

Model Year | 2003 | 2012 | |
Model | Ford Explorer | Honda Fit | |
Engine | |||
Transmission | |||
Drivetrain | |||
Body | |||
Difference | |||
Total Legroom | 0 in (over 1 rows) | 0 in (over 1 rows) | 0 in |
2003 Ford Explorer Seat Room and Comfort: Pros | ||
Year | Body/Powertrain | Comment |
2004 | 4dr SUV 210-horsepower 4.0L V6 5-speed automatic 4WD w/low range |
I needed the 3rd-row seating to keep 3 boys happy in the back seats - this was one of the main motivations for buying this SUV - and because I was so happy with my 97 Explorer. see full Ford Explorer review |
2003 | 4dr SUV 239-horsepower 4.6L V8 5-speed automatic 4WD w/low range |
Other than a minivan, the explorer had much more room in the third row than other vehicles of comparable size. see full Ford Explorer review |
2012 Honda Fit Seat Room and Comfort: Pros | ||
Year | Body/Powertrain | Comment |
2013 | 4dr Hatch 117-horsepower 1.5L I4 5-speed manual FWD |
The best in this category (when you take into consideration the size of the trunk). see full Honda Fit review |
2012 Honda Fit Seat Room and Comfort: Cons | ||
Year | Body/Powertrain | Comment |
2013 | 4dr Hatch 117-horsepower 1.5L I4 5-speed shiftable automatic FWD |
Seat bottoms are typical Japanese style short bottomed and not conducive to long duration drives. see full Honda Fit review |
2013 | 4dr Hatch 117-horsepower 1.5L I4 5-speed manual FWD |
One more thing. Rear seat comfort was obviously not a big selling point, nor a necessary feature. But one piece of it was worse than it had to be: the rear seat headrests. The artful circular shape and limited adjustment made the rear seats even harder to use; the headrest would tend to jab passengers in their spine. A better solution which was more even with the seat back would really have helped here. see full Honda Fit review |