I'm still looking for a 2019 Mk3 and have narrowed down the ideal to a SE Navi.
An EX has additional toys I don't need and bigger wheels that (probably?) worsen and already marginal ride quality.
The Mk 3 may be far better than a Mk1 but that is not saying much! On my 2006 Mk1 I actually went underneath after a couple of days to check it actually did have springs!
Its other main failings were poor throttle response and directional instability.
CVT - As in entering a busy roundabout and there is a big truck coming and it really would ne apppreciated if the thing would get a bit of a move on! I tried a Mk1 CVT was a horrible, grindey thing. Not much effect but lots of nasty noises.
Up to now I've discounted Mk3 CVT on the grounds of -
An unknown. Many other Japanese car makers use the same bespoke CVT that has a poor reputation.
I believe Honda make their own?
To make some assumptions.
The vast majority of the time, with general pootling about, it works fine.
Doing 50ish and attempting to merge into a motorway, open the throttle firmly and the revs shoot up but not a great deal else? Good at cruising with lower revs than a manual?
This about right?
I believe a CVT has no torque convertor so the ploy of holding on the brakes and building up the revs is a non starter?
I don't really see why a Jazz is so low geared anyway. Mrs replaced her MK1 with a Hyundai I10 and it was a virtual pocket rocket compared to th Jazz. Yet 25mph per 1000 in 5th. 70 at less that 3000 revs.
If this sound a bit negative its not intended. Honda so nearly had a perfect small car in the MK1 .
It needed a decent engine - which should have been easy.
Spend a few quid and send it to LOTUS to sort the chassis (or simple copy a Fiesta!) I've just moved on a'72 Lotus ELan +2. 50 years old and it makes most modern cars handling / ride seem rubbish! If you think an Audi is bad try a BMW on run flat tyres!
Make the bad seat slide so for the majority of time, if you carry no rear passengers, you can have acavenous boot.
Easy!