Oh! for a 1.6 engine.

[guest1010]

After a weeks holiday with three adults and luggage I really felt the lack of power of the 1.4 . I know I could buy a different car but I like my Jazz (most of the time).

[chrisc]

Everything to do with cars is a compromise.  If you had a 1.6 engine, you probably would not get such good gas mileage.

Amazingly, neighbour's BMW 318i has a 1.9 litre engine and he gets 7.5 litres per 100km around town, but I suspect he seldom drives over 60km/hr

[culzean]

Depends what you mainly use the car for,  If you do a lot of long runs you can get good MPG and a more relaxed drive with a larger engine and pretty good local MPG too, but the temptation is to use the extra power - and bang goes your fuel economy. 

I think the Jazz is a good compromise between good everyday MPG and being a reasonable car for longer journeys. I have had five adults in the GD and it copes pretty well if you keep it between 2000 and 3,500 rpm.  (peak torque is around 2,700). and lets face it, the gearbox is a joy to use,  but surprisingly you don't really have to change gear that much to make pretty good progress.  I almost bought another Civic to replace my 1.5 VTEC Civic,  but having driven my wifes Jazz and seeing how good it was to drive and the fuel economy (with one eye on rising fuel prices) I bought a Jazz and have never regretted it.

[guest3340]

I bought my jazz after trading it with a corolla t sport 190 bhp the corolla was good fun but at 25mpg not so good on the pocket.

I have to agree at a drop of just over 100 bhp do find it lacks power on hills but on the flat not a bad car and as stated if you want more power you pay the price.

I do not regret the change as the saving just on fuel since owning this car is about £50.00 a fortnight and the Tax is about £150.00 a year cheaper don't forget bigger engine more Tax aswell.

[guest3250]

I was going to start a thread on this too.
The problem is more within the engine's Power and torque curve -
in simple terms - all the oomph is high up the rev band!
Mine (which is slowly improving so I assume there is a degree of running in still going on)
is dead in the water on the open road at 2000rpm - there is a slight improvement at 2500rpm
then it is almost OK at 3000rpm
I wish there was a mod, or tweak, to either boost the torque at lower revs or to shift the torque band
down lower - on mine (1.4) it peaks at 4800 - but is dropping off a lot at lower revs. Ie not much use
below 3000rpm - despite the smoothness of the Variable balve timing.
Don't missunderstand though - it is reasonable if you use the revs - but if you did this all the time
you would loose out on all that wonderfull economy.
My previous vehicle was a totally different beast and generally there is no point in comparing
but - it also had a reletively high Torque rpm peak (3750), but the torque was good right down to 1600rpm
below which is was not good.
On a recent break I managed to change my driving habits to change down a lot more - also on motorways
if using the A/C I would turn it off for a while on steep hills, as well as change down.
I nearly got stuck on some country roads when I had to stop on a very steep hill - it took me 3 attempts
at starting - and I am not an inexperienced driver - even after starting it was barely able to pull away as
the revs were too low even in first and it would otherwise mean terrible amounts of clutch slip.
So - we either try to adapt and put up with it - or find a way to increase that lower down pull.
I reckon a 1600 - or even a 1500 cc engine option wouldn't go amis, so long as it didn't also have all the torque high up in the rev band.

[Downsizer]

The torque curve published in the Autocar review of the 1.4ES Jazz GE (29.10.08) suggests torque of c. 80 lb ft @ 2000 rpm, rising to c. 87 @3000 rpm, a further slight increase to 4000 rpm, and then a sharper rise to the peak of 94 lb ft @ 4800 rpm.  I certainly find it flexible from 2000, but clearly you need to change down a gear or two for maximum acceleration.

[chrisc]

Friend runs a performance garage and he reckons any engine management computer can be tweaked to do what you want.

He runs a standard Honda Civic 2000, a 2004 model and he increased the kW output of the engine from 128 to 158 at 4200 rpm with mods to the valve timing.  Of course the fuel consumption went for a Burton.  He says the torque curve for the Honda 1400cc engine is too high at 4800 rpm and says he could get it down to about 4000 rpm.  In 5th this is still 130km/hr which is above the national speed limit of 120km/hr but is the speed most people travel at

[bucksfizz]

How about the installation of a Honda 1.6 engine in the Jazz with the following specification.
!!8 BHP. 221 lb/ft of Torque at 2000RPM. 75 MPG(as installed in the Civic) and a 95g/Km CO2 figure giving  a free access to the London Congestion Area.Reputed to be the lightest !.6 engine of its type(Diesel) in production world wide at 170 Kgs.Now that would give an excellent take -off rate with a future Jazz. And it will be manufactured in Swindon.

[Kenneve]

This will probably put the cat amongst the pigeons, but it seem to me that all the owners who are complaining about the performance of the 1.4 engine, have manual gearboxes.
There is no problem with this engine when coupled to an auto CVT gearbox.
When max power is required, simply put your foot down and the box changes down to a ratio, which puts the engine into the 4000+rpm power band and it just stays there until the desired speed is reached.
We are probably all, me included, used to being light footed on the pedal and perhaps don't realise that there is a lot more 'umph'  available, than we normally use.

[chrisc]

This would definitely work, and would also increase the fuel consumption substantially.  The iTec engine opens all the valves at higher revs to increase power, which means that more fuel is burnt.

I don't know about you, but 90% of my drivng is in traffic.  Now and then there is a place where you can get up to the maximum speed allowed on an inner city freeway (100km/hr) for a few mins but most of the time it is short bursts between traffic lights.  Cape Town is built around some high mountains and going up hill you feel the lack of power, but it does not last long, maybe 3-4 mins and you are on the level again

[bucksfizz]

Sorry folks for the digit problem in my previous message.The BHP figure should be 118BHP.

[guest3250]

well mine seems to be getting a little better as the weeks go by, longer journeys seem to help
but I read you have to drive it a little differently to what I have previously been used to doing.
It would seem we are better off NOT going super light all the time on the throttle!
The advise I have had is to quickly squeeze the throttle and take it up to just under 3000rpm
then change - whearas I am used to tickling the throttle and coxing it up less high
The economy has not suffered doing this - still getting nearly 40mpg around town

[jamesdean]

My Jazz has an I-shift. This has 6 gears and a sharp kick-down changes down two gears.
according to Honda's own figures this model gives better milage than the manual or the
other belt-driven auto's. If you keep the tyres at the best pressure it drives very smartly
and has never given any trouble in the city or on very long, fully loaded, motorway journeys.

[monkeydave]

How about the installation of a Honda 1.6 engine in the Jazz with the following specification.
!!8 BHP. 221 lb/ft of Torque at 2000RPM. 75 MPG(as installed in the Civic) and a 95g/Km CO2 figure giving  a free access to the London Congestion Area.Reputed to be the lightest !.6 engine of its type(Diesel) in production world wide at 170 Kgs.Now that would give an excellent take -off rate with a future Jazz. And it will be manufactured in Swindon.

i prefer a cam chain to a cam belt, a lot less hassle when the car gets older and the 2004 1.6 se civic was my last car

[guest3250]

A deisel would be good - but the additional service costs should be weighed in the balance.
Also Deisel is not so good if you do a lot of short journeys