|
We had an Ecosport for a couple of years, the 125bhp engine. For all the criticisms you’ll read about it, it was a great car, comfortable ride, economical (mid 40’s with mixed use) and we never had any problems with it. It replaced a B-MAX which was also faultless whilst we had it. Driving position was good, visibility not too bad, although we did have one with a rear view camera and rear parking se sensors. We were a bit unsure about the practicality of the side hinged tailgate when we first got it, but that was never a problem.
would we have another? Well, we swapped it for a Fiesta, and I think the new Ford Puma is a far better car, but yes, we’d have another. I will add we are a house that like our Ford cars, we’ve had other brands, but they weren’t as good to drive and we benefit from having a very trustworthy garage who look after them.
Edited by tim10597 on 16/01/2021 at 20:05
|
|
Many thanks for the very interesting and varied responses.
I'd love to swap from one Honda to another and go for an HRV, though without checking I reckon it would be beyond my budget. Some excellent feedback to consider, although I can confirm without further reflection that having had experience of the Powershift gearbox, I'd no more go near another one than jump into an active volcano.
The search probably goes on, but I'd certainly like to drive an Ecosport and have a look at the interior space just to see how it feels before dismissing it entirely.
Edit: just had a look at HRVs on an auction site and yes, low mileage examples are definitely beyond my budget, which at best would be on the meaner side of £8500.
Edited by argybargy on 16/01/2021 at 20:19
|
Well, I've also heard, or at least read, about the downsides of Ecosports. But, whether they are valid or not, I can only report a friend's experience.
He, like me, is a bit of a mountain biking fanatic. He wanted something that could cope with unmade roads, steep off-road climbs etc. He's had an Ecosport for about 2 years now and really rates it.
Wouldn't like to say if he's right or not.
|
|
|
|
Keep your reliable Jazz and save until a good low mileage HRV comes into view. It’s a far superior car than the fragile and flawed Ecosport. The Jazz will also still be on the road long after the Ford is gone despite its added years.
|
|
I agree...I'd stay with the marque that's given you so much reliability...or at least stay Japanese.
As ever, my choices would always be Toyota/Honda....after about 6 or 7 consecutive Toyotas' ...all with utter reliability, I almost daren't move from the marque...lol
Maybe my age is showing...reliability is now my top priority.
|
|
|
|
|
As it seems to be the extra oomph of a turbo you fancy, I'd suggest the Vauxhall Mokka X. Not a particularly brilliant car either*, but I'd have one ahead of an Ecoboost any day. Your budget would get you into a circa 2018 1.4 turbo (140bhp) petrol.
The original Mokka (no X) apparently had a very poor ride and was, in general, considered a similarly poor compact SUV to the Ecoboost. But the facelift (2016) which gave us the Mokka X addressed many of the criticisms of the Mokka (not sure to what extent though). I would certainly have more confidence in the Vauxhall's 1.4 turbo than the Ford's 1.0 Ecoboost. Also, if you wished to go auto again, the Vauxhall uses a nice reliable torque converter auto. The Ecoboost auto started life with the Powershift DCT (like your B-Max), though I think it did switch to a T/C auto later in its life.
Sticking with a turbo option, the 1.0 Boosterjet version of the Suzuki SX4 S-Cross is available for around £8k for a 2017 car, it would be a fairly low spec though.
A non turbo option, often overlooked, which I'd throw in too is the Kia Soul. If you like its oddball looks, it is a very reliable and straightforward car mechanically. You'd be getting a 132bhp 1.6 petrol, so not too bad, and a 2017 car would be available in budget. This could potentially have a couple of years warranty left if main dealer history.
|
|
I'm not particularly wedded to the attractions of a turbo, but only mentioned the Ecoboost because I was under the impression that its initial frailties had been addressed. Perhaps not.
The other options you mention, BBD, certainly interest me, particularly that of the facelift Mokka, which if I'm not mistaken is a bigger car than either the Jazz or the Ecosport. My wife has some mobility problems, and she particularly likes the idea of having to step up into a car rather than step down, as she does with the Jazz. So something that rides a little higher is another requirement.
As for spec, bells and whistles don't interest me so I'll certainly have a look at the Suzuki. Both my brother and my son have Kias, and I'm very much aware of that long warranty and the general reliability of the brand. I really like the look of the Sportage but again, the pocket simply won't stretch to a later, low mileage example.
Once more, cheers.
Edited by argybargy on 17/01/2021 at 10:11
|
I'm not particularly wedded to the attractions of a turbo, but only mentioned the Ecoboost because I was under the impression that its initial frailties had been addressed. Perhaps not.
The other options you mention, BBD, certainly interest me, particularly that of the facelift Mokka, which if I'm not mistaken is a bigger car than either the Jazz or the Ecosport. My wife has some mobility problems, and she particularly likes the idea of having to step up into a car rather than step down, as she does with the Jazz. So something that rides a little higher is another requirement.
As for spec, bells and whistles don't interest me so I'll certainly have a look at the Suzuki. Both my brother and my son have Kias, and I'm very much aware of that long warranty and the general reliability of the brand. I really like the look of the Sportage but again, the pocket simply won't stretch to a later, low mileage example.
Once more, cheers.
The Mokka X is very slightly bigger than the Ecosport but barely enough to make a meaningful difference. And I'd still say neither are likely to have noticeably more (if indeed any) interior space over the jazz. Take the boot for example, the figures I have for your Jazz is 337litres, whereas the Ecosport and Mokka X give 333 and 356 litres respectively (BTW, the boot in the Suzuki SX4 S-Cross is 430 litres). The key pointer to interior space, assuming the car does not have an especially long bonnet (like a sporty coupe) is wheelbase (the distance from the centre of the front wheel to the centre of the rear wheel). Your Jazz has a 2500mm wheelbase, the Ecosport is barely any longer at 2519mm and the Mokka X is 2555mm (so actually should, in theory, have a bit more rear legroom than the Jazz).
My comment about the turbo was based on your comments on the Jazz's performance both in this thread and previous ones, specifically that it is slow. But as I have mentioned before, it isn't so much that the Jazz is slow, more that you need to ring its neck to access it!. The peak torque of 127nm on your Jazz happens at a lofty 4800rpm, whereas on a Mokka X 1.4t you have 200nm available from 1850-4900rpm. The little 1.0 turbo in the Suzuki SX4 S-Cross makes 170nm from 2000-3500 rpm. So in a turbo car you don't have to thrash it to get the oomph.
|
|
Once again, very interesting and useful advice, particularly about the relative interior space and torque figures of the cars in question. Much obliged.
I've had a look on a certain auction site at all three models that you suggested above, and there are a number of affordable Mokkas of good spec and low mileage; though not so many of the Suzukis or Kias that fall into my price bracket.
Unlike in 2017 when I rushed out and bought a B Max with that infernal gearbox (and had to get shut of it just over six months later before it landed me with bankruptcy and madness) I'm going to take my time with this next purchase, not least because as SLO suggests I have a perfectly good car outside my house in the meantime.
I'd like better performance, although having owned it for 3 years I do understand the point that the Jazz can deliver to some extent if worked hard. However, the bottom line is that I'd like to upgrade to something bigger which has upwards of 120 bhp, and whilst it doesn't have to be a turbo, I'd prefer to confine my search to petrol cars.
|
Re sticking with Honda I wouldn't recommend the HRV. When changing my 2012 Civic 18 months back I test drove an HRV (2017 I think). It fell well short in performance, comfort, noise and seat quality when compared back to back with the Civic.
I terminated the test after about 5 minutes and the salesman said it wasn't unusual for Civic owners to find the HRV a step back. He said later ones were better but I didn't want to stretch my budget.
How about considering a Civic?
|
I’ve been looking at the Suzuki Vitara . A 2015 on with the 1.6 petrol engine with more than enough gizmos can be had for £10k or less . Drove one this week and was pretty impressed. Only negative I found was no spare wheel , but looked like there was enough space to accommodate a space saver.
|
I’ve been looking at the Suzuki Vitara . A 2015 on with the 1.6 petrol engine with more than enough gizmos can be had for £10k or less . Drove one this week and was pretty impressed. Only negative I found was no spare wheel , but looked like there was enough space to accommodate a space saver.
Good cars, forgot about the Vitara.
|
|
|
|
|
I did briefly consider the option of a Civic just before buying the Jazz, but at the time prices were just out of my reach. I'd certainly look at that option again, so thanks for reminding me, catsdad.
I've been mighty impressed with the reliability and generally solid feel of this Honda. It may not have the "driving experience" of a Ford, but it gets you there every time. Hopefully that reliability is shared by other models in the range.
As for the Vitara, something tells me "Hairdresser's Car", but maybe that was in a previous manifestation (not that there's anything wrong with the noble profession of hairdressing, of course) Anyhow, I'll study that option as well.
Edited by argybargy on 19/01/2021 at 10:29
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
