Go Back   Team-BHP > BHP India > Team-BHP Reviews > Official New Car Reviews


Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old 16th August 2016, 13:59   #5416
Senior - BHPian
 
KiloAlpha's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: Cubicle
Posts: 1,121
Thanked: 1,124 Times
Default Re: Maruti S-Cross : Official Review

Quote:
Originally Posted by greatmana2000 View Post
After having driven the S-cross for over 6000km , I am not satisfied with the car . First , the suspension is too bad for me , the rear is a virtual springboard on bad roads and then the power . While 320NM on paper looks good and in the leagues of skoda , audi , merc , bmw the engine is a pure irritant if one needs to do spirited driving on high traffic highways . The gear shifting is constant and you just feel that the 320 NM is at a particular narrow power band RPM and the engine drops too much of power before and after the band . The power delivery is just at 2000 -3000 RPM . The highways that I frequent ,the gear changing is constant .
Quote:
Originally Posted by ank.nsit View Post
...
Not to offend the current 1.6 owners, but I really fail to understand the reason behind the hype of 1.6. Even the veterans like GTO consider it to be an amazing engine, but why? Just because of that huge push back effect(320Nm) at 2000 RPM band? What about the power before and after this RPM?

I guess there is something which I failed to observe/understand in my multiple test drives of 1.6.
I own a 1.6 Alpha, done 5000km in 4 months. About half my running is on highways. I used to own a Figo before I bought the S-Cross.
I have just come back from a 900km trip, so here is my take on this car.

Please remember that all cars have a "sweet spot". You need to find it. Take suspension for example. In my Figo, the "sweet spot" was around 40-45kmph on broken roads. At these speeds, minor bumps and potholes were swallowed up, and vertical movement of the car was minimal. The S-Cross too, similarly, has a sweet spot around 50-55kmph. But then, it depends on the type of broken surface, to judge the optimum speed. Can it get "bouncy"? Yes, it can. I have also felt some "looseness" of the back at certain speeds on undulating roads, I almost felt as though I was driving an old Verna! But then, I guess I was out of the "sweet spot". I have done 100kmph on a gravel stretch (road under construction) and used left-foot braking to adjust the line. For those few minutes, my name was Tommi Makinen

As far as turbo lag is concerned - lets say you are driving on a 6-lane highway (just came back from a trip, remember?). As is typical of such roads in India, all manner of traffic doing a range of speeds, occupies all lanes at random. I was able to average 75kmph over ~300km. The S-Cross turbo wakes up at 1700rpm. At 100kmph, 6th gear, car is doing 1750rpm. Shift speeds need to be judged correctly if you are weaving through this kind of traffic. I never had to drop below 4th (50kmph @ 1500rpm), and you can hold 5th until your speed becomes illegal. Where turbo lag catches you out badly is if you have to drop speeds quickly and don't downshift. If you can judge your shifts correctly, you can get past slow moving trucks on 2-lane highways very very quickly, and make rapid progress. Gaps that were previously impossible now become wide open because of the in-gear acceleration.

The 1.6 is also not very fast off the line. Acceleration in 1st and 2nd is not much better than most other cars in the B+/C segments. But it will out-accelerate most other cars once past 50kmph, and continue to accelerate long after those cars have run out of ideas.

However, my enthusiasm for the S-Cross 1.6 is because I love the car enough to learn its sweet spots. That is not everybody's cup of tea, however.

Last edited by KiloAlpha : 16th August 2016 at 14:00.
KiloAlpha is offline   (11) Thanks Reply With Quote
Old 16th August 2016, 14:08   #5417
Senior - BHPian
 
ajay_satpute's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: Pune
Posts: 1,714
Thanked: 1,226 Times
Default Re: Maruti S-Cross : Official Review

Quote:
Originally Posted by ank.nsit View Post
Why do you say that?
Turbo lag of 1.6 has been discussed on this thread multiple times.
I agree that turbo lag of 1.6 has been discussed at length on the forum. But it is also discussed that the lag very much manageable and it is something you can get used easily.

Also, the suspension setup of S-Cross is one of the best in the segment, better than Creta for sure, so even the suspension related comment was surprising.

Do not think that I am trying to defend the product. Every person has/will have a different experience with the same product. But, by and large, every S-Cross owner is happy with the product, hence the surprise.
ajay_satpute is offline   (4) Thanks Reply With Quote
Old 16th August 2016, 14:16   #5418
Senior - BHPian
 
Join Date: Dec 2015
Location: Mlore/Kasaragod
Posts: 1,443
Thanked: 2,183 Times
Default Re: Maruti S-Cross : Official Review

Quote:
Originally Posted by greatmana2000 View Post
After having driven the S-cross for over 6000km , I am not satisfied with the car . First , the suspension is too bad for me , the rear is a virtual springboard on bad roads and then the power . While 320NM on paper looks good and in the leagues of skoda , audi , merc , bmw the engine is a pure irritant if one needs to do spirited driving on high traffic highways . The gear shifting is constant and you just feel that the 320 NM is at a particular narrow power band RPM and the engine drops too much of power before and after the band . The power delivery is just at 2000 -3000 RPM . The highways that I frequent ,the gear changing is constant .
I do not agree about the suspension part. 1.6 just pulls even with slight throttle when RPM is above 1800. Yes, if you are below 1500 RPM : the struggle starts. I slot into 6 th gear at 100 KMPH. Overtaking is a breeze, just tap the pedal and you are done. (even in 6 th gear, above 100 KMPH).

I agree about sudden drop in peak torque. I will post the power-torque graph of 1.6 multijet engine. 320 NM torque drops steeply post peak. But if you observe, 1.6 makes much more torque than 1.3 multijet. 1.6 produces 200 NM even at 4000 RPM (200 NM is the peak torque for 1.3). 1.6 engine is a gem, but it could have been made much more better by holding the peak torque for longer revv band. I am planning to do the same through remap.
Attached Thumbnails
Maruti S-Cross : Official Review-screenshot_20160816141736_com.miui.gallery.png  


Last edited by Dr.Naren : 16th August 2016 at 14:18.
Dr.Naren is online now   (5) Thanks Reply With Quote
Old 16th August 2016, 15:02   #5419
BANNED
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: chennai
Posts: 703
Thanked: 54 Times
Default Re: Maruti S-Cross : Official Review

Quote:
Originally Posted by Dr.Naren View Post
I do not agree about the suspension part. 1.6 just pulls even with slight throttle when RPM is above 1800. Yes, if you are below 1500 RPM : the struggle starts. .........., but it could have been made much more better by holding the peak torque for longer revv band. I am planning to do the same through remap.

As you said , the 100 -120 comes up pretty soon on the 1.6 . After that it takes long enough . As long as it takes for a punto with 200 NM torque . What I have realised is that the 1.3 and the 1.6 do not have much of a difference except for a hint of higher torque at a narrow power band .

Quote:
Originally Posted by ajay_satpute View Post
I agree that turbo lag of 1.6 has been discussed at length on the forum.
.....hence the surprise.
Turbo lag is manageable on the highways . I tend to do gearshifts without straining the engine . I tend to floor the accelerator only when I am in the the top gear and not in the lower gears . I hate redlining the engine ..especially when it is a diesel engine .
I do not think that the suspension setup is the best ..period . The suspension set up is in a no-mans land . Neither here nor there . My Mom would be a better person as a judge . She just dreads sitting in the back seat of the S-cross . She is happy sitting in the backseat of a wagon R /Punto /Figo /Etios . I am not comparing Creta . Creta is not a benchmark . I would say Figo or a punto /linea /vento rapid would be the benchmark .

Quote:
Originally Posted by KiloAlpha View Post
I own a 1.6 Alpha, done 5000km in 4 months. About half my running is on highways..........

However, my enthusiasm for the S-Cross 1.6 is because I love the car enough to learn its sweet spots. That is not everybody's cup of tea, however.
I tend to agree with your observations . What i believe is that the S-cross suspension can be good on gravel or loose sand . The scross loses on roads which are uneven , have pot holes and cracks . That is when the suspension loses track and that is precisely what I am talking about .


My reasons for buying the S-cross were as follows

1. VFM compared to an I20 hyundai . I get more power , bigger car /better features and the 1.3 S-cross is very closely priced to an I20 . I never had the creta as a comparision .

2. My drives are mainly during the night times . Unfortunately , after the S-cross was bought I have been doing day time trips . I prefer driving at nights when there is less of traffic so that I can maintain my mental equillibrium , else I end up screaming at each driver who drives irrational .

3 . The peak torque on my other cars is 200 NM max on the punto . It is lower on the figo , etios . I tend to do speeds over 100 km/hr, so that I have a good average speed and I do not feel like an idiot for not taking the volvo bus to reach earlier .

4. The other smaller cars tend to return a very low fuel efficiency if they are driven at higher speeds . At 80-90 they return much better fuel averages . On the 1.6 I guessed that the maximum efficiency would be at 100+ KM /Hr due to a 6 speed gearbox . It seems that it is true . I still get 18-19 while for the same speed on a figo /punto I would be getting around 15 Km/hr .

Last edited by SDP : 17th August 2016 at 08:30. Reason: Removed high-speed references
greatmana2000 is offline   (4) Thanks Reply With Quote
Old 16th August 2016, 15:30   #5420
Senior - BHPian
 
Join Date: Dec 2015
Location: Mlore/Kasaragod
Posts: 1,443
Thanked: 2,183 Times
Default Re: Maruti S-Cross : Official Review

Quote:
Originally Posted by greatmana2000 View Post
As you said , the 100 -120 comes up pretty soon on the 1.6 . After that it takes long enough . As long as it takes a punto with 200 NM torque
120+ is possible in 4th, 5 th and 6 th gear in 1.6 S-Cross. Even in 6 th gear, I found the car picking up speeds very well. Slot into 4 th and floor the pedal from 100 KMPH, it would hit illegal speeds in no time. I have 1.3 SX4 (remapped ). My stock S-Cross 1.6 is way faster above 100 KMPH, be it 4 th or 5 th or 6 th gear. I seriously don't believe in similar timing for 1.3 Punto and 1.6 S-Cross to accelerate from 120+ KMPH.

I am not encouraging high speed driving. I had just tested the car under safe conditions (Road closed for public)

Last edited by SDP : 17th August 2016 at 08:32. Reason: Edited high-speed references
Dr.Naren is online now   (1) Thanks Reply With Quote
Old 16th August 2016, 16:05   #5421
BHPian
 
sou_3749's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2014
Location: Bangalore
Posts: 92
Thanked: 142 Times
Default Re: Maruti S-Cross : Official Review

Quote:
Originally Posted by greatmana2000 View Post
My reasons for buying the S-cross were as follows

1. VFM compared to an I20 hyundai . I get more power , bigger car /better features and the 1.3 S-cross is very closely priced to an I20 . I never had the creta as a comparision .

2. My drives are mainly during the night times . Unfortunately , after the S-cross was bought I have been doing day time trips . I prefer driving at nights when there is less of traffic so that I can maintain my mental equillibrium , else I end up screaming at each driver who drives irrational .

3 . The peak torque on my other cars is 200 NM max on the punto . It is lower on the figo , etios . I tend to do speeds over 100 km/hr, so that I have a good average speed and I do not feel like an idiot for not taking the volvo bus to reach earlier .

4. The other smaller cars tend to return a very low fuel efficiency if they are driven at higher speeds . At 80-90 they return much better fuel averages . On the 1.6 I guessed that the maximum efficiency would be at 100+ KM /Hr due to a 6 speed gearbox . It seems that it is true . I still get 18-19 while for the same speed on a figo /punto I would be getting around 15 Km/hr .
I do agree to some of your observations/opinions and I respect that. But, why are we talking about 120+ kmph? Is it not unsafe to self or others? Well that argument is for a different day as we all know the intention is not to endorse racing/unsafe driving. Talking about speeds, yesterday I was driving along with a punto 90hp for sometime and the dude being very aggressive couldn't get passed a 1.3 s-cross. Having a bigger engine or better engine doesn't mean how far you can push it. To me it's how comfortable is the machine doing good speeds if not illegal. The 1.6 s-cross does it pretty effectively and that's what everybody is impressed with.

As you mentioned earlier, I too observed fishtailing. But, when I saw the needle, I was not surprised. At that point I was unhappy with my car cursing the tyres and suspension, but then I realized the purpose of this car. To each his own. If you are really not happy with so many things, then look for other options or rather try to adopt or somehow try to make it better. If you ask me, I would say 6000 km is a very low mileage to come to a conclusion. Give it some more time, work with Maruti guys to solve issues and things will get better.

This time on bangalore-chennai highway I marked large boards mentioning the speed limits for all vehicles and the fine for not adhering to them. For cars the max legal speed is 100 kmph and the fine starts from 2000 rupees

Last edited by SDP : 17th August 2016 at 08:37. Reason: Edited high-speed references from quoted post
sou_3749 is offline   (4) Thanks Reply With Quote
Old 16th August 2016, 16:13   #5422
BHPian
 
Join Date: Jun 2015
Location: Mumbai
Posts: 57
Thanked: 33 Times
Default Re: Maruti S-Cross : Official Review

Hello friends. Just back from treacherous drive on Mumbai-Alibaug route over long weekend. Trust me even small villages roads might be better. We were 5 people in car and loaded with luggage of 3 days.

It is quite smooth on potholes even in deep potholes as per my experience. 5 hours for 110 kms and yet I was perfectly fine with not even iota of backache. Average of 15 on such roads was commendable. Over all very happy and pleasant experience on most unpleasant roads.

Last edited by SDP : 17th August 2016 at 08:39. Reason: Multiple grammar mistakes
akshatmangal is offline   (1) Thanks Reply With Quote Received Infraction
Old 16th August 2016, 18:35   #5423
BANNED
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: chennai
Posts: 703
Thanked: 54 Times
Default Re: Maruti S-Cross : Official Review

Quote:
Originally Posted by Dr.Naren View Post
120+ KMPH is possible in 4th, 5 th and 6 th gear in 1.6 S-Cross. Even in 6 th gear, I found the car picking up speeds very well. Slot into 4 th and floor the pedal from 100 KMPH, it would hit illegal speeds in no time. I have 1.3 SX4 (remapped ). My stock S-Cross 1.6 is way faster above 100 KMPH, be it 4 th or 5 th or 6 th gear. I seriously don't believe in similar timing for 1.3 Punto and 1.6 S-Cross to accelerate from 120-160 KMPH.

I am not encouraging high speed driving. I had just tested the car under safe conditions (Road closed for public)
I was not talking about racing or unsafe conditions . For an experienced driver , 80km or 100km /hr on a car with good steering , driving dynamics , engine and brakes is no big deal . Below 100 km/hr one would tend to sleep off especially on NH . Another point is you have buses which would ideally be doing 100 km/hr on NH Roads . Accidents can happen at any speeds and no one can for sure tell what would be the safest speed on any vehicle . 80 Km/hr would be unsafe on a high traffic road with multiple side roads where motorcyclists or pedestrians would just dart out onto the main road . Once on a NH I was a calf lying down and I was doing 50km/hr . While the car got nearer to the calf , it suddenly jumped on to the main road . On the NH there are dividers with grass patches and lot of cattle graze on it . It was so sudden and even though I braked , I still hit the calf at 20-25km/hr . I had to spend 35000 on my Alto to get it repaired . On a diesel engine , the driver would just make use of the torque and dropping gears and accelerating is not what I meant . Though 120-160 might be possible on the 4th gear or the 5th gear , effectively the torque in the 4th has dropped considerably and the car would not accelerate as much as it would in the 5th or the 6th . That is what i tried to point out .When you look at the graph that you posted , the peak 320NM happens at a point .. not even a narrow RPM range . Mostly it is at the 220 -250 NM torque . Probably if we took an average of the torque produced we can for sure say that the torque produced is not so much as 320NM .

Quote:
Originally Posted by sou_3749 View Post
I do agree to some of your observations/opinions and I respect that. But, why are we talking about 120+ kmph? Is it not unsafe to self or others? Well that argument is for a different day as we all know the intention is not to endorse racing/unsafe driving. Talking about speeds, yesterday I was driving along with a punto 90hp for sometime and the dude being very aggressive couldn't get passed a 1.3 s-cross. Having a bigger engine or better engine doesn't mean how far you can push it. To me it's how comfortable is the machine doing good speeds if not illegal. The 1.6 s-cross does it pretty effectively and that's what everybody is impressed with.

As you mentioned earlier, I too observed fishtailing. But, when I saw the needle, I was not surprised. At that point I was unhappy with my car cursing the tyres and suspension, but then I realized the purpose of this car. To each his own. If you are really not happy with so many things, then look for other options or rather try to adopt or somehow try to make it better. If you ask me, I would say 6000 km is a very low mileage to come to a conclusion. Give it some more time, work with Maruti guys to solve issues and things will get better.

This time on bangalore-chennai highway I marked large boards mentioning the speed limits for all vehicles and the fine for not adhering to them. For cars the max legal speed is 100 kmph and the fine starts from 2000 rupees

On a hilly twisty road with patches of straight roads , I am sure one would experience more than frequent gearshifts .As far as I am concerned , there is nothing to die for in the S-cross or the 1.6 engine . If one is interested in the S-cross then it has to be the 1.6 and not the 1.3 for sure . As I mentioned earlier with regard to suspension or steering feedback or engine performance , we need to take cars below 12-15 lakhs under consideration . For example the Tata Safari storme has more space , 4 wheel disc brakes and it costs similar to the S-cross . I think people are just comparing the S-cross to Creta and coming up with the rosy side of S-cross and on paper 320NM .

Yes, I am trying to get the suspension issue resolved . If you go through my previous posts I have been looking up at suspension parts of the S-cross from other countries . I strongly believe at this point of time that the suspension components that are made in India are the cause of the issue . I have searched the internet for the past 2-3 months to get the part nos and I think I finally have the parts codes . Why am i raising it here ?because I do not want someone to believe that the suspension is really good and have a huge surprise in the form of an accident . Many previous posts from others have confirmed that there is fishtailing and I am trying to get to the root of the problem .

The max legal speed of 100km/hr is ambiguous again . For a santro ,nano , alto , it definitely is not safe . Especially with cars that still have tubes in the tyres . So it all boils down to what car , road , traffic , visibility ,response time and brakes .

Last edited by SDP : 17th August 2016 at 08:47. Reason: Edited high-speed reference from quoted posts
greatmana2000 is offline   (1) Thanks Reply With Quote
Old 16th August 2016, 19:01   #5424
Senior - BHPian
 
Join Date: Dec 2015
Location: Mlore/Kasaragod
Posts: 1,443
Thanked: 2,183 Times
Default Re: Maruti S-Cross : Official Review

Quote:
Originally Posted by greatmana2000 View Post
Though 120+ might be possible on the 4th gear or the 5th gear , effectively the torque in the 4th has dropped considerably and the car would not accelerate as much as it would in the 5th or the 6th . That is what i tried to point out .When you look at the graph that you posted , the peak 320NM happens at a point .. not even a narrow RPM range . Mostly it is at the 220 -250 NM torque . Probably if we took an average of the torque produced we can for sure say that the torque produced is not so much as 320NM .
Yes, I understand about peak torque of 320 NM for a very short revv band. If that peak torque was held for longer revv band, car would be more faster. But I won't complain about lack of power in stock map. Hyundai/VW 1.6 peak torque is way lower than 1.6 multijet. If you see the graph of 1.6 multijet, it's producing 250 NM torque even at 3500 RPM (which is peak torque of 1.6 VW). 1.6 multijet has more torque across the revv band compared to other 1.6 engines. Forget 1.3 multijet, it's nowhere close.

Quote:
As far as I am concerned , there is nothing to die for in the S-cross or the 1.6 engine . If one is interested in the S-cross then it has to be the 1.6 and not the 1.3. I think people are just comparing the S-cross to Creta and coming up with the rosy side of S-cross and on paper 320NM .
1.6 multijet engine is a gem. It produces more torque at any RPM than the competition . Peak torque of 320 NM could have been held longer which would have added few extra horses too.

Also no manufacturer would give peak torque across the revv band. When they claim power and torque figures, it's the peak power and torque. Few engines maintain peak torque for longer revv band like my grand i10.

Posting the pic!!
Attached Thumbnails
Maruti S-Cross : Official Review-hw093717.jpg  


Last edited by SDP : 17th August 2016 at 08:49. Reason: Edited high-speed reference from quoted post
Dr.Naren is online now   (1) Thanks Reply With Quote
Old 16th August 2016, 19:27   #5425
BHPian
 
sou_3749's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2014
Location: Bangalore
Posts: 92
Thanked: 142 Times
Default Re: Maruti S-Cross : Official Review

Quote:
Originally Posted by greatmana2000 View Post
On a hilly twisty road with patches of straight roads , I am sure one would experience more than frequent gearshifts .As far as I am concerned , there is nothing to die for in the S-cross or the 1.6 engine . If one is interested in the S-cross then it has to be the 1.6 and not the 1.3 for sure . As I mentioned earlier with regard to suspension or steering feedback or engine performance , we need to take cars below 12-15 lakhs under consideration . For example the Tata Safari storme has more space , 4 wheel disc brakes and it costs similar to the S-cross . I think people are just comparing the S-cross to Creta and coming up with the rosy side of S-cross and on paper 320NM .

The max legal speed of 100km/hr is ambiguous again . For a santro ,nano , alto , it definitely is not safe . Especially with cars that still have tubes in the tyres . So it all boils down to what car , road , traffic , visibility ,response time and brakes .
Well we are not comparing apples to jack fruit here. As far as form factor and power goes it's justified to compare s-cross with creta or duster and not any full size SUV although people consider them while making a decision. In all possibility the s-cross is a much modern and superior car than the safari. And there is definitely something novel about the car in the form of space, interior quality , dynamics, engine which not many cars provide in that price range. If you think s-cross is so bad, then name a competitor which is miles ahead of it. The low numbers of s-cross is only due to the looks and nothing else. I am sure Maruti will work on improving it's drawbacks.

Coming to the speed limit, well there is a rationale behind this. Even in USA it's mostly 100-110 kmph at max and even lower at nights. What you are saying is it's better to smoke and die with heart attack , because you might also get a heart attack even without smoking

No offense intended.
sou_3749 is offline   (2) Thanks Reply With Quote
Old 16th August 2016, 20:04   #5426
BANNED
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: chennai
Posts: 703
Thanked: 54 Times
Default Re: Maruti S-Cross : Official Review

Quote:
Originally Posted by sou_3749 View Post
Well we are not comparing apples to jack fruit here. As far as form factor and power goes it's justified to compare s-cross with creta or duster and not any full size SUV although people consider them while making a decision. In all possibility the s-cross is a much modern and superior car than the safari. And there is definitely something novel about the car in the form of space, interior quality , dynamics, engine which not many cars provide in that price range. If you think s-cross is so bad, then name a competitor which is miles ahead of it. The low numbers of s-cross is only due to the looks and nothing else. I am sure Maruti will work on improving it's drawbacks.

Coming to the speed limit, well there is a rationale behind this. Even in USA it's mostly 100-110 kmph at max and even lower at nights. What you are saying is it's better to smoke and die with heart attack , because you might also get a heart attack even without smoking

No offense intended.
While I agree comparison should always be with the cars in the same league , I see no reason why we should not compare an apple to an orange if we are getting the apple at a lower price point than the orange . I never said that the S-cross was bad . I was just pointing out that the S-cross is not so perfect and does have a lot of short comings which I have pointed out .With regard to the maximum speed of 100 on highways , what I meant was for a better built car a higher speed is much safer than a car which is built to price . A BMW at 100 km/hr would definitely be safer to drive than an alto at 100 km /hr .

Quote:
Originally Posted by Dr.Naren View Post
Yes, I understand about peak torque of 320 NM for a very short revv band. If that peak torque was held for longer revv band, car would be more faster. But I won't complain about lack of power in stock map. Hyundai/VW 1.6 peak torque is way lower than 1.6 multijet. If you see the graph of 1.6 multijet, it's producing 250 NM torque even at 3500 RPM (which is peak torque of 1.6 VW). 1.6 multijet has more torque across the revv band compared to other 1.6 engines. Forget 1.3 multijet, it's nowhere close.



1.6 multijet engine is a gem. It produces more torque at any RPM than the competition . Peak torque of 320 NM could have been held longer which would have added few extra horses too.

Also no manufacturer would give peak torque across the revv band. When they claim power and torque figures, it's the peak power and torque. Few engines maintain peak torque for longer revv band like my grand i10.

Posting the pic!!
Peak torque is ambiguous . The hyundai /VW have a more flatter curve than the 1.6 and trust me , it really helps in the overall characteristics /drive-ability of the car . A vento with 250NM or a creta with 250NM torque is much more relaxing to drive than a 320Nm S-cross .You do not need 6 gears . You just need 5 gears if the torque is flatter . You do not need to frequently shift gears to keep the car in the power band . At least that is what I think it is .Peak torque depends on a no. of parameters . I think the manufacturers have found an easy way to claim /advertise about how powerful their engines are . To point out the obvious the 1.6 makes peak torque at 1700-2000 Rpm . After that the torque drops . Looking at the graph that you have posted it is like someone throwing a stone up in the air and the stone falling down . Beyond 2500 RPM there is not much power left . Could you try to get the hyundai 1.6 engine , VW 1.6 engine graph and the Renault 1.5 250 NM engine graphs ? A comparison should put to rest as to which engine has a flatter torque curve .

My older elantra with 250NM torque is infinitely more driveable , more relaxing . Blame it on the 2.0 liter engine . The torque curve is a lot flatter and power delivery is much much better .

Last edited by greatmana2000 : 16th August 2016 at 20:06.
greatmana2000 is offline   (1) Thanks Reply With Quote
Old 16th August 2016, 20:28   #5427
BHPian
 
ank.nsit's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2013
Location: Faridabad
Posts: 358
Thanked: 155 Times
Default Re: Maruti S-Cross : Official Review

Quote:
Originally Posted by KiloAlpha View Post
...
As far as turbo lag is concerned - lets say you are driving on a 6-lane highway (just came back from a trip, remember?)...

However, my enthusiasm for the S-Cross 1.6 is because I love the car enough to learn its sweet spots. That is not everybody's cup of tea, however...
Basically, you work your gears to keep the car in power band on highways. This is exactly what I do with my Dzire 1.3 MJD and have never felt the lag to be troublesome on highways.
But it is the hills/sudden acceleration and deceleration traffic situation that is bothersome. I guess it's not my cup of tea to find a sweet spot in such a situation.

Let's take a scenario on hilly roads. Suppose the maximum speed you can reach is 35-40 km/hr. And due to erratic traffic on single lane curvy roads you are supposed to bring the car to near 0 speed many a times.

How do you find the sweet spot in such a situation especially when the steep inclines always need you to be in power band? Keep revving the car in 2nd gear?

Your answer might help me resolve a huge pain point. Thanks in advance.

Last edited by ank.nsit : 16th August 2016 at 20:35.
ank.nsit is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 16th August 2016, 21:17   #5428
Senior - BHPian
 
Join Date: Dec 2015
Location: Mlore/Kasaragod
Posts: 1,443
Thanked: 2,183 Times
Default Re: Maruti S-Cross : Official Review

@greatmana2000:

I am not arguing 1.6 has flat torque curve. I too agree that peak torque falls very steeply. What I am trying to highlight is even with steep drop in torque, it produces 250 NM at 3500 RPM. Peak torque of other 1.6 engines is just 250 NM in turbo zone.

From the 1.6 multijet engine graph,

320 NM : 1700 to 2000 RPM
275 NM : 3000 RPM
250 NM : 3500 RPM
200 NM : 4000 RPM

1.6 is way ahead of competition in terms of torque. It's just a psychological feeling about power drop. Torque builds up very quickly and falls down steeply in 1.6. But my point is you can't term 1.6 underpowered/slow because of this. Also 1.3 Punto won't accelerate faster than 1.6 S-Cross for sure.

Last edited by Dr.Naren : 16th August 2016 at 21:19.
Dr.Naren is online now   (2) Thanks Reply With Quote
Old 16th August 2016, 21:24   #5429
BANNED
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: chennai
Posts: 703
Thanked: 54 Times
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by ank.nsit View Post
Basically, you work your gears to keep the car in power band on highways. This is exactly what I do with my Dzire 1.3 MJD and have never felt the lag to be troublesome on highways.
But it is the hills/sudden acceleration and deceleration traffic situation that is bothersome. I guess it's not my cup of tea to find a sweet spot in such a situation.

Let's take a scenario on hilly roads. Suppose the maximum speed you can reach is 35-40 km/hr. And due to erratic traffic on single lane curvy roads you are supposed to bring the car to near 0 speed many a times.

How do you find the sweet spot in such a situation especially when the steep inclines always need you to be in power band? Keep revving the car in 2nd gear?

Your answer might help me resolve a huge pain point. Thanks in advance.

I met with an accident last year precisely because of what you have posted . I was doing around 30-40 kms and the car was in 3 rd gear . I had to do a sudden stop and go , even though I had downshifted to the 1st gear , the car would still not accelerate since technically it was not in the power band and I had to go through a corner . I was left with no time to maneuver the car and the jeep coming opposite crashed on my car . It was a 1.3 punto MJD .
One such single lane traffic road is the notorious Banglore - chittor -chennai road . It is got some hills en route as well . At one point of time you are doing 100 km/hr and the next instant you are at near 0 . Given the huge no of turns and the single lane , for most of the journey one ends up working the gears for the whole length of the journey . It gets pretty tiresome .

Quote:
Originally Posted by Dr.Naren View Post
@greatmana2000:

I am not arguing 1.6 has flat torque curve. I too agree that peak torque falls very steeply. What I am trying to highlight is even with steep drop in torque, it produces 250 NM at 3500 RPM. Peak torque of other 1.6 engines is just 250 NM in turbo zone.

From the 1.6 multijet engine graph,

320 NM : 1700 to 2000 RPM
275 NM : 3000 RPM
250 NM : 3500 RPM
200 NM : 4000 RPM

1.6 is way ahead of competition in terms of torque. It's just a psychological feeling about power drop. Torque builds up very quickly and falls down steeply in 1.6. But my point is you can't term 1.6 underpowered/slow because of this. Also 1.3 Punto won't accelerate faster than 1.6 S-Cross for sure.
Dr. Naren , What I am trying to point out is apart from a very very momentary 320NM of torque the car is making more of 250NM torque in most of its usable power band . In real world conditions a flatter torque curve producing 250Nm car over a larger part of the RPM band would be much faster as the pull is constant rather than low-high-low torque . So for each gear instead of a constant torque what you get is low torque -high torque and then low torque . With a better power delivery one could technically stay for a much much longer time in any gear than on the 1.6 . The 1.3 wont accelerate faster than a 1.6 for sure . But , when you are doing 120 in both the time taken to reach 160 is not really different . It takes ages in both . To get the car to reach higher speeds is agony on both .
Also , 900 RPM to 1700 RPM is the most used torque band as well as 1700 -3000 RPM . A competent driver has to make sure that the car is in between those power bands and that is real hard work for a relaxed cruising vehicle .

Mod Note : Please use the EDIT or MULTI-QUOTE buttons instead of typing one post after another on the SAME THREAD!

Last edited by SDP : 16th August 2016 at 22:52. Reason: Merging back to back posts
greatmana2000 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 16th August 2016, 21:43   #5430
BHPian
 
Sree73's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2016
Location: Bangalore
Posts: 380
Thanked: 379 Times
Default Re: Maruti S-Cross : Official Review

Quote:
Originally Posted by greatmana2000 View Post
Could you try to get the hyundai 1.6 engine , VW 1.6 engine graph and the Renault 1.5 250 NM engine graphs ? A comparison should put to rest as to which engine has a flatter torque curve .
Here goes with the Speed - Torque graphs of Hyundai1.6 / VW1.6 and Renault1.5.

Let the discussion continue.

Edit : VW 1.6 is Petrol one.
Attached Thumbnails
Maruti S-Cross : Official Review-hyundai1.6.jpg  

Attached Images
  

Last edited by Sree73 : 16th August 2016 at 22:08. Reason: Clarification.
Sree73 is online now   (4) Thanks Reply With Quote
Reply


Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
The Maruti S-Cross. (Details released: Page 38) .anshuman The Indian Car Scene 1220 25th July 2015 11:33
Fiat Avventura vs VW Cross Polo vs Toyota Etios Cross vs Ford EcoSport a4anurag Hatchbacks 14 16th July 2015 10:22
CUV Wars: EcoSport vs Avventura vs Cross Polo vs Liva Cross vs Premier Rio devarshi84 What Car? 19 4th December 2014 03:25


All times are GMT +5.5. The time now is 13:46.

Copyright 2000 - 2016, Team-BHP.com
Proudly powered by E2E Networks