Topic: Test Drive: 2011 Ford Fiesta SES hatchback

[Jaeger]

^^^ I agree.

Jaeger

[bikenut]

Manual-transmission versions of the Fiesta offer spirited low-speed acceleration but lack high-speed passing power. Both the clutch and shifter actions are impressively smooth and precise. With the automatic, full-throttle acceleration is timid from a stop for about the first 50 feet, and some full-throttle downshifts are somewhat delayed. (consumer guide)
http://consumerguideauto.howstuffworks.com/2011-ford-fiesta.htm

too bad the automatic is slow off the line otherwise i might like a hatch myself
 but i'd wait till there di engines filter down to this model

[MKII]

<div style="text-align:left">

<img src=http://www.canadiandriver.com/galleries/2011/thumbs/2057-2011-ford-fiesta_cc_004-2057.jpg class=excerptimage>
Five-speed manual transmission: "Balanced and eager handling" and a suspension that "rarely felt unsettled," are the highlights of the new Fiesta, says Chris Chase. The manual transmission is "pleasant to use" though the third-to-fourth shift "can be tricky."  Criticisms include a "quirky interior design."

<a href=http://www.canadiandriver.com/2010/09/10/test-drive-2011-ford-fiesta-ses-hatchback.htm>Read More...</a></div>

@Chris Chase you wrote "The only thing I wish was available in the SE is SYNC, Ford’s wireless connectivity system"

Maybe your info from Ford Canada was lacking regarding features available
SE trim is offered a SYNC & Sound Package $650.00 which includes a bunch of stuff I am sure you can look up and correct your article.
Quite easy to find this on Ford.ca also if you take the time on this site in the build your Fiesta tool under "Optional Accessories" you will find a bunch of individual features you can add , for example centre consol armrest for $199.00, and maybe some other "small-but-important features " as you put it might be listed there as well.

[Jaeger]

Manual-transmission versions of the Fiesta offer spirited low-speed acceleration but lack high-speed passing power. Both the clutch and shifter actions are impressively smooth and precise. With the automatic, full-throttle acceleration is timid from a stop for about the first 50 feet, and some full-throttle downshifts are somewhat delayed. (consumer guide)
http://consumerguideauto.howstuffworks.com/2011-ford-fiesta.htm

too bad the automatic is slow off the line otherwise i might like a hatch myself
 but i'd wait till there di engines filter down to this model

Well.... Car and Driver (October issue) tested the Fiesta against the Fit and Mazda 2 - manual transmissions all - and the Fiesta rang in one full second slower than the Mazda, and nearly two full seconds slower than the Fit.  This, to me, was more suprising than the fact that they picked the Fit as the overall winner.

Jaeger

[dirtyjeffer]

Well.... Car and Driver (October issue) tested the Fiesta against the Fit and Mazda 2 - manual transmissions all - and the Fiesta rang in one full second slower than the Mazda, and nearly two full seconds slower than the Fit.  This, to me, was more suprising than the fact that they picked the Fit as the overall winner.

Jaeger

i've never driven a Fit, although i do like them (price, versatility, style), but when i drove the Fiesta with the 6sp auto, it didn't feel any slower or faster than any other subcompact car...while 1-2 seconds is a fair number on paper, it is doubtful people who buy these cars are going to try and set those times each time they drive them...now, if the Fiesta was being sold as "Sport Sedan", i would take issue with it, but it's not.

[Jaeger]

^^^ That's probably true - though my post was in response to the quote describing the "spirited" acceleration of the stickshift Fiesta.  That may well be the legitimate subjective impression of the author, but acceleration is one of the things we can objectively quantify. I had expected all three would be fairly close - but there was a pretty big gap between first and last.  As I said, I was surprised.  And I do think 2 seconds is both noticeable - and relavant outside the realm of sports cars / sedans.  If it were a comparison of 4 cylinder midsize family sedans and most entries got to 60 in 8 seconds, while one took 10, there is no way that would escape comment by the reviewers.

Jaeger

[tpl]

In the real world of public roads does it matter at all if a car can get to 60 mph in 7,8,9,10 or even 12 seconds ?   How many people EVER do WOT takeoffs on a regular road.

When I drive the Fit it is usually with mrs tpl on board and a whole pile of groceries and stuff.  I don't spin the wheels or drop the clutch suddenly  but I am invariably the first away from the lights and often keep that lead until the next stop... and no I don't do 70 in a 50 or 80 in a 60 to do this.  I  never exceed 4500 rpm in the Fit either. I found there was no need to so do.

Where the Fit misses out of course is the 50 to 80 time ( 80kmh to 140) thats required for passing on a two laner.  I do find its underpowered then...( my GTI is just fine with not only the extra bhp but the dsg keeping the engine accurately in its power band. )

It is plenty fast enough and I bet that most of these modern small cars are the same.  As John said at 2pm these cars are better than their predecessors by a lot as well.

[wing]

The comparisons that keep testing the manual fiesta are missing the point.  Th auto fiesta is more fuel efficient and has better performance. In a back to back autox inwas faster in the auto because of the better gearing.

I lik the fit but it looks like a minivan and for a lot of people that is an automatic fail.

[Jaeger]

In the real world of public roads does it matter at all if a car can get to 60 mph in 7,8,9,10 or even 12 seconds ?   How many people EVER do WOT takeoffs on a regular road.

It might not matter in absolute terms, but it matters in comparative terms.  If one segment competitor gets to 60 is 7 seconds and another takes 12, I'd say that matters in a general sense.  It would matter to me, and I suspect it would matter to a good number of people here. There's a reason car mags run instrumented tests on all vehicles - and 0 to 60 is one they pretty much always do - not just on sports cars, but for all cars.  They maybe don't always report maximum lateral G's or slalom time, but they all report 0-60.  It's provides a comparative measure of the car's ability to accelerate - something that every driver does every day, whether they go WOT or not.  It may not matter a whit to you - and that's more than okay.  But it seems to be regarded as relevant in the automotive industry.

The comparisons that keep testing the manual fiesta are missing the point.  Th auto fiesta is more fuel efficient and has better performance. In a back to back autox inwas faster in the auto because of the better gearing.

It's not missing the point for those who prefer to shift for themselves - precious few though we may be.    Arguably, which car is faster on an autocross course is far less relevant in the real world than 0 to 60.  If very few go WOT on a daily basis, far fewer Fit, Fiesta and Mazda 2 buyers will ever see an autocross course.

I lik the fit but it looks like a minivan and for a lot of people that is an automatic fail.

It seems that enough people like the look of the Fit just fine - Honda doesn't seem to be struggling to sell them.  For just about any given car you can find "a lot of people" who don't like its styling.  There isn't really much about the Fit that could fairly be described as an "automatic fail". It's easily one of Honda's better offerings.

Jaeger

[wing]

My gawd people like to construe other's words to suit there argument, even if there originally was no argument.....

[bikenut]

0-60 times are very relevant ,its a good gauge to others in the same class as well .

 you want to make sure your car has enough power to merge ,either on the highway or in the city when your lane runs out .
 sometimes you  have to scoot quickly when turning to beat on coming traffic or traffic coming the other way .
 all of us aren't patient enough to wait a day or so till all traffic is cleared both ways before going .
 i like to take advantage of those brief openings that accelerating quickly enough allows me to get into

its your right to doodle along if you like . its not how i drive .

 a slow responding car , slow off the line would just be to frustrating to me and could very well get me into an accident

the auto fiesta i'm certain is better geared than the standard but as soon as i read from another review it was slow for the first 50 ft ,-- that could get me in an accident , so its automatically crossed off the list

i agree with the mini van look of the fit - i don't need the utility either -- if it looked more sporty car - coupe like ,  i might have bought one

wing , ha,ha,ha , haven't you noticed , thats what we do here ! well not all of us ,all the time

[Jaeger]

0-60 times are very relevant ,its a good gauge to others in the same class as well .

That's all I'm saying.

Jaeger

[bikenut]

jaeger , i agree with your post , my post was directed at tpl not you , he was the one placing no relevance on 0 - 60 times

[Vanstar]

The Fiesta seems a nice package but the cargo capacity with the rear seat folded is very limited in comparison to my 2008 Fit. My sister's 2010 Fit is even better. I realise this may not be a big selling point for a younger market when the extra carrying capacity is needed, it really comes in handy.

[MKII]

0-60 times are very relevant ,its a good gauge to others in the same class as well .
 but as soon as i read from another review it was slow for the first 50 ft ,-- that could get me in an accident , so its automatically crossed off the list

So you make your decision based on someone's comment in a review or have you driven the Fiesta to verify your conclusion?

[Jake The Snake]

Mazda3 Sport GX starts at $17000 (but no AC), before incentives, and there is room for the dealer to discount further. The Mazda3 Sedan is $1000 less.

[tpl]

0-60 times are very relevant ,its a good gauge to others in the same class as well .

 you want to make sure your car has enough power to merge ,either on the highway or in the city when your lane runs out .
 sometimes you  have to scoot quickly when turning to beat on coming traffic or traffic coming the other way .
 all of us aren't patient enough to wait a day or so till all traffic is cleared both ways before going .
 i like to take advantage of those brief openings that accelerating quickly enough allows me to get into

its your right to doodle along if you like . its not how i drive .

 a slow responding car , slow off the line would just be to frustrating to me and could very well get me into an accident

the auto fiesta i'm certain is better geared than the standard but as soon as i read from another review it was slow for the first 50 ft ,-- that could get me in an accident , so its automatically crossed off the list

i agree with the mini van look of the fit - i don't need the utility either -- if it looked more sporty car - coupe like ,  i might have bought one

wing , ha,ha,ha , haven't you noticed , thats what we do here ! well not all of us ,all the time

0-60 times are relevant as a comparison it is the absolute numbers that are less important.
My whole point was that the Fit is just fine when it has to "scoot quickly".  Most of the "competition" at a stop weighs much more AND has the inherent lag of a slushbox. 
The gist of my argument is that the Fit is plenty powerful enough for what it is... not to say that it would not be improved by a turbo and another 50 bhp.

FWIW we did not buy or even test drive the automatic Fit

Now the Fiesta automatic is a DSG and I suspect that will be a better transmission in most respects than the manual and of course will be chosen by >90% of buyers.   I do hope that Ford have programmed the DSG to allow for someone with a heavy foot.

[Shnak]

In the real world of public roads does it matter at all if a car can get to 60 mph in 7,8,9,10 or even 12 seconds ?   How many people EVER do WOT takeoffs on a regular road.

When I drive the Fit it is usually with mrs tpl on board and a whole pile of groceries and stuff.  I don't spin the wheels or drop the clutch suddenly  but I am invariably the first away from the lights and often keep that lead until the next stop... and no I don't do 70 in a 50 or 80 in a 60 to do this.  I  never exceed 4500 rpm in the Fit either. I found there was no need to so do.

Where the Fit misses out of course is the 50 to 80 time ( 80kmh to 140) thats required for passing on a two laner.  I do find its underpowered then...( my GTI is just fine with not only the extra bhp but the dsg keeping the engine accurately in its power band. )

It is plenty fast enough and I bet that most of these modern small cars are the same.  As John said at 2pm these cars are better than their predecessors by a lot as well.

I couldn't agree with you more on this one; 80-140kph is the number that should be added to reviews, not the fairly useless 0-100kph.

[Googoo]

When I went and looked at both of these vehicles(Fiesta and 2) I came away quite impressed with one of them, and that was the Mazda 2. I couldn't handle the odd centre cluster of the Fiesta, and with the exception of the front end the 2 is better looking.

Where I run into big problems is with the placement of the "B" pillar, a problem I've always run into with domestic vehicles, it's too far forward for both ingress and egress. It also makes it uncomfortable when driving. For some reason I've never had the problem with imports in this regard.

I also remember configuring the Fiesta and not being able to find an ARMREST, and that would be enough for me to not buy EITHER vehicle!. The Fit also had this problem for the first year but was quickly remedied for the following model year. now that Ford is offering one I can only hope that Mazda begins to offer a proper armrest.

With me it's the little things, the 0-60 time was enough for me to rule out the CR-Z(2 seconds slower to 60 than a 20 year old CRX NO THANK YOU), and so might it be with both of these. The biggest problem I have with the Fit is the higher interest rates for both leasing ans purchasing, that's ALMOST enough to rule that out for me

The real problem is there is too much choice in GOOD cars out there now UNDER $23 000, heck I would have looked at the Accent 2 door is cruise was standard:)

Now what was the question?

Brent

[Dante]

What are those scary numbers posted by C/D anyway?
9.x is what I would expect from these powertrains, give or take.

As far as Fit Manual goes, I've seen numbers from 8.3s (Motortrend) to 10.2s (Edmunds). I guess testing conditions (vehicle itself, tires, surface, temp, wind, driver, instruments, etc) are big factors here.

I'm not sure if fractions of a second tell any story in this class.

I wouldn't be surprised to hear Ford is making updates to the car's setup next year or even earlier. Enough people have complained that the gear ratios are towards fuel economy versus performance (both manual and auto). Afterall, isn't one of the main factors for this car and class? Personally, I would take performance over a marginal decrease in fuel economy, but that's just me.