Clubjazz - Honda Jazz & HR-V Forums
Honda Jazz Forums => Honda Jazz Mk3 2015 - 2020 => Topic started by: RichardA on October 02, 2016, 11:47:38 AM
-
(http://cdn1.autoexpress.co.uk/sites/autoexpressuk/files/styles/article_main_image/public/5/44/dsc_8153_0_0_0.jpg)
So says Autoexpress:
http://www.autoexpress.co.uk/honda/jazz/97261/honda-jazz-to-get-new-10-litre-turbo-petrol-power (http://www.autoexpress.co.uk/honda/jazz/97261/honda-jazz-to-get-new-10-litre-turbo-petrol-power)
-
Read this the other day, should be good as long as they get the gearing right.
Sent from my XT1039 using Tapatalk
-
Good news but would the Jazz use the 127bhp version or would it be turned down a bit to,say, 110bhp?
Vic.
-
It does not matter what is under the bonnet, it still takes the same amount of fuel to do the job of moving the car, more low down torque used = more fuel used.
-
It does not matter what is under the bonnet, it still takes the same amount of fuel to do the job of moving the car, more low down torque used = more fuel used.
Can't agree with that Deeps ! Engine efficiency comes into it somewhere!
If the 1 litre turbo is more efficient it will take less fuel.
Like you I expect, as a very recent purchaser of a new Mk3, I shall be a bit disappointed if the 1 litre turbo is available soon!
-
As I have said before, one reason I bought the car was long term reliability, after 30 odd years of diesel ownership I want long term reliability. Not boy racer turbo boosted traffic light take offs with a highly stressed engine. The current engine is plenty powerful enough if you know how and when to use it. Honda engines are some of the best around, they just have the majority of their power at the top half of the rev range. It is a choice whether you use it or not.
-
As I have said before, one reason I bought the car was long term reliability, after 30 odd years of diesel ownership I want long term reliability. Not boy racer turbo boosted traffic light take offs with a highly stressed engine. The current engine is plenty powerful enough if you know how and when to use it. Honda engines are some of the best around, they just have the majority of their power at the top half of the rev range. It is a choice whether you use it or not.
I agree with that. The Mk 3 has plenty of power and I would not want to sacrifice any reliability for more power. But I would trust Honda not to introduce a less reliable engine, especially given its worldwide pedigree.
Just because it is a turbo doesn't mean it has to be driven like a boy racer. As you said, it is a choice whether you use the power or not.
-
Aye right. Easily accessible power is addictive. I have grown out of turbo diesels now that I am a geriatric boy racer. :-)
-
Likely I will order a mk3 before the end of the year. I strongly hope that the 1.0t will be avaiable... If you run calmly, it will drink moreorless this 1.3, but if you push the right pedal it will run like a good 1.8 naturally aspirated.
-
I don't think it will be available in 2016.
-
Yes, I'think so...
I strongly hope, but I know it's quite impossible...
-
...... but if you push the right pedal it will run like a good 1.8 naturally aspirated.
And drink fuel like one.
http://www.honestjohn.co.uk/askhj/answer/33148/i-cant-meet-official-fuel-economy-in-a-focus-ecoboost (http://www.honestjohn.co.uk/askhj/answer/33148/i-cant-meet-official-fuel-economy-in-a-focus-ecoboost)
-
Usually, a modern 1.2 turbocharged petrol engine can run like a good 1.6-1.8 Naturally Aspirated old engine (with a similiar conspumption), but driving normally it will consume like a 1.3-1.4 N.A.
IMHO an engine that can run normally with a low consumption but can also run fast (even if with an high consumption) is a good engine, better than engines with a low consumption but also with low power and torque.
-
I would like to know where these incredible mpg figures come from and how they are allowed to claim them. BMW i8 and Misubishi PHEV can both claim 135mpg + but after 15 to 20 miles when battery is flat the consumption is no better than 30mpg. Same with small turbo, if you use the power you burn the fuel (still can't get away from 14:1 air / fuel mix). Turbo will give more torque at lower revs, and help reduce pumping losses, but you 'don't get owt for nowt'
-
I would like to know where these incredible mpg figures come from and how they are allowed to claim them. BMW i8 and Misubishi PHEV can both claim 135mpg
Blame the rather short official test cycle. The US figures are more representative from a more thorough test procedure especially if you ignore the gallon conversion factor.
Hybrid emissions are not measured at an MOT either, just because it's operating mode can't always be predetermined.
My northern next door neighbour has an i8 and several of my London neighbours have plug-ins in our garage - none of them are ever hooked up. It must be the tax advantages that appeal.
Facelift Mk3 might get the new engine, hoping that we'll get the 1.5 iVTEC + i-DCD hybrid gearbox that's just been put in the Jazz's cousin the Freed (http://www.honda.co.jp/FREED/), and the Japanese version of the Honda Jade (http://www.honda.co.jp/JADE/) (110kW & 203 Nm), but I don't think that Swindon is making this engine/gearbox right now.
--
TG
-
I would like to know where these incredible mpg figures come from and how they are allowed to claim them. BMW i8 and Misubishi PHEV can both claim 135mpg + but after 15 to 20 miles when battery is flat the consumption is no better than 30mpg. Same with small turbo, if you use the power you burn the fuel (still can't get away from 14:1 air / fuel mix). Turbo will give more torque at lower revs, and help reduce pumping losses, but you 'don't get owt for nowt'
This is the comparison between two Ford Fiesta engines, the 3L 1.0 naturally aspirated:
http://www.spritmonitor.de/en/overview/17-Ford/147-Fiesta.html?fueltype=2&constyear_s=2013&constyear_e=2016&power_s=80&power_e=80&page=2&gearing=1&powerunit=2 (http://www.spritmonitor.de/en/overview/17-Ford/147-Fiesta.html?fueltype=2&constyear_s=2013&constyear_e=2016&power_s=80&power_e=80&page=2&gearing=1&powerunit=2)
and the 1.0 turbocharged.
http://www.spritmonitor.de/en/overview/17-Ford/147-Fiesta.html?fueltype=2&constyear_s=2013&constyear_e=2016&power_s=99&power_e=101&page=4&gearing=1&powerunit=2 (http://www.spritmonitor.de/en/overview/17-Ford/147-Fiesta.html?fueltype=2&constyear_s=2013&constyear_e=2016&power_s=99&power_e=101&page=4&gearing=1&powerunit=2)
The fuel consumption appear a little bigger, but driving pleasure and boost are much bigger.
IMHO, a 1.0 turbocharged is a better choice for cars like Fiesta, Jazz, 208...
-
You can't change the laws of physics, if you use the power, you use the fuel.
-
You can't change the laws of physics, if you use the power, you use the fuel.
A litre of petrol contains ~34,000kJ (=9.4kWh), how many of those joules are used to turn the wheels is the issue.
Every combustion engine is Fuel > Heat > Motion, no matter if it's in a petrol car, diesel boat, or avgas jet. We are getting better at the conversion, improving from mid 20s to nearly 30%. Toyota have an engine in development that has a claimed thermal efficiency of 38%, current F1 power units are hitting 40%.
So what about capturing the other 60% wasted thermal energy somehow. Steam turbine? Any heat > chemical battery technologies?
--
TG
-
You can't change the laws of physics, if you use the power, you use the fuel.
Yep.
But using modern techniques, you can decide HOW use the power from petrol (wasting less power in thermal energy), and WHEN using the power for speed increasing.
-
Like using i-vtec or not?
-
You can't change the laws of physics, if you use the power, you use the fuel.
One small contribution to the energy saving is that three cylinders will have slightly lower friction than four of about the same size while tick-over fuel consumption will be less (under those various conditions when the engine auto-stop doesn't work).
-
Hopefully it'll be supported by hondata
-
I would like to know where these incredible mpg figures come from and how they are allowed to claim them. BMW i8 and Misubishi PHEV can both claim 135mpg
Facelift Mk3 might get the new engine, hoping that we'll get the 1.5 iVTEC + i-DCD hybrid gearbox that's just been put in the Jazz's cousin the Freed (http://www.honda.co.jp/FREED/), and the Japanese version of the Honda Jade (http://www.honda.co.jp/JADE/) (110kW & 203 Nm), but I don't think that Swindon is making this engine/gearbox right now.
--
TG
err The Mark 3 is made in Mexico iiirc
-
err The Mark 3 is made in Mexico iiirc
Mine was made in Japan
-
err The Mark 3 is made in Mexico iiirc
Mine was made in Japan
How do you check this? Thanks
-
err The Mark 3 is made in Mexico iiirc
Mine was made in Japan
How do you check this? Thanks
All the info is contained in the VIN. This may help https://en.wikibooks.org/wiki/Vehicle_Identification_Numbers_(VIN_codes)/Honda/VIN_Codes
-
All the info is contained in the VIN. This may help https://en.wikibooks.org/wiki/Vehicle_Identification_Numbers_(VIN_codes)/Honda/VIN_Codes
Thanks but It was bit easier than that....I photo'd the plate inside the passenger door to get the VIN, but then noticed on the plate "Made in Japan" !
-
I think all the UK spec Mk3 jazz have a VIN starting with a J. The HRV is from the general direction of the Americas.
-
Facelift Mk3 might get the new engine, hoping that we'll get the 1.5 iVTEC + i-DCD hybrid gearbox that's just been put in the Jazz's cousin the Freed (http://www.honda.co.jp/FREED/), and the Japanese version of the Honda Jade (http://www.honda.co.jp/JADE/) (110kW & 203 Nm), but I don't think that Swindon is making this engine/gearbox right now.
.... but I think that's only being produced in Japan right now.
http://world.honda.com/automobile-technology/i-DCD/ (http://world.honda.com/automobile-technology/i-DCD/)
I seem to be behind the curve, the Mk3 Hybrids spotted by John Ratsey in Sri Lanka must have this 1.5L + 7 speed dual clutch hybrid combination in them, Honda has been talking about it since 2013.
https://youtu.be/C--2LxxaFto?t=1m7s (https://youtu.be/C--2LxxaFto?t=1m7s) The video suggests:
No CVT hybrid
1st gear is electric only?
Full EV mode
Electric drives odd gears while petrol is in all gears?
The petrol engine is bump started
Lithium instead of NiMH batteries
No engine braking - purely regenerative plus discs
I like it a lot, much improved over the IMA unit. Hopefully it would mate to the 1L 3 cylinder turbo unit as well for a lighter, smaller, punchier, torque~ier unit.
--
TG
-
Thanks but It was bit easier than that....I photo'd the plate inside the passenger door to get the VIN, but then noticed on the plate "Made in Japan" !
LOL. That would work :)
-
No CVT hybrid
Yes, here we have a dual clutch 7 speed gearbox (made by Schaeffler, Germany) mated with a high power electric motor made by Honda
1st gear is electric only?
No, 1st gear is a traditional gear but the system prefer to start moving the car using the electric motor. But it can use also the 1st gear.
Full EV mode
Yes, the car can run in full EV mode, even if slowly and for a short path.
Electric drives odd gears while petrol is in all gears?
No, electric motor can help petrol engine in all gears
The petrol engine is bump started
No, it is started by the electric motor or, in emergency mode, by a traditional starter motor
Lithium instead of NiMH batteries
Yes
No engine braking - purely regenerative plus discs
I don't know
Hopefully it would mate to the 1L 3 cylinder turbo unit as well for a lighter, smaller, punchier, torque~ier unit.
This won't happen: usually, all Hybrid car we can see are a mating between an electric motor and an Atkinson Cicle petrol engine: Atkinsons are the best in fuel economy, but they lack in torque and power, so both Toyota than Honda couple this engines with an electric motor gaining the desidered boost.
Mating the 1.0T with the Hybrid I-DCD would give a lot of power and boost, but poor fuel economy.
-
I've been reading up on the Kia Niro https://www.kia.co.uk/new-cars/range/mid-sized-cars/niro.aspx (https://www.kia.co.uk/new-cars/range/mid-sized-cars/niro.aspx) as an example of a brand new hybrid design and has a 1.6 litre Atkinson cycle engine + 40HP electric motor. However, the vehicle is a size bigger than the Jazz as well as being more expensive but, because the battery is under the back seat, it can still take a spare wheel. Overall, it's more an equivalent to the HRV (Vezel) hybrid of which I have seen plenty in Sri Lanka but hasn't come to the UK.
-
This article puts the cat well and truly among the pigeons on small engines with turbo and emissions
http://www.caradvice.com.au/490266/european-car-makers-to-upsize-engines-to-meet-real-world-emissions-tests-report/?source=plista (http://www.caradvice.com.au/490266/european-car-makers-to-upsize-engines-to-meet-real-world-emissions-tests-report/?source=plista)
-
That's a shame but maybe we shouldn't be surprised. (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/There_ain%27t_no_such_thing_as_a_free_lunch)
???
-
I am sure I have mentioned the free lunch recently, also if you use the power you use the fuel. So glad I wasn't delusional.
-
I am sure I have mentioned the free lunch recently, also if you use the power you use the fuel. So glad I wasn't delusional.
Seems to me it is the European car industry that is delusional - they got it soooh badly wrong again, notice how Japs were slow to go down small engine / turbo route ? Just another sign that the Japanese are the ones to trust with engine technology (they were pushed down the smaller engine route by wild European claims wooing the buyers, just like they reluctantly went down the diesel route to woo back buyers dazzled by European makers claims ) . I hope the PHEV technology will be the next to be 'outed' with their fantastical MPG claims of 135mpg and less than 40grams carbon (run on electric for less than 20 miles, then 30mpg or less - what kind of test regime do they use to get 135mpg out of that ?) seems these favourable test regimes are handed by car makers to legislators who then use them to make laws - could only happen in Europe - all smoke and mirrors.
http://www.autonews.com/article/20150727/OEM06/307279956/at-last-honda-and-toyota-prepare-for-turbo-charge (http://www.autonews.com/article/20150727/OEM06/307279956/at-last-honda-and-toyota-prepare-for-turbo-charge)
Think I'll hang onto my 1.8VTEC Civic for a while longer - can get pretty good MPG (high 40's) if you drive it properly and it is a superb engine. Same goes for my wifes MK2 1.4Si.
Quote below from another source......... :-X
Modern engines (especially 3-cylinder turbocharged ones) are not designed for the real world; they’re designed for the NEDC and similar Japanese and American test cycles, but a change is on the way. The Volkswagen emission debacle has put a lot of pressure on the industry to adopt a more realistic on-the-road test cycle.
The European Union is introducing new-model on-the-road testing for NOX pollution next year, and for fuel consumption and CO2 emissions 2 years later. This announcement has forced most automotive engineers to admit that their cars emit far more pollutants on the road than on a NEDC dynamometer test.
The surprising consequence is that some manufacturers are having second thoughts about extreme downsizing and fitting turbos. At the recent Paris motor show Thomas Weber, head of research and development at Mercedes, said: “It becomes apparent that a small engine is not an advantage. That’s why we didn’t jump on the three-cylinder engine trend.”
What's more, Reuters reports that the new test will effectively kill the development of small turbocharged engines due to the fuel consumption penalty (for petrol engines) and NO X penalty (for diesel engines) when driven at real-world speeds.
The agency quotes sources that suggest "Renault, General Motors and VW are preparing to enlarge or scrap some of their best-selling small car engines over the next three years" and "other manufacturers are expected to follow".
"The tougher tests may kill turbodiesel engines smaller than 1.5-litres and (petrol motors) below about 1.2-litres, analysts predict", the report adds.
-
I am currently in the market for the new Jazz. I spoke to a dealer about the new engine (1.0 turbo) that is fitted in the Civic. He is expecting a Jazz update with the 1.0 turbo engine between December 2017 and January 2018. Won't have the 128bhp though. It would be slightly de-tuned for fuel efficiency.
-
It would be slightly de-tuned for fuel efficiency.
It would need to be, have you checked the real world fuel consumption of small turbo engines? If you use the power, and you will, it will use the fuel to provide it.
-
Restricting the engine to around 100HP but with better low end torque than the current engine would provide a noticeable performance improvement. Having 3 cylinders instead of 4 reduces internal friction and a smaller block should improve the engine warm-up from a cold start (a serious fuel guzzler - the new Kia Niro includes heat recovery from the exhaust to help address this).
The fuel consumption and CO2 figures for the 1L 2017 Civic are better than for the Mk 3 Jazz but some of this may be attributable to better aerodynamics (Civic vs Jazz) rather than improved engine efficiency.
-
The fuel consumption and CO2 figures for the 1L 2017 Civic are better than for the Mk 3 Jazz but some of this may be attributable to better aerodynamics (Civic vs Jazz) rather than improved engine efficiency.
Are these comparisons real world driving or official test cycles? It's suggested that the discrepancy between the two is greater with the small turbo engines than with normally aspirated engines, perhaps because as Deeps suggests, it's hard to restrain the right foot!
-
Are these comparisons real world driving or official test cycles? It's suggested that the discrepancy between the two is greater with the small turbo engines than with normally aspirated engines, perhaps because as Deeps suggests, it's hard to restrain the right foot!
My comments are based on some technical reasons why the engines should be more efficient plus the official test data which, I agree, have to be interpreted with caution. Honest John's realmpg doesn't currently have user data for the new Civic. Whether Honda also take advantage of the potential power to offer a Jazz Type R with a less downrated engine remains to be seen.
However, there's also the question of how the efficiency of a 1L turbo will compare with the Atkinson cycle part of the current engine (or can Atkinson cycle and turbo co-exist?). For many drivers, if the 1L turbo provides the low end torque absent from the current engine without worsening actual fuel economy then it will be a significant improvement.
PS: Some useful discussion of the topic at http://www.telegraph.co.uk/motoring/green-motoring/9241054/Fuel-economy-why-your-car-wont-match-the-official-mpg.html (http://www.telegraph.co.uk/motoring/green-motoring/9241054/Fuel-economy-why-your-car-wont-match-the-official-mpg.html).
-
And a lot of interesting stuff here about testing, from a 2016 government report:
https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/548148/vehicle-emissions-testing-programme-web.pdf (https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/548148/vehicle-emissions-testing-programme-web.pdf)
-
PS: Some useful discussion of the topic at http://www.telegraph.co.uk/motoring/green-motoring/9241054/Fuel-economy-why-your-car-wont-match-the-official-mpg.html (http://www.telegraph.co.uk/motoring/green-motoring/9241054/Fuel-economy-why-your-car-wont-match-the-official-mpg.html).
Personally I blame it on drivers having poor acceleration sense (http://www.iam-bristol.org.uk/index.php/articles/driving-tips/72-accelerator-sense-a-light-right-foot) and failing to correctly anticipate traffic flow. Anyone who uses their brakes to do anything other than bring their vehicle to a complete halt falls into that category in my opinion. I almost never use my brakes for adjusting my speed. And I don't come to a complete stop very often. I have matched manufacturer figures for fuel consumption in every vehicle I have owned as far back as I can remember.
The tests are only inaccurate because they fail to reflect the relatively poor standard of vehicle control prevalent on our roads.
So I counteract your link with this one (http://ecomodder.com/blog/hypermiling-101-driving-without-brakes/) ;)
-
I pride myself in seldom using my brakes, and I am rewarded by excellent fuel consumption. Most of my driving is town driving, albeit not a busy city (though I do a bit of that as well) and I still achieve 52 mpg.
-
Accelerator control is as important as clutch control, few seem to realise it though. I wasn't taught it until I did my HGV training. That does not mean you have to drive like a fuel conservation extremist. The Jazz engine is just as powerful as the tiny turbos it just produces its power and torque at higher revs, which seems to terrify some drivers.
-
Hi
I passed my test in the very early eighties, before seatbelts were compulsory for children in the back seats only, then adults then front seat
Use of the accelerator formed part of the driving training and my instrutor physically hit my hands on the steering wheel if I kept doing things wrong.
I believe the training now is to maintain speed until you have to stop at traffic lights junctions etc, instead of preparing to continue in the correct gear
Also, for going downhill, most use brakes but I was taught to use same gear going downhill as you would going uphill and not use brakes
How times change
Many thanks
John
-
I passed my test in the 60's when, despite most cars having indicators, you still had to stick your hand out the window and wave it about, to give signals for part of your test! As you can imagine, when I came to do my PCV test in 2006, I found the Hazard Perception test a delight!! Ended up treating it like a computer game (which is really all it is).
-
There is an interesting story in the July issue of Car Mechanics magazine about a 36,000 mile Ford 1.0 turbo engine in a Focus. It had a slight misfire rapidly followed by a seized engine. On investigation the head gasket had failed, all three cylinders were full of coolant. As the front cover has to come off to get the head off as the timing belt runs through the sump and the con roads were probably bent the engine was beyond economical repair.
The article headline - "Overextended 1.0 litre engine?"
-
I pride myself in seldom using my brakes, and I am rewarded by excellent fuel consumption. Most of my driving is town driving, albeit not a busy city (though I do a bit of that as well) and I still achieve 52 mpg.
My typical driving is 10 miles rural, 2 miles urban. The urban is fairly free flowing in the morning but often choppy in the evening. Pump-to-pump I'm getting between 51mpg and 54mpg depending on the weather. But two weeks ago I was on vacation and just drove to/from golf courses out of peak hours so no stopping. The fill at the end of that was 58mpg and included a previous 'normal' week.
I was taught to drive in the late 90s by an ex-Police instructor. He told me "brakes are for stopping or correcting your mistakes". From speaking to others since though it does seem like the modern instruction method is to rely on the brakes a lot more. I can only assume it's because good accelerator control isn't easy and instructors are just trying to get people past the test. Sad.
Mind you it would also make our roads safer if people were taught how pointless overtaking is on single lane carriageways most of the time. A chap out dragged me and went round this morning (not that I was trying to defend, merely getting away from a roundabout at my usual brisk pace). And that was as far as he got for the next 10 miles. One place ahead of me behind a couple of HGV and some other cars. We parted ways at the M40 motorway but I wonder if he noticed how little his overtake achieved? Probably not.
-
The only time I ever overtake on a single carriageway road is when the vehicle is EXTREMELY slow and the road is clear for a good distance (and that includes driving my works white van!). Some drivers cut things so neat I think they have an on-board computer doing the driving!!
-
A friend pointed me to this:
https://www.facebook.com/BBCSouthToday/videos/1402917239798862/ (https://www.facebook.com/BBCSouthToday/videos/1402917239798862/)
Not recommended driving style but very impressive :)
-
Brilliant! And interesting that they chose a Jazz. Honda should make the most of the publicity opportunities.
-
Don't get too exited, it is a stunt, a bit like the official test figures. It bears no relation to real world fuel consumption.
-
94.8mpg averaged over 800+ miles. Did they say the sweet spot was 40? Air temp also looked pretty high and they are on the
steel wheels 175/65 15" alloy. They don't mention whether the car had been tweaked but mighty impressive anyway.
I nearly got 70mpg over 25 miles following a lorry one day last summer only the fading temperature prevented it.
--
TG
-
I know that in the days of the Mobil Economy Run, one of the things they did was blow the tyres up to inordinate pressures, to cut down the rolling resistance.
A thing I try to do is avoid, when possible, coming to a complete halt. If you have ever pushed a car you know the effort required to overcome the initial inertia. Once you get it moving it is easy to keep it moving. Well the engine has to overcome that same inertia of a stationary car and if you can keep it from coming to a complete stop you can avoid that output of energy.
-
I am impressed by the margin by which they exceeded the official mpg. However, 40mph will have kept the aerodynamic losses reasonably low but a key element is to avoid hold-ups - make sure the traffic lights are green and the roundabouts empty. They must have also chosen a good tailwind.
-
The only time I ever overtake on a single carriageway road is when the vehicle is EXTREMELY slow and the road is clear for a good distance (and that includes driving my works white van!). Some drivers cut things so neat I think they have an on-board computer doing the driving!!
yeah, I will only overtake if someone is taking the piss and driving at 30 in a 60 limit or such, as long as I am making decent progress that is OK by me, the less time I spend on the wrong side of the road the better I like it.
Don't get me started on dangerous overtaking, and amazing how often the vehicle has a German badge (except for Vauxhall Corsas which seem to figure in bad overtaking a lot). My main problem is that I have had overtaking vehicles approaching me at closing speed of at least 120mph and they never think of dropping back in when they can see vehicle(s) namely me approaching and obviously no room for 3 vehicles on the road (hardly room for 2 on most B roads) - do they expect me to dive into the hedge, or make the road wider or do they have some kind of death wish (I have no problem with that as long as it is only their own death, but when they involve me its not good). Often people overtake badly and then turn off a less than a mile later wtf !
-
Another thing that would allow drivers to make smooth progress would be if everyone used their indicators (a pet hate of mine). Nothing worse that having to stop at a roundabout, then the car takes the exit you are entering from.
Happened to me this morning. Two lanes approaching the roundabout, car is straddling both, I stop and he signals as the turns the wheel to leave the roundabout (even worse than no signal, in my eyes). Grrrr!
-
..and if they do use them they often don't reverse them when they reach their exit. Grrrr.
-
Another thing that would allow drivers to make smooth progress would be if everyone used their indicators (a pet hate of mine). Nothing worse that having to stop at a roundabout, then the car takes the exit you are entering from.
Happened to me this morning. Two lanes approaching the roundabout, car is straddling both, I stop and he signals as the turns the wheel to leave the roundabout (even worse than no signal, in my eyes). Grrrr!
I will indicate left if it helps someone trying to get onto island, but I used to indicate right when I was going round as well - soon realised that I was getting cut up an awful lot with people diving onto island in front of me, so don't do the 'right' thing anymore.
-
With the busy traffic these days you cannot hang about waiting on no traffic approaching from your right. I don't object to traffic cutting in in front of me provided they do not impede my progress or cause me to have to brake.