2011 Honda City 1.3S OR 2011 Honda Jazz 1.3S?

**Philip0021** · May 1st, 2011 12:04 PM

we're planning to buy a new car this summer.. my mothers loves the looks of the city.. but the design is a bit old now since its release on 2008.. there's a new jazz the facelift jazz.. but its 20k more.. confused on what to buy.. hmm

**Philip0021** · May 1st, 2011 12:29 PM

we're planning to buy a new car this summer.. the looks of the city is good but its a bit old now since it was released in 2008.. and then there's the facelift jazz.. its new.. they said that the jazz is better than the city no doubt..

but its 20k more.. i have few questions..

is the 20k more jazz worth the money than the cheaper city?

is the audio system of the city and the jazz the same?

and which has better interior..?

tnx for answering the questions guys..

went to the showroom last week but forgot that its holyweek.. CLOSED!

**renzo_d10** · May 1st, 2011 01:01 PM

Personally, I hate the new facelift jazz. The bumpers are screaming 500whp, while the rims scream " HEY IM CHEAP ! "

Seriously, who would think that those set of alloys cost more than 5k ? :hysterical: ... without rubbers of course. Hahaha.

Anyways, still, the practicality and the enjoyment you get from car cannot be set aside. So unless you need the transformers look of the city plus the rather small-ish trunk, then get the Honda Jazz.

Of course you cannot exchange the fact that it's really an advantage having a trunk, but with the interior space of the Jazz ? it would already suffice. It has enough space to boot your bicycle in, you bags etc. etc. However, if you're the guy who brings his family with him every month in the grocery and spends 20k worth of groceries every month ( that's a lot of grocery bags I tell you ...

), then get the City. Because for sure you can use that trunk and spare yourself from the complaints of the backseat passengers who does nothing but blabber about the impracticality of the Jazz for not having a trunk. :hysterical:

Besides that, the City will have no use. The Jazz is easier to park, maneuver and cut through people since it's smaller. It's enjoyable too since it's fast enough ( - check bigbigcar.com for Niky's review regarding the pre-facelifted Jazz )

Interior design, I have nothing much to say. Props to honda for having nice plastics inside. From their cheapest car - City 1.3A - to their most expensive vehicle - Honda Accord 3.5 V6 - their plastics are top-notch !

If it's worth the added 20k ? Sure it does. Fresher looks. 500whp bumpers. What more can you ask for ? ... - oh wait, there's something. A different set of alloy rims.

Goodluck !

**Philip0021** · May 1st, 2011 01:44 PM

hmm... so i guess it's still na jazz? haha.. i'm just 21 and my parents is letting me choose between the two cars for my grad gift this may.. you said that the rims are kindda cheap.. my plan after having the car is changing the rims... so the alloy is not kinda of a prob. i guess..

**renzo_d10** · May 1st, 2011 01:56 PM

Yes. And in fact, the Jazz has a wider array of modifications to choose from compared to the City.

**Gecko Guy** · May 1st, 2011 02:06 PM

Test drove the Old city....I hate the torque...
Go for the jazz...it's smaller and faster. Congrats on the graduation! Swerteng bata!

**Philip0021** · May 1st, 2011 02:21 PM

* renzo: un nga dn iniisip ko.. lots of aftermarkets parts.. pero plan ko lng tlga pg nkuha ko is change of rims and xenon.. ung not very bright na nkkistorbo sa kasalubong.. haha

*gecko: hahaha tnx.. pero im sure lagi gagamitin ng tatay ko un.. amp.. especially with smaller engine lagi reklamo gas! ang mahal!!

**renzo_d10** · May 1st, 2011 02:25 PM

Please do avoid in using TXT/SMS speak. You might get an infraction from the mods. ;)

--

HIDs ? Er. I hope they're not PNP kits who produce so much glare. Go for MH1 or retrofitted projectors. If you can't help yourself putting PNP HID kits for whatever reason, then please limit your purchase to 4300k HID kits only and lower your headlight beam a bit.

**Philip0021** · May 1st, 2011 02:34 PM

ah so the 4300k has the right brightness for the car?

**renzo_d10** · May 1st, 2011 02:45 PM

Quite. The 4300k is the closest kelvin rating to stock. It's somewhat yellowish - but not similar to 3000k which is completely yellow & not actually very similar to stock.

Between the numerous kelvin ratings - 6000k, 8000k, 12000k, 25000k etc. -, 4300k gives the best performance in rain & in wet pavements.

Being " right " is subjective, some say 6000k works best on a car especially on dry pavements - which is somewhat true - while some says 4300k is alright.

Personally, the 6000k is too much for me. Cause there's a drawback to it. In HID kits, the whiter the beam is, the lesser the light it gives during downpour and the more straining it is to the eyes of the driver & of the oncoming motorists.

It's a choose your poison thing. If you think you can compromise safety & function in exchange to form, then .. go on and choose kelvin ratings that are higher than 6000k. But be aware that if 8000k HIDs gives SO MUCH GLARE what more can a 12000k HID kit give ? More so a 25000k PNP HID kit. Yes, there's such thing. I've seen some. They're pink-ish. And they suck like hell.