Go Back   Team-BHP > BHP India > The Indian Car Scene


Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old 13th September 2010, 13:28   #16
GTO
Team-BHP Support
 
GTO's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Bombay
Posts: 47,713
Thanked: 89,096 Times
Default

Firstly, Excellent thread idea nukeblitz.

The way that I see it, when the market wants it, the manufacturers will provide. Very few manufacturers proactively provide new technologies. Hyundai is an exception here; they were the first to offer common-rail diesels at <10 lakh rupees (the Accent CRDi) and 4 speed auto transmissions in hatchbacks (Santro, i10). Or even 6 airbags in a hatchback!

As things stand, the mass market is happy with *acceptable power* and high fuel efficiency. It wouldn't spend 50 grand more on a turbo-charged engine. Heck, the average Indian consumer doesn't see any sense in spending 20K on the life-saving ABS system. Why would he shell out more $$$ for BHP? Then, there's the issues with maintenance. Turbos require 60 second idling before & after a drive. Mass market doesn't have the discipline to follow this practice. When the turbo fails, he's going to blame the manufacturer (and NOT himself).

That said, turbo-charged engines are also more fuel efficient. I suppose blown turbo engines will start off in the fully loaded variants after a couple of years, and gradually trickle down to mid-level variants too. But in the cost sensitive hatchback market, cheap N/A engines will always make for a majority.

Quote:
Originally Posted by nukeblitz View Post
1.2 turbo with the excise duty cut would still be cheaper than a naturally aspirated 1.4 or 1.6
Not really. The Polo 1.6 costs only 40,000 more than the 1.2 on the road. A turbo will cost atleast this much, if not more.

Quote:
Originally Posted by nukeblitz View Post
I was just going by the cost difference between the indica and indica turbo which was around 30k.
The Indica N/A still sold more than the Turbo. Plus, the N/A Indica was too slow. It desperately needed a turbo, unlike most 1.2 petrols today (which offer acceptable performance).

Quote:
Originally Posted by vinaydas View Post
Certain People were complaining regarding a 30k increase in the punto for the VGT.
The complaints were because the 90 BHP Punto didn't perform as expected.

Quote:
Originally Posted by CPH View Post
the Indian market is not big enough at this moment in time to develop engines specifically for the Indian market.
Not true at all. 1.2s generally make for the hatchback market. And the Indian hatchback market is H-U-G-E (check my August sales analysis thread for additional info). A 4.5 lakh rupee hatchback like the Swift sells over 10,000 a month, while the premium i20 sold 7,000. There are several 7 - 10 lakh rupee products (from Tata & Mahindra) that sell exclusively in the Indian market and still rake in profits. The cost of developing an engine derivative is chump change.

Your statement is applicable to the more expensive segments though.
GTO is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 13th September 2010, 13:42   #17
Senior - BHPian
 
greenhorn's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: TN-14
Posts: 6,837
Thanked: 1,312 Times
Default

1.2 Turbo hatch would come dangerously close to its turbodiesel equivalents which serve the enthusiast segments reasonably well at a cheaper running cost. take for example the case of the punto 90ps and the i20 crdi's

do you think their petrol equivalents would survive if they got a FI? costs would shoot up, and you would have a result which is not substantially more or less powerful than its diesel equivalent ( and probably less than the chipped diesel ) at higher or similar to a petrol running cost. Why would anyone want same or slightly more performance for about the same initial cost, and higher running costs ?
Now Pure petrolhead enthusiasts are a very specific niche. I mean, look at the Octavia Vrs. It went down like a lead zeppelin. I think a hatch would face the same fate

Last edited by greenhorn : 13th September 2010 at 13:44.
greenhorn is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 17th September 2010, 20:30   #18
Senior - BHPian
 
Sn1p3r's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: Germany
Posts: 1,017
Thanked: 224 Times
Default

some very valid points by GTO and Greenhorn. I also would like to add that the bay area are compact and the heat turbos will generate should be a concern.

Also Turbos wont be really efficiently deployed in city runs where these cars make their mark. The higher speed gains will make these minis vulnerable as chassis/brakes/steering are not optimized for speed on highways.

I will pick 1.6 to 1.2 turbo polo any day.

Cheers!
Sn1p3r is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 17th September 2010, 20:48   #19
Distinguished - BHPian
 
Mpower's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Bangalore
Posts: 10,432
Thanked: 1,682 Times
Default

Good idea, but remains to be seen if anybody is willing to take a chance. Renault has a 1.2 turbo already out for the clio. Others include the VW 1.2 TFSI, Fiat Multiair and the Micra SC.

I'm sure VW decided to do a Polo 1.6 instead of the 1.2 TFSI for cost, even with the excise concession.

Between the 2, Micra SC is the most likely to get launched in India. Heck its probably already being manufactured in Chennai for export.

But it there's one car that 'needs it' then that would be the Punto.
Mpower is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 17th September 2010, 21:55   #20
BHPian
 
amrisharm's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: siliguri/Darj
Posts: 505
Thanked: 299 Times
Default

yes i agree with you 100% Nukeblitz. Give the customer the choice. In a market flooded with so many 1.2 l hatches, i think it would give the manufacturer an opportunity to differentiate and add value in the customers minds if a turbo is added. A perfect example is the underpowered Fiat Punto. A truly fantastic car in terms of ride and handling and i just love the exterior, but really let down by an underpowered motor. Same goes for the Polo, Fabia and to a certain extent the i20. I am sure they are great cars to drive in the city, but take them on the highway or in and around hilly terrain and they start to run out of breath.

By my estimate the premium one would have to pay for a turbo charger would probably come to about Rs 20,000 maximum. and in my opinion that is a perfectly reasonable premium to charge a car with a turbo.

The only manufacturer i see doing this is probably VW (and sister company skoda) with their world famous twin turbo motors which are already sold in overseas markets.

Also another trend i am really really despising right now is the emergence of more 3 cylinder engines in the premium hatch category, namely skoda, VW, Nissan, etc etc. Is it just me who is not liking this trend or are there others out there?
amrisharm is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 18th September 2010, 18:55   #21
Senior - BHPian
 
Ricky_63's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Gurgaon
Posts: 3,845
Thanked: 375 Times
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by nukeblitz View Post
I do understand that prices will go up. Probably by around 30-40k at the most. But the trick would be to sell the non-turbo version alongside the turbo version like they did with the indica and indica turbo. Not to mention the manufacturer would probably able to make a profit on the turbo itself.

While it's true that 1.2s are aimed at the vfm segment, that's also a reason why they are an excellent option to turbocharge. That's because the vfm segment also includes the hordes of young 20 something first time buyers who would look for and love the extra power. The reduced power would still be available at a lower price and maintainence for those who don't want it.

And as far as the turbolag goes, anyone who has driven a turbodiesel would be familiar with it. Even for those who are not familiar with it, driving it in city wouldn't be a problem as long as you compare it with the non-turbo engine cuz the non-turbo would be all lag and never any turbo anyway :-D ..and petrols generally have a decent amount of pep even when they are non-turbo. I don't think the engine would be horrible to drive before the turbo spools up...

And regarding the extra power making the roads more dangerous, i don't think that making power harder to access is the way to go to make roads safer. The same rash driver would be dangerous whether the car involved is 80bhp or 100bhp.

I don't think the price itself would be an issue for the manufacturer as they would be passed on to the consumer and the targeted wouldn't mind it. I'll give you the similar example of the alto and the alto k10. Except that here, it's even simpler to manufacture as all the components would literally be the same. Look under the hood of an indica and an indica turbo and you'll see what i mean. The only things that may need to be changed are the gearbox to allow for the the extra power. But i think that as an extra cost cutting measure, you could just use the same gear ratios with just a different differential. And maybe you'd have to get rid of the puny 155 width tires and put on some decent ones but that will probably add to the appeal but not decrease the FE by too much.

I read about a supercharged nissan micra somewhere but no, AFAIK there are no 1.2 turbos anywhere, except for the aftermarket jobs on some swifts...
One thing I would like to say is that I like your "out of the box" thinking. Most of your points (almost all actually) are valid. It's all about offering an "option" - I see nothing wrong with that. Provided ofcourse that it is technically feasible !!

Kudos to you !




Cheers
Ricky_63 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 18th September 2010, 19:43   #22
Senior - BHPian
 
greenhorn's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: TN-14
Posts: 6,837
Thanked: 1,312 Times
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by nukeblitz View Post
Look under the hood of an indica and an indica turbo and you'll see what i mean. The only things that may need to be changed are the gearbox to allow for the the extra power.
for the record, this is only true for the lesser powered indica DLS turbo(TC). the DLG turbo (TCIC) is mostly indigo underneath. not just the gearbox, the intake, the clutch, the wheels, the brake boosters, the suspension, all are different. I think a better option would be, if there are a hatch and a sedan, use the turbo petrol to ensure that the sedan has adequate power, and maybe use that opportunity to plonk the same engine into a hot hatch variant, as was done for the indica, and for the 90ps punto
greenhorn is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 19th September 2010, 19:56   #23
BHPian
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: Hyderabad/Mysor
Posts: 155
Thanked: 58 Times
Default

Incidentally, I just looked up the specs of the 1.2TSI on the Polo. WOW. 104bhp at 5000rpm and 175 Nm from 1500-4100. Claimed 0-100 time of 9.7 seconds which is waay better than that of the 1.6l engine due to the wider and higher torque band. Now, granted, it's an I4 and won't give as much fuel economy as that of the 3 pots in use but I bet it's more than the 1.6. Then again, you could detune it slightly for some extra mileage...but I wonder how much it costs compared to the 1.6...

List of Volkswagen Group petrol engines - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
nukeblitz is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 20th September 2010, 00:15   #24
Team-BHP Support
 
ampere's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: Bangalore
Posts: 15,595
Thanked: 8,569 Times
Default

1.2 TSI is even supposed to run the Yeti! So one can imagine the power.
The other argument which I hear is that TSI is a costly technology and VW is struggling to introduce it on vehicles costing less that 10L, as it cannot recover the price.

That's one reason why we are seeing delay in release the TSI Yeti/Polo. At least for me VW has not yet firmed up on its TSI strategy for small cars. Once they decide, then we see what others also do.

Till then we just have to wait and watch.
ampere is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 20th September 2010, 10:20   #25
BHPian
 
dhrishikesh's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2009
Location: Mumbai
Posts: 795
Thanked: 65 Times
Default

Many of the buyers will not go for these engines as there will not be or there will be less tax advantages with the use of these engine in the cars.
I personally will also prefer higher displacement NA (Naturally Aspirated) engine over these 1.2L Turbocharged engines.
But yes, If any company will offer these engines in their SPORTS edition over regular 1.6L engines (only in SPORTS editions); it will be a better choice as there will be more power output along with good fuel economy.
dhrishikesh is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 20th September 2010, 11:26   #26
BHPian
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Bangalore
Posts: 124
Thanked: 26 Times
Default

The Maruti 800 was a modified version of the Suzuki Alto SS40 which had the F5A engine (543 cc!) with turbocharger and multi-valves, mainly in the "Works" series. Since there were no restrictions in India to maintain fuel economy and emissions within limits, Maruti installed the 800 cc mill. Horses for couses.

Microcars | Autopia | Wired.com - Part 3

The 1200 cc and dimension restrictions for excise benefits were issued to provide adequate specs for family cars, the bread and butter configuration for the masses. A turbocharged version would only serve the performance market, and economies of scale would require that market to be sizable to make it a viable proposition for manufacturers.

Just my 2 cents.
proton is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 20th September 2010, 13:34   #27
BHPian
 
MihirC's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: Mumbai
Posts: 536
Thanked: 64 Times
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by amrisharm View Post
Also another trend i am really really despising right now is the emergence of more 3 cylinder engines in the premium hatch category, namely skoda, VW, Nissan, etc etc. Is it just me who is not liking this trend or are there others out there?
I know this is going OT from the thread but no mate you are not the only one who doesent like manufacturers coming out with 3 cylinder engines,neither do I. Skoda was the first one to come up with a 3 cylinder premium hatchback. and Now there is VW , Maruti, Nissan in the group as well. Im just glad that Ford,Fiat,Tata, Hyundai have not ventured as of yet into the 3 cylinder race.

As for the turbo charged 1.2 ltrs, (esp in the 1.2 category) I would prefer a NA enginge over a turbo charged one. But say for e.g. Ford comes out with a 1.2 turboed figo and charges a premium of 40k for it. Then I would go for the turbocharged one. Why not pay 40k more for additional 20-30 bhp from the manufacturer then tuning it later. I guess it also depends on the premium charged for turbos along with their positioning in the model line up. If I had it my way all the companys would have a seperate line up of turbocharged versions of their hatches irrespective of the NA displacement and power.
MihirC is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 20th September 2010, 16:43   #28
Newbie
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: Bangalore
Posts: 15
Thanked: 0 Times
Default

Predicting the indian hatchback market is like timing the stock market. There may be many experts but few get it right.

If Indians are VFM creatures, then i20 shouldn't be selling as it is. The concept of VFM has changed in India and with sites like team-bhp emphasizing so heavily, and rightly so, on safety features like ABS and Airbags, knowledgeable folks now expect this in their cars, even if it is a hatchback. Petrol Turbo engines would be one such thing which people could see value in (if priced in a non-jazzy way, pun intended )

In overcrowded roads and cramped parking conditions in India a hatchback still makes a lot of sense, even to those who can afford a sedan. And this group of buyers will like the turbo charged petrol mills. For e.g. the i20 asta 1.2L petrol variant is approx 7L OTR Bangalore while the i20 asta 1.4L diesel variant is approx 8.5L OTR Bangalore. That is 1.5L difference to play around with. Someone who doesn't drive too much on highways, would still love to have a powerful-goodies-loaded-i20 by paying a premium which is still significantly less than the diesel variant.

I, for one, would love to get one of those!
lonecrusader is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 20th September 2010, 18:39   #29
BHPian
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: Chennai
Posts: 311
Thanked: 61 Times
Default

Actually i20 petrol is what sells. The diesel sells less than 20% (should be around 1000-1500 units) on a monthly basis. I don't think a turbocharged engine will really help i20's case at all. For a normal car buyer performance will probably figure in only after FE, drivability, Comfort, looks/brand perception, A.S.S etc. i20 petrol sells because it looks and feels luxurious to the average indian customer whose benchmark is swift whose interiors are quite plain.
vishnurp99 is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 20th September 2010, 19:57   #30
Team-BHP Support
 
.anshuman's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Good-Gaon
Posts: 7,708
Thanked: 8,928 Times
Default

A 1.2 Turbocharged engine in a Hatchback will comply the small car norms, so it will attract lesser taxes but this advantage will be offset by higher costs for manufacturing a turbocharged engine(Remember the turbo is not a bolt on upgrade, it also requires strengthened engine components).

The Direct Injection units like 1.2 TSi VW sells in other parts of the world will prove very expensive compared to the basic 1.2 MPFI engine Polo come fitted with in India.

Quote:
Originally Posted by vishnurp99 View Post
Actually i20 petrol is what sells. The diesel sells less than 20% (should be around 1000-1500 units) on a monthly basis. I don't think a turbocharged engine will really help i20's case at all.
Hyundai i20's CRDi engine is not locally manufactured(Unlike it's competitors) , which is the actual reason behind the huge price difference between Petrol and Diesel variants. Apart from the initial cost the Hyundai's CRDi engines cost a BOMB to rebuild.
.anshuman is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply


Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Europe 2050: No Petrols or Diesels for you! ph03n!x Shifting gears 5 27th September 2012 16:00
Mercedes AMG Dropping 6.2-liter V8 for Bi-Turbo 5.5-Liter V8 hanmust The International Automotive Scene 3 19th December 2009 18:47
what's really there different in premium petrols/diesels? silver_shadow Technical Stuff 1 19th April 2008 13:59
difference between speed,power,xtramile,supershell and reliance petrols please? rider60 Technical Stuff 4 28th April 2007 18:27
Performance today:petrols or diesels??? veyron1 Technical Stuff 5 24th March 2005 18:55


All times are GMT +5.5. The time now is 08:53.

Copyright 2000 - 2017, Team-BHP.com
Proudly powered by E2E Networks