Clubjazz - Honda Jazz & HR-V Forums

Honda Jazz Forums => Honda Jazz Mk2 2008-2015 => Topic started by: guest2074 on January 05, 2013, 10:05:23 PM

Title: the good and the bad.....
Post by: guest2074 on January 05, 2013, 10:05:23 PM
My first Honda (after many other make of cars) and after 17 month's here's my take. Good: Space, economy, looks (I think it's a good looking car) comfort. Bad: cheap internal plastics (lots of scratches) paint seems soft, lots of chip's etc. and front tyres (Dunlops) shot at 13000 miles. I'm a bit peed off at that as they are £90 each (She is an EX) But....for some reason I love her....  8)
Title: Re: the good and the bad.....
Post by: DV on January 05, 2013, 10:18:40 PM
I agree with the paint chips but not with the tyres.
I`ve 47135 miles in my tyres (rotated every 6000 miles front to rear) and now down to 2.5-3mm, 70% driving on motorway (not Michelin EnergySaver).
Title: Re: the good and the bad.....
Post by: guest2074 on January 05, 2013, 10:57:45 PM
Hi DV, maybe I should have rotated my tyres but does that mean replacing all four in one go? Not sure what I have done wrong to wear the fronts out so quickly. All I am doing is driving to work and holidays.... The only car I have ever had that did this was a Fiat Panda.
Title: Re: the good and the bad.....
Post by: chrisc on January 06, 2013, 05:34:56 AM
13000 miles on tyres is a rather short life.  Its mainly braking and cornering that wears away the rubber, have you tried gentler braking (easier to say than do I know), which is awkward in traffic, but comes with practice?

Of all the cars and vans I have had both personally and in the business, Michelin tyres last the longest by a wide margin.  They might cost 15% more but you get 50% more mileage out of them.

I also rotate my tyres, once a year but it does mean replacing all 4 at one go.  Also shop around for tyres.  Here there are at least 30 dealers selling tyres and the prices vary by a considerable margin.  One time it was worth my while to have some tyres shipped from Johannesburg (1400km away) since the discount was so great.
Title: Re: the good and the bad.....
Post by: monkeydave on January 06, 2013, 12:20:03 PM
im up to 15,000 miles on my orig tyres (mitchelin) and they have only gone down 2mm front and 1mm rear still look nearly new and i don't rotate, i can't be bothered just replace two at a time and at £53 each who cares about rotating

you must be heavy on the accelerate and brake
Title: Re: the good and the bad.....
Post by: madasafish on January 06, 2013, 12:41:20 PM
The last car which I drove where tyre life was under 20,000 miles was 40 years afgo: original Mini on crossply tyres. and 10inch wheels iirc.
Title: Re: the good and the bad.....
Post by: guest2074 on January 06, 2013, 04:59:41 PM
I'm not heavy on the the throttle or the brakes, I just drive normally!  (I have been driving since 1978) I can't be the only one who is not happy with the Dunlop tyres on a 2011 EX?

Have been told by a local dealer that the latest Jazz eats tyres and to fit Bridgstones, anybody else have these?

Monkeydave (great name)! where can I get tyres for £53 for an EX?
Title: Re: the good and the bad.....
Post by: guest1521 on January 06, 2013, 08:29:20 PM
Here's a source for good value tyres. For the EX there's a Nankang (among a number of others) here at around £50. One of the great things about this supplier is the independent tyre test ratings.
http://www.mytyres.co.uk/
Title: Re: the good and the bad.....
Post by: guest3250 on January 06, 2013, 11:57:26 PM
Mytyres is a great place to peruse for tyre options. Also the link to the 'reifen test' is quite helpful.
I am not sure about the Nankangs as they often get put down for not being the best at stopping in the wet.
Sadly the 185/55/16 size gives you a seriously limited choice and, for eg, does not even include Michelin.
My solution, and I recommend this whole heatedly, is to change to 195/55/16 tyres. These will be around 5% cheaper - but the choice range is way bigger - so you can shop for something a little less expensive if you need to.
Handling is fine with these and if anything the ride is slightly less bumpy. Speedo reading is still OK - I noted that with the Dunlops 3/4 worn I was over reading about 4.5% at 70mph - with brand new 195's that has gone back to about
2% (bearing in mind also the new tread will also have some effect).
I used Black circles which gave me about 30% saving over my local garage
This time I have tried the new Falken ZE914 and can report this is an excellent tyre (once initially worn in for around 100miles) Lots of feedback and great handling wet or dry and even when I seriously pushed it way to fast around a corner - it went round with a very slight feeling of slither - but maintained the line! - warning me not to go much faster - very safe indeed!!
Oh - I will never use those Dunlop 2030's again they had perished before wearing out.
Title: Re: the good and the bad.....
Post by: chrisc on January 07, 2013, 04:41:50 PM
Bridgestone and Michelin are both superior tyres.  In SA, Continental (Germany) tyres are advertised a lot, mainly by dealers who give you a "free" set of drinking glasses or a cool bag.  But, apart from Michelin, Bridgestone and Hankook, plus some obscure Korean and Chinese brands, all tyres are made in South Africa and many at the same factory!  I believe the rubber compound is considered "hard" compared with Europe as it has to contend with high road surface temperatures (often over 60 deg) to make the rubber last longer.
Title: Re: the good and the bad.....
Post by: guest2853 on January 08, 2013, 10:52:20 AM
http://clubjazz.org/forum/index.php?topic=2988.0

even the new paint is beginning to chip....
Title: Re: the good and the bad.....
Post by: guest2074 on January 08, 2013, 08:36:19 PM
Thanks to you all for the advice concerning tyres. I have been on the 'Honest John' site and it seems that I am not the only one having problems with front tyre wear. Still pissed off at having to replace tyres so quickly!

The question is, do I keep the car when it comes to trade in or go back to Toyota ? (wrong thing to ask on a Honda site)!
Title: Re: the good and the bad.....
Post by: guest3250 on January 08, 2013, 09:33:59 PM
I guess we just need to rotate the tyres a bit more than normal - I had the same thing on my old Scenic -
fronts didn't last more than about 13K miles - 14K at a push...
On the subject of tyres  - which I am unhealthily enthusiastic about! - one important German brand - mentioned above has had a recent history of Pinholes in the sidewalls - resulting in slow deflation or more often full on puntures.
we had both fronts on a Smart car - separately go that way and a brand new one on the back of the Jazz.
The Falken I mentioned appears to be pretty close in overall performance at a fraction of the price, but there are plenty of other good alternatives.
As far as wear is concerned - it would upset me if I had spent £130 or £140 which I was quoted for two brands!
But I generally don't rack up a lot of miles and would prefer better grip over long life. £68= for tyres that seem as good as the best alternatives seems great to me!
Title: Re: the good and the bad.....
Post by: chrisc on January 09, 2013, 08:58:27 AM
The CEO of Continental Tyres was interviewed on a TV Consumer show and he attributed the pin-hole story to urban legend or else smearing by his competitors.  Nevertheless, he had no answer for the fact that Michelin and Bridgestone tyres scored better overall than his brand, with road grip both wet and dry, comfort, long life and pothole resilience.

What I don't understand is why some posters manage much higher mileage on their tyres than other people.  We have 3 FWD vans (Ford 1/2 ton) at the business, driven hard in town conditions by guys.  The tyres on these last between 25000 and 35000km unless they drive up a kerb and cut it.
Title: Re: the good and the bad.....
Post by: guest1521 on January 09, 2013, 09:30:50 AM
ChrisC "What I don't understand is why some posters manage much higher mileage on their tyres than other people. "

Presuming same car and tyres... it largely lies in how people habitually drive. Whether fast, slow, smooth or hard. (The rest lies on the types of roads and surfaces they drive on.)

In F1 Alain Prost was thought to be a 'boring' driver. Nigel Mansell was considered 'exciting.' Both were FAST. Both were World Champions, Prost more times than Mansell.  Prost was renowned for smooth driving, so no drama. Safe. Mansell was harder on his car and sometimes you could 'see' the drama in his cornering. A smooth driver can be faster than a hard driver because he can maintain higher levels of grip for longer - and stay on the track, so finish.

Admirable drivers in their time, both.   

Title: Re: the good and the bad.....
Post by: madasafish on January 09, 2013, 09:52:19 AM
What I don't understand is why some posters manage much higher mileage on their tyres than other people.  We have 3 FWD vans (Ford 1/2 ton) at the business, driven hard in town conditions by guys.  The tyres on these last between 25000 and 35000km unless they drive up a kerb and cut it.

Tyre wear can be attributed to:

Tyre pressures
wheel alignment
worn suspension
hard cornering
hard braking
hard acceleration.

If you maintain your tyres at correct pressures and have your car regularly maintained, then the rest if up to driver smoothness.

I see lots of people drive up to road junctions and brake at th last moment. And then start off with a squeal of tyres. Do they get to their destination any faster? Nope.
Do they wear their tyres more? Yes.

And surprise : those who wear tyres faster also tend to use more fuel.

Driving smoothly is an attitude of mind...

My Yaris will see 40k miles + from its Michelins.
Title: Re: the good and the bad.....
Post by: guest1521 on January 09, 2013, 10:57:22 AM
Madasafish: "And surprise: those who wear tyres faster also tend to use more fuel."

Yep. And more brakes... and more mechanical wear altogether.

At almost 30,000 miles now on the original Dunlop SP31's (GE1.2) and brake pads reported as '60% remaining' at last month's Honda service, display shows 'overall' mpg as 51.4 after lots of shortish round town runs (and a learner driver) in recent weeks. Till the learner driver it was showing 54-55mpg. 750 miles motorway and A-road over Christmas, though.

The car is certainly driven to keep up with traffic flow at all times and is used on all sorts of motoring. On motorways, all three lanes get used... depending on traffic conditions. So we don't 'sit about'.

Smooth does not necessarily mean slow.

As madasafish says, it's an attitude of mind. I think it's also a learned habit. It requires unusual levels of concentration and anticipation to begin with and then becomes easy. It pays.
Title: Re: the good and the bad.....
Post by: guest2074 on January 09, 2013, 07:51:07 PM
There are some interesting comments to my original message but I am still adam adament (one for the oldies) that the excessive tyre wear is not down to my driving but is down to poor tyres. (Dunlop's)

You cannot compare the tyre wear on a Yaris to my vehicle etc.... If that was the case I could compare with Saxo, AX, IQ, Smart, Triumph Herald, Mini, BMW Mini, Panda (tyre eater) etc.... all did more miles than my Jazz.

There must be somebody out there having the same problem?

Title: Re: the good and the bad.....
Post by: uovouvou on January 09, 2013, 08:47:35 PM
There are some interesting comments to my original message but I am still adam adament (one for the oldies) that the excessive tyre wear is not down to my driving but is down to poor tyres. (Dunlop's)

You cannot compare the tyre wear on a Yaris to my vehicle etc.... If that was the case I could compare with Saxo, AX, IQ, Smart, Triumph Herald, Mini, BMW Mini, Panda (tyre eater) etc.... all did more miles than my Jazz.

There must be somebody out there having the same problem?

Reading your post jogged my memory.  I checked the service history print out I got with my car (a one owner, ex-lease 2009 EX manual with 50,000 miles on when I bought it) as I remembered that it listed tyre changes and it showed the following:

18k miles - Dunlop tyres put on (original tyres lasted 18k, brand unknown)
28k miles - Bridgestone tyres put on (Dunlop tyres lasted 10k)
44k miles - Bridgestone tyres put on (1st set Bridgestones lasted 16k)
53k miles (now) 2nd set Bridgestones still on the car, still got 5mm tread left.

Going by this data, it does seem that the Dunlops don't last as long as the Bridgestones in the same conditions.
Title: Re: the good and the bad.....
Post by: guest3250 on January 10, 2013, 12:00:17 AM
If the Dunlops (2030's?) don't wear out then they will perish like mine did!

Watch out - some harder wearing tyres are not so good at stopping when it's wet.

I drive sensibly - but find or have found with previous cars) fronts do wear out quickly if you leave the tyres on for life - swapping around will help as backs last ages more
Title: Re: the good and the bad.....
Post by: chrisc on January 10, 2013, 06:09:21 AM
Mr Paxton is the perfect driver, thus his driving style is not to blame....

The fellow who attends to all our vehicles' mechanical needs reckons that wheel alignment is one of the main causes or premature tyre wear, as is underinflation and driving on hot roads.  He said underinflation (caused by lazy owners not checking the tyre pressures) would cause a tyre to last 1/2 as long as it should. 

We inspect all our cars once a week on a Friday afternoon and take the tyre pressure 30 mins after they stop.  Many times I have found nails and screws embedded into the tyre with a resultant slow puncture.  Often, with power steering, you don't notice the extra load when pulling out of a parking space that is caused by a semi-deflated tyre.

Our lady rep drives a Toyota Yaris and after 55000km the tyres look excellent.  She always takes her shoes off when driving as she says she can feel the pedals better that way.  Not having to wear tights 9 months of the year helps too.
Title: Re: the good and the bad.....
Post by: guest2074 on January 12, 2013, 07:45:37 PM
I am not a perfect driver chrisc but have always driven the same with all my cars. I am trying to find out why the new Jazz eats front tyres when my previous cars front tyres would last for many more miles.

How does somebody from South Africa feel he/she can comment on driving conditions/tyre wear in England?

By the way I drive a company van and own a Harley Softail so my driving/riding experience is not just limited to my Honda.
Title: Re: the good and the bad.....
Post by: chrisc on January 13, 2013, 08:46:14 AM
I'll pull your leg a bit harder next time.

It is quite possible that the Dunlop tyres that gave you a poor mileage useage had some sort of soft compound that resulted in their early demise.  The OP offered a comment on the fact that his tyres had lasted for less than he expected, and since none of us know him personally, could only offer generic answers to the post.

My neighbour's son, driving a Subaru Impreza, got through a set of Bridgestones in under 9000 km and tried to blame the poor tyres.  Noticing his propensity for fast take-offs and violent braking, I thought he did quite well getting nearly 9000 km from his tyres, given that his brake pads also only lasted 6 months.  When I suggested that he take it easy driving, he asked me what would be the purpose of buying a performance car and not utilising its full potential!
Title: Re: the good and the bad.....
Post by: guest3250 on January 13, 2013, 09:18:55 AM
How we drive, and therefor how quickly we wear tyres out, will vary a lot from person to person - so we
can only really compare tyre wear on a personal level and get a general idea from others.
Those 2030 Dunlops were not bad as such - but mine had deteriorated (big cracks in the grooves) - I got the car 2 years old and 14,700miles on the clock - yet the tyres had between 3  5mm left on them - I don't know for sure that they were orig tyres so I cannot be sure - there was one odd conti Tyre on the back.
Front tyres on my previous car (Facelift RXE 2.0 Scenic) lasted between 12K & 15K depending - I would say I drove that in a moderately spirited fashion, not as concerned about preserving the tyres as my mileage was not high - so the occasional quicker corner but not really wheelspining or slamming on the brakes intentionally.
Conti PS 2's got to 13K miles with about 3mm left, Khumho Solus 15 about the same - maybe a little less, Pirrelli P6 lasted longest yet still gripped quite well - but had a weird wandering feel on the motorways...unerving. Last tyres were Uniroyal Rain Expert which were very good all round -but never found how long they lasted.
Started out with 3 2030's and a PC2 on this Jazz - so far it has been a nightmare as I bought a 2nd PC2 and it got a pinhole and had to be replaced (with alternative brand!)
2 Falken ZE914 initially on the front are excellent - but will go on the back in order to kick out the odd pair I have on the back transfering those to the front. I won't care about those at all as I hate to have different tyres on one axle - but short of trying to sell them that is my quickest way to having 4 tyres the same, and same size all round.
Current fronts are 195 /55 /16 and this is way nicer to drive than the 185's
Title: Re: the good and the bad.....
Post by: chrisc on January 13, 2013, 03:27:19 PM

How does somebody from South Africa feel he/she can comment on driving conditions/tyre wear in England?

<snip>

I have lived in England (London and Leicester) for a few years at times and have had a Fiat 127, a Golf and a Citroen C3.  There is a lot more traffic on the roads compared with the average here and unless you are on a motorway or a country road, it is stop/start all the time, you barely get out of second gear. 

I think it is much easier to achieve better fuel consumption here since a) there is not so much traffic, b) it is generally much warmer and of course c) the petrol is a bit cheaper (currently = 85p/litre)
Title: Re: the good and the bad.....
Post by: guest3250 on January 16, 2013, 10:40:15 PM
As far as economy and reduced tyre wear is concerned - all it takes is a little extra reading and planning as you drive.
Look ahead as far as you can see and try to predict possible outcomes - if traffic lights have been green a long time - they're going to change! Don't continue to apply the gas when the lights are red - let the car slow naturally  - applying the brakes only to bring you to a stop. Change up - if you don't need to accelerate and are  just tootling along - change up, only change down when you need to.
Ok - so I am teaching my Grandma to suck eggs!
Currently I am just nudging over 40mpg only around town and at around 0°C
(Oh, forgot to mention - check tyre pressures often - make sure they are correct)
Title: Re: the good and the bad.....
Post by: madasafish on January 17, 2013, 06:53:17 AM
The CVT is great for anticipation. I am averaging around 45mpg - mainly around town - but NOT short journeys - by driving a lot of the time with my foot off the accelerator.. the CVT transmission does not slow the car down as much as a normal gearbox so fuel consumption is minimal..(if Honda's fuel system is as others, it basically stops fuel injection on the overrun).

Currently around -3C during daytime.

I woulkd expect in summer and fully run in to average mid 50s.
Title: Re: the good and the bad.....
Post by: russd1978 on January 17, 2013, 10:22:26 AM
The stock Dunlops are rubbish, pretty sure they put them on there to save costs, but Toyota also do it so its not just Honda.
Title: Re: the good and the bad.....
Post by: guest3250 on January 17, 2013, 01:43:58 PM
The Dunlop SP Sport Fast response would be a different matter though.
But at quite a price!
The short list for the 185 /55 / 16 is short! The ride a little bumpy but handling OK
The short list for the 195 / 55 /16 is not short! The ride is a little better and so is the overall handling
plus they are approx 5% cheaper for a given tyre
Given the better choice on top of that I am converted!
Title: Re: the good and the bad.....
Post by: Rory on February 02, 2013, 10:11:09 PM

It is quite possible that the Dunlop tyres that gave you a poor mileage useage had some sort of soft compound that resulted in their early demise.  The OP offered a comment on the fact that his tyres had lasted for less than he expected, and since none of us know him personally, could only offer generic answers to the post.


I think the Dunlop SP2030's used on the 16" wheels on the EX are very soft - I drove ours through the bad winters we had in the UK of 2009/10 and 2010/11 and never had a moment of trouble.

We only use the car around town and semi-rural use - have another car for long trips - and the tyres were pretty shot all round (I had rotated them) at 18K miles.   Those saying they got good life from Michelin tyres aren't using the 16" size - Michelin don't do a 16" tyre in the Jazz size (185/55R16).

In Oct 2011 I got hold of a set of 15" wheels and fitted Michelin Alpin A4 winter tyres and have run those ever since, right through last "summer".   They're wearing well and should very easily outlast the 16" Dunlop - and being 15" they're way cheaper and the ride is a lot better too!
Title: Re: the good and the bad.....
Post by: guest3250 on February 02, 2013, 11:18:28 PM
Exactly as I thought - yes those Dunlops would be ok in winter
But they are not alone
Even my 195's were brilliant in the snow - and they are the all new Falken ZIEX 914
Again - a better ride than the 185's bit most likely not as good as the 15" wheels