Reliable, fun, 4 door commuter, MT only

A Mazda 3 might be an option; especially since you're in CA where their propensity to rust isn't as big an issue.

I'm with you on the VW/Focus concerns.

If you're serious about the safety issue, your previous rear ending notwithstanding, you really want electronic stability control; which I believe is standard on '13 and newer cars.

The Civic Si could be nice, but I've always found their short gearing annoying (buzzy on the highway); not sure what the gear ratios on the new models are like. I think you'll like a Fit, though - it's a way better handling car than a '90's civic with great interior space.

Given your criteria, I'd buy either a Mazda 3 s (with the 2.5-liter engine, only offered with a manual from 2015 on), a Civic Si, or--as an outside possibility--a used Acura ILX, if you want a somewhat more upscale car.

The Mazda and Honda have a much different feel, partly because the latter has much lighter steering. Have you driven both? You might have a strong personal preference.

The Ford or VW should be okay for six years or so, but beyond that is iffy.

Good suggestions. I forgot to menation the Mazda3. Are Mazdas good for the long run? I have yet to test drive anything. The 2.5L is tempting but I feel like the Mazda3i Touring really hits the sweet spot for content vs cost. It'd be nice if we could get the larger engine without all the extra equipment (and cost). I have yet to test drive stuff but will keep an eye out for the steering feel between the two. Not sure an ILX would be worth it, the extra lux/features don't appeal to me much. Plus i don't know if the ILX has an LSD so it seems a bummer to trade sportiness for lux iMO.

For the safety concerns it was more a nod to something that is "strong" enough to better handle a similar accident. So something with good crash scores, but I think lighter cars are always going to have an inherent disadvantage. I assume smaller cars like the Fit are engineered to protect its occupants but it makes me nervous sometimes when I think ab it. That said, I'm not too concerned with stability control. FF cars are typically fairly stable and like you said most/all newer cars will have it by default.

if I open the "used car" can of worms, a Mazdaspeed3 would be fun but I'm not sure if I trust a used turbo car (guess I gotta decide if I trust a Mazda first). :) Plus I've seen way too many forum posts about "going back to stock." A 2.0L Si would be fun too but those cars are nearing 5yrs old (2011 was the last 2.0 si I think) so I don't know if the added maintenance is worth the better engine and the hassle of finding a clean example.

No LSD in the ILX. Sounds like that one can be scratched.

Lighter cars do have an inherent disadvantage. Frontal crash tests inherently assume that the other car is the same weight. This said, the latest Mazda3 and Civic aren't all that light. They're as heavy as midsize cars were 20 years ago.

I also wish the 2.5 were offered in lower trim levels. I do think the current generation of the Mazda3 will be more reliable long term than the previous generations. Those could be prone to rust, but this won't be an issue where the roads aren't salted. I wouldn't count on long-term reliability with the MS3.

I'd like to also suggest a Ford Focus SE with the Sport Package, but it's far too soon to tell how these will fare in the long term.

I had a chance to sit in and drive a Civic Si and a Mazda3 i Grand Touring hatchback MT. Both drive very nicely, slight edge to the Si. The Mazda3 fails the "family interior check" though. I felt the Mazda3 felt cramped in both passenger and rear seating. I also did not see a lot of utility to the cargo space behind the 2nd row; the hatch slopes down sharply, so it's almost like a sedan-trunk-sized space anyway. The only benefit is the hatch opening is much larger than the trunk opening. Granted, I did not compare Mazda3 hb to sedan, but the "hatch is great" argument is losing ground to me. Sat in an older Mazda3, for comparison's sake, and it felt even smaller.

So Mz3 is out, down to Civic Si. For better or worse, I started kicking around the idea of finding a 2009-11 Si to get the 2.0L engine and save some money... any thoughts on this? More recent Si's, 2013-14 (don't want 2012, the dud year for Civics), are too close to the same price as new, so don't seem to warrant the risk of buying used. Help me out in this used vs new debate!

I like the idea of the high-winding 2.0-liter, and also prefer the styling of the earlier car. But the new one does have considerably more torque. It sounds like the next step is to drive one of the earlier cars and see how much you like it compared to the current one. As long as you don't buy a car that has been abused you can't really go wrong with either. With a used one I'd personally prefer a private party sale so you can get a sense of the owner and view the maintenance records.

I'm personally a fan of used as opposed to new, and also of paying cash for a car; not financing. You can get a '09-11 for half the cost of new. Sure, you're off warranty with used, but if you don't have the financial margin to replace a $4k engine or transmission (not likely anyway, but it could happen), you should probably be looking at more like a 10 year old car in order to cut costs. But if you have money in the bank, the used car will leave you with more money in the bank and probably provide you with the same driving happiness. Mustachecalc has a little section of their website for checking cost of ownership (it ignores interest, however).