2010 Honda Jazz, Suzuki Swift - which has higher maintenance cost?

Forums › Transport (cars, bikes and boats) › 2010 Honda Jazz, Suzuki Swift - which has higher maintenance cost?

1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6

6556 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 2743

Subscriber

#1097809 29-Jul-2014 12:00

TimA:
"Suzuki claims a figure of 3.6 litres/100 km "

Pfffft. Its more like 5-7

Where did you get 3.6 from? That looks more like a diesel figure. The Rightcar site quotes 6.4l/100km for a 1600 Swift Sport.

meesham

973 posts

Ultimate Geek
+1 received by user: 266

#1097810 29-Jul-2014 12:00

KiwiNZ: two things the Jazz does have are ....

The most versatile seat configurations of any small car and Hondas excellent resale value.

The Jazz has an amazing amount of space, we can get 2 rear facing car seats in the back of my wife's Jazz that we couldn't fit into a new Mazda CX-5 (when I was shopping for a new car). She has a 2010 sports model with the standard auto transmission and it actually performs quite well on the Dunedin hills, I've not tried the new ones with CVT.

Batman

Mad Scientist
29827 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 6089

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#1097816 29-Jul-2014 12:08

Cvt would overall work better, but when you floor it, it takes time for the belts to wind up while a downshift on the auto is quicker

k1wi

484 posts

Ultimate Geek
+1 received by user: 111

#1097835 29-Jul-2014 12:46

I heard a while back that the Swift was much more expensive to repair...

I found this link, but didn't really look to check it: http://www.drivesouth.co.nz/news/16357/best-selling-car-039not-recommended039

toyonut

1508 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 211

#1097883 29-Jul-2014 13:46

From experience with both, my parents have a Jazz and my brother had a Swift, they will be much of a muchness in terms of maintenance. Just regular oil changes, fluids and consumables. Neither have anything overly fancy to go wrong. If I had to pick, I prefer the Jazz, it's roomier and more versatile and I find even the 1.3 VTEC is great to drive with enough go, I imagine the 1.5 would be better again.
I had heard about the parts thing before, Suzuki apparently take less profit from the car itself and charge more for spares, but there enough of them around that getting second hand spares should not be an issue. That is only going to be an issue if you crash it though, but so as long as you are insured, you will only pay the excess anyway and insurance covers the rest. It does not seem to be anything to do with the consumables like brake pads, filters etc.

Try Vultr using this link and get us both some credit:

http://www.vultr.com/?ref=7033587-3B

Coil

6614 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 2153
Inactive user

#1097890 29-Jul-2014 13:58

Bung:
TimA:
"Suzuki claims a figure of 3.6 litres/100 km "

Pfffft. Its more like 5-7

Where did you get 3.6 from? That looks more like a diesel figure. The Rightcar site quotes 6.4l/100km for a 1600 Swift Sport.

Suzuki's website.

Batman

Mad Scientist
29827 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 6089

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#1097909 29-Jul-2014 14:27

must be a diesel

Quic Broadband

Move to New Zealand's best fibre broadband service (affiliate link). Free setup code: R587125ERQ6VE. Note that to use Quic Broadband you must be comfortable with configuring your own router.

jonathan18

7413 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 2850

ID Verified

Trusted

#1097919 29-Jul-2014 14:47

Krishant007: I get between 6-7.5L per 100km consumption on my Jazz. I can easily stretch about 650km out of 40L of fuel (tank capacity is 50L). I have mixed driving - in traffic, motorway, suburban. Hope that helps :).

I wish we got as much out of ours! Is yours the 1.3 or 1.5?

We have the previous generation (a 2009, I think) Jazz 1.5 litre auto, and we're currently lucky to get 400km of urban driving from a tank (the latest reading is 10l/100km). I think it's partly the short trips my wife does (to/from school etc), plus how she drives it (accelerates like mad at every intersection), as I basically never drive it now I've got a new Mazda6 to drive.

So, like with all cars the running costs will also depend on how you drive it - if that's lots of urban driving don't expect a great return. Given you're looking at a manual, it'll no doubt not be as bad as the auto (personally, I'm not that impressed with the auto's changes; apparently the return to a CVT in the latest model has helped economy).

I'm not sure I'd be keen on buying a Jazz next time, despite my wife loving hers, and the amazing seat configuration (which, as we have demonstrated, is no use if there are two kids' car-seats in the back!) - next time I hope we'll get something more sporty to drive and economical on fuel; by the time we come to replace it, I'm thinking the yet-to-be-released Mazda 2 will be an option.

Krishant007

1403 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 80

#1097924 29-Jul-2014 14:58

jonathan18:
We have the previous generation (a 2009, I think) Jazz 1.5 litre auto, and we're currently lucky to get 400km of urban driving from a tank (the latest reading is 10l/100km). I think it's partly the short trips my wife does (to/from school etc), plus how she drives it (accelerates like mad at every intersection), as I basically never drive it now I've got a new Mazda6 to drive.

So, like with all cars the running costs will also depend on how you drive it - if that's lots of urban driving don't expect a great return. Given you're looking at a manual, it'll no doubt not be as bad as the auto (personally, I'm not that impressed with the auto's changes; apparently the return to a CVT in the latest model has helped economy).

I'm not sure I'd be keen on buying a Jazz next time, despite my wife loving hers, and the amazing seat configuration (which, as we have demonstrated, is no use if there are two kids' car-seats in the back!) - next time I hope we'll get something more sporty to drive and economical on fuel; by the time we come to replace it, I'm thinking the yet-to-be-released Mazda 2 will be an option.

Mine's actually a 2006 model 1.3L version. I do quite a bit of urban driving too and on my worst days (when I had a car full of people to drive around), my economy reading was at 7.6L per 100km. I live in Ellerslie and drive to city every day for work. So my trips are about 7-10km one way depending on the route taken. And also have lots of stop starts.

Yes you are right that it entirely depends on your driving style as well! My sister would prob yield about 75 - 80% of my mileage. I would definitely buy this car again. Its an awesome knock around car - small dings dont even hurt my feelings in this car.. lol..

Bung

6556 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 2743

Subscriber

#1097927 29-Jul-2014 15:04

joker97: must be a diesel

Suzuki claim 4.2l/100km for the 1300cc diesel Swift. Anything less is not going to come from a petrol model.

meesham

973 posts

Ultimate Geek
+1 received by user: 266

#1097929 29-Jul-2014 15:06

jonathan18:
I'm not sure I'd be keen on buying a Jazz next time, despite my wife loving hers, and the amazing seat configuration (which, as we have demonstrated, is no use if there are two kids' car-seats in the back!) - next time I hope we'll get something more sporty to drive and economical on fuel; by the time we come to replace it, I'm thinking the yet-to-be-released Mazda 2 will be an option.

Another thing I like that I forgot to mention is how wide the rear doors open, I find it makes loading kids/car seats into the car much easier. I was loading the car seat into my mother-in-law's 2013 Golf a couple of days ago and noticed the difference.

Coil

6614 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 2153
Inactive user

#1097933 29-Jul-2014 15:19

http://www.suzuki.co.nz/News/Automotive/2012/05/22/Swift+Diesel+Sets+Economy+Milestone+in+Auckland+to+Wellington+Drive
I call somewhat BS. maybe coasted behind a truck the whole way done. I am sure my car uses that idling.
OR SINCE GOING TO WELLINGTON IS BELOW AUCKLAND ITS LIKE GOING DOWNHILL!! <- Answer.

MikeB4

18464 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 12124

ID Verified

Trusted

Subscriber

#1097934 29-Jul-2014 15:19

I actually like the look of the new Jazz, it would be a car I would consider, and this is coming from someone people used to say the main aid I took with me to find a car was a measuring tape so I could find the biggest.
I used to buy Holden Commodores, Ford Falcons, full sized SUV's like Toyota Land Cruiser but my preference has shifted, I really like small to medium hatch backs, cheap to buy, cheap to run, versatile, fun to drive.

jonathan18

7413 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 2850

ID Verified

Trusted

#1097935 29-Jul-2014 15:20

meesham:
jonathan18:
I'm not sure I'd be keen on buying a Jazz next time, despite my wife loving hers, and the amazing seat configuration (which, as we have demonstrated, is no use if there are two kids' car-seats in the back!) - next time I hope we'll get something more sporty to drive and economical on fuel; by the time we come to replace it, I'm thinking the yet-to-be-released Mazda 2 will be an option.

Another thing I like that I forgot to mention is how wide the rear doors open, I find it makes loading kids/car seats into the car much easier. I was loading the car seat into my mother-in-law's 2013 Golf a couple of days ago and noticed the difference.

Yep, would agree on that - the rear doors open to nearly 90 degrees. I also rarely bash the kids' heads on the side of the car getting them in or out! (Can't say this is the case in the Mazda!)

Don't get me wrong - I think they're a great design, but it just doesn't have the zing I personally want in a car (but why should I care if it's my wife driving it 90% of the time??!!). A better gearbox would help, but I too am not a CVT fan, after having had (and recently got rid of) a 2001 Primera. Supposedly the new ones are completely different, with less lag on take-off - and this is indeed my experience when I took the new Jazz for a test-drive a couple of weeks back. That said, I found this new one to be an evolutionary rather than revolutionary compared to the previous model - though the standard new features like GPS and reversing camera are great. It was also noticeably quieter than the previous model, which is known for having a noisy interior.

jonathan18

7413 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 2850

ID Verified

Trusted

#1097937 29-Jul-2014 15:24

KiwiNZ: I actually like the look of the new Jazz, it would be a car I would consider, and this is coming from someone people used to say the main aid I took with me to find a car was a measuring tape so I could find the biggest.
I used to buy Holden Commodores, Ford Falcons, full sized SUV's like Toyota Land Cruiser but my preference has shifted, I really like small to medium hatch backs, cheap to buy, cheap to run, versatile, fun to drive.

In terms of space, the Jazz (even the last one) is definitely the one to beat (for small cars)... When we were in the market for a small car, our 'measuring stick' was the Mountain Buggy. I took that when I went for test drives - basically, it wasn't a goer if it couldn't fit that in its boot. This ruled out cars like the Mazda 2, Swift and Echo hatch (though the Echo sedan was enormous - apparently similar interior space to the Corolla hatch!).

1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6