My wife and I have had a manual Jazz since 2003 and hve been delighted with it.
We are considering replasing it (not least because she needs seat height adjustment which it does not have) with an automatic Jazz....perhaps new but more likely second hand.
I am under the imoression that some versions of the auto gearbox are (I exaggerate) rubbish whilst others are excellent.
Please can anyone tell us which years model are the ones to avoid bearing in mind that the local dealer in unlikely to have models much older than five years.
My thanks in anticipation of your help.
My wife took delivery of our new Honda Jazz ex auto just over a month ago and, so far, we are very happy with it!. A couple of points worth mentioning, our ex has height adjustment on both front seats if it's of interest. Not sure if that was the previous model. Also, you may be a little wary of the cvt after reading skidpan's comments (who seems to have some real animosity towards them with, as far as I can tell, no real reason why), I can assure you that it is a lovely car to drive. It may need a lot of revs to overtake, but as it is a high revving nat asp petrol engine, that is only to be expected, and not specific to it having a cvt gearbox. I can however, also confirm that if you really put your foot down, it's plenty fast enough!. The gearbox has 7 'steps' and has paddles behind the steering wheel so you can change gear manually if you want. These are extremely responsive, much, much more so than the manual change facility in our previous car, a hyundai i30 turbo diesel with a torque converter auto.
|
|
I have a 21012 CVT Jazz. Owned since October 2012 (S/h).
Great for town driving: smooth changes, optional reversing sensors, great turning circle.
Not so good for long journeys but you adapt your driving system ..
Ideal car for town driving.. takes an awful lot of bulky stuff with magic seats..
100% reliable.
If I was 20 years younger and drove now as I did then, I would hate it. The later model addresses many of the issues mine has.. But I am satisfied as I only do 6k miles a year bening an Odd Antiquated Person
Edited by madf on 16/06/2017 at 22:41
|
Also, you may be a little wary of the cvt after reading skidpan's comments (who seems to have some real animosity towards them with, as far as I can tell, no real reason why),
The problem with auto's in small cars is simple, they totally spoil them. Small cars with small engines don't have a huge amount of performance but if you give them some revs and right pedal most go well enough. But saddle them with a torque converter or a CVT and all you get when you press the right pedal is an instant rise in revs and very little extra perforance. This does not enhance them in any way. I have driven 3 VAG cars fitted with the DSG and in truth its little better despite all the fans it has.
Take dads 80's Honda with the speed speed torque converter auto. It had about 75 bhp, weighed sod all (like all 80's cars) yet the performance was absolutely abysmal. Same car with a manual was very entertaining (if you could cope with the rubbish ride).
The Micras that we and dad had (all manuals) were really good for small cars, in truth way better than they had a right to be. Plenty of performance but when you consider they only had about 78 bhp and weighed far more than an 80's Honda just try and imagine what the performance must have been like when they were saddled with a torque converter auto.
The Honda Jazz dad drove with the CVT was possibly the worst combination of car and gearbox I have experienced. The manual was a decent enough car (ride, noise and seats were poor) but an auto, no thanks.
If for medical reasons you need an auto I suppose there is no option but to drive one but for the rest of us the cheaper, quicker, far more pleasant manual is the only small car to buy.
|
|
What complete t***!
We are onto our third Jazz CVT and have never encountered the situation you describe. Yes when you press the accelerator the revs rise rapidly but then the car starts to accelerate just like any other. Once you are up to speed the revs drop again. I can happily cruise at 70 with the engine doing about 2000 rpm
I suppose they could be classed as marmite cars, you either love them or hate them. But if you hate them there is no reason to pour scorn upon them or suggest that the only reason to buy one is because you are medically incapable of driving anything else.
|
What complete t***!
We are onto our third Jazz CVT and have never encountered the situation you describe. Yes when you press the accelerator the revs rise rapidly but then the car starts to accelerate just like any other. Once you are up to speed the revs drop again. I can happily cruise at 70 with the engine doing about 2000 rpm
I suppose they could be classed as marmite cars, you either love them or hate them. But if you hate them there is no reason to pour scorn upon them or suggest that the only reason to buy one is because you are medically incapable of driving anything else.
I couldn't agree more Vitesse!. We have not had our jazz for very long, but so far, I haven't found anything I don't like about it. And to be honest, I'm a bit baffled of this notion that the cvt jazz is sluggish. Where I live in Aberdeenshire, there are no motorways and few dual carriageways, so overtaking ability is important if you want to get on. Given what I had read about cars with cvt gearboxes, I was a little nervous when I pulled out to overtake a logging truck pulling a trailer the other night on a relatively short straight. But i was most impressed, OK I had to put my foot right down, but I passed the truck easily and quickly.
Everyone is entitled to their own opinion, and I respect that. But skidpan seems to think his opinion and fact are one and the same thing, when in this case, they are poles apart. But even if what he said was fact, putting down or belittling others who have a different opinion is nothing short of ignorance.
|
|
|
|
|
I have certainly driven small automatics that were very dreary indeed but the DSG can't be compared with a TC or CVT in this respect.
Our Popemobile (Roomster) 1.2TSI 105 with 7 speed DSG is a very nice car to drive, and lively too. Longevity of the engine and gearbox of course is another question.
|
|
My only experience of small autos is a Corsa Easytronic, which was actually OK but possibly the slowest car I've ever driven. In manual mode, it was a bit quicker but nowhere near as responsive as a manual. The lag time from pressing the accelerator to forward motion was several seconds. A Mini CVT I drove was hopeless. However, the larger cars with autos have all been smooth and relaxing, including a Prius, which was excellent and various big SUVs etc, where an auto box seems to suit the character of the car. DSGs I've been in all seem quick and smooth. I prefer a manual myself but could be tempted by a decent hybrid auto. I tend to agree with SP that small cars with small engines are generally more fun to drive with a manual box, but if one is not in a hurry and drives a lot in town, I can see the attraction.
|
All,
Please take skidpans opinion with a pinch of salt.
It's widely recognised the current (no longer produced) Nissan Note is an awful beast , especially when compared to the old Note.
This is not only my opinion, honest johns opinion and my good friend a Nissan technicians opinion but also the opinion of 99% of the Nissan Note owners forum (check it out for yourself).
But because skidpan was daft enough to buy one brand new it's a 'brilliant car'.
It's a real shame the residual values don't agree with skidpan either.
As for the Jazz , it's the best small MPV on the market.
Ultra reliable, more space than anything else in its class, economical, etc
The only downside to a Jazz IMO is on a motorway, the steering is too sensitive.
It's worth adding the old shape Nissan Note was a good competitor and if you can find one of the last 1.6 petrol automatics on a 62/13 plate they are well worth considering
|
All, Please take skidpans opinion with a pinch of salt. It's widely recognised the current (no longer produced) Nissan Note is an awful beast , especially when compared to the old Note.This is not only my opinion, honest johns opinion and my good friend a Nissan technicians opinion but also the opinion of 99% of the Nissan Note owners forum (check it out for yourself).
OK, lets look at the facts
1) We actually own a Note and know how good it is. Has daveyK_UK actually ever driven one?
2) So Honest John says its auful does he. Here is the summing up at the end of the Road Test of the 1.2 DiG-S Acenta Premium, the exact model we have "The 1.2DIG-S is certainly more fun to drive than the old 1.4 and 1.6 petrol engines in the Note, more relaxing and a lot more fuel-efficient" Does that read liks its a dog. Here is a link to the full report, read it please.www.honestjohn.co.uk/road-tests/nissan/nissan-note.../
3) 99% of the posters on the Nissan Note Forum are idiots including the moderators. When we bought the Note I joined a couple of weeks later and posted that we really liked the car so far and I was banned for flame baiting. My post was adjudged to be annoying to unhappy owners. One other poster came to my defense and he was also banned. My best guess is all happy owners have their posts removed which makes the Note look bad.
But because skidpan was daft enough to buy one brand new it's a 'brilliant car'. It's a real shame the residual values don't agree with skidpan either.
We paid just over £11000 for our car brand new and not the stupid £16000 retail We lost more than £11000 in depreciation on the wifes last car (Kia Ceed) so are bothered, not one bit.
As for the Jazz , it's the best small MPV on the market. Ultra reliable, more space than anything else in its class, economical, etc
My dad had a Jazz for 5 years. It never went wrong, it was spacious and economical. But it was noisy, hard riding and the front seats left a lot to be desired. He replaced it with a Micra, not as spacious but just as economical and far more comfortable and refined. Together we kept it almost 8 years and in that time the only part replaced (other than service items) was a front spring. The Note is more spacious than the Jazz and its ride and refinement are much better. Economy is about the same. We have only had it 2 years but no issues so far.
Wold we buy a Jazz now since the Note is no longer made, no way.
|
Here we go again
Yes, we had the previous shape Note 1.4 as a staff pool car that was excellent
My partner had the new Note 1.2 accenta premium with the dreadful 3 cylinder engine that was completely gutless and horrible to drive.
The current Note suffers from common problems and failures.
Again, you paint a very different picture to what happened on the Nissan owners forum to what I witnessed with your posts that were taken as aggressive.
As someone who has driven both the current Note and the mark 2 Jazz, the mark 2 Jazz had considerably more space in it than a Note - this fact once again is confirmed by the motoring press but of course skidpan must be right
As for honest johns opinion, you have chosen to take his road test of the super charged engine, an engine that picked up 12% of all sales (check the data for yourself) in the Note.
The current Note was a pig, and thankfully the buying public soon caught on and Nissan were forced to heavily discount them , send lots of them out to the hire car industry and eventually pull the product as it had few redeeming features
I would buy the original shape Note, not the current piece of Renault parts bin junk designed to make the manufacturing process as easy as possible.
Edited by daveyK_UK on 18/06/2017 at 09:22
|
My partner had the new Note 1.2 accenta premium with the dreadful 3 cylinder engine that was completely gutless and horrible to drive.
Ours is the DiG-S which is not gutless. We did not consider the non-supercharged version because we did not want slug. We have brains and know which may be OK in town but useless once out of town.
Again, you paint a very different picture to what happened on the Nissan owners forum to what I witnessed with your posts that were taken as aggressive.
Just been on the Note forum to copy the content of my posts but whilst the thread I started is still there all the posts I made have been deleted. I was not aggressive, I simply refused to be called an idiot for buying one by the owner of a Mk1 Note, nothing wrong with that but the mods are also idiots so the allowed the chap who made the original insult to stay on. Silverhairs was his name.
As someone who has driven both the current Note and the mark 2 Jazz, the mark 2 Jazz had considerably more space in it than a Note - this fact once again is confirmed by the motoring press but of course skidpan must be right
Interior space in the Mk2 Note is excellent and at 411 litres the boot is bigger than the 2016 Jazz which has 354 litres. That space is with the Notes sliding back seat all the way forward but even with it back to provide sensible legroom it will still beat the Jazz's boot. Add to that the simple fact that the Note will accept a full size spare with no los of boot space simply by removing the underfloor plastic bin that holds the glue kit etc. Don't think the Jazz will accept a full size spare without affecting boot space, that was certainly the case with dad's Jazz.
As for honest johns opinion, you have chosen to take his road test of the super charged engine,
Of couse I linked to that test, its exactly the car we bought.
The current Note was a pig, and thankfully the buying public soon caught on and Nissan were forced to heavily discount them
Certainly not a pig but way to expensive without a doubt (which is a fact not restricted to the Note), many cars are heavilly discounted.
|
Interior space in the Mk2 Note is excellent and at 411 litres the boot is bigger than the 2016 Jazz which has 354 litres. That space is with the Notes sliding back seat all the way forward but even with it back to provide sensible legroom it will still beat the Jazz's boot. Add to that the simple fact that the Note will accept a full size spare with no los of boot space simply by removing the underfloor plastic bin that holds the glue kit etc. Don't think the Jazz will accept a full size spare without affecting boot space, that was certainly the case with dad's Jazz.
The MK2 Jazz will take a full size spare, no loss of boot space. Oh and the Mk 1 does as well.
|
Oh and the Mk 1 does as well.
Dads Mk 1 had a space saver and it filled the wheel wellto the carpet. Considering it only had 14" wheels will narrow tyres you do wonder why they bothered with a space saver.
|
|
|
My dad had a Jazz for 5 years
Ah the joys of comparing a car since replaced many years ago by a later model with a 2014 Note.
Pigs and Apples.
Same logic as:
I would not buy a Ford as the Mark1 Fiesta was pants compared to a Kia Ceed..
|
|
No logic at all in comparing a mk1 fiesta to a Kia cee'd, as they are in different categories. Mk1 fiesta was a supermini so the equivalent Kia would be the rio. Though given how much supermini's have grown over the years (like every other class of car), a closer match would be the Kia picanto, which occupies the city car class, invented to fill the need for a properly small car since supermini's got so big!.
|
My dad had a Jazz for 5 years
Ah the joys of comparing a car since replaced many years ago by a later model with a 2014 Note.
Pigs and Apples
I am not directly comparing the 2 cars, I am simply stating what we likes and disliked about them. Fact is the Note is a far better car than the Jazz ever was. In truth the Micra that repleced the Jazz was better that the Jazz in many ways.
And for the record its a 2015 Note.
|
|
Despite it being a fact (well it must be, 'cos skidpan says so) that the note is a much better car, the note is no longer on sale whilst the jazz continues to thrive?
Hmm..........?
But of course you are right and everyone else are idiots!.
|
|
To paraphrase St Augustine , "Skidpan has spoken, the case is ended." Not!
|
|
OK - I did a bake off between the Jazz and the Note
A while ago I posted on HJ asking advice on a small car for my sister capable of carrying a double bass :- www.honestjohn.co.uk/user-article/115193/small-car...o
On cars circa 2011:-
Honda Jazz:-
The Honda Jazz "magic seats" were amazing allowing allsorts of combinations
The boot was bigger than the Note (withe Note seat fully back)
1.4 engine was a bit of a screamer on a motorway
Seats were comfortable
Nissan Note:-
Honda Jazz has reasonable passenger space but Note had more with rear seats fully back
Very refined on a motorway
Seat bases lifted up for additional storage but were not that comfortable to sit on
!.6 auto was very good - very refined (overdrive helped) and lockup worked well (although to be honest she wanted a manual anway)
Overall - not much in it but my sister went for the Hoda Jazz which has done the job required and has been faultless thus far
Edited by Big John on 19/06/2017 at 00:55
|
|
|
|
|
|
