Fit vs. Rabbit

gagrice

For those interested the VW 2.5L is available PZEV rated. The Fit is not even close to PZEV. I don't think you can consider a Fit if you are environmentally conscientious. The 2.5L has a better emissions rating than the Prius in the 45 non-CARB states.

carfanatic007

$3,000 more than you paid for it? Yea, sure you did! As far as made up "by folks working for Toyota and Honda". Give me a break. Consumer Reports surely dosen't work for Toyota or Honda. I have owned 3 VW's, they were mechanical nightmares, and no I don't work for Toyota or Honda! As Far as resale value, Toyota and Honda have a much better resale value than VW any day of the week. Your whole post is without fact or basis.

hungarian83

Leave it out, my friend. You go on a bashing spree regarding Honda and Toyota and then say that anyone who says something wrong about your precious VW must work for Honda or Toyota.
"For those interested the VW 2.5L is available PZEV rated."
You aren't trying to sell anything are you? Of course I would be a fool to say that anyone who bashed Honda or Toyota worked for VW, so I won't continue on that.

VW has a less than spectacular reliability record. Just face it.
I have driven several different kinds of Volkswagen Group cars, and I enjoyed driving them. During the time period I drove them they were enjoyable and reliable, but I have known plenty of people who have had plenty of trouble with their Volkswagens...and then there are the CR ratings.

Not environmentally conscientious? I take it you are refering to the 2.5 in the Rabbit. The one that gets EPA estimated 22/30 compared to 33/38 for the Fit. It would be a lot better if the Fit was at least ULEV or SULEV, if not PZEV, but really(!) drving a 2.5L engine in a car such as the Rabbit is hardly an "environmentally conscientious" move.

shrinermonkey

Wow you owned a car for 13 months and 8300 miles... wow I'm so impressed. That is hardly what I would call a real ownership experience. Here is what has gone wrong in 6 years and over 62,000 miles of ownership with my Passat:

Mass Air Meter dead - under 30k
Vaccum lines failed - under 30k
ABS Module dead - 55k
2 upper Control arms - 55k (more starting to fail now)
Driver side airbag fault - 60k
Belly pan falling off - under 30k (missing fasteners AGAIN)
Dead Ignition Coilpack - 60k (after they were all replaced with a recall at 35k)
Numerous squeaks and rattles that developed shortly after purchasing the car
Driver side window switch going bad
Several oil leaks at under 30k (fixed under warranty)

This is thousands of dollars of repairs, fortunately I am somewhat handy and fixed some of these myself, but most owners would not attempt that on a car as complex as this.

Not to mention the expensive maintenance and replacement part costs. This car has been a joy to drive when it was working right, but an absolute nightmare the rest of the time. From what I have heard I have been lucky as I did not have my engine sludge up...yet. I have been using only costly synthetic oil and have been religious in getting it changed often.

The poor reliabilty of VWs are not based on made up stories, they are based on the experiences of REAL owners like me who keep their cars for more that a year and drive it for more that 8300 miles. And while you may have had a good experience with a VW dealer, most, including myself have not, and I have tried 3 different dealerships. VW has one of the lowest rated dealer service networks.

moparbad

Resale value!?! Any car will do better than a VW. Let me see, let's go back to Toyota/Honda. S#!t, I see no lowest German brand on my book (i.e. VW). Here's the reality.

Your statement is incorrect. There are several VW's that are class leaders for retained value and overall ownership cost.

2005 IntelliChoice Best Overall Value Awards
In addition to the eight category winners, IntelliChoice also recognizes the following vehicles as class winners:

Cars
Subcompact Class – Honda Civic Coupe
Compact Class under $16,000 – Honda Civic Sedan
Compact Class over $16,000 – Honda Civic Hybrid
Midsize Class under $21,000 – Toyota Prius
Midsize Class over $21,000 – Volkswagen Passat TDI
Large Class – Chrysler 300
Near Luxury Class – Lexus ES 330
Luxury Class – Lexus LS 430
Small Wagon Class – Volkswagen Jetta TDI
Midsize/Large Wagon Class – Volkswagen Passat TDI
Base Sport Class – Toyota MR2 Spyder
Sport Class – Lexus SC 430

shrinermonkey

When or if Toyota and Honda start selling their diesels here in the states you will see VW disappear out of those lists.

moparbad

Intellichoice 2006 Highest Retained Value
2006 Volkswagen GTI 1.8T (manual) Base Sport Class

When or if Toyota and Honda start selling their diesels here in the states you will see VW disappear out of those lists.

The GTI 1.8T is NOT a diesel and it is on the list. :P

johnnyb11

When you buy a comprable vw (passat vs. accord, jetta vs. civic, rabbit vs. fit), vw's are almost hands down better cars. They tend to have more safety features, more neat little gadgets, more luxury features, better handling and tight powertrains - and handsome/unique bodies. The vw's are not better by a huge margin, but on day of purchase, they are nicer cars. One month later, 6 months later, 2 years later, all those strengths become overwhelmed by the negatives. The doors that start rattling, the suspension that starts making odd noises that no mechanic can stop, the first brake job that always seems to be at least $800 or more, the pricier maintenance and other repairs, the electrical issues, i had a seat cushion collapse on the left side, so I was leaning to the left until vw agreed to replace it (in less than 1 year). I have owned a passat and golf - that golf was one of my favorite cars ever (I've owned over 18 cars so since I was 16 (now 38), but in the end, my love for the car was eaten away by my inability to trust it from day to day, month to month. My friends who own them have the same experience - long term vs is a problem. Anyone who disputes this is just not looking. My favorite cars overall, have been the hondas I've owned; they've been quite similar to the vw's in power and handling (but not quite as connected, germanic), and have had less little gadgets and luxury features and even safety features, but my hondas have always been reliable, have felt as solid when they were new, as they were when one year old. A five year old honda feels like a 10 year old vw. With what we pay for cars these days, vw has no excuse for not putting more effort into quality control. If they did, I think their engineering and design would make them nearly impossible to beat... but this is long hx of the same problem.

I kinda miss my old golf, but my fit is great, and will feel great in 4 or 5 years, whereas that neat little rabbit will be great, for a little while (safer, more luxurious, more fun), but the romance will be short and the breakup annoying.

shrinermonkey

Exactly. I bought my Passat back in 2000 because of rave reviews from Edmunds and other car sites. But what Edmunds doesn't take into consideration is reliability and boy is that a big flaw in this car. The romance is over with my Passat because I always seem to have a dash light on for somethimg and feel like I am driving a ticking time bomb.

sanyok

Well, I feel sorry for you, guys.
I have 2001 Passat GLX (V6).
It is almost 6 years old.
It has 162,000 mi.
I love this car - I still enjoy every mile I drive.
I did not even change sparks yet or any wires.
There was no any major repair exsept some suspension parts replacement. Timing belt was also replaced at 105,000, as per VW requirement (was nothing wrong with it)
So,the romance is far from over.

outdoorszee

I've owned a 2000 Jetta(100,000 miles), and currently own a 2002 Civic (80,000 miles). I agree that Honda does manage to build cars that run, but here's my list of complaints..

Shock Replacement 3X's which while waiting for shocks I am sure the CV's took a beating and are now clicking...yes, they too now need replacement. This due to a mfg defect that causes the seals to blow in cold temps. so many cars needed shocks in Ottawa, Canada that they were back ordered for 6 weeks???

Replaced both rear brake cylinders at a point in time that I consider premature.

Air Cleaner cover fastened with inferior bolts and as such rusted in place even though I was checking evere oil change. Salt and dampness should not play a role so early?? Why not use stainless??

Passenger door panel pulled away from door and resulted in stripped thread attachment. Install superior fastener to overcome issue.

Exhaust rattle drives me crazy and I am very mechanically inclined so changed all rubber hangers and only solution..crank the tunes.

There is an odd girgling sound coming from the engine that Honda says is normal and I just can't figure out what is happening and why I should have to put up with the girgling.

SOOOO, all that to say that I find Honda's are fairly well built but there are issues. They really don't affect actually driving the vehicle but are a nuisance. Actually, I know many women at work that drive 2003-2005 Civic's and their shocks are also shot, but they just don't realize it. So, how can they even complain when they don't realize the clunking sound they hear when going over speed bumps is a shock with low fluid.

On the other hand....the Jetta didn't have these little problems but burned more oil than gas and any difficulties...well, left you stranded.

I am currently looking at buying a new vehicle and (my wife who has driven...1990, 1996 Civic, 2001 Accord) is now convinced that she doesn't want another Honda ..but where to go? For example, VW fit and finish is great..reliable? and Honda's are reliable but it's the little things that drive me crazy.

Maybe I will SETTLE for the new civic but will go into this purchase with a much lower expectation. Knowing that the famous Honda reputation is not what the experts claim. But, buy the highest rated vehicle and some student will pay big bucks for it when it's old and tired...go figure??

cheers..

hungarian83

Interesting that you mention those problems on a 2002 Civic. We also have a 2002 Civic (5MT coupé) with about 90,000 miles and it hasn't had those issues. The clutch pedal makes an odd creaking/screeching noise when pressed down, and the door panels sound like they are quite loose, with some shaking/rattling when you slam the door shut. Nothing other than that. I like the Fit better than our Civic though. It generally feels more solid (despite having more hard plastics inside) and with no rattles or squeaks from the interior.

I had an Accord passed down to me as my first car from my family who had owned it since brand new. The first repair (other than maintenance and wear items) was the radiator which cracked open at ~220,000 miles. Although the problems came relatively frequently after that, that was the first real issue. Sorry to hear about all the problems you have had.
If I were you, I would at least take a look at the Fit and the new Civic. Admitedly, I haven't examined the interior of the new Civic, but the Fit is really quite nice...with the exception of the "carpet". Floor mats solved that problem though.

deepdivot2

I've driven the Rabbit and son owns a Fit. I'm not sure they are very comparable, other than both being hatchbacks. Rabbit has quite a few more features for the extra $2-3K it costs. Center console, ceiling console, independent suspension, much better carpeting and included floor mats, height adjustable seats, full size spare, cover for hatch area, reading lights, two vanity miorrors, better HP, torque, and quieter is only a partial list. Fit's claim to fame seems to be limited to a lower price, the ingenious Magic Seats, better EPA MPG, and the Honda reputation. Son's not having too good a luck yet with MPG, averaging only 22 MPG in exclusively city driving for first two tanks. He has a light foot, so hopefully for him, that will get significantly better. The Rabbit is very manueverable, but the Fit is a blast around town if the lack of power isn't a concern. The ultra quick steering is fun, although could be a problem in an emergency situation, where oversteer is a distinct possibility. Paddle shifters are a cute toy, but essentially useless with the lack of HP and torque.

VW doesn't have the reliability reputation of Honda, although I'm not sure what it's based on. Some owners have very good luck, others terrible luck. I've got an uncle who has owned nothing but VWs for the last 40 years. Bugs, pickups, rabbits, and now jettas. Even had a microbus He's always been happy with them. Wouldn't it be nice to seen warranty claim info, so much of the hype could be justified or disproved?

bodble2

I agree with almost everything you said. On paper, the Rabbit blows away the Fit. The Civic, in terms of power and content, is really a more worthy adversary for the Rabbit. But the VW still has the 6-sp steptronic, traction and stability control and hatch config which you cannot get on the Civic at any price.

Reliability is a funny thing. You can't really bring yourself to ignore it, but in reality, I think it's a real crapshoot. For any brand, you're find some that have had a horrible experience, and others that have experienced the opposite. Maybe the trick is to lease, or trade in every 2 or 3 years. That way, the car would always be under full warranty, and you don't keep them long enough for the real big problems to show up! :P

carfanatic007

No trick for the VW Bunny. There reliability sucks. Civic is light years ahead, bottom line.

deepdivot2

Agreed, Civic is probably closer, although unfortunately it doesn't come in a hatch configuration anymore. Great car otherwise. I believe as America starts going smaller with their vehicles, the hatchback will be a preferred setup, just like in Europe. Reliability really is a strange animal. I have a hard time getting too worked up on all the reliability hype, largely since the most unreliable car built today is head and shoulders above what I grew up with. As a kid, it was a weekend ritual to work on one of my dad's cars. IMHO, as difficult as it is, the smartest option is to wait until the second or third year a car is out to avoid some of the birthing pains. CR said something similar to that recently where they rated the reliability of a new Toyota model (can't remember if it was Avalon or Camry) as only average.

bodble2

"Civic is light years ahead"

Only when it comes to reliability. And even then, it's not light years anymore. Honda ain't what it used to be. :sick:

bodble2

Yeah, it's interesting that small cars are in vogue pretty well everywhere in the world except North America, and the US specifically. :confuse:

You're right about not buying the first year of a new model. But sometimes it's hard to control the new car urge, especially when a new model appears to be a home run, as the Rabbit appears to be.

jpmccormac

Re: "You're right about not buying the first year of a new model."

This is not the first year for the Rabbit. The MK V Golf (now merely renamed the Rabbit) has been out in Europe for four years. Same car.

hungarian83

"new model appears to be a home run, as the Rabbit appears to be"

I have a feeling it will be as successful as the Golf...oh wait, it is a Golf.
Anyway, time will tell on whether it is really a home run.
I personally like the look of the Rabbit, but to think that Volkswagen says on their site "The perfect car for city driving", is a joke.
What they should have done is kept the Golf as the Golf, and brought the Polo over and sold it as the Rabbit. None of this 2.5L 150HP 22/30 mpg "city car" nonsense.

nippononly

Bring over the Polo! That would be at least as a good a comparison with the Fit as it is currently equipped, IMO.

cvt

The Polo might be sold thru DaimlerChrysler, as they need a replacement for Mitsubishi as as source for their smallest cars. VW may also sell the Polo directly.

2007 Volkswagen Polo: U.S. Debut Stalled?

moparbad

Quality statistics - JD Power Initial Quality 2006 models

Honda - 110 problems per 100 vehicles.

Volkswagen - 171 problems per 100 vehicles.

There reliability sucks. Civic is light years ahead, bottom line.

0.61 problems per vehicle difference.

0.61 problems per vehicle equals light years? :sick: In carfanatics perception it does.

bodble2

I don't think "city car" would be an inappropriate marketing description. After all, it can't be marketed as an "autobahn flyer", or "luxury cruiser", or "family hauler". So, almost by default, "city car" seems appropriate. They didn't pass it off as an "inner-city hydrid alternative", so the gas mileage is not a contradiction. I think it is a car that appeals to young, or youngish, urbanites.

hungarian83

I just think of "city car" as a vehicle with a smaller displacement engine that gets decent mileage, not one with an engine bigger than that of an Accord.

hungarian83

Everyone likes to present the results of statistics so it benefits their argument.

You say 0.61 problems per vehicle is nothing.
However, when 38 brand names are surveyed, and Honda places 6th place, and Volkswagen places 36th place, it is a big difference.
According to that survey, Honda places quite a few marks above the industry average, and Volkswagen places well below it.

Porsche received 1st place while Land Rover placed last. Only 1.13 problems more for a Land Rover? Definitely not a big deal. :sick:

bodble2

I do think of the Rabbit as a vehicle with a smaller engine with decent gas mileage. Not hybrid level mileage, but decent.

bodble2

But you know, as the saying goes in sports, sometimes statistics are for losers. As someone else alluded to, the modern automobile has improved to the point where even the so-called bad ones are way better than the better ones from yesteryears. If they must be ranked, then someone will come in first, and someone must come in last. So while 1st place, compared to 36th place may be statistically significant, you have to ask yourself, is there a corresponding practical significance?

hungarian83

22/30 for a "city car" is decent?

shrinermonkey

There is a pracitcal significance. As cars have gotten more reliable across the board they have also gotten more complex and expensive to repair, especially the European makes like my VW Passat. So while that Land Rover might be more reliable than a 1979 Bonneville, if it breaks it is gonna cost a great deal more to fix than that Bonneville did in it's day. The fact that all cars a getting more reliable makes no difference to someone on the market for a new car now. Shoppers want to buy the most reliable car that is available. The parctical significance is easy to see when you have to crack open your wallet as many times as I have for big dollar repairs while my friends who own Hondas and Toyotas only have to put gas and oil in their cars.

Your logic makes no sense because it is like saying that the Hummer H1 get's great gas mileage compared to a 1967 Cadillac El Dorado.

bodble2

You bet. I would be happy if I got 22mpg with my TL. It's all relative, baby, it's all relative. The irony with a lot of people is that, unless you're a taxi driver, or a door-to-door salesman, you don't really need to forego all amenitiesa just to get a 40mpg car strictly for urban commuting. You won't rack up enough miles to make the exercise worthwhile.

bodble2

I don't see how a Land Rover under warranty would be more expensive to repair then a Bonneville. If you're one of those people that keep a car for 10 years, buy an extended warranty. And are you sure, after adjusting for inflation, and measured as a % of disposable income, any car today is more "expensive" to repair then any car in 1967?! Better go find out first before you stick your head out on that one!

"The fact that all cars a getting more reliable makes no difference to someone on the market for a new car now."

It makes one hell of difference!! Because it eliminates reliability concerns from the decision process! It expands one's potential choices of cars to buy.

"Shoppers want to buy the most reliable car that is available."

Not all shoppers, pal.

"...the Hummer H1 get's great gas mileage compared to a 1967 Cadillac El Dorado."

It doesn't. But doesn't matter, I don't know where you're going with that one anyway. :confuse:

hungarian83

I am sure if I had a TL, I would be happy with 22 mpg as well. However, the TL is not a city car, economy car, or anything of the sort. It is not marketed that way either.

This discussion is about the Rabbit and Fit. While I feel the Rabbit is a better comparison to the Civic, even the Civic beats the Rabbit hands down in efficiency.

As you said, it's all relative. But then again I don't know why you trying to bring a $30,000+ sport/luxury sedan into a discussion about a ~$15,000 "car for city driving".
If I could get 22 mpg in a Maybach 62, I would be thrilled. Doesn't change the fact that the Rabbit is the glutton of its category.

bodble2

I don't know what the sale numbers are for the Passat, but I do know that they still sell boatloads of BMWs, MINIs, Audis, etc., all of which are supposed to have less than stellar reliability records. I know for me personally, the general improvement in reliability for cars in general has me considering brands that I wouldn't have considered otherwise.

Your VW was no doubt a lemon. It happens. It's too bad. Honda and Toyotas have lemons too. Luck of the draw more or less.

Some people may base their buying decision on JD Power, and Consumer Reports. But many don't. I know I don't.

If extended warranties aren't your cup of tea, don't keep a car beyond the factory warranty.

I didn't say reliability is no longer a factor. I said improved reliability makes a difference. And I don't know what it is that you think the market has proven, because I don't think you read what I said accurately.

deepdivot2

Of course reliability is important, but the difference between cars based on the data available is not that much anymore. You could easily trade your Passat and get a Honda or Toyota and get a real lemon. Ask the thousands of Toyota/Lexus owners whose $7-10k engines failed prematurely. 5 years ago, I bought a used Corolla for my kids to drive to school. It cost a little more due to the Toyota image, and in the next 40K miles I replaced nearly everything but the engine, including radiator, headliner, radio, exhaust system, 3 stud bolts, blower motor, starter, brakes, struts, CV joints to name a few. Some were normal wear-and-tear, others just failed. When a head gasket went at 160K miles, and I discovered the exhaust manifold was cracked, the wife said 'no more!' and it went to salvage. Replaced with a 2001 Prizm, and lo and behold, the fuel system has a vacuum leak and the valve stem seals need replacing at 36K miles. The hood release cable froze up, which made it difficult to check the oil (and the bad seals made that a necessity). The point is, get rid of your lemon Passat by all means, but realize there ain't no free lunch. ALL cars need maintenance and repair. There's no car that you just put oil and gas in.

bodble2

"Doesn't change the fact that the Rabbit is the glutton of its category."

That's an interesting statement. Just what category would you put the Rabbit in? Based on it's styling, ride, handling, equipment, safety features, utility, sportiness, I think the only model that comes close is the Mini, which still costs a few thousands more, albeit with even more of a "cool factor" as trade-off. And the Mini gets similar gas mileage to the Rabbit.

So, if it is in a class of 1, is it at the bottom, or the top?

I don't think the intention of this thread is to discuss whether the Fit gets better mpg than the Rabbit. Any moron would know it does. I think the debate is whether the Rabbit, all things considered, would represent an attractive buying alternative to the Fit.

They are similar is some ways (notably hatch config and price), but what the Rabbit gives up in fuel efficiency, I think it makes up for in spades in many other ways.

moparbad

:confuse: But you know, as the saying goes in sports, sometimes statistics are for losers. As someone else alluded to, the modern automobile has improved to the point where even the so-called bad ones are way better than the better ones from yesteryears. If they must be ranked, then someone will come in first, and someone must come in last. So while 1st place, compared to 36th place may be statistically significant, you have to ask yourself, is there a corresponding practical significance? :confuse:

What is the point you are trying to make?

phinneas519

This isn't Sesame Street, but some things are not just adding up on Rabbit's spec sheet. We've got a five cylinder 2.5 liter engine that makes 150 hp and a somewhat higher amount of torque. An estimated 22/30 mileage rating is a pretty weak tradeoff for a vehicle weighing about one and a half tons and clocking in with its listed hp-torque rating.

So what's going on here? I know that VW, despite its spotty reliability, can engineer vehicles well enough. For sake of comparison, my 2004 Lancer Sportback, weighing closer to two tons has a 2.4 I4 that makes 160 hp and an equal amount of torque while getting 22/28 (my own experiences are with two miles more on each). An engineer I am not, but something is rotten in Denmark...er...Germany.

bodble2

I thought I made it already. How many times do I need to repeat it?! It's not rocket science. Anyway, here it is again:

SOMETIMES YOU CAN'T READ TOO MUCH INTO WHETHER ONE MODEL IS RANKED 1ST, OR 10TH, OR 36TH. IF RELIABILITY HAS SIGNIFICANTLY IMPROVED OVERALL, THEN IT MAY BE INSIGNFICANT REGARDLESS OF WHERE IT IS RANKED. THE RANKING IS JUST A STATISTICAL EXERCISE!

How's that?

bodble2

Your Sportback is 2 tons?! Why bother then? May as well have gotten an SUV!

phinneas519

Let me rephrase that, I got the figure a bit off. The listed curb weight is 3,020 lbs and the gross weight is 4,012 lbs. I primarily got it because the price was right and it was a wagon - I just love wagons.

Despite that, the Rabbit's figures just don't seem right to me, somehow. Though I won't deny that it's a sharp looking car.

bodble2

"...the Rabbit's figures just don't seem right to me, somehow"

What's the Rabbit's curb weight? It shouldn't be over 3,000 lbs, I wouldn't think. Maybe the gearing?

gogirlgo

So to me it is the difference between the drive. If a car to you is just something to get from point A to point B then get a Fit. If you like to drive, get a Rabbit. It is more than a city drive. Drivers wanted says it all!!!!

hungarian83

"If a car to you is just something to get from point A to point B then get a Fit. If you like to drive, get a Rabbit."

I like to drive, and I find the Fit to be quite enjoyable. I don't pretend it is a Civic Si or anything, but for what it is, it's fun.
Have you even driven the Fit?

bpeachee1

I've driven the Fit, and the Rabbit, then bought the Rabbit.
I agree the Fit is a fun little car as well....just not enough leg room for me.
Try pouncing on the throttle at 65mph in the Fit in top gear....see if anything happens.
Try that in the Rabbit in 5th gear (manual)....thats fun!
150 HP might not seem that much these days...but its the 170 lbft of Torque that makes it a blast.
So far, getting about 25-26 mpg, about 90% city driving.

hungarian83

I'm glad you are enjoying your Rabbit.
I have the Fit 5MT, so at 65 mph the engine is spinning at just over 3000 rpm in 5th gear. It actually has a decent amount of passing power.
I don't doubt that the Rabbit will have more jump to it, what with 150 HP and 170 lbft of torque, but when going at 65 in the Fit, if I do "pounce on the throttle", it picks up speed nicely. Personally I think the Fit is more fun on backroads, than trying to push it on open roads. It is relatively light, the suspension is firm enough to counter any significant body roll (considering the tall height), and the steering, clutch, and shifter have a light, responsive feel.

Out of curiousity, what is the weight of your Rabbit? I am just trying to get an idea of the power-to-weight ratio since that is a more useful figure than HP alone.
Thanks!

shrinermonkey

Your VW was no doubt a lemon. It happens. It's too bad. Honda and Toyotas have lemons too. Luck of the draw more or less.
My car is not a lemon. From my extensive research that I have done and with talking with other owners on Passat message boards, ALL of my problems are very common with these cars. The fact is your chances of getting a Honda and Toyota lemon are much lower than with a VW. Add on to that VWs poor service ratings and getting those problems fixed also becomes a hassle (as I have also experienced). My point is that my experience is not unique and makes a big impact on overall satisfaction with the product. Since VW shares many statistical similarities with other European and domestic brands this has made me eliminated those brands from my shopping list and I feel that I have made the right decision by doing so.
If extended warranties aren't your cup of tea, don't keep a car beyond the factory warranty.
That would mean I would have gotten rid of my car after 2 years or 24k miles... that was the extent of the factory B to B warranty. I DID buy an extended warranty for about $700 that covered me until 5 years. The only repair it covered was some control arms that would have cost me about $700 to repair so it was a wash.

bpeachee1

I know what you mean...I liked driving the Fit a lot.
It just came down to leg room, and seat position.
I'm 6'6", and the Rabbits seat travel, and height adjustment beat the Fit.

The 2 door 5spd manual says curb weight is 2970 or so.
Not a light weight, but you can feel how solid it is on the road. Doesnt ride like a small car at all.

hondaful

Our family has owned six Hondas since 1984, and we never bought an extended warranty. None of the (very few) repairs to any of those six cars would have been covered by the extended warranties offered by the dealers, so that has turned out to be a good decision.

carfanatic007

If I wanted a larger hatchback I would have bought the Mazda 3S hatchback over the Rabbit any day. Japanese made and rated highly by consumer reports.