Howdy, Stranger!

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

2009 Honda Fit

nippononlynippononly SF Bay AreaPosts: 12,695
edited July 2014 in Honda
Well, after some casual searching around the Web, I am unable to find much more than bare-bones information on the next-gen Honda Fit, so I thought I would throw it open to you dedicated Edmunds posters in the hopes someone else had more info! :-)

I do know that it grows a little bit for the next gen, and some unconfirmed "spy pics" at Autospies give it a more microvan-ish look. And I also know that it will be released in Japan in about two months, right around the time of the Tokyo Auto Show, so I am sure the States will be getting it next year as an all-new '09 model.

Here's one little article I found:

Here's a different pic which I like more: - site/

And here's a third article, but again a lot of it just seems to be rumor. Honda seems to be very tight-lipped about the new model, unless I have just missed what I am looking for:

What would you Hondaphiles like to see in the new Fit? I would like to see fuel economy improvements for sure. And a height-adjustable driver's seat and just a general improvement in interior materials. An optional moonroof might be nice, but that is not Honda's style (a stand-alone moonroof option, I mean). I like that the car is nice and basic with a price to match.

Anybody want to see a 3-door model?

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



  • rv65rv65 Posts: 1,074
    ">Well can a host merge this with 2009/2010 honda fit. There is already a thread on this.
  • ifitifit Posts: 18
    What would I like to see in the new fit?

    More legroom in the back. Lots of American kids get tall fast. It's not unusual for them to be 6 feet before they become teenagers. I'd like to see an extra three inches of legroom in the back seat. They could move the seat back permanently or make it adjustable. If that's too hard, maybe they could make the front seats a little thinner to provide more legroom in the back.
  • bobw3bobw3 Posts: 2,992
    4" longer overall with 4" would still be only 161"
  • mwqamwqa Posts: 106
    Hi Nippononly!

    You haven't checked out directly for info?

    They're pretty good. :)

    It's amazing how Honda has been able to keep a lid on this new version. They must be building them by now (for the Japanese market).

    I can only hope for a better driving position. :blush:
  • nippononlynippononly SF Bay AreaPosts: 12,695
    Yeah, I checked out Temple of VTEC, but they didn't seem to have any more than stuff I had already found.

    And then there's this rumor that there would be "official" pics on the 26th because of the car's release in Japan, and yet here it is a week later and all we have is these couple of shots from magazine ads. I do like what I have seen so far though - the lines are better even if it is does look a little microvan-ish.

    Mainly what I am looking for is a huge technology update under the hood - I expect i-VTEC in the next model, with a substantial improvement in low-end torque and emissions, and hopefully better fuel economy to boot.

    Considering they plan to have the new hybrid 2-door model in a couple of years, it would be cool to see them develop that model off the Fit platform and eventually offer that hybrid powertrain in the Fit too. But that's a couple of years away at least...

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

  • kreuzerkreuzer Posts: 127
    Does anyone know if this will happen with the next generation? It would be a good opportunity for this to happen! :)
  • nippononlynippononly SF Bay AreaPosts: 12,695
    I think the only Honda diesels in the next two or three years will be the 2.2L and the 3L. The smaller one is for the Accord and then the CRV, the larger is for the Ridgeline (and perhaps someday the Odyssey?). So you will have to wait until the next-next generation for a Fit diesel, I think!

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

  • eldainoeldaino Posts: 1,618
    i'd like to see something new under the hood! the l15 is great, but its an older engine...i've heard of an r15 that should put out slightly more power and better fuel economy.


    i'd like to see a 1.6 litre sohc ivtec making about 120hp with about 112 lbs of torque. that would be a great zippy engine! and its hp would be low enough to still slot it below the civic.

    ....and how about an si version? with a 1.8 litre k series with 170 hp? ;)
  • rv65rv65 Posts: 1,074
    no r15 engine. Just another l15 variant with some civic hybrid features without the hybrid system.
  • robertsmxrobertsmx Posts: 5,525
    I will be surprised if it isn't a new engine (R-series). The R-series may have been designed to cater 1.5-2.0 liter displacement class, and we have already seen 1.8 (Civic) and 2.0 (JDM Stream). The K-series was designed for 2.0-2.4 liter class.
  • nippononlynippononly SF Bay AreaPosts: 12,695
    I think 170 hp might be going a bit overboard, as long as they hold the weight increase in check for the '09. I think if they use the engine already in the Civic, maybe tuned up just a tad to 145, 150 hp, that would be more than enough for a Fit SI, and I personally would love to see it. Could that one have a factory moonroof and go for around $19K in a stick? Please?! ;-)

    If so, that would be my next car. Give it the 16s of the Civic EX. I think that would have a lot going for it vs the Mini, and nothing else would compete really.

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

  • robertsmxrobertsmx Posts: 5,525
    I like the idea of Honda Fit DX/LX with ~120 HP and an Si with 1.8/140 HP from Civic.

    As for weight issue, it is an impossibility to avoid it these days. 50-75 lb gain is virtually guaranteed. I just hope it does come with 16 and 17 inch rims now, adding another 30-40 lb.
  • nippononlynippononly SF Bay AreaPosts: 12,695
    Maybe they could throw in a little aluminum for us in place of steel on the SI model, to reduce weight. Subaru does this on their $18K Impreza, why not Honda on its $19K Fit SI?

    I like the idea of an '09 Fit DX roughly similar to the current base Fit in equipment levels and power, tuned for maximum fuel efficiency. Then a Fit LX, tuned up (or with a slightly larger engine) as you say to around 120 hp, and an SI. Basically, I want the old days of an HF trim back! But me, I would still probably go for the SI. Maybe I could get two, an HF and an SI, one to commute in and the other for the rest of the time! :-)

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

  • robertsmxrobertsmx Posts: 5,525
    Price sensitivity can be different for a car topping out at $19K (if it gets that high) compared to a car starting at $18K. Besides, there isn't a whole lot of gain to be had from a little aluminum. To put that in perspective, using aluminum rear subframe in RL costs money, but it saves only 17 lb over steel hydroformed rear subframe in TL. That saving can quickly dissipate with just couple of additional features (NAV itself is said to add about 15-16 lb), much less the new found love for larger and larger rims (which can quickly add weight).

    As much as I would like to see a reduction in curb weight, won't be surprised if it gains some. Sad, but thats the reality.
  • hpmctorquehpmctorque Posts: 4,593
    Maybe a 1.3 displacement would make sense for the HF, since the small Hondas sold in Asia and Europe displace <1.5.
  • robertsmxrobertsmx Posts: 5,525
    Yeah, there are two smaller engines in Fit. A 1.2-liter i-DSI in Europe, and a 1.3-liter i-DSI (in Europe it is labeled 1.4, and also available in Japan, probably the rest of the world as well, except North America).

    The new 1.3 is rumored to boast 100 HP (up from 86 HP). But then, with ever increasing weight, increased torque becomes a necessity to help keep taller ratios (or else gearing tends to be shorter which affects fuel economy anyway)
  • eldainoeldaino Posts: 1,618
    I think 170 hp might be going a bit overboard, as long as they hold the weight increase in check for the '09. I think if they use the engine already in the Civic, maybe tuned up just a tad to 145,

    you think so? the b16 engine in the old civic si hatchback (early 90's) weighed about the same, and had 160hp, i don't think that is pushing it at all!

    the size and power of the r-series in the civic sounds good, i'd like at least 150. But i wouldn't want an r series engine in the si, maybe just in the 'lx' trim you speak of.

    Reason why? There is no real tunability in the r series engines. thats why i feel a small displacement k series, or even a souped up l series engine would fit the bill.
  • nippononlynippononly SF Bay AreaPosts: 12,695
    Per Edmunds, the '95 SI (last year of the old hatch) had 125 hp and weighed 2390 pounds, which also rings true with what I recall. ;-)

    So if they can get the '09 Fit SI to 145 hp (using the 1.8 from the Civic) and hold the weight to 2500 pounds or less, it will be faster than the old Civic SI. In fact, that will be the same power-to-weight ratio as the MOST RECENT SI hatch (the '02-'06), pretty good for the next model down methinks.

    And I figure a Fit HF making around 100 hp and geared to make 40+ mpg would sell well, maybe using that foreign-market 1.3, or maybe just using the 1.5 it already has, detuned a bit and employing a little bit of Honda magic like the VTEC-e from the last Civic HX to improve fuel economy and low-end torque.

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

  • eldainoeldaino Posts: 1,618
    the '95 SI (last year of the old hatch) had 125 hp and weighed 2390 pounds, which also rings true with what I recall.

    wooo nippon you got your stuff down pat! :) i think i got confused with the 99 si, or at least the type r version in japan, which DID have 160 in that hatch body style and actually weighed even less than 2390.

    I think making it as fast as the old si would be great, but the power to weight ration of the newest si hatch was horrible...i don't think honda would attempt that again, as it was a general failure when compared to the newest, and older si models. (it still has a following, and i do like the way it LOOKS.)

    so maybe a small 1.8, or even a 1.6 pushing around 145-160 would be good? i'd buy it!
  • bobw3bobw3 Posts: 2,992
    If they could make the Fit with 35/45 mpg city/hwy I think it would sell great regardless of the HP figures.
  • robertsmxrobertsmx Posts: 5,525
    Yep. I think that should be the approach, although for marketing purpose and to appeal to performance enthusiasts, they could still have a higher performance model. One of my disappointments with Fit was that it didn't even meet the 1997+ Civic HX in fuel economy ratings much less beat it.
  • I usually don't like to cite Wikipedia, but it seems the 2009 Fit is destined to make its debut in Tokyo in October.
  • bobw3bobw3 Posts: 2,992
    I don't think it's fair to compare the Fit mpg to the Civic, because the Fit is more upright and less aerodynamic which really hurts the highway mpg, which is the real difference between the mpg of the Fit and Civic. City mpg is pretty much the same.
  • eldainoeldaino Posts: 1,618

    but even more so than aerodynamics, we gotta realize that the fits engine is older than the r18 in the civic, even if its new to us, and its less technologically advanced.

    its more akin to the d series engines that found themselves in the previous generation civics.

    and like older civic engines, it gets good fuel economy because of its size, not so much because its been engineered to do so like the r18 has.
  • bobw3bobw3 Posts: 2,992
    It's hard to compare the older engines to new ones. My old '91 Escort gave me mid-30s MPG, but maybe newer engines can do so with lower emissions? Or with more power? It really doesn't seem like MPG has improved much over the past 20 years for any car.
  • nippononlynippononly SF Bay AreaPosts: 12,695
    "One of my disappointments with Fit was that it didn't even meet the 1997+ Civic HX in fuel economy ratings much less beat it."

    GAWD, you can sure say that again! I know this is an upright model with a hatchback, both of which increase aerodynamic drag and reduce fuel economy, but it is also lighter and lower-powered than the old HX, and produces more smog-forming emissions to boot! Talk about a step backwards. And the original '01 Fit was introduced in Japan after the last-gen Civic HX too.

    This is their smallest model for sale in the U.S. IMO the next model should really stand out in emissions and fuel economy. If they want to have a performance trim, I would applaud that and there the line could slip a little bit on FE and emissions, but the bulk of the sales should be trims with top-of-their-class fuel economy.

    Speaking of emissions, I was interested to note that the new Accord will be PZEV here in California for 4-cylinders AND V-6s. If they can do that for the Accord, they should be able to do it for the Fit also.

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

  • ifitifit Posts: 18
    I want a left foot rest. Scratch that, I need a left foot rest.
  • eldainoeldaino Posts: 1,618
    to echo what bob said, we can't really gripe about newer, older engines but then go on to say what cars the fit pales in comparison to.

    sure the fit is 'dirtier' and less fuel eficient than the hx, but it handles much better, has a more upscale interior, and is far more versatile.
  • nippononlynippononly SF Bay AreaPosts: 12,695
    Yes, but this is Honda, the ENGINE company. Every successive generation of vehicles should exceed the last in engineering, IMO. More hp per liter, lower emissions, better fuel economy.

    Besides, all we are talking about really is a wish list for the next gen. While the current Fit is a little disappointing to me, it still excels in its price class, and it IS six years old after all.

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

  • robertsmxrobertsmx Posts: 5,525
    Six years and three months (in two days) in fact. :)

    But it is still a design that holds its own, especially inside and in driving dynamics.

    While getting more HP/liter has been one of Honda's strengths, that is not why Honda is considered an ENGINE company. For that matter, the D16 in Civic HX wasn't as refined and was rated at "only" 117 HP.

    Fit appears to be one of those cars that don't do well in EPA rating system, but deliver better mileage in reality. It might help Honda market the car even better (if there is enough production capacity) if they addressed EPA-rating-happy crowd too.

    I think CVT makes more sense in the Fit than a 5AT (all other markets get CVT-7 or 5MT). But I won't be surprised to see 6-speed iShift transmission in the new version (currently offered only in European Civic).
This discussion has been closed.
2009 Honda Fit — Car Forums at