Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!





Honda Fit v. Hyundai Accent

1234568

Comments

  • backybacky Twin CitiesPosts: 18,728
    Reliability doesn't factor into CR's rankings of one car vs. another. It does factor into whether CR recommends the car.
  • "I don't remember everything from my quick read, but it seemed like it was on the driving characteristics, handling, braking, etc, and on road noise, interior space, and reliability."

    That about covers everything. So, they pretty much disliked the cars?
  • bobw3bobw3 Posts: 2,997
    Okay, I'm not too sure. I just remember from my quick read that they commented on the reliability, but there were actual points for the rankings but I'm not sure exactly how that's calculated. Too bad you can't just go online and pull down the CR report for free...anyone here have a userid/logon?

    I like to read the narratives because sometimes they'll point out things that they consider bad, but that I don't. Or they'll mention things you might not think about. And then I do like looking at the actual mpg, braking, handling and other more objective stats, again just to compare, but if you have 4 cars that all handle great, just because one is slightly better it doesn't matter so much, but at least you can see the real dogs.
  • backybacky Twin CitiesPosts: 18,728
    My local stores don't have the December issue yet. Should have it out in a day or so.
  • fitluverfitluver Posts: 198
    My local stores don't have the December issue yet. Should have it out in a day or so.

    Maybe if I am lucky, mine will be in my mailbox tomorrow. ;)
  • backybacky Twin CitiesPosts: 18,728
    I finally found a store with the December issue today. The Fit and Accent were pretty close with automatics, just two points separated them. But it was a runaway for the Fit with the MT-equipped cars, with a score 20 points higher than the next car in the B class, the xB. (The Focus ZX3 was tossed in also, and was 2nd in the MT ratings behind the Fit, but CR admits it's in the next class up.) I put my overall impressions of the review in the Low-End cars discussion, since more than the Fit and Accent are discussed:

    backy, "Low End Sedans (under $16k)" #3704, 6 Nov 2006 9:17 am
  • First, reliability does NOT factor into Consumer Reports' final score. It's a completely separate component that figures into whether or not they recommend the car.
    Next, the Fit Sport isn't any different mechanically than the base Fit. The only reason the manual Sport got a higher score than the auto base was because they really like the manual tranny in the Civic (and it gave it respectable acceleration figures).
    Next, the Rio and Accent scored extremely well, especially compared to the Yaris. The reason the manual versions scored lower is because CR will dock a car roughly 10 points if they don't buy it with ABS. For anyone who hasn't read the article, here are the scores:
    Versa CVT - 65
    Fit Auto - 64
    Rio Auto - 63
    Accent Auto - 62
    So the four of them essentially tied. I wish they would have tested the Accent SE, though. There's no question the improved handling would have bumped it up a few points, probably to win the whole comparison.
  • bobw3bobw3 Posts: 2,997
    If they tested a Fit sport auto instead of a Fit base auto, the Fit would have handled and braked better with the larger tires, so that, plus the additional internal features (cruise, paddle shifters, etc) might have put the Fit auto at the #1 spot, maybe by a wide margin like the manual.

    I think they should have tested each car in the fully loaded version (auto and every option) and then each car in the stripped out version. Now we can only speculate.
  • I was under the impression that different "niceties" like cruise control don't really figure into the total score for Consumer Reports because it's an option that doesn't really affect performance. I could be wrong, though. But you're right about the discrepancies between equipment. It's kinda shady that people will look at the tests and say "Oh, the Versa's the best" but it was the high-end CVT SL model that outscored the cheaper models. They could have at least tested the Versa S with the 4-speed auto.
  • bobw3bobw3 Posts: 2,997
    Especially when at a first glance, you would think that the only differences between the cars tested in the two categories is the transmission. If that were the case, then it makes the Versa's manual and the Fit's auto to be real dogs based on the scoring differences between the manual and automatic versions.

    Actually I think testing the Versa SL with CVT is a good choice, since as soon as production of CVTs gets going, the 4sp auto is gone.
  • fitluverfitluver Posts: 198
    Especially when at a first glance, you would think that the only differences between the cars tested in the two categories is the transmission. If that were the case, then it makes the Versa's manual and the Fit's auto to be real dogs based on the scoring differences between the manual and automatic versions.

    Actually I think testing the Versa SL with CVT is a good choice, since as soon as production of CVTs gets going, the 4sp auto is gone.

    I rather like that my Fit MT beats out the versa. :)
  • i would think that these 2 have different features.
    If you would like just a daily driver car like stock to stock features, you'd go for Fit. Its definetly practical since its a four door hatch. Its a car between a Wagon and a Hatchback. plenty of room compared to a hatchback but less than a wagon's. Fun to drive only falls to the Accent SE since it had close ratio tranny as well as sporty suspension and wheels.
    if money doesnt matter, civic hb Si or type-R would be the choice.
  • backybacky Twin CitiesPosts: 18,728
    I think the Fit is plenty fun to drive, with crisp handling and shifter--actually crisper than the Accent's standard shifter. I think the Accent is more for someone either looking for basic transportation at a bargain price (they can be had under $9k in my town for a GS hatch) or for something with a good complement of equipment, sporty looks and handling, and lower price than a Fit Sport. Also the Accent SE has an available moonroof, which some people like to have.
  • lhansonlhanson Posts: 268
    With Hyundai's improved quality ratings, $9k sounds like a bargain. Is that with or without A/C?
  • backybacky Twin CitiesPosts: 18,728
    I am pretty sure it's without a/c, since the ad didn't mention a/c. Also w/o ABS of course. But it's not uncommon up North to have a basic car w/o a/c, especially for a student. I should know--I did w/o a/c for ten years driving in MN before I moved to Houston--got a new car with a/c then! But now I'm back in MN and try to use a/c as little as possible--I prefer the fresh air. :)
  • lhansonlhanson Posts: 268
    I am the same way and I live in Mississippi where it's in the 90's from May to October, but A/C is still a necessity if I ever want my wife to ride in the car. I also use it when I am bringing ice cream home from Aldi's. My parents lived in Rochester, Minnesota until they retired and then moved to Mesa, Arizona for 10 years before returning to Rochester for health reasons. At any rate, they took their Chysler Newport without A/C out with them and used it as their only vehicle for the whole 10 years in Arizona. That's what I call depression era toughness.
  • bobw3bobw3 Posts: 2,997
    And if you do a lot of highway driving, you'll get better MPG by using the AC versus opening windows because of the reduced wind resistence.
  • backybacky Twin CitiesPosts: 18,728
    Perhaps not if you just pop the moonroof (tilt up) if so equipped, and maybe also open the side windows a crack.
  • lhansonlhanson Posts: 268
    What would you say is the break even speed for windows down versus using A/C?
  • thegraduatethegraduate Posts: 9,731
    That's something that will change with every car, but it seems like I've heard anywhere from 50 MPH to 65 MPH. Above that, use the A/C.
  • snakeweaselsnakeweasel a Certified Edmunds Poster.Posts: 11,753
    I would hazard to say that was not the case with any car I have had.

    The sign said "No shoes, no shirt, no service", it didn't say anything about no pants.

  • bobw3bobw3 Posts: 2,997
    Why do you say that?
  • snakeweaselsnakeweasel a Certified Edmunds Poster.Posts: 11,753
    Because every car I have had has gotten better gas mileage with the windows down and the A/C off than the windows up with the A/C on.

    The sign said "No shoes, no shirt, no service", it didn't say anything about no pants.

  • bobw3bobw3 Posts: 2,997
    So you've actually calculated your highway MPG with and without windows open and with and without the AC on. What was the difference in MPGs based on your calculations?
  • snakeweaselsnakeweasel a Certified Edmunds Poster.Posts: 11,753
    I have friends who live in downstate IL (I live near Chicago) so going to see them I usually drive most of the trip on the Interstate. Usually going there in the heat of the day I would drive with the A/C on but coming home well after dark I would drive with the windows open in the cool of the night. At times I would test this theory by filling it up at each end and checking the mileage. IIRC it was slightly more than 1 MPG difference.

    Now my dad lived out of state (about 450 miles away) and I had a car that if I drove windows open I could make the trip in one tankfull. But with the A/C on I would have to stop for gas maybe 10-15 miles sooner.

    The sign said "No shoes, no shirt, no service", it didn't say anything about no pants.

  • litesong1litesong1 Posts: 39
    This comparison between Honda Fit & Hyundai Accent was pretty good. I only read the latter parts of the thread & didn't see any comparisons of the MPG of both cars.
    My wife's 2008 Accent, bought in Dec 2007 gave 30 to 32 thru the winter & rose just a bit as the weather warmed. I was a bit disappointed, thinking a Honda Fit might have given better MPG.

    Finally, I got to take the Accent on 3 day trips to the mountains & Mt. Rainier, getting 41.5, 42.6, & 45.1 MPG! Suddenly, I didn't think the Fit could have gotten any better MPG.
  • Just an interesting note, the 2009 models MPG ratings are changing on both vehicles. The Honda FIT is getting heavier, and getting a more powerful engine. The engine is a little more advanced but I think the weight is taking the Govt. rated MPG ratings downward on the FIT.

    The Accent is just the opposite. The Koreans twiddled the engine or transmission gear ratio to get the Automatic version of the Accent up to 35MPG Hwy(listed on the sticker). That is a 2 MPG improvement over the 2008 Accent on the government testing. The net result is that the Accent will likely now be the MPG leader of the two, although the new FIT looks like a much more expensive vehicle with many more options (but with a price tag to pay for it).
  • backybacky Twin CitiesPosts: 18,728
    I think the 2009 Fit with AT is also EPA rated 35 highway. Also the Fit has more power now (117 hp) than the Accent. The Fit Sport does get a little pricey, especially with nav (and with ESC, both of which the Accent doesn't offer)--nearly $19.5k with the AT.
  • backybacky Twin CitiesPosts: 18,728
    Except the Accent is not a mid-sized car. It's a subcompact, albeit with a compact-sized interior per EPA volume numbers.
  • steverstever Viva Las CrucesPosts: 40,822
    A reporter is looking for a car shopper who thinks 40 MPG is a requisite before they buy. If you have recently shopped for a car, and you have only considered cars that get 40 MPG, and you are willing to share your story with a reporter, please contact pr@edmunds.com with your daytime contact information no later than Tuesday, April 24, 2012 at noon Pacific/3 p.m. Eastern.

    Moderator
    Need help navigating? stever@edmunds.com - or send a private message by clicking on my name.

Sign In or Register to comment.