Clubjazz - Honda Jazz & HR-V Forums
Honda Jazz Forums => Honda Jazz Mk3 2015 - 2020 => Topic started by: peteo48 on March 08, 2018, 10:35:34 AM
-
It's a big change and one that I have made largely because of joint issues, particularly my left shoulder and left leg (knee and ankle!). I had had a ride as a passenger in a Mk2 CVT and didn't like the experience.
I had seriously considered going for a 30kwh Nissan Leaf - I've test driven one and they are a delight to drive, especially in an urban environment but there are issues with the charging network and also, after I had consulted my son in law (an electrician) there were going to be some issues with installing a home charger especially trip hazards. What clinched it for me was seeing the new Nissan Leaf at our local dealers. I decided then and there that this was the EV I wanted but not at £25,000 (give or take).
Test drove a Yaris hybrid - too small.
So back to the Jazz. Well I love having an automatic. My driving is mainly urban and the constant stop start in a manual was getting wearing. I am amazed at how much easier parking is an automatic with the creep facility. On the motorway, once up to cruising speed, very relaxed indeed. Less than 2,000 revs at 70 and, round town, once you've reached 30, you are basically just ticking over.
In earlier posts I referred to droning. I'll repeat that, the car drones and this is especially noticeable when accelerating from rest or if you have to floor the accelerator to join a motorway. In short, in these situations it's noisy and there is no getting away from that.
But for all the other benefits I can live with this.
-
Glad you like it. I don't fancy the CVT, but any time I am stuck in creeping traffic I'd happily settle for one. Even the old DAF Variomatic would be better than the tap dancing you need to do in a manual.
A problem I find with my Jazz is, if I hold the clutch down for more than a few seconds, my foot seems to creep forward and the pedal seems to be in my instep. It is just an issue with seat height, pedal placement and leg length. Shorter legs or higher seat would probably alleviate it, but it is a nuisance.
-
I suspect that the people who don't fancy the CVT, have not actually driven one for any great distance.
I have been driving automatics since 2003, first with a Landrover Freelander and followed by 4 Jazz cars. The first was the I-shift, bl**dy terrible and it nearly put off autos for life. However i persevered and 3 CVTs later, I would not even consider going back to a manual gearbox.
Yes, there are issues with the MK3, mainly with the Atkinson cycle engine, but the gearbox is perfect and gives a very relaxed drive for 99% of the time.
-
I suspect that the people who don't fancy the CVT, have not actually driven one for any great distance.
I have been driving automatics since 2003, first with a Landrover Freelander and followed by 4 Jazz cars. The first was the I-shift, bl**dy terrible and it nearly put off autos for life. However i persevered and 3 CVTs later, I would not even consider going back to a manual gearbox.
Yes, there are issues with the MK3, mainly with the Atkinson cycle engine, but the gearbox is perfect and gives a very relaxed drive for 99% of the time.
I have driven CVT and automatic before for many years, but still love manual boxes - If I lived in a large town or city I may well have a CVT, but I don't. If like peteo48 I had some physical reason I needed one, no problem -but truth is I just enjoy swapping cogs (I like the 6 speed gearbox on my motorbike better though, if you get the revs right you don't need the clutch once moving :-X )
-
Have to join in the praise for the automatic. Like Pete I am experimenting with creep when parking and doing 3 point turns. It has relieved all the left hip pain and muscle strain so that’s brilliant. Getting broadly similar mpg to the previous car. Satnav is a bit of a pain when it sends you via tiny country lanes in preference to motorways and main roads. Definitely need to find a way to check out a route before obediently following it. Fortunately the roads had been ploughed on Tuesday.
-
Sounds like your Sat Nav could be programmed for shortest route rather than fastest route. Check your settings.
-
Sounds like your Sat Nav could be programmed for shortest route rather than fastest route. Check your settings.
'Shortest route' is real pain and will happily send you along goat tracks, I always use 'fastest route' with 'avoidances' programmed in (toll roads etc) but even then with discretion - if I don't like the look of a road when instructed to turn I will carry on. I think the maps are in layers (hence different colour for different road types) and single track back roads are supposed to be de-restricted 60mph and the satnav does not seem to know the difference between those and a decent 'B' road. my Garmin will let you put routes in, were you can broadly tell it which way you want to go (need a paper map as well really) and it will take you through those points rather than just from A to B, where B may be hundreds of miles away. I always use 'track up' as well, where you are always driving from bottom to top of the screen, I tried North up and it did my head in as I was sometimes driving across or down the screen - very disorientating. I find '3D map' easier as well.
-
Thinking on from what Peteo48 said about 'Drone', I was out this afternoon and covered around 50 miles, on various types of road, listening for what sort of noises I was hearing.
At 30 mph all I could hear was the heater fan on position 3 or above.
At 70 mph all I could hear was wind noise and maybe a bit of tyre noise as well, depending on road surface.
Accelerating onto a motorway at maybe 4000+ rpm, yes, you will hear the engine working, but to my mind this is not objectionable. I would submit in that circumstance, any car of this type will be the same, remember we are not driving a £30k limo, but a fairly upmarket 5 door hatchback.
Drone to me, is a noise akin to a worn wheel bearing, a constant hum/whine whose frequency may rise/fall with road speed.
If Peteo48 is concerned about 'Drone', then he should take the car back to the dealer, for examination and possible rectification. Hope this comment is helpful.
-
I think I'd agree with the 'drone' label under moderate acceleration (between 3k and 4k rpm). But I quite like it. It sounds purposeful but without sounding over eager. Just the engine 'getting the business done'. When you reach your target speed you lift off and the engine goes almost silent.
-
I can understand, drone.....
Today, I had a few hours with an EX Navi, courtesy car. Mk 3. 67 reg. 150 miles on clock.
Initial acceleration, needed the revs, at 2,000+. Sounding like a bag of marbles....
When forward motion had been achieved. The revs then could drop to 1,500, to maintain sensible, town progress.
It needed a burst of revs, to overcome inertia. Then dropping back, when movement occurred. As though there was nil power below 2,000.
My 15 reg, Mk2. CVT, in the same circumstances. Will pull away, quietly, at 1,100rpm. Maintaining these revs, during town driving.
Frankly. I was a little disappointed, by this foible. :(
-
My 15 reg, Mk2. CVT, in the same circumstances. Will pull away, quietly, at 1,100rpm. Maintaining these revs, during town driving.
Yeah, that's the Atkinson cycle. It is indeed lacking in power..however it's also burning less fuel. The trick is to get the engine above 2,000 when you want it to move. With the manual this is implicit in your gear selection but CVT owners need to give the accelerator a bit of a jab to encourage it. In my experience the latest version seemed a bit more happy to make the shift but it only took me a couple of months to work the trick out with mine. Now it rarely bothers me.
-
The "drone" word is something I've picked up from several reviews of the CVT box as applied to the Jazz. I think it's an accurate description. I go right back to my plane spotting days at Ringway (now Manchester Airport) and it sounds exactly like the Vickers Viscount taking off (a turbo prop plane).
I can see why people don't like it - a lot of noise and very little action when you want to push on from rest. I think an enthusiastic driver would be driven mad by this aspect of the CVT box. I have been toying with S mode - still a lot of noise but more action.
But I can live with it. I don't need to accelerate quickly all that often. My wife thinks the car is noisy under acceleration and it is. This may be an issue with CVT boxes generally.
-
The "drone" and noise complainers need to manage their expectations, it is a supermini optimised for urban use, not a luxury autobahn stormer.
-
The "drone" and noise complainers need to manage their expectations, it is a supermini optimised for urban use, not a luxury autobahn stormer.
They are comparing the Jazz CVT to the Jazz manual, not an "autobahn stormer".
As an aside, my brother thinks my Jazz is as quiet as his BMW 320d.
-
But I can live with it. I don't need to accelerate quickly all that often. My wife thinks the car is noisy under acceleration and it is. This may be an issue with CVT boxes generally.
The noise is more noticeable on the MK 3 Jazz as it's programmed to rev the engine above around 3,000 rpm when acceleration is needed as the Atkinson cycle mode (below around 3,000 rpm) delivers economy but less power. I also found this feature annoying. Honda could have programmed the vehicle differently to accelerate while still in Atkinson cycle mode but then people would have complained about sluggish acceleration.
My HR-V has a very similar engine without the Atkinson cycle mode and can smoothly accelerate with rpm slowly increasing as the speed increases. How does the Jazz Sport behave in this respect?
-
The "drone" and noise complainers need to manage their expectations, it is a supermini optimised for urban use, not a luxury autobahn stormer.
That's true but to be fair once you've worked out how to use the accelerator it is as sprightly as almost anyone else on the road. I am rarely 'left behind' by anyone and if I'm at the head of a queue I usually leave everyone else behind when the way becomes clear. In my experience very few people use all the power they have under their right foot. Of course it's somewhat relative: Only using a bit a of what a 1 litre engine can give does less than only using a bit of what a 2 litre engine can give. But I have found that by using 'quite a bit of' my 1.3 litre engine I usually out accelerate the majority. And no, that doesn't mean I floor the accelerator at every opportunity. I've just learnt the sweet spot and movement that will bump the car straight up to 3,000 rpm.
It's really only the speedsters (typically driving BMWs or Audis) that require me to really push the car. Even then I rarely feel the need to get out of their way. There's a short stretch of dual carriageway leading away from Banbury up a steep(ish) hill and if I'm feeling frisky I can often lead the charge up there and it's not often that I feel like I'm being pushed. More often I'm having to hold back.
So what I'd say is that the Honda Jazz (manual or CVT) is a very performant 1.3 litre car. If you're not scared of working the accelerator pedal you will get all the acceleration that is required the vast majority of the time. The only cars that you might hold up through lack of engine power are - frankly - those who could probably do with calming down anyway.
-
My HR-V has a very similar engine without the Atkinson cycle mode and can smoothly accelerate with rpm slowly increasing as the speed increases. How does the Jazz Sport behave in this respect?
I have done less than 100 miles so far in the Sport, all around urban roads, but it is clear that there is a lot more power available from standstill and the engine responds well to just a little extra throttle input rather than having to put the pedal well over half way down as I had to do with the 1.3 when in Atkinson mode. Overall I am very pleased and the performance will no doubt improve once I have done a few more miles.
It would be interesting to know how a 1.3 without the Atkinson cycle would perform. I would expect it to be more responsive but with a fuel consumption penalty.
-
+1 to Andruec's comments regarding the 'get up and go' of the Mk3 Jazz
-
Does the Sport have firmer suspension and sports style seats? And is the engine/gearbox the same as in the HRV?
-
Does the Sport have firmer suspension and sports style seats? And is the engine/gearbox the same as in the HRV?
As far as I can tell the seats are the same as in the EX but with some feature stitching and a unique pattern on the seat faces. Similarly the suspension feels just the same. I have never driven a HRV but it looks like the powertrain is the same.
-
The "drone" and noise complainers need to manage their expectations, it is a supermini optimised for urban use, not a luxury autobahn stormer.
I think that's fair comment.
-
The "drone" and noise complainers need to manage their expectations, it is a supermini optimised for urban use, not a luxury autobahn stormer.
Sorry..... If, sounding like a bag of marbles, is optimised. No wonder I was disappointed!
I expected the latest model's development, to be more refined, in urban use. Not less!
-
The "drone" and noise complainers need to manage their expectations, it is a supermini optimised for urban use, not a luxury autobahn stormer.
Sorry..... If, sounding like a bag of marbles, is optimised. No wonder I was disappointed!
I expected the latest model's development, to be more refined, in urban use. Not less!
There must be something very wrong with your Jazz if the engine sounds like a bag of marbles. I'd accept 'drones' or 'growls' or even (at high revs) 'howls'. But I would never describe the engine noise produced by any of the Mk3 Jazz that I've driven as 'a bag of marbles'. And compared with other cars I've ridden in or driven recently the most negative thing I'd say about Jazz engine noise is 'It's a bit loud and raw when you rev it hard'. But you don't often have to rev it really hard anyway.
-
Well.... I guess, that's me, put in my place.....
-
Just looping the loop around it is fastest routes. Or it was today.Very disconcerting to be offered alternative routes to save time along the way. Thought it best to ignore that.
I think it has a deep purr suggesting strength!
-
Well.... I guess, that's me, put in my place.....
Lol, sorry, I wasn't trying to put you in your place. I just really struggle to understand how any noise the Jazz engine makes can be said to sound like a back of marbles. To me that description sounds like tappet or bearing issues.
-
Well.... I guess, that's me, put in my place.....
Lol, sorry, I wasn't trying to put you in your place. I just really struggle to understand how any noise the Jazz engine makes can be said to sound like a back of marbles. To me that description sounds like tappet or bearing issues.
No problem, Andruec! ;)
I was referring to my posting, on page 1.......
I can understand, drone.....
Today, I had a few hours with an EX Navi, courtesy car. Mk 3. 67 reg. 150 miles on clock.
Initial acceleration, needed the revs, at 2,000+. Sounding like a bag of marbles....
When forward motion had been achieved. The revs then could drop to 1,500, to maintain sensible, town progress.
It needed a burst of revs, to overcome inertia. Then dropping back, when movement occurred. As though there was nil power below 2,000.
My 15 reg, Mk2. CVT, in the same circumstances. Will pull away, quietly, at 1,100rpm. Maintaining these revs, during town driving.
Frankly. I was a little disappointed, by this foible. :(
I am quite sure, I can easily develop an appropriate throttle technique.....
Hope so! Cos, I have an EX Navi on order. Delivery early April..... :D
-
I am quite sure, I can easily develop an appropriate throttle technique.....
Hope so! Cos, I have an EX Navi on order. Delivery early April..... :D
To keep the engine out of the noisy zone you will need a very light touch on the accelerator and accept that acceleration will be slow. I've been there. This engine behaviour was one reason I traded in my Mk 3 for an HR-V.
I have to wonder whether you would be well-advised to change your order to the Jazz Sport. Not because you need the extra headline power but because of the better low end performance which delivers smooth acceleration without the engine getting into the noisy zone. Every now and again I deliberately give a couple of tugs on the left paddle on my HR-V in order to clear a few cobwebs out of the engine as this doesn't happen during normal usage.
-
John.
I have already changed my enquiry, from a sport. As it's spec. lacks several "must haves", for me. (Though, an EX, with a 1.5 engine would be my idea of perfection).....
I was amazed, how slow my present Jazz's, initial acceleration was. Compared to my previous, Yaris cvt.
I'm sure, I will soon develop the necessary throttle technique......
-
John.
I have already changed my enquiry, from a sport. As it's spec. lacks several "must haves", for me. (Though, an EX, with a 1.5 engine would be my idea of perfection).....
I was amazed, how slow my present Jazz's, initial acceleration was. Compared to my previous, Yaris cvt.
I'm sure, I will soon develop the necessary throttle technique......
The whole thing with 0-60 times is so subjective. Just thinking about some of my old cars and also some current 0-60 times.
1) 1.3 Jazz CVT - 12.2 secs
2) Toyota Yaris Hybrid (test driven) - 11.8 secs
3) Nissan Leaf - 11.8 secs
4) VW Golf 1.9 Tdi - 11.3 secs
These 4 cars are pretty much in the same ball park but it's the torque. The Nissan Leaf feels really quick off the mark. My VW Golf - well I can hardly believe it is comparable in the 0-60 stakes to my current car. The Golf felt like a drag racer is comparison.
The whole torque thing is down to how effortless it feels. Push the Jazz hard and it will do the figures I'm sure. I have noticed a pronounced difference when dropping into S mode.
But do we buy cars like the Jazz for performance? I buy it for practicality (it spends a lot of life as a shopping trolley) ease of driving, mechanical reliability etc etc. If I'd wanted performance, £13 k will buy you a pretty decent BMW 3 Series (about 5 years old).
-
I bought my Jazz, because with the mirrors folded, it fits into my garage.
Also, it easily swallows a catering table, and all my hot air engines. On show days...... :)
-
The whole thing with 0-60 times is so subjective. Just thinking about some of my old cars and also some current 0-60 times.
1) 1.3 Jazz CVT - 12.2 secs
2) Toyota Yaris Hybrid (test driven) - 11.8 secs
3) Nissan Leaf - 11.8 secs
4) VW Golf 1.9 Tdi - 11.3 secs
The hybrid Mk 2 Jazz also provides relatively effortless initial acceleration. These vehicles are all a bit nippier than my Austin A35 which needed about half a minute to get to 60 mph! Getting back on topic, the Mk 3 Jazz can perform well if the engine is allowed to pile on the revs which results in the engine becoming more vocal, but not in a way which sounds distressed.
-
http://www.gbclassiccars.co.uk/mg_mgb_mgbgt.html
These 0-60 times for the old MGB are interesting. A sports car of it's day and a 0-60 time of 14 seconds for the MGB GT.
We are spoiled by modern cars.
-
I recall driving a new MGBGT in c 1973. It was PANTS...Slow, noisy, difficult to enter and exit. I subsequently bought a Lotus Elan with 130bhp - which was FAST.
-
The Americans have a saying, "You buy horse power, but drive torque". That's why diesels and tiny turbo petrol engines are popular, the torque makes for lazy driving.
-
The Elan was 0 - 60 in about six second. Even today that takes a bit of beating. Mind you, it weighed about the same as an empty crisp bag.
-
We are spoiled by modern cars.
My first car was a 1963 3 gear Renault 4. I don't think I ever got it to 60 mph! The 6 volt electrics made driving on wet winter evenings quite a challenge, as there wasn't enough juice to run lights, wipers and heater fan simultaneously. But the basic concept was similar to the Jazz, with 5 doors and fold flat rear bench seat. I was very upset to find after I bought it in 1965 that the wheelbase was longer on one side than the other. However, this resulted from the two rear suspension full-width torsion bars being mounted one behind the other.
-
We certainly are spoiled by modern cars. One problem that took me a while to figure out on my Renault 4 was the pipe clip on the fuel filler pipe in the rear wing corroding allowing water thrown up by the rear wheel to get into the fuel tank. Not enough to cause rough running but enough to freeze and block the fuel to the engine. I do not miss old cars and laying in wet gutters fixing them!
-
I used to have a 1.5 daihatsu yrv turbo 130ps and it had a 7 speed cvt it did not have paddles instead in manual mode had press buttons each side of the front steering wheel and it was really good i liked it and it was so fast the only thing let that car down was body roll round bends as it was a tall semi mpv.
-
A couple of recent journeys have got me thinking. Is there an issue with people moving from manual to CVT and not using all the capabilities of the system?
On the Jazz 1.3 there is an issue with sluggish acceleration in situations like roundabouts. I'm beginning to learn that, if you use the tools at your disposal, there are answers to these issues. A quick flip of the down paddle to get a burst of acceleration and/or drop into S mode for a situation where you might need livelier performance for a mile or two.
In short, you might need to postively engage with the system. Now you could say that negates the whole purpose of an automatic but it doesn't. The big thing for me is not having to continually use the clutch in traffic - flipping a few paddles to get a bit of extra oomph is no biggie for me.
-
On the Jazz 1.3 there is an issue with sluggish acceleration in situations like roundabouts. I'm beginning to learn that, if you use the tools at your disposal, there are answers to these issues. A quick flip of the down paddle to get a burst of acceleration and/or drop into S mode for a situation where you might need livelier performance for a mile or two.
That's not really automatic though is it? An automatic gearbox shouldn't require you to do anything other than selecting the direction you want to travel. I've found that jabbing the accelerator down to indicate my desire to get a move on suffices most of the time. It's still not the seamless operation I came to expect from the Mk1 and Mk2 but I blame the engine for that not the gearbox :-/
-
On the Jazz 1.3 there is an issue with sluggish acceleration in situations like roundabouts. I'm beginning to learn that, if you use the tools at your disposal, there are answers to these issues. A quick flip of the down paddle to get a burst of acceleration and/or drop into S mode for a situation where you might need livelier performance for a mile or two.
That's not really automatic though is it? An automatic gearbox shouldn't require you to do anything other than selecting the direction you want to travel. I've found that jabbing the accelerator down to indicate my desire to get a move on suffices most of the time. It's still not the seamless operation I came to expect from the Mk1 and Mk2 but I blame the engine for that not the gearbox :-/
That's interesting. In your experience the MK3 is a step backwards? I've no experience of the CVT other than in the Mk3.
-
On the Jazz 1.3 there is an issue with sluggish acceleration in situations like roundabouts. I'm beginning to learn that, if you use the tools at your disposal, there are answers to these issues. A quick flip of the down paddle to get a burst of acceleration and/or drop into S mode for a situation where you might need livelier performance for a mile or two.
That's not really automatic though is it? An automatic gearbox shouldn't require you to do anything other than selecting the direction you want to travel. I've found that jabbing the accelerator down to indicate my desire to get a move on suffices most of the time. It's still not the seamless operation I came to expect from the Mk1 and Mk2 but I blame the engine for that not the gearbox :-/
That's interesting. In your experience the MK3 is a step backwards? I've no experience of the CVT other than in the Mk3.
In overall smoothness, yes, it is. The Mk1 and Mk2 were both simple push and go systems. The only time you needed to think about doing anything special was if you wanted to overtake and needed kick down. Most of the time it was simple. If you wanted faster you pushed down, if you wanted slower you lifted off. That's the CVT I fell in love with.
The dual-mode nature of the engine complicated things and it appears that Honda have programmed the transmission and engine to favour staying in Atkinson mode at low speed unless the driver takes the trouble to request a more aggressive response. To my mind that's a step backward. The Mk1 and Mk2 allowed a driver to completely ignore/forget about gear choice and engine RPM. That's what a proper automatic transmission should be like.
-
That seems to be what my car does, more accelerator, more speed, it has kickdown which is enhanced if you go beyond the detent at almost full accelerator travel. You don't need the flappy paddles for full power use. As my car is new I have only tried it once to see if it worked. It does and is impressive.
-
Wouldn't go back to a manual after CVT. Yes it gets negative press from journalists as it doesnt rush off the line but its made driving a pleasant experience. Once your used to it its fine an relaxing.
-
The lack of pickup from a standstill is probably more down to the 1.3 engines Atkinson cycle than the CVT.
-
I recall driving a new MGBGT in c 1973. It was PANTS...Slow, noisy, difficult to enter and exit. I subsequently bought a Lotus Elan with 130bhp - which was FAST.
A while ago I had a Morris Marina 1.8TC, which was the same engine as the MGB, IIRC.
-
Test drove a 2016 SE with CVT today, didn't thrash it as it was on less than the national speed limit roads, but seemed very civilised, and not that much difference from the manual car I own. Pick up the CVT car on Tuesday ;D
On Wednesday probably searching / asking for how the different things work compared to the current car ::)
-
Test drove a 2016 SE with CVT today, didn't thrash it as it was on less than the national speed limit roads, but seemed very civilised, and not that much difference from the manual car I own. Pick up the CVT car on Tuesday ;D
On Wednesday probably searching / asking for how the different things work compared to the current car ::)
From my experience of driving conventional automatics and also CVT just keep your left foot out of the way and forget you have a left foot. You never need to accelerate and brake at same time and braking with left foot can be a salutary / sobering experience.
You may read other advice on internet about using both feet in an automatic, but IMHO it can be dangerous
-
Totally agree. The only thing you used your left foot for in the past (other that dipping the headlights in an old Morris) is to depress the clutch.
Depressing the imaginary clutch in an automatic kind of takes your breath away :o
-
I had a shot of an automatic with a large brake pedal. Something along these lines.
(https://comps.canstockphoto.com/automatic-car-pedals-stock-photo_csp17831345.jpg)
I did an emergency stop and hit the brake with both feet. Talk about standing on its nose!
-
Right foot to go faster or slower, left for the clutch is the mantra I try to follow. Will be trying not to swap between manuals and automatics as the subconscious need to depress the clutch as you come to a stop is very great for me.
-
I had a shot of an automatic with a large brake pedal. Something along these lines.
(https://comps.canstockphoto.com/automatic-car-pedals-stock-photo_csp17831345.jpg)
I did an emergency stop and hit the brake with both feet. Talk about standing on its nose!
The most important pedal is the brake !
-
I've never had to do anything special with my left foot when driving automatics. I put it on the floor and it stays there. I've never felt any impulse to try and press a non-existent clutch pedal. I do sometimes have a problem going the other way, at least at first. I sometimes forget to press the clutch in when coming to a stop, especially after a long drive without changing gear.
Frankly that was the reason I switched to automatics several years ago. I rented one on a visit to the USA and had no 'left-foot problems' but had a few when I returned to the UK and my manual car. I concluded that my body/brain was trying to tell me something so I switched to automatic and have never looked back.
-
My experience exactly. My first serious automatic driving was a 3 week stint working in California with an automatic hire car. On the last day, a colleague brought in his 71 pre federal spec Corvette for me to have a shot off. First junction I came to I thought "These brakes are cr@p". Eventually I managed to stall the 7.4 litre (454 cu inch) brute, with my left foot still on the floor!