I'm disappointed to learn about the new automatic gearbox. I had a 2006 Jazz and the gearbox was a typical CVT change, i.e. no jerk at all -- quite the reverse. Good review. I'm carless at the moment and am considering both the Jazz and Note. I must say my original Jazz never once gave a murmur. It was 100% reliable.
I own a 1.3 EX MT since late 2008. My previous car was a first gen Jazz. The old one was a great car considering its purpose, but the new Jazz is a quantum leap in every aspect. And the with the MT, 100 bhp feels like much more. It's a fast car. Faster than most of the competition.
I went on a test drive with the new Jazz ES and was very impressed with the ride, so I bought one last week. Maybe I did not listen carefully enough to the salesman's chat, but when I collected the car I was astonished to find that there was NO spare wheel, not even the pathetic "space-saving thing I had with my old Jazz. When I questioned the use of the "puncture repair kit" which goes with the car, the salesman said it would be better to get in touch with the AA in the event of a puncture!! I also bought the package, which is supposed to provide protection... side strips, carpets etc. What a con!! Pathetic little side strips and NOTHING for bumper protection.
I have read the previous comments and HOW I agree with the auto, which I bought, having had an auto Honda for years. Maybe it is the way I was driving, but the auto gear change is jerky and very disconcerting. I like the appearance and the quality of the car, but after having had a Honda car for many years, I do wonder whether I will buy another.
It is a shame the AUTO is jerky - it was the auto I wanted. Having liked the old JAZZ, although it was a fab car, it was well documented for bad ride quality.
Totally LOVE the new shape, looks great.
But what happened to the AUTO VERSION, which was going to be under 120 co/2 - therefore £35 road fund?? Honda had apparently dropped a Bo Bo with the emissions.
I purchased a new Honda Jazz EX i Shift just over two months ago and am completely satisfied with it, especially the transmission. Having driven vehicles fitted with the classic auto-box/fluid-flywheel combination for years, I realised that Honda's new 'automated' six speed manual box would probably need small adjustments in driving technique.
A couple of hours driving around the local hilly terrain soon allowed me to to become accustomed to how this transmission performs/operates, ensuring jerk free operation and fast engagement on move off from roundabouts etc. I find that being able to shift down the box by simple lever or paddle movements, rather than the usual boot-full of throttle down shifts, gives far less frenzied overtaking maneuvers.
Do not expect the i Shift box to perform in exactly the same manner as the old Borg Warner, adjust your driving technique accordingly and you will be rewarded with smooth gear changes.
I certainly have no complaints with this system, and am very happy with the vehicle.
I also test drove the Jazz ES iShift today and noted the jerky acceleration up through the gears as compared to the CVT I am used to. It's reassuring to hear that one can learn to adjust driving technique to smooth things. Another concern I had was excessive road noise on the motorway, but was unable to test this. Has anyone had any experience with the 2009 model?
Original reviewer back.
Surely the point of an auto box is that you don't NEED to learn it?
I'm not particularly keen on driving and want the work done for me - that's why I buy an automatic!
I have no experience of CVT's (except the DAF), but it seems most people think the old Jazz auto was much better than the i-Shift...
It seems that I am the only person here satisfied with the I Shift box fitted to the new Jazz. This does not surprise me; I still maintain that if you consider this transmission system as functioning like the traditional fluid flywheel/autobox combination, you will be disappointed unless you make due allowances.
The I Shift system now being used by the likes of Honda and Fiat is not an automatic gearbox; it is basically a bog standard manual box fitted with a computer controlled servo to change ratios that is connected via a fully automated clutch to the engine flywheel. The computer completely replaces the left foot and 'reads' the input of the right foot/hands (brakes, accelerator, gear stick/paddles), allowing a smooth take off - stopping action.
By getting rid of the energy sapping fluid flywheel system and using the I Shift, manufactures produce very fuel efficient small engined cars with good performance - something that the traditional autobox would be hard pressed to replicate in the same package.
As to a learning/relearning period or need to acclimatise one's self to this system, perhaps the following will illustrate what I mean. One route I regularly take requires a slow right hand turn into a narrow lane that then climbs with increasing steepness for approximately 200 yards until a T junction. Without having due regard to speed/revs, it is very easy to get the box to change up into 2nd before the steepest part - continuing on the same throttle will invariably lead to a snatch/jerky drop into 1st well before the T junction as speed drops off and the engine labours. If I accelerate sensibly immediately on entering the lane, the box will change up into 2nd and then drop into 1st as I brake at the T junction - all changes being smooth and snatch free.
Of course with the I Shift I have another option for solving the above. A quick flick to the left on the gear stick and I have manual control of the gear ratios via the paddles until engine revs are in keeping with the terrain, then another flick on the stick gives me 'auto' back.
I have driven all types of vehicle fitted with 'automatic' transmissions over the years, from pre-selector via the early offerings to the modern multi range/mode boxes controlled by computers. I like the I Shift system; finding it involving to drive if I am in the mood, otherwise it is a relaxing drive comparable with the best and capable for producing phenomenal fuel economy. However a CVT or classical autobox it ain't, treat it as if it were and I think you will be disappointed. Understand its foibles and even those that hate driving will find it more than acceptable.
Original reviewer back!
Having a motor engineering background, I have always completely understood the mechanics of the i-Shift. It's just an automated manual. Not a new idea at all.
Yes, I know that the salesmen warn you re i-Shift, but the bottom line is that Honda are trying to sell the car as an auto (like the CVT was), which leads one to think it'll drive like a torque-converter (or perhaps CVT) box. And it just doesn't...!!!
If you can get on with it, great, but my review was just pointing out the necessity of giving it a good testdrive before buying!
Cheers - Peter.
Next page of comments >
Copyright 1997 - 2013 CSDO Media Limited Advertise on this site