed the environment that we all share.

nereo

  • Senior Mustachian
  • ********
  • Posts: 13084
  • Location: Just south of Canada
    • Here's how you can support science today:
Re: Honda Fit discontinued for the US
« Reply #137 on: August 04, 2020, 07:13:52 AM »
Easy button alternative to a fit is a post-dieselgate VW. They are coming off the fix and can be had very cheap with a 155k mile powertrain warranty. Combine that with their reliability and fuel economy and it's really a no brainer.

I bought a 2013 Golf with 104k miles on it for $7000, which means it's still under warranty for another 51k miles. All the maintenance is easily DIY-able including the upcoming 130k mile timing belt service. You can also buy all of your parts from FCP Euro which has a lifetime warranty on everything they sell, including oil. Just pay to ship the old stuff back which works out to ~$20 every 10k miles for oil changes, and my 260k mile timing belt service will basically be free.

Had mine for less than a month before I took it on a 7200 mile road trip out to California with the dog visiting a bunch of national parks. Credit card rewards covered all of the hotels so my only real cost was food and fuel. And fuel wasn't that bad despite cruising at 80mph the whole way and doing some off-road trails in Moab and northern California. 40mpg average for the entire trip. I have no doubt I can get 300k reliable miles out of this car, although I'll probably have to replace the DPF once.

Sorry to bring this back up as it's a bit off topic to the original point of the thread, but as a counter point to anybody considering these, for the same money you can get a hybrid or even PHEV Ford of similar vintage with similar miles. It will use a more common, and less expensive fuel. Being hybrid, it will have lower maintenance costs and frequency. It will have a timing chain instead of a belt that needs maintenance. It will not be a complex German car with German car needs. And you don't give your money to a company that lied to consumers, cheated the competition, and knowingly harmed the environment that we all share.

The concept of a 'complex German car with German car needs' is prejudiced.  Modern cars - particularly PHEVs - are complex machines regardless of the manufacturer. Neither repair history data nor service requirements supports the blanket notion that a 'German' (or even VW) cars are more repair prone and finicky.  Rather, individual models can have great or lousy servicing needs and repair history. As an example VW's GTI has had a better than average history of repair cost, whereas the 2014/15 Ford Flex and 2014-2016 Ford Flex had below average reliability and high repair costs.

I'm still pissed about VW's willing subterfuge in the 'dieselgate' scandal.  But that extended beyond just VW (it included Fiat Chrysler - makers of Jeep and Ram, Nissan and a few others). Ford is under investigation right now by the DOJ for its testing procedures, and has been accused of using unrealistic modeling to achieve lower emission figures.   Domestic carmakers aren't immune from scandals either.  Ford had their utterly awful Firestone tire blowouts which was the subject of a coverup and did actually kill people

Paper Chaser

  • Stubble
  • **
  • Posts: 231
Re: Honda Fit discontinued for the US
« Reply #138 on: August 04, 2020, 07:58:41 AM »

Sorry to bring this back up as it's a bit off topic to the original point of the thread, but as a counter point to anybody considering these, for the same money you can get a hybrid or even PHEV Ford of similar vintage with similar miles. It will use a more common, and less expensive fuel. Being hybrid, it will have lower maintenance costs and frequency. It will have a timing chain instead of a belt that needs maintenance. It will not be a complex German car with German car needs. And you don't give your money to a company that lied to consumers, cheated the competition, and knowingly harmed the environment that we all share.

The concept of a 'complex German car with German car needs' is prejudiced.  Modern cars - particularly PHEVs - are complex machines regardless of the manufacturer. Neither repair history data nor service requirements supports the blanket notion that a 'German' (or even VW) cars are more repair prone and finicky.  Rather, individual models can have great or lousy servicing needs and repair history. As an example VW's GTI has had a better than average history of repair cost, whereas the 2014/15 Ford Flex and 2014-2016 Ford Flex had below average reliability and high repair costs.

I'm still pissed about VW's willing subterfuge in the 'dieselgate' scandal.  But that extended beyond just VW (it included Fiat Chrysler - makers of Jeep and Ram, Nissan and a few others). Ford is under investigation right now by the DOJ for its testing procedures, and has been accused of using unrealistic modeling to achieve lower emission figures.   Domestic carmakers aren't immune from scandals either.  Ford had their utterly awful Firestone tire blowouts which was the subject of a coverup and did actually kill people.

Hybrids and PHEVs have fewer components that need frequent maintenance. Especially compared to a modern diesel. That saves the owner time and money. Cheaper fuel cost, no DEF, cheaper oil changes, cheaper replacement parts etc all help the case for a hybrid/PHEV over a diesel too. Just pointing out that there's more than one option available for a person shopping for a fuel efficient ride in the <$15k price bracket.

nereo

  • Senior Mustachian
  • ********
  • Posts: 13084
  • Location: Just south of Canada
    • Here's how you can support science today:
Re: Honda Fit discontinued for the US
« Reply #139 on: August 04, 2020, 08:22:18 AM »

Sorry to bring this back up as it's a bit off topic to the original point of the thread, but as a counter point to anybody considering these, for the same money you can get a hybrid or even PHEV Ford of similar vintage with similar miles. It will use a more common, and less expensive fuel. Being hybrid, it will have lower maintenance costs and frequency. It will have a timing chain instead of a belt that needs maintenance. It will not be a complex German car with German car needs. And you don't give your money to a company that lied to consumers, cheated the competition, and knowingly harmed the environment that we all share.

The concept of a 'complex German car with German car needs' is prejudiced.  Modern cars - particularly PHEVs - are complex machines regardless of the manufacturer. Neither repair history data nor service requirements supports the blanket notion that a 'German' (or even VW) cars are more repair prone and finicky.  Rather, individual models can have great or lousy servicing needs and repair history. As an example VW's GTI has had a better than average history of repair cost, whereas the 2014/15 Ford Flex and 2014-2016 Ford Flex had below average reliability and high repair costs.

I'm still pissed about VW's willing subterfuge in the 'dieselgate' scandal.  But that extended beyond just VW (it included Fiat Chrysler - makers of Jeep and Ram, Nissan and a few others). Ford is under investigation right now by the DOJ for its testing procedures, and has been accused of using unrealistic modeling to achieve lower emission figures.   Domestic carmakers aren't immune from scandals either.  Ford had their utterly awful Firestone tire blowouts which was the subject of a coverup and did actually kill people.

Hybrids and PHEVs have fewer components that need frequent maintenance. Especially compared to a modern diesel. That saves the owner time and money. Cheaper fuel cost, no DEF, cheaper oil changes, cheaper replacement parts etc all help the case for a hybrid/PHEV over a diesel too. Just pointing out that there's more than one option available for a person shopping for a fuel efficient ride in the <$15k price bracket.

I'm not arguing any of those established points.  I'm pointing out that the perception that 'German Vehicles' are (all else being equal) more expensive to own and repair is incorrect, and that domestic automakers have had their own share of scandals.

Kevin S.

  • Stubble
  • **
  • Posts: 222
Re: Honda Fit discontinued for the US
« Reply #140 on: August 04, 2020, 08:46:40 AM »
RIP Honda fit ! I've always loved these cars ! Bought a 2nd gen , manual trans with high miles. Never had an issue with it before it was sold to a co worker for peanuts. Great vehicles !

My wifes fiesta - also (while not as reliable as the fit) is a great small car.

America hates small cars. Always has and probably always will.

This is the land of big...i don't think that is changing even if gas hits $5 / gallon...dunno ?

Besides the mirage - what else is out there that is qualified as basic / simple / (easy to work i imagine) on transportation ?
Honda getting rid of the manual transmission in the accord is also another nail in the coffin.

I think in my lifetime - (38 yrs old) we will see a major shift in how we commute,(if level 5 autonomy becomes real that is)- that is when things will really start changing. Possibly being mandated by the government that you can no longer drive your vehicle between these - insert heavy traffic hours, inclimate weather, etc....leased / subscription vehicle service is already becoming popular in some areas

I imagine future vehicle cost will be much like a cell phone cost - you have a contract for 2 yrs, make your monthly subscription payment and have no other charges - possibly even in some areas public transport that actually works ? Who knows...just rambling now haha

Que - Red barchetta...
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nIZ73q9M-Gk

nereo

  • Senior Mustachian
  • ********
  • Posts: 13084
  • Location: Just south of Canada
    • Here's how you can support science today:
Re: Honda Fit discontinued for the US
« Reply #141 on: August 04, 2020, 09:07:56 AM »

Honda getting rid of the manual transmission in the accord is also another nail in the coffin.


Can you car folks explain to me the focus on manual transmissions?  My first 15 years of driving was with manual transmission cars and I do find them fun, but...
my understanding is that automatic transmissions have improved so much that the percieved benefits of a manual are almost non-existant in modern cars, including a negligible boost in fuel economy and better acceleration/handling. Automatic transmissions no longer seem to need replacement any more frequent than manuals (and manual clutches can suffer from 'operator error').   It seems to me that most drivers are better served with automatics

The only remaining advantage I can see is a slightly lower price point.  But pretty much all features have gotten 'fancier' - particularly in the US.  Even the "base trim' model has features that were luxuries a decade+ ago (and still are in poorer countries)... almost impossible to find a new(ish) car sold in the US that doesn't have power windows, a/c, a decent stereo that syncs with your phone and a bunch of other nice but unnecessary n'luxuries'/

so... why not automatics?

Paper Chaser

  • Stubble
  • **
  • Posts: 231
Re: Honda Fit discontinued for the US
« Reply #142 on: August 04, 2020, 09:47:13 AM »

Sorry to bring this back up as it's a bit off topic to the original point of the thread, but as a counter point to anybody considering these, for the same money you can get a hybrid or even PHEV Ford of similar vintage with similar miles. It will use a more common, and less expensive fuel. Being hybrid, it will have lower maintenance costs and frequency. It will have a timing chain instead of a belt that needs maintenance. It will not be a complex German car with German car needs. And you don't give your money to a company that lied to consumers, cheated the competition, and knowingly harmed the environment that we all share.

The concept of a 'complex German car with German car needs' is prejudiced.  Modern cars - particularly PHEVs - are complex machines regardless of the manufacturer. Neither repair history data nor service requirements supports the blanket notion that a 'German' (or even VW) cars are more repair prone and finicky.  Rather, individual models can have great or lousy servicing needs and repair history. As an example VW's GTI has had a better than average history of repair cost, whereas the 2014/15 Ford Flex and 2014-2016 Ford Flex had below average reliability and high repair costs.

I'm still pissed about VW's willing subterfuge in the 'dieselgate' scandal.  But that extended beyond just VW (it included Fiat Chrysler - makers of Jeep and Ram, Nissan and a few others). Ford is under investigation right now by the DOJ for its testing procedures, and has been accused of using unrealistic modeling to achieve lower emission figures.   Domestic carmakers aren't immune from scandals either.  Ford had their utterly awful Firestone tire blowouts which was the subject of a coverup and did actually kill people.

Hybrids and PHEVs have fewer components that need frequent maintenance. Especially compared to a modern diesel. That saves the owner time and money. Cheaper fuel cost, no DEF, cheaper oil changes, cheaper replacement parts etc all help the case for a hybrid/PHEV over a diesel too. Just pointing out that there's more than one option available for a person shopping for a fuel efficient ride in the <$15k price bracket.

I'm not arguing any of those established points.  I'm pointing out that the perception that 'German Vehicles' are (all else being equal) more expensive to own and repair is incorrect, and that domestic automakers have had their own share of scandals.

I'm not sure I understand the hang up? The TDI (the vehicle being discussed) is a complex German car compared to the Ford hybrids (the other vehicles being discussed). It has expensive components like a turbocharger, direct injection and a diesel aftertreatment system that the other vehicles in the comparison lack. Something like a hybrid Fusion or CMax will likely have far lower operating costs than the TDI over it's lifetime. Did I just not provide enough context to discern that I was referring to the vehicles being compared with that statement?

As for automaker scandals, you're correct that they all have some skeletons in the closet. Some are worse than others, and some are fresher in memory than others. I don't really care to debate whether a supplier issue that killed nearly 300 people  and the subsequent cover up is better or worse than systemic emissions cheating that had less severe effects on a much larger number of people. I will say that the Ford thing happened before I had my driver's license, and the VW thing is far fresher in mind.

Kevin S.

  • Stubble
  • **
  • Posts: 222
Re: Honda Fit discontinued for the US
« Reply #143 on: August 04, 2020, 09:56:19 AM »

Honda getting rid of the manual transmission in the accord is also another nail in the coffin.


Can you car folks explain to me the focus on manual transmissions?  My first 15 years of driving was with manual transmission cars and I do find them fun, but...
my understanding is that automatic transmissions have improved so much that the percieved benefits of a manual are almost non-existant in modern cars, including a negligible boost in fuel economy and better acceleration/handling. Automatic transmissions no longer seem to need replacement any more frequent than manuals (and manual clutches can suffer from 'operator error').   It seems to me that most drivers are better served with automatics

The only remaining advantage I can see is a slightly lower price point.  But pretty much all features have gotten 'fancier' - particularly in the US.  Even the "base trim' model has features that were luxuries a decade+ ago (and still are in poorer countries)... almost impossible to find a new(ish) car sold in the US that doesn't have power windows, a/c, a decent stereo that syncs with your phone and a bunch of other nice but unnecessary n'luxuries'/

so... why not automatics?

all of what you said is true. automatics used to be = less mpg,less reliable - over the 100k mark.

Now though it's one of the true mechanical connections to a car - for an enthusiast driving a manual is much more fun - unless i'm stuck in traffic.

My daily driver is a manual transmission ranger. I thought by now i'd hate driving manuals but i prefer them. For me they are easier to manage in inclimate weather, easier to work on - no trans cooler lines to pull off when i drain coolant, easier (for me) to replace a clutch,resurface flywheel as opposed to replacing torque converter, rebuilding trans, etc.

Now though - these new manual transmission - alot of them don't even have direct linkage - look at the new bronco for example.

My personal opinion though is manual trans has it's place - fun to drive cars (at least for me) will always be a manual transmission.

Even my base single cab 4 cyl ranger is fun (kinda) because of the manual transmission.

Take any base economy car - put in an automatic and 9/10 times it's less fun to drive than that same car with a manual trans.

Now i will see the dsg / auto trans where you can hold the gear is really fun to drive. 

Recently drove a charger scat pack -that zf trans is amazing ! no reason for a manual in that car imho.

Also for faster shifts, drag times, etc - auto is always going to win.

I'm just an automotive purist. I like crank windows, manual locks, manual trans, cruise control as an option...old school i guess ? haha

Still though i'm not 100 % crazy - points ignition, carburetors, cars without a/c, power steering, crank starting,  etc all are outdated and have no place in a daily vehicle.

RWD

  • Magnum Stache
  • ******
  • Posts: 4176
  • Location: Mississippi
Re: Honda Fit discontinued for the US
« Reply #144 on: August 04, 2020, 01:18:06 PM »
Honda getting rid of the manual transmission in the accord is also another nail in the coffin.


Can you car folks explain to me the focus on manual transmissions?  My first 15 years of driving was with manual transmission cars and I do find them fun, but...
my understanding is that automatic transmissions have improved so much that the percieved benefits of a manual are almost non-existant in modern cars, including a negligible boost in fuel economy and better acceleration/handling. Automatic transmissions no longer seem to need replacement any more frequent than manuals (and manual clutches can suffer from 'operator error').   It seems to me that most drivers are better served with automatics

The only remaining advantage I can see is a slightly lower price point.  But pretty much all features have gotten 'fancier' - particularly in the US.  Even the "base trim' model has features that were luxuries a decade+ ago (and still are in poorer countries)... almost impossible to find a new(ish) car sold in the US that doesn't have power windows, a/c, a decent stereo that syncs with your phone and a bunch of other nice but unnecessary n'luxuries'/

so... why not automatics?

From a purely practical standpoint there is not much reason to get a manual anymore. Maybe for better control in ice and snow? Brake pad wear is probably slower on a manual as well since you can engine brake easily (can be useful on long downhill section especially).

From an enjoyment perspective a manual transmission is much more engaging than an automatic. You feel much more connected to the car by always selecting the gear you want. You can skip gears when it makes sense (hard acceleration in 2nd followed by cruising in 6th, for example) which isn't matched even by automatics with a manual-mode. The clutch is an additional level of engagement for which there is no equivalent. Executing a perfect heel-toe downshift is one of the best drivings feelings there is.

From a performance perspective manual transmissions tend to be lighter and will also transmit a higher percentage of power. This doesn't matter much in your heavy luxury cars but in a small light car like the Honda Fit this can be a noticeable difference. For the 1st and 2nd generation Honda Fit this meant 0-60 mph took 20% longer in the automatic. And around 10% for the 3rd generation.

I should note that there are quite a few different types of automatics which have varying levels of engagement. Dual-clutch transmissions with a fully manual mode (like my PDK) are almost as good from an enjoyment perspective. Single-clutch automated manuals (e.g. older Ferrari paddle shift systems) are similar to DCTs but you get more of a lag between shifts and clutch replacement becomes a worry. Traditional torque converter automatics are just boring though some give you a manual-mode which can help. Newer ones have a ton of gears and quick shifts so they aren't as noticeably annoying to drive (ever mash the throttle to try and make a yellow light only for the transmission to not finish downshifting until you're almost through the intersection?). Then there is the hated CVTs with their rubber-banding. Fine in hybrids were there is an additional source of propulsion but otherwise they are the worst transmission for driving enjoyment. Which is unfortunately because they are the best for fuel efficiency.

Yes, most people are better served with automatics. Automatics work better with all the fancy new tech too like adaptive cruise control, emergency braking, automatic parallel parking, etc. But if you want to enjoy driving a manual transmission will often help a lot more than a ton more power.

alsoknownasDean

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 2187
  • Age: 36
  • Location: Melbourne, Australia
Re: Honda Fit discontinued for the US
« Reply #145 on: August 04, 2020, 07:12:08 PM »
A couple of years ago I rented a VW Polo with a DSG and a 1.2L turbo. Not only did I get 5L/100km (47 MPUSG) for much of the 2000km I drove it, but I didn't miss a manual transmission when driving it. Great little car.

The concern I've had with many of the modern automatics is repair/servicing costs, especially with CVTs and dual clutch transmissions (although maybe the PowerShift Fords and VW DSGs have affected my opinion there). Yes, clutches on a manual are expensive (and I suspect dual clutch ones are similarly so), but at least with a torque converter auto it should last the lifetime of the car if the fluid is changed regularly.

In the days of 4 speed automatics, I'd take the manual transmission. With modern cars, I'd take the automatic.

PDXTabs

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1907
  • Age: 37
  • Location: Portland, OR, USA
Re: Honda Fit discontinued for the US
« Reply #146 on: August 04, 2020, 07:15:32 PM »
From a purely practical standpoint there is not much reason to get a manual anymore.

I wholeheartedly disagree. I've seen about three too many automatics fail with $2~3K repair bills. Manuals are more mustachian because they rarely fail before the engine. In my experience automatics typically fail before the engine.*

* - EDITed to add: I think that part of this has to do with fuel economy and only caring about the first buyer. The car companies are going to make the lightest automatic with the most gears that will last 100K miles, because the first owner will be long gone and they will meet CAFE.
« Last Edit: August 04, 2020, 07:18:02 PM by PDXTabs »

alsoknownasDean

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 2187
  • Age: 36
  • Location: Melbourne, Australia
Re: Honda Fit discontinued for the US
« Reply #147 on: August 04, 2020, 07:18:36 PM »
From a purely practical standpoint there is not much reason to get a manual anymore.

I wholeheartedly disagree. I've seen about three too many automatics fail with $2~3K repair bills. Manuals are more mustachian because they rarely fail before the engine. In my experience automatics typically fail before the engine.

And I had to pay $1500 a year and a bit ago to replace a clutch. The manual vehicles aren't maintenance-free.

Something something so called 'sealed for life transmissions'...

PDXTabs

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1907
  • Age: 37
  • Location: Portland, OR, USA
Re: Honda Fit discontinued for the US
« Reply #148 on: August 04, 2020, 07:21:57 PM »
And I had to pay $1500 a year and a bit ago to replace a clutch. The manual vehicles aren't maintenance-free.

Yup, absolutely. I've also replaced one in my one car garage over Christmas break. It's cheaper and easier than an automatic transmission rebuild.

EDITed to add: I have also paid for clutch replacements on a Toyota Corolla and a Subaru Impreza.

Kevin S.

  • Stubble
  • **
  • Posts: 222
Re: Honda Fit discontinued for the US
« Reply #149 on: August 05, 2020, 08:31:56 AM »
A couple of years ago I rented a VW Polo with a DSG and a 1.2L turbo. Not only did I get 5L/100km (47 MPUSG) for much of the 2000km I drove it, but I didn't miss a manual transmission when driving it. Great little car.

The concern I've had with many of the modern automatics is repair/servicing costs, especially with CVTs and dual clutch transmissions (although maybe the PowerShift Fords and VW DSGs have affected my opinion there). Yes, clutches on a manual are expensive (and I suspect dual clutch ones are similarly so), but at least with a torque converter auto it should last the lifetime of the car if the fluid is changed regularly.

In the days of 4 speed automatics, I'd take the manual transmission. With modern cars, I'd take the automatic.

Run as fast as you can away from early build vw dsg , all ford selectshift,powershift - complete garbage as well as early nissan cvt products and you should be ok.

The new stuff vw is putting out isn't nearly as bad as it was 8-10 yrs ago...but i still wouldn't trust a VAG product to save my life.