I am just going to develop a digital "Hybrid" MPG guage you can install on any vehicle and it reads 41-48mpg all the time no matter what...I'll make a killing in the SUV aftermarket.
Last edited:
Honda not so Insight(ful)
- Thread starter Tempest
- Start date
- Status
Originally Posted By: bepperb
For the life of me, I don't know why people would buy an Insight over a Fit other than image. If Honda had put one-tenth the development cost of the Insight into a new transmission for the Fit...
I own a 2000 (first generation) Insight. Most of the first generation Insight owners I know would agree with me that the 2nd generation Insight is a disgrace to the name. I currently have 55,000 miles on my Insight and have averaged 69MPG over the life of the car. I would never purchase the 2nd generation. But if I had to replace my 2000 Insight today, I'd go out and immediately purchase another first generation Insight.
-Bryan
For the life of me, I don't know why people would buy an Insight over a Fit other than image. If Honda had put one-tenth the development cost of the Insight into a new transmission for the Fit...
I own a 2000 (first generation) Insight. Most of the first generation Insight owners I know would agree with me that the 2nd generation Insight is a disgrace to the name. I currently have 55,000 miles on my Insight and have averaged 69MPG over the life of the car. I would never purchase the 2nd generation. But if I had to replace my 2000 Insight today, I'd go out and immediately purchase another first generation Insight.
-Bryan
Quest, are you serious? Are you familiar with the show Top Gear that he hosts? Jeremy Clarkson is an entertainer. Nothing more, nothing less. If you don't find him funny, then you are watching & listening for the wrong reason.
Originally Posted By: bepperb
The fit comes in two drive ratios. One gets 35 hwy (epa), the other 33.
Not to pick on you, but since you posted the numbers, I need a quote...
My 10-year old Malibu consistently gets 32+ on the highway, and I have one tank recorded as high as 33.6-something. And this is at speeds that average 65.
For all the talk I hear about the Japanese being wizards at mileage, I'm somewhat baffled.
OK, now that I got that out of my system, I return this thread to its original topic. Thanks for everyone's patience....
The fit comes in two drive ratios. One gets 35 hwy (epa), the other 33.
Not to pick on you, but since you posted the numbers, I need a quote...
My 10-year old Malibu consistently gets 32+ on the highway, and I have one tank recorded as high as 33.6-something. And this is at speeds that average 65.
For all the talk I hear about the Japanese being wizards at mileage, I'm somewhat baffled.
OK, now that I got that out of my system, I return this thread to its original topic. Thanks for everyone's patience....
Originally Posted By: opus1
Not to pick on you, but since you posted the numbers, I need a quote...
My 10-year old Malibu consistently gets 32+ on the highway, and I have one tank recorded as high as 33.6-something. And this is at speeds that average 65.
For all the talk I hear about the Japanese being wizards at mileage, I'm somewhat baffled.
OK, now that I got that out of my system, I return this thread to its original topic. Thanks for everyone's patience....
One of the things mentioned earlier in this thread was the FIt's EPA numbers vs. real world numbers. Most Fit owners are seeing combined mpg in the 33-35 mpg range. Some see much higher. I've gotten 35 and 37 mpg out of my fillups so far. And that's with heavy a/c use. Right now I'm showing 39.
Not to pick on you, but since you posted the numbers, I need a quote...
My 10-year old Malibu consistently gets 32+ on the highway, and I have one tank recorded as high as 33.6-something. And this is at speeds that average 65.
For all the talk I hear about the Japanese being wizards at mileage, I'm somewhat baffled.
OK, now that I got that out of my system, I return this thread to its original topic. Thanks for everyone's patience....
One of the things mentioned earlier in this thread was the FIt's EPA numbers vs. real world numbers. Most Fit owners are seeing combined mpg in the 33-35 mpg range. Some see much higher. I've gotten 35 and 37 mpg out of my fillups so far. And that's with heavy a/c use. Right now I'm showing 39.
Last edited:
Your Malibu gets 26 (v6) or 28 (I4) mpg, per the new EPA numbers. That's the only thing you can compare to the Fit's EPA numbers. You can't compare your real world mileage to a standarized test of another car. Apples to Oranges.
You can find any EPA rating at fueleconomy.gov.
And FWIW, I've never owned a car I wouldn't get better highway mileage than EPA buy just setting the cruise at 75 on the freeway.
You can find any EPA rating at fueleconomy.gov.
And FWIW, I've never owned a car I wouldn't get better highway mileage than EPA buy just setting the cruise at 75 on the freeway.
Originally Posted By: BrianWC
But really, how can you compare the two? The 2nd Gen is a more complex car and seats 5 comfortably. The 1 Gen doesn't even have a real trunk!
Quite easily, actually. They both are called Insights. Honda obviously made the comparison themselves when they used the name Insight for this new car. I'm not sure what you mean by "more complex", but I'd disagree. The first generation is super high tech, in ways that the second one pales in comparison: all aluminum body, platinum catalytic converter, manganese oil pan, lean burn, more aerodynamic, etc. I'm sure the second generation is more complex in some ways, but I'm simply saying that in many ways the first generation is much more advanced.
I will agree with you that the 2nd generation Insight is bigger and seats more people (although I'm not sure what you mean about trunk space -- both generations are hatchbacks and have ample space back there). However, if I wanted a hybrid that gets good MPG but seats five, I'd buy the Toyota Prius -- especially the 2010 third generation Prius which gets significantly better MPG than the 2nd generation Insight.
-Bryan
But really, how can you compare the two? The 2nd Gen is a more complex car and seats 5 comfortably. The 1 Gen doesn't even have a real trunk!
Quite easily, actually. They both are called Insights. Honda obviously made the comparison themselves when they used the name Insight for this new car. I'm not sure what you mean by "more complex", but I'd disagree. The first generation is super high tech, in ways that the second one pales in comparison: all aluminum body, platinum catalytic converter, manganese oil pan, lean burn, more aerodynamic, etc. I'm sure the second generation is more complex in some ways, but I'm simply saying that in many ways the first generation is much more advanced.
I will agree with you that the 2nd generation Insight is bigger and seats more people (although I'm not sure what you mean about trunk space -- both generations are hatchbacks and have ample space back there). However, if I wanted a hybrid that gets good MPG but seats five, I'd buy the Toyota Prius -- especially the 2010 third generation Prius which gets significantly better MPG than the 2nd generation Insight.
-Bryan
Originally Posted By: opus1
Originally Posted By: bepperb
The fit comes in two drive ratios. One gets 35 hwy (epa), the other 33.
Not to pick on you, but since you posted the numbers, I need a quote...
My 10-year old Malibu consistently gets 32+ on the highway, and I have one tank recorded as high as 33.6-something. And this is at speeds that average 65.
For all the talk I hear about the Japanese being wizards at mileage, I'm somewhat baffled.
OK, now that I got that out of my system, I return this thread to its original topic. Thanks for everyone's patience....
I don't doubt you do get good mileage. The thing is you have to compare apples to apples. You can't compare your observed results to EPA derived values.
Heck, you can't even compare EPA values today with values from 3 years ago (or 20) because they've changed the formulas.
I could consistently beat EPA values before they downgraded the expected mileage. I'm sure if I bought a new car today, I'd crush the values.
For example, when I test drove a Cobalt a couple of months ago, I reset the fuel economy computer to see how I would do. This was a Cobalt LT, not the XFE edition, so it had a manual transmission, etc.
From my post back in February
Quote:
I do have to say one thing good about the Cobalt LT I drove. The 2.2L ecotec delivered nearly 36MPG according to the display in my 30 minute test drive.
I don't think the EPA combined for that car is 36MPG. I don't even think the highway rating is 36MPG for the non XFE models.
So unless that computer is totally out of whack, anyone should be able to handily beat the EPA values if they try.
So what I'm saying is compare apples to apples.
Originally Posted By: bepperb
The fit comes in two drive ratios. One gets 35 hwy (epa), the other 33.
Not to pick on you, but since you posted the numbers, I need a quote...
My 10-year old Malibu consistently gets 32+ on the highway, and I have one tank recorded as high as 33.6-something. And this is at speeds that average 65.
For all the talk I hear about the Japanese being wizards at mileage, I'm somewhat baffled.
OK, now that I got that out of my system, I return this thread to its original topic. Thanks for everyone's patience....
I don't doubt you do get good mileage. The thing is you have to compare apples to apples. You can't compare your observed results to EPA derived values.
Heck, you can't even compare EPA values today with values from 3 years ago (or 20) because they've changed the formulas.
I could consistently beat EPA values before they downgraded the expected mileage. I'm sure if I bought a new car today, I'd crush the values.
For example, when I test drove a Cobalt a couple of months ago, I reset the fuel economy computer to see how I would do. This was a Cobalt LT, not the XFE edition, so it had a manual transmission, etc.
From my post back in February
Quote:
I do have to say one thing good about the Cobalt LT I drove. The 2.2L ecotec delivered nearly 36MPG according to the display in my 30 minute test drive.
I don't think the EPA combined for that car is 36MPG. I don't even think the highway rating is 36MPG for the non XFE models.
So unless that computer is totally out of whack, anyone should be able to handily beat the EPA values if they try.
So what I'm saying is compare apples to apples.
EPA numbers have been downgraded to reflect the additional pork behind the wheel.
Originally Posted By: Bryan K. Walton
Originally Posted By: BrianWC
But really, how can you compare the two? The 2nd Gen is a more complex car and seats 5 comfortably. The 1 Gen doesn't even have a real trunk!
Quite easily, actually. They both are called Insights. Honda obviously made the comparison themselves when they used the name Insight for this new car. I'm not sure what you mean by "more complex", but I'd disagree. The first generation is super high tech, in ways that the second one pales in comparison: all aluminum body, platinum catalytic converter, manganese oil pan, lean burn, more aerodynamic, etc. I'm sure the second generation is more complex in some ways, but I'm simply saying that in many ways the first generation is much more advanced.
I will agree with you that the 2nd generation Insight is bigger and seats more people (although I'm not sure what you mean about trunk space -- both generations are hatchbacks and have ample space back there). However, if I wanted a hybrid that gets good MPG but seats five, I'd buy the Toyota Prius -- especially the 2010 third generation Prius which gets significantly better MPG than the 2nd generation Insight.
-Bryan
The first generation car had a goal in mind and that was to be a test-bed show off of what could be done with hybrid tech. The new car had another goal in mind, to be a 5 passenger hybrid at a low price point while still being relatively stuffed with amenities. Got XM, projector beam headlights, LED tailights, voice operated climate control, nav system, multiple hybrid systems displays, and all the other "stuff" that people want in a modern over-$20k car in that old Insight? Toyota's taking a beating by having to come up with a Prius that competes on price.
I agree, if you had to pick a hybrid out there, the Prius is awesome. But this wailing over the new insight vs. the old is silly. They share a name, yes, but beyond that, they are different animals. There was a reason the first one didn't sell in great numbers. It just wasn't a very practical daily driver for most people. Sure, if it suits you, it's a fantastic car. But the Insight is already the top-selling car in Japan. It's a car people can live with.
Originally Posted By: BrianWC
But really, how can you compare the two? The 2nd Gen is a more complex car and seats 5 comfortably. The 1 Gen doesn't even have a real trunk!
Quite easily, actually. They both are called Insights. Honda obviously made the comparison themselves when they used the name Insight for this new car. I'm not sure what you mean by "more complex", but I'd disagree. The first generation is super high tech, in ways that the second one pales in comparison: all aluminum body, platinum catalytic converter, manganese oil pan, lean burn, more aerodynamic, etc. I'm sure the second generation is more complex in some ways, but I'm simply saying that in many ways the first generation is much more advanced.
I will agree with you that the 2nd generation Insight is bigger and seats more people (although I'm not sure what you mean about trunk space -- both generations are hatchbacks and have ample space back there). However, if I wanted a hybrid that gets good MPG but seats five, I'd buy the Toyota Prius -- especially the 2010 third generation Prius which gets significantly better MPG than the 2nd generation Insight.
-Bryan
The first generation car had a goal in mind and that was to be a test-bed show off of what could be done with hybrid tech. The new car had another goal in mind, to be a 5 passenger hybrid at a low price point while still being relatively stuffed with amenities. Got XM, projector beam headlights, LED tailights, voice operated climate control, nav system, multiple hybrid systems displays, and all the other "stuff" that people want in a modern over-$20k car in that old Insight? Toyota's taking a beating by having to come up with a Prius that competes on price.
I agree, if you had to pick a hybrid out there, the Prius is awesome. But this wailing over the new insight vs. the old is silly. They share a name, yes, but beyond that, they are different animals. There was a reason the first one didn't sell in great numbers. It just wasn't a very practical daily driver for most people. Sure, if it suits you, it's a fantastic car. But the Insight is already the top-selling car in Japan. It's a car people can live with.
Originally Posted By: BrianWC
Originally Posted By: Bryan K. Walton
I'm not sure what you mean by "more complex", but I'd disagree. The first generation is super high tech, in ways that the second one pales in comparison: all aluminum body, platinum catalytic converter, manganese oil pan, lean burn, more aerodynamic, etc. I'm sure the second generation is more complex in some ways, but I'm simply saying that in many ways the first generation is much more advanced.
The first generation car had a goal in mind and that was to be a test-bed show off of what could be done with hybrid tech. The new car had another goal in mind, to be a 5 passenger hybrid at a low price point while still being relatively stuffed with amenities.
No disagreement here.
Originally Posted By: BrianWC
Got XM, projector beam headlights, LED tailights, voice operated climate control, nav system, multiple hybrid systems displays, and all the other "stuff" that people want in a modern over-$20k car in that old Insight?
See my original comment above. I agreed with you that the 2nd generation Insight is more complex in some ways. But as I stated, Honda regressed in some ways, too.
Originally Posted By: BrianWC
Toyota's taking a beating by having to come up with a Prius that competes on price.
Competition is a good thing. I'm glad that Honda is forcing the price of the Prius down.
Originally Posted By: BrianWC
But this wailing over the new insight vs. the old is silly. They share a name, yes, but beyond that, they are different animals.
Again, if you go back and read my original comment, I said:
Originally Posted By: Bryan K. Walton
the 2nd generation Insight is a disgrace to the name.
.
That was the extent of my comparison. Indeed, in my follow up post, I stated that the name was the only comparison I was making. In fact, I only defended the 1st generation Insight from your implication that the 1st generation wasn't complex when you started the more detailed comparison with the following comment:
Originally Posted By: BrianWC
But really, how can you compare the two? The 2nd Gen is a more complex car and seats 5 comfortably. The 1 Gen doesn't even have a real trunk!
Again, I'm not making any real comparison between the two Insights. For people who need a five seater hybrid, of course the 2nd generation is the only Insight that will work. If I'm making any kind of comparison, its between the 2nd generation and the Prius, a comparison that I personally feel Honda loses.
-Bryan
Originally Posted By: Bryan K. Walton
I'm not sure what you mean by "more complex", but I'd disagree. The first generation is super high tech, in ways that the second one pales in comparison: all aluminum body, platinum catalytic converter, manganese oil pan, lean burn, more aerodynamic, etc. I'm sure the second generation is more complex in some ways, but I'm simply saying that in many ways the first generation is much more advanced.
The first generation car had a goal in mind and that was to be a test-bed show off of what could be done with hybrid tech. The new car had another goal in mind, to be a 5 passenger hybrid at a low price point while still being relatively stuffed with amenities.
No disagreement here.
Originally Posted By: BrianWC
Got XM, projector beam headlights, LED tailights, voice operated climate control, nav system, multiple hybrid systems displays, and all the other "stuff" that people want in a modern over-$20k car in that old Insight?
See my original comment above. I agreed with you that the 2nd generation Insight is more complex in some ways. But as I stated, Honda regressed in some ways, too.
Originally Posted By: BrianWC
Toyota's taking a beating by having to come up with a Prius that competes on price.
Competition is a good thing. I'm glad that Honda is forcing the price of the Prius down.
Originally Posted By: BrianWC
But this wailing over the new insight vs. the old is silly. They share a name, yes, but beyond that, they are different animals.
Again, if you go back and read my original comment, I said:
Originally Posted By: Bryan K. Walton
the 2nd generation Insight is a disgrace to the name.
.
That was the extent of my comparison. Indeed, in my follow up post, I stated that the name was the only comparison I was making. In fact, I only defended the 1st generation Insight from your implication that the 1st generation wasn't complex when you started the more detailed comparison with the following comment:
Originally Posted By: BrianWC
But really, how can you compare the two? The 2nd Gen is a more complex car and seats 5 comfortably. The 1 Gen doesn't even have a real trunk!
Again, I'm not making any real comparison between the two Insights. For people who need a five seater hybrid, of course the 2nd generation is the only Insight that will work. If I'm making any kind of comparison, its between the 2nd generation and the Prius, a comparison that I personally feel Honda loses.
-Bryan
To the "name" Insight, sure, it's depressing to have an icon repackaged as something more accessable to the masses. No argument. As far as new base Prius comparisons, I'd have to see content comparisons. Obviously the Prius wins on mpg.
Originally Posted By: Bryan K. Walton
If I'm making any kind of comparison, its between the 2nd generation and the Prius, a comparison that I personally feel Honda loses.
And thats a battle they knew they were going to lose on all sides EXCEPT for value which is where they win big time.
If I'm making any kind of comparison, its between the 2nd generation and the Prius, a comparison that I personally feel Honda loses.
And thats a battle they knew they were going to lose on all sides EXCEPT for value which is where they win big time.
Originally Posted By: BrianWC
Obviously the Prius wins on mpg.
Agreed. Regarding the Prius vs. 2nd generation Insight comparison:
Originally Posted By: Dyoel182
And thats a battle they knew they were going to lose on all sides EXCEPT for value which is where they win big time.
Agreed. Found the following article comparing their corporate cultures interesting:
Prius vs. Insight: A clash of corporate cultures
-Bryan
Obviously the Prius wins on mpg.
Agreed. Regarding the Prius vs. 2nd generation Insight comparison:
Originally Posted By: Dyoel182
And thats a battle they knew they were going to lose on all sides EXCEPT for value which is where they win big time.
Agreed. Found the following article comparing their corporate cultures interesting:
Prius vs. Insight: A clash of corporate cultures
-Bryan
For Brian and Bryan:
Interesting comments. But do keep one thing in mind when comparing either Gen-II or Gen-III Prius vs the new Insight. Although the new Insight, by looks, appears to be a shameless knock-off of the Prius, there's a critical scale difference. Quite simply, the Prius is a substantially larger car (all the more impressive, then, that it beats the Insight in fuel economy). The new Insight has a 100.4 inch wheelbase, only 85 cubic feet of interior passenger volume, and tips the scales at just over 2700 lbs. The New Prius has a 106.3 inch wheelbase, 93.7 cubic feet of passenger volume (down three from the Gen-II!), and weighs in at 3042 lbs.
In short, although the two cars look very similar, the Prius-III is, again, a much larger car. The interior volume difference is almost as much as going from a Corolla to a Camry, if that helps make the point.
Interesting comments. But do keep one thing in mind when comparing either Gen-II or Gen-III Prius vs the new Insight. Although the new Insight, by looks, appears to be a shameless knock-off of the Prius, there's a critical scale difference. Quite simply, the Prius is a substantially larger car (all the more impressive, then, that it beats the Insight in fuel economy). The new Insight has a 100.4 inch wheelbase, only 85 cubic feet of interior passenger volume, and tips the scales at just over 2700 lbs. The New Prius has a 106.3 inch wheelbase, 93.7 cubic feet of passenger volume (down three from the Gen-II!), and weighs in at 3042 lbs.
In short, although the two cars look very similar, the Prius-III is, again, a much larger car. The interior volume difference is almost as much as going from a Corolla to a Camry, if that helps make the point.
Originally Posted By: Dyoel182
Originally Posted By: Bryan K. Walton
If I'm making any kind of comparison, its between the 2nd generation and the Prius, a comparison that I personally feel Honda loses.
And thats a battle they knew they were going to lose on all sides EXCEPT for value which is where they win big time.
See my previous comment. On one hand I can see what you're saying, but on the other, is it really legitimate to compare the two cars on a "value" basis? Given the size difference, to me, that would be just like making a value comparison between a Camry and a Civic.
Originally Posted By: Bryan K. Walton
If I'm making any kind of comparison, its between the 2nd generation and the Prius, a comparison that I personally feel Honda loses.
And thats a battle they knew they were going to lose on all sides EXCEPT for value which is where they win big time.
See my previous comment. On one hand I can see what you're saying, but on the other, is it really legitimate to compare the two cars on a "value" basis? Given the size difference, to me, that would be just like making a value comparison between a Camry and a Civic.
Yes, I did forget the size of the Prius vs. the Insight. Still, I don't think the difference is that great. No doubt, though, the Prius is a great car.
I wouldn't call the Insight a shameless knockoff, though. Aerodynamics obviously palyed a key role in the shape of both. Although the fact that that article mentioned that the Civic has a lower drag coefficient than the Insight was quite a surprise.
Ah well, I'll toodle around in my much cheaper Fit and avoid the contraversy all together.
I wouldn't call the Insight a shameless knockoff, though. Aerodynamics obviously palyed a key role in the shape of both. Although the fact that that article mentioned that the Civic has a lower drag coefficient than the Insight was quite a surprise.
Ah well, I'll toodle around in my much cheaper Fit and avoid the contraversy all together.
Originally Posted By: ekpolk
On one hand I can see what you're saying, but on the other, is it really legitimate to compare the two cars on a "value" basis? Given the size difference, to me, that would be just like making a value comparison between a Camry and a Civic.
Certainly it is. Honda aimed their product to be more entry level but still give most of the hybrid benefits the Prius offers. If they were only $1000-2000 apart I would say value doesnt apply as much but we're talking closer to $10k difference.
On one hand I can see what you're saying, but on the other, is it really legitimate to compare the two cars on a "value" basis? Given the size difference, to me, that would be just like making a value comparison between a Camry and a Civic.
Certainly it is. Honda aimed their product to be more entry level but still give most of the hybrid benefits the Prius offers. If they were only $1000-2000 apart I would say value doesnt apply as much but we're talking closer to $10k difference.
Originally Posted By: Dyoel182
If they were only $1000-2000 apart I would say value doesnt apply as much but we're talking closer to $10k difference.
$10K?
"The redesigned 2010 Toyota Prius goes on sale in the United States in late May with a base price of $22,750, including freight. The price of the top-trim Prius will be $28,020. Later this year, a stripped-down base model will be offered for $21,750. The Insight, by contrast, starts at $20,470 and climbs to $23,000, fully loaded. Toyota's aggressive pricing of the third-generation Prius may pressure margins again."
Source: http://reviews.cnet.com/8301-13746_7-10243346-48.html
A difference of $2,280 (and soon to be only $1,280) at the very low end and $5,020 at the very high end. I personally think that following the initial excitement of the new Honda, they are going to have drop the Insight price further to stay competitive with the Prius.
-Bryan
If they were only $1000-2000 apart I would say value doesnt apply as much but we're talking closer to $10k difference.
$10K?
"The redesigned 2010 Toyota Prius goes on sale in the United States in late May with a base price of $22,750, including freight. The price of the top-trim Prius will be $28,020. Later this year, a stripped-down base model will be offered for $21,750. The Insight, by contrast, starts at $20,470 and climbs to $23,000, fully loaded. Toyota's aggressive pricing of the third-generation Prius may pressure margins again."
Source: http://reviews.cnet.com/8301-13746_7-10243346-48.html
A difference of $2,280 (and soon to be only $1,280) at the very low end and $5,020 at the very high end. I personally think that following the initial excitement of the new Honda, they are going to have drop the Insight price further to stay competitive with the Prius.
-Bryan
- Status
