Honda Fit or Scion xA?

Discussion in 'Fit' started by Mikhail T., Nov 10, 2006.

  1. Mikhail T.

    Mikhail T. Guest

    Thanks, I'm actually, their Internet-subscriber. Nissan Versa is the best,
    in their opinion, although Fit is the most economical.

    With 5K miles/year, fuel efficiency is not a concern here. Safety and
    comforts are.

    Trying to configure "my own Versa" on nissanusa.com, though, I can't include
    both the ABS Package and the "Convenience Package" (which includes
    Bluetooth). This puzzles me greatly, but if bluetooth is incompatible with
    ABS in a Nissan (and a dealer just confirmed this much over the phone),
    then so be it... Oh, and the "Sunroof Package" requires the "Audio Package"
    and one of the SIRIUS or XM satellite radio systems. Bizarre...

    The second-best was Fit, according to CR with 64-points to Versa's 65. But
    all of Toyotas/Scions were below Korean models, and Scion xA, in
    particular, had only 37 :-(

    -mi
     
    Mikhail T., Nov 10, 2006
    #21
  2. Mikhail T.

    Mikhail T. Guest

    In a Versa Bluetooth and ABS are mutually exclusive... Go figure...

    -mi
     
    Mikhail T., Nov 10, 2006
    #22
  3. Mikhail T.

    Mikhail T. Guest

    In a Versa Bluetooth and ABS are mutually exclusive... Go figure...

    -mi
     
    Mikhail T., Nov 10, 2006
    #23
  4. Mikhail T.

    Don Fearn Guest

    No side airbags. (The original poster mentioned them, so I assume
    they're important.)

    -Don (enjoying his xBox despite that lack)
     
    Don Fearn, Nov 10, 2006
    #24
  5. Mikhail T.

    Don Fearn Guest

    No side airbags. (The original poster mentioned them, so I assume
    they're important.)

    -Don (enjoying his xBox despite that lack)
     
    Don Fearn, Nov 10, 2006
    #25
  6. Mikhail T.

    Don Fearn Guest

    Not to mention that xBoxen aren't really in the same category -- MUCH
    more interior space than either the Fit or the xA . . . . ;^)

    -Don (who carried home a 10'x16' shed in his xB; in several trips ;^)
     
    Don Fearn, Nov 10, 2006
    #26
  7. Mikhail T.

    Don Fearn Guest

    Not to mention that xBoxen aren't really in the same category -- MUCH
    more interior space than either the Fit or the xA . . . . ;^)

    -Don (who carried home a 10'x16' shed in his xB; in several trips ;^)
     
    Don Fearn, Nov 10, 2006
    #27
  8. Mikhail T.

    Bob Guest

    My parents, both in 80's, survived a head-on in an xA. No serious
    injuries, just beat up a little. The car was a total.

    According to a consumers' mag description of the Fit, the gas tank is
    under the passenger's seat. Somehow, that doesn't seem to be a really
    great idea. Maybe someone else can shed some light on that issue.

    Herb
     
    Bob, Nov 11, 2006
    #28
  9. Mikhail T.

    Art Guest

    Gas tank in the middle of the car seems like a safe spot to me. Plus those
    plastic tanks are darn strong these days.
     
    Art, Nov 11, 2006
    #29
  10. Mikhail T.

    mike Guest

    which means... absolutely nothing. nissan was a non-issue for me. i
    looked at the fit, i looked at the yaris hatch. going with the xA was a
    no-brainer.
     
    mike, Nov 11, 2006
    #30
  11. Mikhail T.

    mike Guest

    which means... absolutely nothing. nissan was a non-issue for me. i
    looked at the fit, i looked at the yaris hatch. going with the xA was a
    no-brainer.
     
    mike, Nov 11, 2006
    #31
  12. Actually, Consumer Reports liked the Honda Fit with manual transmission much
    better than
    the Versa with manual trans., but they liked the Versa automatic better than
    the Fit automatic
     
    Robert A. Cunningham, Jan 5, 2007
    #32
  13. Actually, Consumer Reports liked the Honda Fit with manual transmission much
    better than
    the Versa with manual trans., but they liked the Versa automatic better than
    the Fit automatic
     
    Robert A. Cunningham, Jan 5, 2007
    #33
  14. The Fit AT which scored 64 was a base model which cost $1400 less than
    the Versa SL which scored 65. The MT Fit scored 75 so it was much
    better than the AT Versa, largely because it was the better equipped
    Sport model. One might surmise that, if a Fit Sport AT had been
    tested, it would have scored better than 65 and the cost would have
    been about equal to the Versa SL.

    Also, CR reported overall mpg for the several months they owned the
    cars:

    Fit MT 34
    Fit AT 32
    Versa MT 29
    Versa AT 28

    Finally, Nissan's reliability has been erratic ever since Renault took
    over (big surprise.)
     
    Gordon McGrew, Jan 6, 2007
    #34
  15. The Fit AT which scored 64 was a base model which cost $1400 less than
    the Versa SL which scored 65. The MT Fit scored 75 so it was much
    better than the AT Versa, largely because it was the better equipped
    Sport model. One might surmise that, if a Fit Sport AT had been
    tested, it would have scored better than 65 and the cost would have
    been about equal to the Versa SL.

    Also, CR reported overall mpg for the several months they owned the
    cars:

    Fit MT 34
    Fit AT 32
    Versa MT 29
    Versa AT 28

    Finally, Nissan's reliability has been erratic ever since Renault took
    over (big surprise.)
     
    Gordon McGrew, Jan 6, 2007
    #35
Ask a Question

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

You'll need to choose a username for the site, which only take a couple of moments (here). After that, you can post your question and our members will help you out.