Unidentical Twins: City vs Jazz
Honda built the City and Jazz from exactly the same moving bits, but priced the two a staggering RM20k apart. KON pits the two against each other to see if this is justified
—
Just not too long ago, I had graduated from uni with a degree in mechanical engineering. Although I have since moved on to work as a writer here in Autoworld, I still retain the viewing perspective of an engineer, and because of that I happen to know a little bit on how engineers think.
I can tell you that products like the Honda City and Honda Jazz could only have been thought of by one type of people, and they are none other than engineers. Using one platform, and one set of mechanical bits, Honda has managed to engineer two cars of totally different character.
In Honda’s model line-up, these two cars complement each other beautifully. Both serve as entry-level models into the range, but aimed at different audiences. The Jazz, with its chic looks, is targeted at single urbanites living active and trendy lifestyles. On the other hand, the City, despite actually having the bolder styling cues, is a conventional three-box sedan aimed at growing young families.
Recently, a friend of mine, a young female fresh grad, got herself a Jazz as her first car. I had no hesitation in endorsing her decision. Quite simply, the Jazz is the perfect solution for one’s urban transportation needs. It is cheap to run, easy to drive, and the sheer brilliance of its interior is second to none. For her, the Jazz was a wise and sensible choice.
However, that said friend of mine happens to reside in Australia. In Australia, the Jazz is an entry level car and made perfect sense. Things are slightly different here in Malaysia, where the peculiar nature of our automotive taxes has sent prices of the Jazz into the six-figure zone. Not so wise and sensible any more, that’s for sure.
In my engineer’s mind, AU$25k for a Jazz makes sense, RM110k for the same does not. Especially not when the mechanically identical City can be yours for a good RM20k less. Still, Honda has managed to find a steady stream of buyers who are actually willing to fork out the premium for the baby in their range.
Considering its less than sensible price tag, the Jazz’s appeal has long since baffled me. So, when Honda recently sponsored five of their cars for the Autoworld Safety & Defensive Driving Course, I decided it was time to answer this question by pitting the two against each other.
Now, I must admit that I went into this test favouring the City. However you look at it, an RM20k gap between two mechanically identical products simply cannot be justified with a sane (engineering) mind. Therefore, in the interest of fair play, a couple of measures were taken to ensure that the Jazz competes on even odds.
For a start, Honda provided us the lower-spec Grade S City, and the highest-spec Grade V Jazz complete with a set of Modulo bodykit, helping to widen the gap between the two. Next, and this is a trick usually used by salespeople too, I also purposely arranged to first test drive the Jazz before ‘downgrading’ to the City.
This may only be a psychological trick, but the fact is that after testing a more expensive model, the first things you will notice when going to a lower version are the things ‘missing’ from the former. In the case of our test cars, this turned out to be a substantial number of omissions – Ultra Seats, paddle shifts, cruise control, cloth inserts in door panels, variable speed intermittent wipers, and steering wheel mounted controls.
The practice of sharing platforms between the City and Jazz started with the previous generation models. At that time, Honda developed the Jazz initially, and then slapped a boot at the back to make the City. So, while the Jazz was endowed with charming good looks, the derivative City was awkwardly styled and shaped, badly hurting its sales despite being a brilliantly packaged product. Little surprise that the current Jazz retains the overall shape and proportions of its predecessor, whereas the City does not. In fact, when both cars are put together, the City is now the better looking one.
Inside, however, it is the Jazz which has the funkier, and at the same time, more practical interior. The curves on the Jazz’s dash is not only visually more exciting, it is actually friendlier to use than that of the City. Honda has configured the controls in such a way that they require zero intelligence to operate; intuitive and making sense even to first-time users. Just the simple act of positioning the air-con knobs closer to the steering made it feel that much more user friendly.
In contrast, the City’s cabin is simple and straight forward, almost dull in comparison. It is a fine cabin, but it lacks the ambiance and atmosphere found in the Jazz. It also lacks the quality. When doing the “dashboard knock” test, I was shocked to find my knuckles pounding a hollow-sounding dashboard. It feels as if as you can punch a hole through it. Central to the dash of both cars are integrated audio head units, but the one on the City does without numbered buttons for pre-selected channels. You have to scroll through the entire list when browsing, and programming it is also not as straight forward as the Jazz. Although it turned out to be a relatively simple process after figuring it out, it has already lost marks simply by not being straight forward enough to use.
The biggest, and I believe the most unfortunate, omission from the City are the brilliant Ultra Seats. This feature defined the interior of the previous City, and went a long way to make it one of the most intelligently designed car interiors. The current model gets a simple 60:40 split-folding rear seats which do not even fold flat. Unfortunately, even this is not a feature available in our Grade S test car. Thankfully though, the Ultra Seats are not omitted from the Jazz. They fold into multiple configurations, and do so with tremendous ease. The rear parcel shelf, which lifts up together with the tailgate, is easily removable, though putting it back proved to be a little trickier as you try to align the slots on both sides.
At this point of the test, the City is in serious danger of being hammered by the Jazz, RM20k price advantage notwithstanding. In all aspects of evaluation, the Jazz’s interior is simply miles ahead of the City, which does not even have a proper foot rest! The City’s only hope of clawing back the deficit now lies on the road. A difficult task, when you remember both possess identical running gear.
The 1.5-litre SOHC i-VTEC engine powering both cars needs little introduction by now. Displacing 1,497cc, it produces 118hp @ 6,600rpm and 145Nm @ 4,800rpm, sent to the front wheels via a class-leading 5-speed automatic transmission. Little separates both in the handling department either. Both get disc brakes all-round, MacPherson struts up front, torsion beam behind, and electric power steering (EPS).
As mentioned earlier, I started off testing the Jazz first. The lightness of the EPS makes the Jazz a breeze to drive even in congested urban traffic. It does not lack in feel, but it is a little over-assisted. All considered, this is a car designed to feel at home squeezing through double-parked lanes like those at Damansara Utama.
On open roads, the engine and gearbox combine well to give the Jazz strong acceleration when needed. The transmission upshifts seamlessly to give a smooth driving experience, but kicks down eagerly to quickly get the engine into its power band. The engine revs smoothly and easily, though it gets a little harsh at the high end. This turns out to be quite a problem for the Jazz, as the noise insulation is unbelievably poor for a car at this price. At speeds above 100kph, the acoustic intrusions due to the engine and wind noise effectively renders normal conversation impossible. Remember, we are not driving a sports car, so we not looking for “music” from the engine bay. We still want to hear the stuff coming out of the radio.
Otherwise, the Jazz is actually a composed car to drive on the highways. Vibration and harshness are well damped out to keep occupants comfortable. It feels planted cruising along a straight line, but the light steering and suspension setup does not inspire confident cornering. This car lacks grip on the bends.
Despite sharing the same mechanical bits, the City drives distinctly different from the Jazz. For one, it feels lighter than the Jazz. It gets off the line quicker, but feels less planted at speed. Sorely missing from the Jazz are the paddle shifts, not because of any fun factor they might provide, but because the City’s transmission lever does not feature the option of manually selecting fourth gear: it’s ‘D’ or ‘D3′.
After being badly hammered by the Jazz in the interior comparison, the City fights back in the handling department. In fast sweeping bends, the City simply grips harder and goes faster than the Jazz. This is despite the Grade S City that we tested having taller AND thinner tyres than the Grade V Jazz. While the Jazz is the nimbler car in congested city roads, the City is the one that handles better at the sweeping trunk roads.
During our time with both cars, my colleagues and I agree that the cute little Jazz is a very likable and charming car. In fact, I’m surprised at how much I actually like it. I have always thought of the Jazz as an over-priced and smaller version of the City. That assessment is true on paper, but somehow, the Jazz possesses an otherworldly charm that the City simply does not have. Despite having the same moving parts, the Jazz is executed with far greater flair and joy in comparison to the prudishly square City.
Unfortunately though, however likable the Jazz is, it is simply not an RM100k car. We must remember that the Jazz, CBU or not, is designed to be an entry-level hatch, not a premium niche product as it is positioned now. As much as I like it, I still think it is wearing a sticker price too big for itself.
Putting on my engineer’s hat again, between these two, the choice I would pick is still the City. Here’s a recommendation though, do spend the extra five thousand and take the higher Grade E spec.
 |
