5th Jan 2010, 08:44

I must be the odd man out. Last week we went car shopping and bought a Honda Fit, but test drove a 2010 Civic. I just don't see what the fuss is about. The Civic was cramped, rode rough, handled poorly, was loud --- there was just nothing that I liked about that car aside from the expected reliability and good gas mileage. I guess it's just not my kind of car.

5th Jan 2010, 16:56

And a Honda Fit is somehow bigger and better? I own a 2008 Honda Civic, but I looked at the Fit when I was car shopping as well. Personally I think that the only way a Honda Fit would be of any use is if you lived in the city and spent all your time driving in the city. It's pathetic on the highway, and the gas mileage is far worse on the highway than a Civic. The Fit is still an excellent vehicle, as it is a Honda, however, how anyone could call it better than the Civic is beyond me. I find my Civic to be a much better vehicle for all-around driving.

6th Jan 2010, 11:32

The Fit seems to minimize the bumps, in that you feel it once and then it's past you, whereas in the Civic, the car keeps jouncing long after the bump is gone. The Fit also has much roomier front seats, more legroom, and more comfortable seats than the Civic. But where the Fit is really superior to the Civic is in cargo space with the fold-down seats and the taller roof. You can put things in the Fit that would never go in a Civic. So yes, the Fit is just a far more practical, better car than the Civic, at least for what we need.

Of course, they're both a bit loud with highway noise, and neither are as smooth and comfortable as people seem to suggest. As we all know, you buy Honda for reliability and gas mileage, but for smooth, quiet, comfortable rides you have to look elsewhere. Though I like the Fit, I will freely admit that it is nowhere near the nice ride of a Ford Fusion or Chevy Impala, let alone a Cadillac. Of course you don't get 35 mpg in those cars, so there is a trade-off. It just depends on what is important to you in a car.