Clubjazz - Honda Jazz & HR-V Forums

Honda Jazz, HR-V & Hybrid Forums => Honda Jazz Mk3 2015 - => Topic started by: peteo48 on November 11, 2017, 05:25:59 PM

Title: Honest Answers Required - Is the Mk3 better than the Mk2?
Post by: peteo48 on November 11, 2017, 05:25:59 PM
Our local Honda dealership has a number of delivery mileage only SE spec Jazz Mk 3s with manual transmissions for £14,000. It's got me tempted I must say. I've seen people having a few niggles with the new Jazz not in terms of reliability but issues around electrics, infotainment etc etc.

I'm interested in anybody who has had a Mk2 and now has a Mk3 and my question is this:

Is it a better car in terms of comfort, economy and performance?
Title: Re: Honest Answers Required - Is the Mk3 better than the Mk2?
Post by: trebor1652 on November 11, 2017, 06:33:48 PM
Had a mk1 now got a MK3 ex.
Never liked the mk2'.
Had no real problems with the mk3 after 2 years.
So my choice- mk3.

Sent from my XT1039 using Tapatalk

Title: Re: Honest Answers Required - Is the Mk3 better than the Mk2?
Post by: andruec on November 11, 2017, 06:49:40 PM
Overall yes. As long as the Dealer has updated the infotainment software it should be glitch free. The only things that I feel the Mk3 didn't improve on are:

* The boot floor. You can forget the carpeted spare wheel well and handy hatch/cargo net arrangement. What you get with the Mk3 is a some flimsy felt covered hardboard and a chunk of polystyrene filling an un-carpeted wheel well. You can remove the polystyrene but then you have painted metal that needs covering before you put anything in it and anything heavy in the main area will bow the floor.
* The wing mirrors don't rotate far enough. Some people have had luck in forcing them into a lower position but it seemed to require more force than I was willing to risk. As a consequence I can't rotate mine far enough to see the rear wheels and kerb when reversing.
* The auto wipers. The Mk2 seemed better at adapting to changing weather conditions. I found a position I could leave the switch at. With the Mk3 I have to keep adjusting the speed to match changing rain conditions so not as automatic. Also when the car is cold condensation can form in the sensor housing which causes the wipers to wipe until the interior warms up (or you manually turn them off).
* Still doesn't feel as well thought out as the Mk2.
* There's another niggle relating to the engine but I think that only applies if you buy the CVT version.

But for balance here are some improvements:

* Auto main beam - works very well most of the time. I leave it on during my commute and it rarely makes a mistake.
* Climate control - you can now leave the system set to blow air to the screen (partially or fully) and it won't start blowing cold air after an hour.
* Infotainment - with the latest updates it's fault free. The UI is a bit poorly thought out and don't talk to me about Daylight Savings but functionally it's very good.
* Suspension - not as harsh.
* Fuel economy - improved about 5% I'd say.

Don't let the above put you off - it is better than the Mk2 overall and if you have the money then you'll be pleased with the upgrade. It's just that (to me) the Mk2 with CVT was perfect. The Mk3 isn't. The implementation has its flaws and it doesn't seem to have received the same level of thought that went into the Mk2.
Title: Re: Honest Answers Required - Is the Mk3 better than the Mk2?
Post by: VicW on November 11, 2017, 07:13:34 PM
It's just that (to me) the Mk2 with CVT was perfect. The Mk3 isn't. The implementation has its flaws and it doesn't seem to have received the same level of thought that went into the Mk2.

Can you expand on that please?

Vic.
Title: Re: Honest Answers Required - Is the Mk3 better than the Mk2?
Post by: mikebore on November 11, 2017, 07:52:14 PM

It's just that (to me) the Mk2 with CVT was perfect. The Mk3 isn't. The implementation has its flaws and it doesn't seem to have received the same level of thought that went into the Mk2.


IMHO the nub of the issue is that the Mk 3 has a dual cycle Atkinson engine for economy. This means the CVT has a more complicated job to do than the Mk 2. In trying to respond to the driver demands it also has to consider which cycle is in operation and what will happen when when the cycle changes etc. It is another factor.

The net result is occasional slightly less automatic response to the accelerator while it ponders these issues. The power and acceleration are there, but not as readily.

The payback is the better economy of course.

As the previous owner of a Mk2 and Mk1 (still have), the answer to your question is that the Mk3 is definitely a better car than the Mk2. I would particularly mention the steering, which was awful on the Mk1, better on the Mk2 and right on the Mk3. Also rear seat leg room.
Title: Re: Honest Answers Required - Is the Mk3 better than the Mk2?
Post by: mikebore on November 11, 2017, 08:00:35 PM
* The wing mirrors don't rotate far enough. Some people have had luck in forcing them into a lower position but it seemed to require more force than I was willing to risk. As a consequence I can't rotate mine far enough to see the rear wheels and kerb when reversing.

I don't think there is anything wrong with the travel. I can point them down to see the rear wheels, same as Mk1 and 2. Forcing shouldn't come into it. If your travel is wrong the neutral position in the housing may need adjusting which has been very easy to do on my Mk1, Mk2 and Mk3. Maybe yours is extra stiff, in which case I can understand your comment, so may be get the dealer to look at it?
Title: Re: Honest Answers Required - Is the Mk3 better than the Mk2?
Post by: andruec on November 11, 2017, 08:09:43 PM
It's just that (to me) the Mk2 with CVT was perfect. The Mk3 isn't. The implementation has its flaws and it doesn't seem to have received the same level of thought that went into the Mk2.

Can you expand on that please?

Vic.
Not easily :)

I just always felt at home in the Mk2. Everything it did it did perfectly. Controls were well positioned and things like the boot floor showed an attention to detail and thoughtful design. By contrast the Mk3 feels like a bunch of people got together at the behest of the marketing department, trawled the shelves looking for cute 'toys' then stuck them almost haphazardly around the car.

Now all this is very subjective and I will say that most of the toys are welcome additions (I'm a computer programmer and although 50 still have a little child-like geek in me). It's just that they don't seem well implemented (the infotainment being built on an obsolete version of Android being the worst example).

Now don't get me wrong. I am absolutely not saying that the Mk3 is a bad car. Not even that I regret buying it. It is the best car I've owned to date. However the rough edges mean that (as I've posted before now) whereas with the Mk1 and Mk2 I would say I was a Honda Jazz driver..with the Mk3 I say I'm a driver that currently owns a Honda Jazz.
Title: Re: Honest Answers Required - Is the Mk3 better than the Mk2?
Post by: andruec on November 11, 2017, 08:12:52 PM
* The wing mirrors don't rotate far enough. Some people have had luck in forcing them into a lower position but it seemed to require more force than I was willing to risk. As a consequence I can't rotate mine far enough to see the rear wheels and kerb when reversing.

I don't think there is anything wrong with the travel. I can point them down to see the rear wheels, same as Mk1 and 2. Forcing shouldn't come into it. If your travel is wrong the neutral position in the housing may need adjusting which has been very easy to do on my Mk1, Mk2 and Mk3. Maybe yours is extra stiff, in which case I can understand your comment, so may be get the dealer to look at it?
Yeah I might do that. I've also got to get them to replace the driver side door controls. The intermittent issue with mirrors not unfolding is becoming more common. So much so that I'm not sure I'll make it through to the next service in February (getting to my dealer is a bit of a pain). Worth noting that it's the first Jazz I've owned that has ever developed a fault (and of course my infamous almost-doesn't-start is another one. Pretty poor after only 18 months. I kept the Mk1 and Mk2 for four years each and neither ever developed a fault.
Title: Re: Honest Answers Required - Is the Mk3 better than the Mk2?
Post by: andruec on November 11, 2017, 08:19:05 PM
You know one theory I have is that it's because the Mk3 wasn't built in the UK. I don't know how much control Swindon had over design decisions or component choices I wonder if perhaps the Mk3 is just a bit too foreign whereas the Mk1 and Mk2 were more UK oriented.

Whatever - I don't want to the put the OP off. It's a great car really and worth upgrading to. Where technology is concerned I can be very picky and the infotainment unit in particular - it being a computer - annoys me because it could have been so much better. Otherwise we'll see what happens in 18 months to 24 months time. I'm just no longer feeling that Honda cares.
Title: Re: Honest Answers Required - Is the Mk3 better than the Mk2?
Post by: peteo48 on November 11, 2017, 09:53:17 PM
One thing I have noticed - looking through the specs - is that although the Mk3 has a tad more bhp it has less torque than the Mk2.  This worries me slightly - in the Which review somebody described it as like driving with the handbrake on.

Why would you build in less torque? I will have a test drive obviously but is the slight reduction in torque from the Mk2 noticeable in any way?
Title: Re: Honest Answers Required - Is the Mk3 better than the Mk2?
Post by: Jocko on November 11, 2017, 10:03:26 PM
I had a loan of a 67 plate Mk 3 and I thought it a wonderful car. So much more sophisticated then my Mk 1. I have never driven a Mk 2, but I would have a Mk 3 at the drop of a hat.
Title: Re: Honest Answers Required - Is the Mk3 better than the Mk2?
Post by: Downsizer on November 11, 2017, 10:13:32 PM
Our local Honda dealership has a number of delivery mileage only SE spec Jazz Mk 3s with manual transmissions for £14,000.
I'm interested in anybody who has had a Mk2 and now has a Mk3 and my question is this:

Is it a better car in terms of comfort, economy and performance?
Comfort - yes; economy - yes;  performance - pass. I had a manual mk 2 and CVT mk 3, so can't compare.
Title: Re: Honest Answers Required - Is the Mk3 better than the Mk2?
Post by: andruec on November 11, 2017, 10:22:39 PM
One thing I have noticed - looking through the specs - is that although the Mk3 has a tad more bhp it has less torque than the Mk2.  This worries me slightly - in the Which review somebody described it as like driving with the handbrake on.

Why would you build in less torque? I will have a test drive obviously but is the slight reduction in torque from the Mk2 noticeable in any way?
No. The new Jazz has plenty of get up and go. It's obviously not a sports car but it has more than enough umph to keep pace with and even outpace the average driver simply because most drivers don't accelerate very hard. The only issue as alluded to earlier in this thread is that you do have to ensure that the engine is in power mode not economy mode. With a manual gear box that's implicit but the CVT sometimes gets confused and doesn't change down enough to wake the engine up unless you actually trigger a kick down.
Title: Re: Honest Answers Required - Is the Mk3 better than the Mk2?
Post by: Deeps on November 11, 2017, 10:47:06 PM
Agreed, use the revs, get the power. 100bhp is plenty adequate for a supermini.
Title: Re: Honest Answers Required - Is the Mk3 better than the Mk2?
Post by: Deeps on November 12, 2017, 08:10:44 AM
I find third and fourth gears the most useful for performance use, overtaking etc. They are both usable from almost walking pace to 80mph. We all potter about but if you want to get a move on and accelerate hard you have to get the engine above 3,000 revs, you will not harm it, it is designed to work at these speeds.
Title: Re: Honest Answers Required - Is the Mk3 better than the Mk2?
Post by: andruec on November 12, 2017, 08:21:34 AM
I find third and fourth gears the most useful for performance use, overtaking etc. They are both usable from almost walking pace to 80mph. We all potter about but if you want to get a move on and accelerate hard you have to get the engine above 3,000 revs, you will not harm it, it is designed to work at these speeds.
Indeed. I occasionally like to let rip by putting my CVT in 'S' then flooring the accelerator. Revs go straight to 4,500 then a gradual climb up to the red line. No need to pause for gear changes :)
Title: Re: Honest Answers Required - Is the Mk3 better than the Mk2?
Post by: Deeps on November 12, 2017, 08:38:29 AM
Otherwise known as the rubber band effect. The MT car's 4,5, and sixth gears are overdrive gears (less than 1 to 1 ratio) so third is the most versatile gear for using power. Sorry to hear about your inability to change gear.  :D
Title: Re: Honest Answers Required - Is the Mk3 better than the Mk2?
Post by: culzean on November 12, 2017, 09:31:14 AM
Otherwise known as the rubber band effect. The MT car's 4,5, and sixth gears are overdrive gears (less than 1 to 1 ratio) so third is the most versatile gear for using power. Sorry to hear about your inability to change gear.  :D

No ICE vehicle can really have a overall gear ratio less than 1:1 where the engine crankshaft turns less than once for each turn of the road wheel.  The ratio in the final drive (differential) will be in the range 3.5:1 and 4.5:1 normally.  This means that even if top gear is 0.75:1 in the gearbox the overall ratio between engine and road wheel is still more than 1:1.
Title: Re: Honest Answers Required - Is the Mk3 better than the Mk2?
Post by: Deeps on November 12, 2017, 09:37:08 AM
I was referring to gearbox ratios which effect the engine to road wheel ratio. The final drive ratio is fixed and irrelevant in this discussion. The top three gearbox ratios are overdrive ratios as the input is slower than the output.
Title: Re: Honest Answers Required - Is the Mk3 better than the Mk2?
Post by: Jocko on November 12, 2017, 09:45:18 AM
I was referring to gearbox ratios which effect the engine to road wheel ratio. The final drive ratio is fixed and irrelevant in this discussion. The top three gearbox ratios are overdrive ratios as the input is slower than the output.
Deeps is quite correct.
https://www.freeasestudyguides.com/gear-ratio.html (https://www.freeasestudyguides.com/gear-ratio.html)
Title: Re: Honest Answers Required - Is the Mk3 better than the Mk2?
Post by: andruec on November 12, 2017, 09:49:18 AM
Otherwise known as the rubber band effect. The MT car's 4,5, and sixth gears are overdrive gears (less than 1 to 1 ratio) so third is the most versatile gear for using power. Sorry to hear about your inability to change gear.  :D
and I'm sorry to hear that you have to keep pulling a lever in order to keep the car in approximately the right gear ratio. Mine is almost(*) always in exactly the right ratio ;)

Also last I checked the CVT has a longer top gear. Presumably because any top gear you have is inevitable inadequate at the very end of its range whereas 100% of my box's available ratios are all useful. I assume that's where the better fuel consumption comes from.

(*)Aside from some confusion occasionally caused around the engine mode cross-over.
Title: Re: Honest Answers Required - Is the Mk3 better than the Mk2?
Post by: culzean on November 12, 2017, 10:17:41 AM
I was referring to gearbox ratios which effect the engine to road wheel ratio. The final drive ratio is fixed and irrelevant in this discussion. The top three gearbox ratios are overdrive ratios as the input is slower than the output.

The gearbox ratios totally depend on the final drive ratio, so it cannot be ignored, if the final drive ratio was 2:1 none of the gearbox ratios could be less than 1:1  - the term overdrive is pretty archaic as it used to apply to Rear wheel drive trains where the differential was separated from the rear axle and the ‘overdrive’ bit  only referred to propeller shaft speed into rear axle compared engine revs (and a separate 'overdrive' gear unit to change ratio of propshaft revs to rear axle was fitted) .  With front wheel engines the differential is an integral part of the gearbox and the only output shaft is to the road wheels
Title: Re: Honest Answers Required - Is the Mk3 better than the Mk2?
Post by: Jocko on November 12, 2017, 11:14:52 AM
the term overdrive is pretty archaic as it used to apply to Rear wheel drive trains where the differential was separated from the rear axle and the ‘overdrive’ bit  only referred to propeller shaft speed into rear axle compared engine revs (and a separate 'overdrive' gear unit to change ratio of propshaft revs to rear axle was fitted) .  With front wheel engines the differential is an integral part of the gearbox and the only output shaft is to the road wheels
I think you will find that that was purely a British term, coined by Laycock de Normanville, for what was an auxiliary electrically or hydraulically operated epicyclic gear train bolted behind the transmission unit. In engineering terms overdrive is as stated by Deeps.
I had a Triumph 2.5 PI with the electrical overdrive and it was a wonderful piece of kit, working on 3rd and 4th gear at the flick of a switch on the gear knob (car only had a 4 speed box as was the norm back then). I could sit in slow moving traffic, in 3rd, and flick between 3rd and 4th as traffic changed, avoiding the need to change grear.
Title: Re: Honest Answers Required - Is the Mk3 better than the Mk2?
Post by: peteo48 on November 12, 2017, 12:43:59 PM
One thing that is concerning me, having read loads of contributions on Revoo but also on Which, is criticism of the manual gearbox. The one in both the Mk1 and the Mk2 are class leading but I'm hearing reports of notchiness and clunkiness. Many see the Mk3 gearbox as inferior to that on the Mk2.

I couldn't contemplate the CVT - the screaming as you accelerate would drive me mad!
Title: Re: Honest Answers Required - Is the Mk3 better than the Mk2?
Post by: zzaj on November 12, 2017, 12:48:58 PM
As we seem to be roaming slightly off topic, This, from Wikipedia, might contribute to the debate.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Overdrive_(mechanics)

I must admit I got lost after the first line or two!

Back to topic, I am very glad I did not buy a Mk 3. Although I have never driven one, (this type of car I own not for drive ability but functionality), I wanted the car with bigger windows and more practical boot space and not excessive leg room in the rear. Nor did I want a car with "driving aids" or a touch screen.

I personally think the two are different cars, different interpretations of the same concept, and thus the preference must purely that of the user.  If they were both concurrent new cars side by side I would chose the Mk 2. That they are consecutive is only a matter of production practicality.

PS I love the CVT. I cannot imagine why anyone would want to "change gears" for a pastime and a CVT knocks 1000 spots off a conventional automatic .
Title: Re: Honest Answers Required - Is the Mk3 better than the Mk2?
Post by: peteo48 on November 12, 2017, 01:02:22 PM

Back to topic, I am very glad I did not buy a Mk 3. Although I have never driven one, (this type of car I own not for drive ability but functionality), I wanted the car with bigger windows and more practical boot space and not excessive leg room in the rear. Nor did I want a car with "driving aids" or a touch screen.

I personally think the two are different cars, different interpretations of the same concept, and thus the preference must purely that of the user.  If they were both concurrent new cars side by side I would chose the Mk 2. That they are consecutive is only a matter of production practicality.

PS I love the CVT. I cannot imagine why anyone would want to "change gears" for a pastime and a CVT knocks 1000 spots off a conventional automatic .

This is what is, slowly but surely, turning me away from the Mk3. I have just noticed that they've removed the passenger's cup holder - my Mrs will go ape!

The CVT thing is interesting. I've been a passenger in 2 cars with CVT boxes - a Mk2 Jazz and, more recently, a Toyota Auris hybrid. The noise from both cars is/was horrendous. It's like driving a car with a badly slipping clutch. The Jazz CVT was woeful on hills - almost scarily so.

I must admit that, round town, they seemed OK. Now I have mentioned in the past that motoring journalists are almost universal in their condemnation of CVTs and that criticism has been dismissed as laziness and boy racer by CVT advocates.

However I now have the opinion of somebody with a mechanical engineering background who has spent a lifetime in the industry. CVTs, he says, are a particularly nasty bit of cost cutting and he hates them with a passion. He prefers more conventional automatics which spare you the slipping clutch sensation.

Seem to have hijacked my own thread here!
Title: Re: Honest Answers Required - Is the Mk3 better than the Mk2?
Post by: Deeps on November 12, 2017, 01:11:37 PM
As I have said before the MK3 is a complete redesign from the ground up. It is a completly different car and comparing it with previous models is a bit pointless. My MK3 is my first Honda and I compared it with other manufacturers current models when choosing the car. Choose a car that suits your requirements not the badge, which is just a brand. My last few cars have been Toyota, Hyundai, Kia, and Ford,  don't just buy a brand through loyalty, the car manufacturers have no loyalty to you.
Title: Re: Honest Answers Required - Is the Mk3 better than the Mk2?
Post by: Hobo on November 12, 2017, 01:59:35 PM
I couldn't contemplate the CVT - the screaming as you accelerate would drive me mad!

One of the reasons I went from a CVT Jazz which I had bought new to a Civic with a conventional auto box was the apparent sluggishness of the CVT especially under hard acceleration if needed for overtaking or going up steep hills, when I was loaned a Jazz courtesy car with a manual gearbox it appeared to be a far more lively vehicle to drive.

The other thing that put me off the CVT was the price Honda quote for a new box if it ever needed one, if the car was a few years old it would be cheaper to buy another car for the cost of the box.
Title: Re: Honest Answers Required - Is the Mk3 better than the Mk2?
Post by: mikebore on November 12, 2017, 02:33:14 PM
A lot of strange info appearing in this thread based on what people have heard other people say not from personal experience, about Mk3 and CVT.

As someone who has owned Mk1 Mk2 and Mk3 CVT I would not hesitate to get a Mk3 over a Mk2, and a Mk2 over a Mk1, and to chose a CVT every time.

Decisions as big as buying a car require hands on experience not hearsay.

Title: Re: Honest Answers Required - Is the Mk3 better than the Mk2?
Post by: Deeps on November 12, 2017, 02:58:57 PM
I have not driven a CVT fitted car but have driven many automatic cars and would expect that your opinion of it depends very much on your driving style and where the car is used (urban or rural). Also some people can't drive a manual car, I have friends in the USA and Australia who would not have a clue how to drive a manual transmission car.
Title: Re: Honest Answers Required - Is the Mk3 better than the Mk2?
Post by: peteo48 on November 12, 2017, 03:10:07 PM
I suspect a lot depends on where you do most of your driving as well. My experience is only as a passenger in a Jazz CVT and an Auris Hybrid. Where I really noticed the din was when the car was accelerating to join the motorway. The engine seemed to be screaming in protest as the revs rose sharply but there was only sluggish acceleration. The other scenario, as mentioned above, was a Jazz CVT struggling up a steepish hill.

Both cars were much better round town. I suppose you might get used to the noise in time.
Title: Re: Honest Answers Required - Is the Mk3 better than the Mk2?
Post by: andruec on November 12, 2017, 03:56:40 PM
One thing that is concerning me, having read loads of contributions on Revoo but also on Which, is criticism of the manual gearbox. The one in both the Mk1 and the Mk2 are class leading but I'm hearing reports of notchiness and clunkiness. Many see the Mk3 gearbox as inferior to that on the Mk2.

I couldn't contemplate the CVT - the screaming as you accelerate would drive me mad!
It doesn't scream. If you push it it gives out a cute but willing growl. If you're driving sensibly you can't hear it.
Title: Re: Honest Answers Required - Is the Mk3 better than the Mk2?
Post by: andruec on November 12, 2017, 03:59:42 PM

Back to topic, I am very glad I did not buy a Mk 3. Although I have never driven one, (this type of car I own not for drive ability but functionality), I wanted the car with bigger windows and more practical boot space and not excessive leg room in the rear. Nor did I want a car with "driving aids" or a touch screen.

I personally think the two are different cars, different interpretations of the same concept, and thus the preference must purely that of the user.  If they were both concurrent new cars side by side I would chose the Mk 2. That they are consecutive is only a matter of production practicality.

PS I love the CVT. I cannot imagine why anyone would want to "change gears" for a pastime and a CVT knocks 1000 spots off a conventional automatic .

This is what is, slowly but surely, turning me away from the Mk3. I have just noticed that they've removed the passenger's cup holder - my Mrs will go ape!

The CVT thing is interesting. I've been a passenger in 2 cars with CVT boxes - a Mk2 Jazz and, more recently, a Toyota Auris hybrid. The noise from both cars is/was horrendous. It's like driving a car with a badly slipping clutch. The Jazz CVT was woeful on hills - almost scarily so.
What? Its just the sound of an engine running at a constant - and ideal - RPM. It's not noisy. It's the sound of good engineering. The Rise fall of RPM under acceleration that you are so familiar with is the sound of compromise.

You just need to re-educate your hearing. A CVT is not noisy. It's correct.
Title: Re: Honest Answers Required - Is the Mk3 better than the Mk2?
Post by: Downsizer on November 12, 2017, 04:15:20 PM
However I now have the opinion of somebody with a mechanical engineering background who has spent a lifetime in the industry. CVTs, he says, are a particularly nasty bit of cost cutting and he hates them with a passion. He prefers more conventional automatics which spare you the slipping clutch sensation.
I feel this opinion is in fact prejudice.  CVT may sound like a slipping clutch, but the cause is very different - cvt is the logical way of running the engine at the optimum speed for the required power output.  I doubt if the cost is very different from other less efficient forms of automatic transmission.
Title: Re: Honest Answers Required - Is the Mk3 better than the Mk2?
Post by: Kenneve on November 12, 2017, 05:17:24 PM
What seems to have been lost in all this discussion, is the fact that virtually all petrol engines have to run at high speed to obtain the quoted horsepower.
Horsepower is the product of Torque (ft/lbs) x Revs divided by 33000. Therefore the 100 hp quoted in the specs is only obtained at roughly 6000 Rpm.
At normal operating speeds, circa 2000-3000 Rpm it is doubtful whether even 50 Hp  is generated, hence the need for CVTs or manual gearboxes to operate at a ratio to suit those parameters, if you want to obtain maximum performance.
Quite obviously the CVT has an advantage here since the transmission is continuously variable and is able to facilitate the running of the engine at optimum speed, to obtain the required power.
Yes there are occasions when you will be running the engine at 5000 maybe 6000 RPM, but it is designed to do exactly that, without any harm.
Title: Re: Honest Answers Required - Is the Mk3 better than the Mk2?
Post by: peteo48 on November 12, 2017, 07:46:07 PM
Interesting discussion and thanks for all the input.

I will accept that, on the CVT issue, you need to suck it and see. It did cross my mind that the slipping clutch sensation might be due to a heavy right foot on the part of both the drivers of the two cars that I have been a passenger in.

It's certainly something that divides opinion both on here but more widely.
Title: Re: Honest Answers Required - Is the Mk3 better than the Mk2?
Post by: peteo48 on November 12, 2017, 07:55:24 PM
However I now have the opinion of somebody with a mechanical engineering background who has spent a lifetime in the industry. CVTs, he says, are a particularly nasty bit of cost cutting and he hates them with a passion. He prefers more conventional automatics which spare you the slipping clutch sensation.
I feel this opinion is in fact prejudice.  CVT may sound like a slipping clutch, but the cause is very different - cvt is the logical way of running the engine at the optimum speed for the required power output.  I doubt if the cost is very different from other less efficient forms of automatic transmission.

My understanding is that they contain fewer parts and are simpler to manufacture so cost is an issue. That doesn't just come from my own source but a bit of internet research as well.

On the other hand, CVTs do deliver better fuel economy than manuals whereas automatics were traditionally more thirsty. That has to be a strong point in their favour.
Title: Re: Honest Answers Required - Is the Mk3 better than the Mk2?
Post by: andruec on November 12, 2017, 08:47:18 PM
However I now have the opinion of somebody with a mechanical engineering background who has spent a lifetime in the industry. CVTs, he says, are a particularly nasty bit of cost cutting and he hates them with a passion. He prefers more conventional automatics which spare you the slipping clutch sensation.
I feel this opinion is in fact prejudice.  CVT may sound like a slipping clutch, but the cause is very different - cvt is the logical way of running the engine at the optimum speed for the required power output.  I doubt if the cost is very different from other less efficient forms of automatic transmission.

My understanding is that they contain fewer parts and are simpler to manufacture so cost is an issue. That doesn't just come from my own source but a bit of internet research as well.

On the other hand, CVTs do deliver better fuel economy than manuals whereas automatics were traditionally more thirsty. That has to be a strong point in their favour.
Personally I also love the smoothness of a CVT but unfortunately the Mk3's dual mode engine has taken some of that away.
Title: Re: Honest Answers Required - Is the Mk3 better than the Mk2?
Post by: Deeps on November 12, 2017, 10:06:01 PM
One thing that is concerning me, having read loads of contributions on Revoo but also on Which, is criticism of the manual gearbox. The one in both the Mk1 and the Mk2 are class leading but I'm hearing reports of notchiness and clunkiness. Many see the Mk3 gearbox as inferior to that on the Mk2.

I couldn't contemplate the CVT - the screaming as you accelerate would drive me mad!

The manual gearbox on my car is a delight to use. Light and precise, one of the better ones I have used. It can be notchy if you get lazy and don't depress the clutch pedal fully when changing gear, particularly if you pull the lever out of a gear before the clutch is fully disengaged. I think any problems are self inflicted.
Title: Re: Honest Answers Required - Is the Mk3 better than the Mk2?
Post by: zzaj on November 12, 2017, 10:37:51 PM
The manual gearbox on my car is a delight to use. Light and precise, one of the better ones I have used. It can be notchy if you get lazy and don't depress the clutch pedal fully when changing gear, particularly if you pull the lever out of a gear before the clutch is fully disengaged. I think any problems are self inflicted.

All sounds very complicated to me.

With CVT you don't have any of these problems in the first place.
Title: Re: Honest Answers Required - Is the Mk3 better than the Mk2?
Post by: Jocko on November 13, 2017, 07:56:15 AM
All sounds very complicated to me.
Yes, pushing the clutch down before changing gear really challenges my abilities. As an automatic driver for over 25 years I don't know how I ever manage. Worse than doing a quickstep!  ::)
Title: Re: Honest Answers Required - Is the Mk3 better than the Mk2?
Post by: andruec on November 13, 2017, 08:35:16 AM
All sounds very complicated to me.
Yes, pushing the clutch down before changing gear really challenges my abilities. As an automatic driver for over 25 years I don't know how I ever manage. Worse than doing a quickstep!  ::)
When I take mine to the dealer for work I inevitably end up with a manual courtesy car. I think the gearbox on the Mk3 is fine. I was a bit perturbed when I realised it had six gears though. My clutch skills aren't what they were but nothing that using a few more RPM couldn't fix  ;D
Title: Re: Honest Answers Required - Is the Mk3 better than the Mk2?
Post by: peteo48 on November 13, 2017, 10:45:11 AM
One thing that is concerning me, having read loads of contributions on Revoo but also on Which, is criticism of the manual gearbox. The one in both the Mk1 and the Mk2 are class leading but I'm hearing reports of notchiness and clunkiness. Many see the Mk3 gearbox as inferior to that on the Mk2.

I couldn't contemplate the CVT - the screaming as you accelerate would drive me mad!

The manual gearbox on my car is a delight to use. Light and precise, one of the better ones I have used. It can be notchy if you get lazy and don't depress the clutch pedal fully when changing gear, particularly if you pull the lever out of a gear before the clutch is fully disengaged. I think any problems are self inflicted.

Really helpful - thanks. I think some people do get lazy with not depressing the clutch properly. Incidentally saw an Irish road test of the Mk3 on YouTube. The tester was positively drooling over the manual gear change.
Title: Re: Honest Answers Required - Is the Mk3 better than the Mk2?
Post by: Deeps on November 13, 2017, 11:12:10 AM
Honda should have left the CVTs on the vehicles they were designed for - snowmobiles and scooters.
Title: Re: Honest Answers Required - Is the Mk3 better than the Mk2?
Post by: zzaj on November 13, 2017, 12:50:53 PM
Honda should have left the CVTs on the vehicles they were designed for - snowmobiles and scooters.

Yet this is the same transmission that was banned from Formula One before the first car so equipped, a 1993 prototype by Williams, turned a single lap in competition.

There will always be manual and automatic transmissions for those people who actually need them, but CVT is for those who want seamless transmission that saves them money at the pump!
Title: Re: Honest Answers Required - Is the Mk3 better than the Mk2?
Post by: PJ Hall on November 13, 2017, 01:36:25 PM
It seems this conversation has become about CVT versus manual, but to go back to the original question l bought a new MK2 EX in 2013 and changed to a Mk3 EX a year ago.my feeling is that the MK3 is a much more accomplished, grown up and modern car compared to the previous models.Yes l do miss the panoramic roof ( one of the best features ) and the split level floor in the boot as others have mentioned, but not those awful door handles.The MK3 door hadles are much better.l liked the ergonomic dash board on the Mk2 and also think the seats were more comfortable. But the MK3 surpasses the old model in every other respect.I have the EX Navi and have not had a problem at all with the infotainment unit nor the digital controls for the heater etc. Though l will admit all the tech takes a bit of understanding and getting used to.mine is a manual and although you do have to use the gearbox in a different way to the five speed in the previous models l much prefer it to the CVT. I think as part of the cars function is autonomous Honda have gone a long way to future proofing the car that is as up to date ( and more) than most of the competition and many more expensive luxury cars.
Title: Re: Honest Answers Required - Is the Mk3 better than the Mk2?
Post by: ColinB on November 13, 2017, 01:51:11 PM
One thing that is concerning me, having read loads of contributions on Revoo but also on Which, is criticism of the manual gearbox. The one in both the Mk1 and the Mk2 are class leading but I'm hearing reports of notchiness and clunkiness. Many see the Mk3 gearbox as inferior to that on the Mk2.!
Generalising about the smoothness or otherwise of the gearchange is always going to be subjective. However in your case you don’t need to be subjective: your original post said you’re interested in one of the low-mileage examples your local dealer has, so you can test drive the very car you’re interested in buying and satisfy yourself about the gear change. For me, I don’t feel the gearchange is any better or worse than any other car I’ve had recently (none have been Hondas) the only issue I have is a tendency to engage 6th when I really want reverse, but I suspect operator error could be a big factor in that.
Title: Re: Honest Answers Required - Is the Mk3 better than the Mk2?
Post by: poul on November 13, 2017, 01:55:42 PM
I just bought a Black MK3 after my old 2012 MK2 broke Down in its CVT box. Must say the new MK3 are so much better then the mk2 driver more smooth and silent and the cvt are better too. So love the new car.
Title: Re: Honest Answers Required - Is the Mk3 better than the Mk2?
Post by: culzean on November 13, 2017, 04:34:49 PM
the only issue I have is a tendency to engage 6th when I really want reverse, but I suspect operator error could be a big factor in that.

Its even worse when you frequently switch between a 6 speed and 5 speed Honda (like I do with Jazz and Civic), because Honda in their wisdom put reverse gear on the 5 speed where 6th gear is on the 6 speed - it means sometimes that you can try to get 6th gear on the 5 speed and you get reverse at 60mph plus.......WTF

Most cars have reverse over the side of gate where first lives, and some kind of double action like lifting a collar or pushing down the lever - much safer,  to be honest I expect better logic from Honda.
Title: Re: Honest Answers Required - Is the Mk3 better than the Mk2?
Post by: Kenneve on November 13, 2017, 05:07:20 PM
As P J Hall says this thread seems to have merged into a CVT/Man discussion, rather than whether the Mk3 is any good.
I note that most of those who decry the CVT have not actually driven one, so how can they form an honest opinion?

As I said previously, as with any small engine, if you want the power, then you have rev it and whether it's a CVT or Manual is largely immaterial.
 
So back to the original thread, the MK3 is without doubt better in many respects to the Mk2, can't comment about Mk1 as I never had one, The only exception is maybe the Atkinson cycle issue, however one gets used to that quite easily, especially when it saves money at the pumps!
Title: Re: Honest Answers Required - Is the Mk3 better than the Mk2?
Post by: Jocko on November 13, 2017, 05:49:49 PM
The only exception is maybe the Atkinson cycle issue, however one gets used to that quite easily, especially when it saves money at the pumps!
When I drove the Mk 3, Honda loaned me for the day, I wasn't aware of the Atkinson cycle. The engine felt the same as my Mk1, only with more grunt.
At what rpm does the Atkinson cycle change to Otto cycle?
Title: Re: Honest Answers Required - Is the Mk3 better than the Mk2?
Post by: andruec on November 13, 2017, 06:17:23 PM
The only exception is maybe the Atkinson cycle issue, however one gets used to that quite easily, especially when it saves money at the pumps!
When I drove the Mk 3, Honda loaned me for the day, I wasn't aware of the Atkinson cycle. The engine felt the same as my Mk1, only with more grunt.
At what rpm does the Atkinson cycle change to Otto cycle?
It seems to be between 2,000 and 2,500 rpm. I didn't notice it when driving a manual and I think that's because you have a fixed RPM for a given road speed per gear. If you're at all competent with gear selection the engine has no choice other than to switch modes and if you ask for more power the RPM will increase by a known amount. The problem the CVT has is that it has the flexibility to run at a wide range of RPM for any given road wheel speed and can mix and match the RPM to the accelerator input as it sees fit. Unless you tell it you want to get up and go it's sometimes content to just increase the ratio to maintain current RPM but increase road speed. If you're in Atkinson mode that increase will be slooooooow.
Title: Re: Honest Answers Required - Is the Mk3 better than the Mk2?
Post by: Downsizer on November 13, 2017, 06:41:40 PM
The problem the CVT has is that it has the flexibility to run at a wide range of RPM for any given road wheel speed and can mix and match the RPM to the accelerator input as it sees fit. Unless you tell it you want to get up and go it's sometimes content to just increase the ratio to maintain current RPM but increase road speed. If you're in Atkinson mode that increase will be slooooooow.
A couple of clicks on the left hand paddle is a great option for a sudden surge of power.
Title: Re: Honest Answers Required - Is the Mk3 better than the Mk2?
Post by: Deeps on November 13, 2017, 06:57:31 PM
I can't tell when the Atkinson /Otto switchover takes place on my MT car, I would expect that the engine ECU decides when to switch over depending on demand and load. The VTEC coming in is noticeable at about 3,500 to 4,000 revs but this is also ECU controlled.
Title: Re: Honest Answers Required - Is the Mk3 better than the Mk2?
Post by: jazzster on November 13, 2017, 08:09:59 PM
I have not driven MK3 but sat in one briefly, Im 6 foot tall and to me there did not seem to be as much room for my knees, the seat seemed to be fully back and steering wheel  fully up and back, it may be just me not trying hard enough, as for CVT very rarely need to make it rev past 4000rpm even uphill, to me its no worse than when you are in a hurry a manual rev high then change gear, just the CVT stays at in higher revs for longer. I have MK2 15 Plate only just got to 11000 miles and seems to be getting a little bit more torque around 2500rpm. If I was a the point of buying another car, I would just try the Mk3 properly to see if I had the seat fully adjusted and like the touch screen etc. I think it looks better than the MK2 (more up to date I guess), but the boot shelf sounds poorly made.
If I was looking at other make I would be struggling to find a smooth gear box like the CVT and the space of the Jazz boot without having a larger car.
Title: Re: Honest Answers Required - Is the Mk3 better than the Mk2?
Post by: Deeps on November 13, 2017, 08:57:06 PM
I am 6' tall with long legs, I find the most comfortable set up to be seat right back, reclined one notch, steering wheel right out, and tilted until the top is visually level with the instrument cowl.
Title: Re: Honest Answers Required - Is the Mk3 better than the Mk2?
Post by: andruec on November 13, 2017, 10:23:15 PM
I am 6' tall with long legs, I find the most comfortable set up to be seat right back, reclined one notch, steering wheel right out, and tilted until the top is visually level with the instrument cowl.
I'm not especially tall (1.8m) and find that my right knee brushes the underside of the steering column when moving from accelerator to brake. I can just about avoid it making contact but it concerns me what might happen in a collision. I can see my knee being forced back and up into the steering column  :o

I think I managed to get myself a bit more clearance under there on the previous models. Oh and I still miss the arm rest a bit.
Title: Re: Honest Answers Required - Is the Mk3 better than the Mk2?
Post by: Deeps on November 13, 2017, 10:46:08 PM
To add to my setup the seat is fully down.
Title: Re: Honest Answers Required - Is the Mk3 better than the Mk2?
Post by: peteo48 on November 14, 2017, 11:27:03 AM
I called the dealers (actually they called me and left a message). What I hadn't fully appreciated was that the SE trim has only manual air con. I've had climate control since 2008 so I don't want to downgrade as it were. Annoying, as well, that they have removed the cup holder on the passenger side and one of the glove boxes. The top one on the Mk2 is useful for keeping your water cool when you have the climate control on.

I think I'd need an EX and they are not trying to offload these at present!

One thing I am going to do, at some point, is try out a CVT. I have dissed them based on the noise and clutch slipping sensation I've experienced in an Auris and a Jazz but this was as a passenger. I really need to see for myself.
Title: Re: Honest Answers Required - Is the Mk3 better than the Mk2?
Post by: andruec on November 14, 2017, 04:57:45 PM
One thing I am going to do, at some point, is try out a CVT. I have dissed them based on the noise and clutch slipping sensation I've experienced in an Auris and a Jazz but this was as a passenger. I really need to see for myself.
To be honest I don't think you'll be aware of it unless you're in the habit of flooring the accelerator all the time. For a more sensible driver it doesn't really sound or feel much different to a manual. Personally I quite like the constant cute growl while accelerating. It tells me that the engine is working hard. I find now that being in a conventional car sounds odd with the engine being moved around it's rev range in a desperate attempt to get the power or the efficiency that the driver is looking for.

Horses for courses.
Title: Re: Honest Answers Required - Is the Mk3 better than the Mk2?
Post by: peteo48 on November 14, 2017, 05:03:38 PM
I am genuinely wondering andruec if you might be right there. I get the impression that a different pattern of acceleration is called for. It's possible the 2 drivers I've been with have been trying to accelerate too hard rather than let the power in a bit more gently.

It will certainly be the case with the motoring press who are almost as one in dissing CVTs.
Title: Re: Honest Answers Required - Is the Mk3 better than the Mk2?
Post by: zzaj on November 14, 2017, 05:09:10 PM
I called the dealers (actually they called me and left a message). What I hadn't fully appreciated was that the SE trim has only manual air con. I've had climate control since 2008 so I don't want to downgrade as it were. Annoying, as well, that they have removed the cup holder on the passenger side and one of the glove boxes. The top one on the Mk2 is useful for keeping your water cool when you have the climate control on.

I think I'd need an EX and they are not trying to offload these at present!

One thing I am going to do, at some point, is try out a CVT. I have dissed them based on the noise and clutch slipping sensation I've experienced in an Auris and a Jazz but this was as a passenger. I really need to see for myself.

If you are buying to a price - try Drivethedeal.com. You might a brand new EX close to the price you are looking at. You will be buying from a Honda dealer but at a much reduced price. I have bought my last three cars through them and the process has been straight forward every time. You can pay by debit card when you pick up the car. There is no real relationship between the dealer selling function and their servicing which you can get done at any dealer. The warranty and service plan are valid with all Honda dealers.
Title: Re: Honest Answers Required - Is the Mk3 better than the Mk2?
Post by: trebor1652 on November 14, 2017, 05:15:58 PM
Don't forget CarWow as well I bought my EX through them and would recommend them on the service I received.
Mine was delivered from Kent to the Midlands all in the quoted price.

Sent from my XT1039 using Tapatalk

Title: Re: Honest Answers Required - Is the Mk3 better than the Mk2?
Post by: Downsizer on November 14, 2017, 05:57:50 PM
I called the dealers (actually they called me and left a message). What I hadn't fully appreciated was that the SE trim has only manual air con. I've had climate control since 2008 so I don't want to downgrade as it were. Annoying, as well, that they have removed the cup holder on the passenger side and one of the glove boxes. The top one on the Mk2 is useful for keeping your water cool when you have the climate control on.

I think I'd need an EX and they are not trying to offload these at present!

One thing I am going to do, at some point, is try out a CVT. I have dissed them based on the noise and clutch slipping sensation I've experienced in an Auris and a Jazz but this was as a passenger. I really need to see for myself.
Upgrading to an EX is a lot of money to pay for climate control, and some folk have suggested that the larger wheels give a less comfortable ride, which was one of your original questions.  The mechanical heating controls are easy to use - I would put climate control in the "nice to have but not essential" box.  Why not test drive an SE, with and without  cvt?
Title: Re: Honest Answers Required - Is the Mk3 better than the Mk2?
Post by: andruec on November 14, 2017, 06:47:19 PM
I certainly don't accept some people's description of the CVT as being 'loud and whiny'. At high RPM loud and growly is a better description. I tested it tonight driving up a steepish dual carriageway between the M40 and Middleton Cheney. I left the car in 'D' and from 30 up to 80 with my foot to the floor revs are not constant - they rise from 4,000 to the red line. They only become constant when they reach the redline and that ain't no whine - a manual car would sound the same at that point. I think that in 'S' the revs would start at 4,500 so would top out earlier.

And for another point: Coming down that hill in the morning my Jazz will sit at 60mph for the last half mile with no acceleration input. Despite that I pulled away from everyone else leaving the roundabout quite easily and eventually reached 100mph(*) before having to back off as the next roundabout approached. The Jazz might not be a sports car but it's no slouch either.

(*)All purely out of scientific interest you understand ;)
Title: Re: Honest Answers Required - Is the Mk3 better than the Mk2?
Post by: peteo48 on November 14, 2017, 07:13:44 PM

Upgrading to an EX is a lot of money to pay for climate control, and some folk have suggested that the larger wheels give a less comfortable ride, which was one of your original questions.  The mechanical heating controls are easy to use - I would put climate control in the "nice to have but not essential" box.  Why not test drive an SE, with and without  cvt?

It's a good point. What I like about Climate Control is that it cuts the aircon in and out as required thus saving fuel and you can set a precise temperature.

Is it worth an extra grand though? Might need to rethink especially as I'm a low mileage driver. The tyre thing is interesting as well. I've come across this a lot in other websites and forums - the smaller wheel with a fatter tyre means better damping.
Title: Re: Honest Answers Required - Is the Mk3 better than the Mk2?
Post by: andruec on November 14, 2017, 09:02:55 PM
I like climate control because it's mostly a set and forget thing. Unfortunately since the Mk2 it's not been quite so good. Both Mk2 and Mk3 have a tendency to get steamed up. The climate control is supposed to direct air toward the windscreen automatically but it's not very good at it. Typically it will direct it at the screen for a minute or so from start then never again which is unlikely to be enough in most cases. For both the Mk2 and Mk3 I resorted to setting the output to screen and feet (overriding the climate control for that but leaving it to handle everything else). One improvement with the Mk3 is that you can do that for as long as you want. The Mk2 had an annoying fault that meant after an hour set that way the CC would start pumping out cold air.

Mind you this evening was a bit weird suggesting the Mk3 has other foibles. Leaving the office car park the temp was 11 degrees outside and slightly misty. With the CC set to auto apart from vent set to screen and feet the fan was off. I was beginning to think it was broken and was just about to stop before joining the main road when it suddenly woke up at level 3. Most odd.
Title: Re: Honest Answers Required - Is the Mk3 better than the Mk2?
Post by: Kenneve on November 15, 2017, 08:55:10 AM
I find that the heater fan dosen't cut in, until the engine temperature light goes off, thus ensuring that you don't get unwanted cold air blowing in, at the start of your journey.
I never seem to,be troubled by a misted screen, maybe because the car is normally kept in the garage overnight.
Title: Re: Honest Answers Required - Is the Mk3 better than the Mk2?
Post by: andruec on November 15, 2017, 02:14:23 PM
I find that the heater fan dosen't cut in, until the engine temperature light goes off, thus ensuring that you don't get unwanted cold air blowing in, at the start of your journey.
I never seem to,be troubled by a misted screen, maybe because the car is normally kept in the garage overnight.
I find it tends to build up during a long journey or even a short one if it's cold enough outside. It's something of a known issue - or at least one that a lot of people have complained about over the years.
Title: Re: Honest Answers Required - Is the Mk3 better than the Mk2?
Post by: zzaj on November 15, 2017, 03:37:44 PM
Are you sure you haven't got blocked ventilation outflow vents? It sounds to be misting as if it could/ would in recirculate mode i.e. there is not a free flow of warm moist air leaving the cabin or even that fresh air is not entering in the first place. Just a thought. It could be a low tech issue like a blocked pollen filter!
Title: Re: Honest Answers Required - Is the Mk3 better than the Mk2?
Post by: andruec on November 15, 2017, 04:31:53 PM
Are you sure you haven't got blocked ventilation outflow vents? It sounds to be misting as if it could/ would in recirculate mode i.e. there is not a free flow of warm moist air leaving the cabin or even that fresh air is not entering in the first place. Just a thought. It could be a low tech issue like a blocked pollen filter!
I don't think so. It isn't as bad as if it was in recirc mode, this is just a gradual build up. I had it on my Mk2 and my Mk3 and it's often been mentioned here and on the wider web so I'm pretty sure it's just poor ventilation design. As I mentioned earlier the Mk2 had the added 'bonus' that if you left it blowing air at the windscreen after an hour it would switch to blowing out cold air. Hardly what you want in the middle of winter :-/

It's one thing I miss from my old Nissan days. With my three Nissans as long as you had your aircon on you could drive on recirc forever without it misting up, the system was that good. My first Civic was fine but that was the joint effort between Rover and Honda and actually had a centre windscreen vent on the top of the dash. After that all my Hondas have suffered misting to some degree, usually in the rear even though I'm usually the only one in the vehicle. My first Jazz was like that but the last two have been worse.

https://clubjazz.org/forum/index.php?topic=131.0
Title: Re: Honest Answers Required - Is the Mk3 better than the Mk2?
Post by: Jocko on November 15, 2017, 07:11:03 PM
I never have bother with the windows steaming up on my Mk 1. I don't turn the fan on until I begin to see a bit of misting then I set it to 1 and it clears in seconds. We are normally two up. I only put the heat on if my wife is feeling cold because I never remove my jacket while driving the car!
My car is just an S and has no air con, and I leave it on Fresh air ALWAYS. Never ever use recirc.