Option 3 (that was mentioned above) seems like the most "Mustachian" approach, but it feels risky... that is, having an unproven '95 DD and a Miata to fall back on. RWD will not suit for Pennsylvania winters. I also lose a lot of cargo capacity by removing a hatchback and adding a 2-seater :-/
My Miata has a trailer hitch, and came with a 4' utility trailer. I wouldn't want to haul much weight with it, but I'm sure it could carry at least as much as a Fit. (The previous owner used it to carry his set of racing wheels to autocross events. I might do so in the future too, if it turns out to be cheaper than simply driving on 200-treadwear tires all the time.)
Anyway, I think you're just being complainypants now. "Feeling" risky isn't good enough; you should quantify it:
First of all, the Civic's reliability is only unproven
now. As you continue driving it, you'll find out how reliable (or not) it is. So wait until spring to sell the Fit and that issue will no longer be relevant.
Second, the probability you getting screwed over by that decision,
P, can be calculated as follows:
let
Pc = probability of the Civic breaking down
let
Pw = probability of that happening during winter
let
Pm = probability of the Miata failing to cope with those winter conditions
let
Pf = probability of the Fit failing to cope with the same conditions (because if the conditions are bad enough that
no car can deal with them, you can't hold the Miata responsible)
P = (Pc * Pw * Pm) - PfI'm pretty sure that's going to end up being a very small number.
For what it's worth, I own three cars (for a two-person household). The
newest of them was built in 1998 (the others are a '96 and a '90), and their reliability has turned out to be much more proportional to their odometer reading than to their age. (The Miata, with about 130K fewer miles than either of the other two, is by far the most reliable.) I would expect your 40k-mile Civic to be
excellent, give or take vacuum hoses and other rubber bits.