Howdy, Stranger!

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





Fit vs. Rabbit

cmkcmk Posts: 59
edited March 6 in Honda
I'll be cross shopping the two, and I imagine that others will be too. Close in price, same type of vehicle.

What makes me lean towards the Fit:
Mileage, reliability, spiffy seats

What makes me lean towards the Rabbit:
Style, comfort, freedom of option choices, satisfying amount of standard features.
«13456789

Comments

  • bodble2bodble2 Posts: 4,519
    Has anyone priced out the new VW Rabbit in Canada? Approx. $22.5K(including freight) for the 3-door, with 6-sp tiptronic, traction and electronic stability control, 150hp motor, 6 airbags, and the usual power accessories.

    Another $1K for the 5-door. Yes, more expensive than the Fit, but a no-option Fit Sport is about $22.5K.

    I think the VW is a very appealing alternative.
  • Appealing alternative? Well, I've owned a VW GTI, 2001. It had the 1.8 liter Turbo. I was the worst car I ever owned. Had to take it in three times because of the Coils. The electronics had constant problems (Alarm, Doors, etc.) I WOULD NEVER buy another VW. Honda is light years ahead of VW in Build Quality and reliability.
  • johnnyvjjohnnyvj Posts: 112
    Have to agree, carfanatic. Every single person I know who has a VW is strongly considering ditching it due to reliability problems, and I know a few people who already have.

    The complaints range from bad electrical systems to leaking oil in a big way after only 25k miles. With VWs in the past few years, it seems like "its always something".

    No wonder they're emphasizing safety in their (shock effect) commercials... they sure can't talk about reliability. :sick:
  • bodble2bodble2 Posts: 4,519
    What I understand, though, is that VW reliability has a lot to do with where the car is built. Mexican-built is a no-no, but German-built is ok. Also, are your friends' VWs older models, or late-models?
  • marikamarika Posts: 39
    I am deeply disappointed in the engine choice for the Rabbit. The 22/30 EPA city/highway mpgs are unacceptable and will be even more so in the future as gas prices increase. Maybe at some point VW will offer a more economical and environmental engine but for now I will pass.
  • mwqamwqa Posts: 106
    My understanding is that the Rabbit is not VW's new entry level car, and that is more expensive than the Fit, too. So comparing the two may not be as useful.

    I heard that VW's new entry level car will be called the City and be based on the Golf/Jetta mk4. Basically, it will be the recycling of an older model, at a reduced price. I've also heard that it may only be a 3-door and be available in August. I don't follow VW very closely, so can't point you to the original source.

    Edit: Hmmm... was reading a bit more and it may just be us Canuks getting the City.
  • cmkcmk Posts: 59
    The main Rabbit thread has several sources stating base price of 14,990 for manual 2-door. I'd say that's close enough for comparison.
  • mwqamwqa Posts: 106
    Could be... cars in Canada are a bit more expensive, so we have a slightly different price points and different products.

    Just for get I said anything. :)
  • cmkcmk Posts: 59
    No, it's a valid point, the Rabbits will be more expensive. Just not enough to (for me) make the comparison unnecessary.

    Plus, you get a lot of options standard:
    link

    Another thing I like is the ease to add individual options:
    link

    I don't need to buy the embarrassing "ground effects kit" to get cruise control, like I would have to on the fit!?? I can get a sunroof? Awesome!
  • mwqamwqa Posts: 106
    I think the the Rabbit is made in Germany, too, which is also good news.
  • reddroverrreddroverr Posts: 509
    maybe, but there is a thread here with 95 posts comparing the Fit to the Accord..so I say, have at it. ;)

    The gas mileage and the price and reliability puts da wabbit out of my running.
  • johnnyvjjohnnyvj Posts: 112
    I'm just amazed anyone is still seriously considering VW... their reliability has really gone off a cliff in the past few years. Why is that? They used to be pretty good. :cry:
  • claudius753claudius753 Posts: 138
    I like the look of the Rabbit, and VW makes some nice interiors.

    But I just find a 5 cylinder engine weird. Mileage is ok, but not stellar.

    The Fit only has a 1.5 liter, compared to the VW's 2.5 liter, but it gets much better mileage, and because of the weight differences, it is probably as quick if not quicker in acceleration. I have read reports of the 5AT Fit doing naught to 60 in under 8.5 seconds, pretty good and plenty for me.

    I'd love to get a 5 door VW GTI, but because of my returning to college and limited finances, the FIt is most likely "GO".

    Really, a better match up with the Fit would be the VW Polo, but it isn't sold in the US. The Rabbit is sort of trying to match Fit and Civic. I really just can't get over that I5 engine.
  • I am the previous owner of a 2001 VW GTI. While it did have a nice interior reliability was below par. I had to replace engine coils 3 times (AT VW Expense). I had alarm and electrical problems several times. As for the Fit AT doing 0-60 under 8.5 seconds? I don't know where you heard that but it is false. Car and Driver rates it at 10.4. Motor Week at 11.0 seconds. The 5 Speed MT is rated at 8.7 seconds (Car and Driver) and 9.3 seconds (Edmunds). That is with one person and taking it to Red line in each gear. I like the Fits interior quality. Especially the front gage cluster. It looks like it belongs on an Acura. The seats to me are comfortable, although I wish there was a center arm rest.
  • randydriverrandydriver Posts: 262
    I long for the days when VW made good cars....
  • dewaltdakotadewaltdakota Posts: 364
    The owners of VW (both the company, and the cars) probably do too... ;)
  • nippononlynippononly SF Bay AreaPosts: 12,669
    "The Fit only has a 1.5 liter, compared to the VW's 2.5 liter, but it gets much better mileage, and because of the weight differences, it is probably as quick if not quicker in acceleration."

    Ummmm, the Rabbit will weigh 20% more than Fit and have almost 70% more torque, available at a lower RPM too. Also, almost 40% more power. I don't think there's any question which will be faster. :-)

    The Rabbit will also have all the usual features at exactly the same price (in the 3-door) as Fit (a 5-door), except for alloy wheels. Unfortunately, yes, the Rabbit's gas mileage is terrible in the context of other cars in its class, and especially given that it's not even a 6-cylinder. The Rabbit, of course, will include VW's famous and wonderful Monsoon sound system at the $15.5K price point. Compare this to Fit's stereo, which while perfectly fine for a $15k car, is hardly inspiring.

    2013 Civic SI, 2009 Outback Sport 5-spd (stick)

  • I didn't think the VW sounds system was so great. As a matter of fact, the stereo in my Fit Sport is outstanding!
  • johnnyvjjohnnyvj Posts: 112
    Ummmm, the Rabbit will weigh 20% more than Fit and have almost 70% more torque, available at a lower RPM too. Also, almost 40% more power. I don't think there's any question which will be faster.

    The Rabbit will also have all the usual features at exactly the same price (in the 3-door) as Fit (a 5-door), except for alloy wheels. Unfortunately, yes, the Rabbit's gas mileage is terrible in the context of other cars in its class, and especially given that it's not even a 6-cylinder. The Rabbit, of course, will include VW's famous and wonderful Monsoon sound system at the $15.5K price point. Compare this to Fit's stereo, which while perfectly fine for a $15k car, is hardly inspiring.


    None of which will matter if the Rabbit's reliability stinks. :lemon:

    Which, given VW's record of the past few years, seems likely... sad to say. :(
  • nippononlynippononly SF Bay AreaPosts: 12,669
    I am not here to disagree with you on principle, but I drove a Rabbit 4-door today, and I have to say it seems to be easily $2000 more car than the Fit. The engine is a rocket over 2500 rpm, and torquey even down at 1500 rpm. The alloys are a $400 option, making the car $18K even when priced back to back with the Fit Sport. Those are 16-inch rims though, to the Fit's 15-inchers.

    The stereo is phenomenal, and it was the standard stereo (there is an optional stereo). It is a 10-speaker system with a lot of power and adjustments for midrange as well as bass and treble, not to mention individual dials for the most common controls, rather than a pushbutton system.

    But uh-oh - what's this? Rated 22/30 EPA? The gas mileage will stink in comparison to the Fit. In the looks department, I give first prize to the Rabbit, but looks are very subjective. I like having a full-size spare (Rabbit yes, Fit no).

    The clutch in the Rabbit is very deep, which I am not sure I would like. I continue eagerly to look for a dealer to actually have a Fit Sport manual in stock for me to test drive, so I have not drawn any conclusions yet. But the Fit has some strong competition in the Rabbit.

    Oh, and as someone who has owned pretty much Toyota and Honda his whole life, I will say this: they make very good cars that are very reliable overall, but reliability is not everything. The Rabbit is a clear cut above in terms of interior and ride over the new Civic, for instance, at about the same price. Not to mention throttle response. I am getting a little tired of rational cars - maybe I am just at that age. Toyotas and Hondas are very rational and provide a strong value quotient, while VWs are less rational (less reliable statistically) but with more of a sensual quality (not to get too heavy here!) and emotional appeal.

    2013 Civic SI, 2009 Outback Sport 5-spd (stick)

This discussion has been closed.