Honda Jazz vs Volkswagen Polo vs Fiat Tipo: here's our winner
Even though the Honda Jazz is now well into its third generation, the basic recipe hasn’t changed much since the original appeared in back in 2001. Into the footprint of a small hatchback, Honda has managed to pack cargo capacity and cabin space worthy of a much larger car, and that’s a formula which has remained ever since. But is that enough to justify this little car’s price premium? We decided to compare it to two conventional opponents, to see which one is the superior choice.
The Honda Jazz is an incredibly versatile design, mainly thanks to very clever packaging which moves the fuel tank under the front seats, combined with an innovative rear seating arrangement which allows for an amazing amount of utility space in the back. In contrast, every mainstream opponent sticks to a much more conventional layout, which allowed the Jazz to carve out a niche for itself as the individualist’s choice.
But, with its mini-minivan-like appearance and comparatively high pricetag, does the Jazz really have what it takes to challenge more-conventional opponents in the sales race? We decided to put it against two alternatives to find out. Our first opponent is the stalwart Volkswagen Polo, which is one of South Africa’s best-selling passenger cars: there’s nothing unusual about its layout, yet buyers simply can’t get enough of them.
The second challenger is a compact hatchback which has been struggling to gain sales momentum ever since it appeared on our market. There’s nothing intrinsically wrong with the Fiat Tipo, but buyers keep on overlooking it – probably because they really want a Polo. As a result, the Tipo is also a niche product, but for completely different reasons to the Jazz: few buyers know about it, and it doesn’t have the brand equity of a Polo (or even a Jazz). Does this red-haired stepson deserve to be ignored, or is it a worthy opponent to the mainstream Polo or the quirky Jazz?
To keep this comparison fair, we selected a price point around the R 300 000 mark, and chose some contenders which offer both petrol power and manual transmissions. We decided to use the least-expensive 1.5-litre Jazz as a baseline, and put it up against the Tipo in high-spec Lounge trim, and the mid-spec Polo in Comfortline “Beats” trim. They are three very different cars, even though they’re aimed at the same price point. Which one will be triumphant? Let’s find out!
Facts and Figures
|
Engine size (cyl/size/fuel) |
4-cyl, 1.5-litre petrol |
3-cyl, 1.0-litre turbopetrol |
4-cyl, 1.4-litre petrol |
|
Power/Torque |
88 kW/145 Nm |
70 kW/175 Nm |
70 kW/127 Nm |
|
Kerb Weight |
1061 kg |
1035 kg |
1195 kg |
|
Length (mm) |
3 955 |
4 053 |
4 368 |
|
Boot volume (litres)* |
363 |
350 |
440 |
|
Airbag count |
6 |
6 |
2 (opt 4/opt 6) |
|
Top Speed (km/h) ** |
180 |
187 |
185 |
|
Ave Consumption ** |
6.0 ℓ/100 km |
4.5 ℓ/100 km |
5.7 ℓ/100 km |
|
Warranty |
5 yr/200 000 km |
3 yr/120 000 km |
3 yr/100 000 km |
|
Price |
R 296 600 |
R 295 750 |
R 300 900 |
*With 5 seats in use.
**Manufacturer's official figures.
Analysis
Just looking at the basic specifications of these three contenders, it’s clear that they have very little in common except for their list prices. On the one hand is the small, ingeniously packaged little Jazz, while the Tipo offers a larger, more conventional car for about the same money. The Polo splits the difference between the other two in size, but is fundamentally the same kind of car as the Tipo – there’s nothing particularly clever about either of them, but they both do their respective (but quite different) jobs decently enough.
Power, performance, and drivetrains
There’s more differentiation in their mechanical layouts as well, although the Polo is definitely the more advanced in this respect. Both the Jazz and Tipo use naturally-aspirated 4-cylinder engines, but only the Tipo comes with a 6-speed manual gearbox instead of only 5 ratios as on the other two.
The Polo ups the ante with its powertrain, though: it’s a downsized 1.0-litre, 3-cylinder turbo mill, and while its power output of 70 kW isn’t extraordinary (the Fiat produces exactly as much, and the Honda 18 kW more), it’s the extra helping of torque that sets it apart. 170 Nm is enough for decent propulsion in a car of this size, and because it’s turbo-charged, the oxygen-starved Gauteng altitude won’t affect its performance as much.
It’s not as though the Jazz has a slouch under its bonnet, though. Those extra kilowatts (88 kW in total) do make their presence felt once you’ve got the engine revving, and it’s fun to stir those 5 gears to extract maximum performance. Unfortunately, because of its relatively low torque output (145 Nm, and only available at 4600 r/min), the naturally-aspirated Jazz can feel lazy when you’re not trying to wring its neck.
That’s still better than the poor Tipo can manage, though. There’s a reason why it gives you so much car for so little money, and that’s because it’s lacking somewhat in the engine compartment. It’s the heaviest car in this comparison (it’s 160 kg heavier than the Polo and 134 kg heavier than the Jazz), and it has the least torque in this trio at only 127 Nm. To compensate, the Tipo has a set of very closely-stacked ratios in its 6-speed ‘box, but it still needs 4000 r/min to cruise at the legal speed limit (in contrast to the long-legged cruising on offer in the others).
As a result of that power advantage, the Honda Jazz has to take the performance accolade in this comparison, with the torquier VW Polo coming in a close second. The portlier and somewhat asthmatic Fiat is unfortunately relegated to a distant third place in this company.
Economy
All three manufacturers claim commendable fuel consumption figures, but it’s a big surprise that the Honda would appear to be the thirstiest car in this trio. That’s if one goes according to the official claims, though, in which case the Honda would probably get the closest to its claimed average consumption of 6.0 ℓ/100 km. Owner reports suggest that this is very close to their experienced consumption, with low-6 ℓ/100 km numbers appearing to be the norm.
That’s pretty much what we experienced in our road tested Fiat Tipos as well, with a base-spec sedan returning a 6.2 ℓ/100 km average over the test period. Let’s call it a close contest between the Jazz and the Tipo, but a moot point in any event, because the Polo is noticeably more frugal than either of them – in both its official claims and in real-world driving.
The Polo’s little 3-cylinder engine has a proven track record of returning low-to-mid 5 ℓ/100 km average consumption figures, with some test cars even dipping into the fours. Volkswagen’s official claim of 4.5 ℓ/100 km isn’t actually that far-fetched, then, which hands it an immediate advantage and victory in the economy department.
Practicality
This is where the Fiat Tipo stages a serious comeback, with by far the largest boot of this trio at 440 litres. The Jazz, being significantly smaller, can only offer 363 litres behind the rear seats, and the Polo can only manage 350 litres. And, thanks to its extra size, the Tipo should have a decently long loading area with the rear seats folded down as well.
The only problem is that the Tipo’s loading area isn’t particularly clever. It lacks a false floor to hide smaller items, and only the rear seatbacks collapse, leaving an uncomfortable step in the expanded loading area. The Polo’s (much smaller overall) volume is much better in this regard, with a mild slope but without any pronounced humps in the way.
But neither of them can hold a candle to the brilliant packaging at work in the Jazz. Because the rear floor is completely flat, the “magic” rear seats are allowed to tumble way out of the way to the front, or fold into the floor, or be configured in a myriad of clever ways to carry everything from mountain bikes with their wheels on to potted plants to flat-screen TVs – all in a load volume with a low floor and no obstructions anywhere. For this astounding versatility, we’ll just have to hand the Jazz this round.
Equipment and safety
All three cars offer ABS, stability control, and rear ISOFIX child seat anchors, and both the Polo and the Jazz are fitted with 6 airbags. The Tipo shows a strange gap in its specification sheet here, because it comes standard with only two airbags – the side- and curtain airbags are all relegated to the option sheet. Halogen headlights are standard equipment for all three, but the Polo does offer an upgrade to LED units.
As far as their crash test data goes, the Polo and Jazz both scored 5-star ratings in Euro-NCAP testing, while the Tipo only scored 3 stars, even when kitted out with the optional airbags but without the electronic driver’s aid options. Let’s call it a marginal win for the Polo over the Jazz, then, purely on account of its optionally-available LED headlamps. Meanwhile, the Fiat’s poor score to end up in third place is a bit of a head-scratcher.
Their comfort- and convenience equipment levels are fair for this price level, but both climate control and cruise control are standard only in the Tipo and the Jazz, and optional for the Polo. For the rest, their features lists match quite neatly, and have such niceties as snazzy alloy wheels (15-inch on the Jazz, 16-inch on the Polo, and 17-inch on the Tipo) and Bluetooth/USB-compatible touchscreen infotainment systems with steering wheel-mounted remotes.
The Fiat one-ups these opponents with its standard rear parking sensors and rear-view camera, though – the Polo can only offer them as options, and the Honda doesn’t have even do that. The Volkswagen’s touchscreen system is the winner here, with its clear graphics and responsive interface, and the “beats” audio system upgrade makes this the one for audiophiles. Overall, though, the Jazz has to take this section, based on its standard kit level and top-notch safety credentials.
Verdict
Fiat’s approach of offering a larger car for the same price as a smaller car is commendable, and may appeal to price-conscious buyers. The Fiat Tipo has a good features list, and offers a lot of usable space for occupants and luggage alike. It is however not as versatile as the Jazz, and its safety credentials and sluggish performance are decided downsides in a car which may otherwise have great appeal to family-car buyers. It ends up in third place in this comparison.
The next to go, surprisingly, would be the Polo. While its fuel efficiency and torquey power delivery are both highly commendable, and it’s trimmed in typical high-quality VW fashion, the Polo simply does not offer the comfort features you’d expect as standard in this price range. Sure, those things are all available as (pricey) options, but in standard trim, it has to yield to the Jazz.
Honda’s little wonder has the strongest performance in 1.5-litre form, returns decent real-world fuel economy, and has a serious practicality advantage, along with a well-stocked standard spec sheet in Elegance trim, along with first-class safety characteristics. With such a wide spread of abilities, it just has to walk away with the overall laurels.
* Pricing was accurate at the time of writing, but may change without prior notice.
Related Reading:
We did the homework for you, and ranked small hatchbacks by versatility.
See the latest Euro-NCAP crash test results here.
Read more about the Fiat Tipo in our initial launch report...
.... and in our road test of the Tipo sedan and video review of the Tipo hatchback.
We also reviewed the VW Polo Beats - find its road test here.