I have owned a Mk1 CVT Jazz since 2004. I am about to request a test drive of the Mk3 CVT Jazz and I have some queries specifically about the Mk3 CVT compared to the Mk1 CVT.
On the 22 July 2015, Honda published the following news item on the Web:
http://hondanews.eu/gb/en/cars/media/pressreleases/58326/2015-jazzIn Section “4. New highly efficient engine and new transmissions”, subsection “Choice of manual or CVT transmissions”, there is a lot of what I consider to be gobbledegook about the newly developed CVT. And it begs questions like:
1. Why did the CVT need redeveloping?. As far as I am concerned, the Mk1 CVT is brilliant.
2. What is a “natural ‘multi-gear’ feel … which simulates seven speeds”? I hope this doesn’t mean that there is a perceptible, simulated gear change. That, in my opinion, would be a terrible retrograde step. Why would I want a multi-gear feel which simulates seven speeds? And what is natural about it?
3. What is so different about the European market? Why has the CVT been redeveloped exclusively for Europe?
Can anyone make any sense of this subsection?
I am also a little concerned about the press critics’ reaction to the Mk3 CVT Jazz. I read statements suggesting that, if you put your foot down on the accelerator pedal, the revs/min increase but nothing else happens! This is certainly not true of my Mk1 CVT Jazz. If I am behind a slow moving car, travelling at say 40 mph, on a single carriageway, I have plenty of power to overtake it. Moreover, comparing published specifications, my Mk1 CVT Jazz does 0-62mph in 12.3 seconds, and so does the Mk3 CVT Jazz.
I suppose my basic question is, am I going to be disappointed with the Mk3 CVT? Or am I going to be pleasantly surprised? Or am I going to notice no difference?