[ASVA]

@ torque18 very very well said. The 1.6 Tdi is pure joy and pure music to my ears. I haven't faced any unusually harsh vibrations in my vento tdi ever and the engine note (I prefer to call it that rather than noise) at higher revs is exhilarating.
Wt is "crude" and "unrefined" to some is pure joy to others. Well, to each his own!

Regards

[coolboy007]

Originally Posted by Mpower

I say go and drive a Verna 1.6 and you will change your mind.

I have driven the Verna 1.6 extensively and personally prefer the 1.6 TDi, am one of those who prefer sudden surge of power instead of linear power delivery. Both Vento and Rapid literally take off like a cat past 2000 rpm. Also the engine has been tuned to perfection, quicker in all in gear times despite being low on paper. TDi has virtually no lag.

Verna's engine is potent and refined, wish it didnt have that terrible steering and the extremely soft suspension, it flies over undulations.

[Mpower]

Hmm...if you like sudden surge of power then its should be the Verna that you like??

Its usually the laggy ones that have more punch and that's exactly how the Verna is.

I do agree that the Tdi is less laggy, but calling it the best 1.6D engine ever is a huge stretch.

Its rough and gravelly at idle & breathless on the highway compared to the revvy & silky smooth Hyundai.

The problem is Verna's engine and chassis are at odds with each other. The monster engine comes alive on the highway while the soft suspension is at home in the city & downright scary on the highway.

[coolboy007]

I didnt mean to say 1.6 TDi is the best engine ever, apologies if i said so. Nothing is best, each engine has its own positives and negatives, upto the customer to decide what he wants.

Never felt the TDi is breathless on the highways though the 6th gear always helps in expressway cruising.

Agree with your views on Verna, chasis gives up much earlier than the engine.

[newtonMeter]

Originally Posted by Mpower

Hmm...if you like sudden surge of power then its should be the Verna that you like?? Its usually the laggy ones that have more punch and that's exactly how the Verna is. I do agree that the Tdi is less laggy, but calling it the best 1.6D engine ever is a huge stretch. Its rough and gravelly at idle & breathless on the highway compared to the revvy & silky smooth Hyundai. The problem is Verna's engine and chassis are at odds with each other. The monster engine comes alive on the highway while the soft suspension is at home in the city & downright scary on the highway.

Breathless !! What a joke diesel should not be revvy my friend. TDI meets the business end between 1500 and. 2500 rpm, where the verna is caught napping

Verna monster specs are true only on paper, it's a laggard looser in in-gear acceleration add to that on the highway the Verna is like a the wobble top.

With Verna's more bhp and torque specs it still comes behind TDI in all sprint specs including real world efficiency, and don't forget the black smoke that comes from its rear every time you floor it. God bless the white verna, the bumper becomes tanned around the fake twin exhaust tail pipes

[Vid6639]

Originally Posted by newtonMeter

Breathless !! What a joke diesel should not be revvy my friend. TDI meets the business end between 1500 and. 2500 rpm, where the verna is caught napping

With Verna's more bhp and torque specs it still comes behind TDI in all sprint specs including real world efficiency, and don't forget the black smoke that comes from its rear every time you floor it. God bless the white verna, the bumper becomes tanned around the fake twin exhaust tail pipes

Depends on how you're driving

And Mpower isn't exactly speaking from hearsay. We drove both cars back to back from Mumbai to Pawna through expressway and rough hilly sections.

If you keep the Verna engine on the boil, it's brilliant. What you're saying is in gear acceleration by not shifting. 40-100kmph and stuff, ofcourse the Vento will do better but what Mpower is saying is outright acceleration. He doesn't wait for turbo to spool by staying in a higher gear, he will downshift to get in the meat.

It was quite fun sitting next to him in the Vento and the flaws of the engine were clearly visible.

Hyundai's handling loses the plot completely. Poor Manson was in the back rolling around like a pin ball. Then I sat in the back. It's more fun sitting in the Verna rear seat than going on a roller coaster.

[dr.surgeon1985]

Originally Posted by Mpower

Hmm...if you like sudden surge of power then its should be the Verna that you like??

Its usually the laggy ones that have more punch and that's exactly how the Verna is.

I do agree that the Tdi is less laggy, but calling it the best 1.6D engine ever is a huge stretch.

Its rough and gravelly at idle & breathless on the highway compared to the revvy & silky smooth Hyundai.

Breathless??? The tdi is quite clattery but never short of power. It has a very strong mid range. Just need to floor the accelerator and thump it goes, easy to complete an overtaking manoeuvre. Verna is a lot unsteady on highways. The vento engine is not as REFINED as the verna but definitely makes up for it with its great mid range

[el lobo 6061]

Just my view points after owning Vento TDi for 2.5 yrs.

Originally Posted by Mpower

Hmm...if you like sudden surge of power then its should be the Verna that you like??

Its usually the laggy ones that have more punch and that's exactly how the Verna is.

Shouldn't it be Vento 1.6 TDi, as it spools up 250 NM torque right at 1500 rpm compared to Verna 1.6 at 1900 rpm. VW 1.6 TDi keep delivering 250 Nm till 2500 rpm where as Verna just lasts for 850 rpm 1900~2750. By the time Verna is reaching up to it, Vento would have already gone past it, up in next gear.

Originally Posted by Mpower

I do agree that the Tdi is less laggy, but calling it the best 1.6D engine ever is a huge stretch.

Any other 1.6 TDi engine you would suggest to be better. In my opinion VW 1.6 TDi is the best out there by far. An engine requires a good chassis as well without which its of no use, which VW delivers and not Hyundai.

Originally Posted by Mpower

Its rough and gravelly at idle & breathless on the highway compared to the revvy & silky smooth Hyundai.

Breathless, how do you define it? I guess you haven't driven 1.6 TDi properly or maybe for a short while. Its no way breathless. Its one of the most eager engine around, which would reach its top speed when driving on full throttle even before you know it. Even for overtaking, just press the throttle and you would accomplish your move whereas in Verna 1.6 you would be needing to downshift. Or given Verna chassis you would have second thoughts for overtaking at speed above 100 Kmph. My friend owns a Verna 1.6 CRDi and claims that speed above 100 you wouldn't like to go further or make overtaking maneuver given car starts to fish tail.

Originally Posted by Mpower

The problem is Verna's engine and chassis are at odds with each other. The monster engine comes alive on the highway while the soft suspension is at home in the city & downright scary on the highway.

Agree with on the point that chassis is just not suited and I guess Hyundai will never be able to rectify it given the way it designs its car around. But Hyundai 1.6 CRDi being a monster on highway when the chassis doesn't help you keep the car steady and makes it feel like a boat? VW 1.6 TDi may qualify as a beast but Hyundai 1.6 CRDi remains a monster on just a brochure.

Originally Posted by Vid6639

If you keep the Verna engine on the boil, it's brilliant. What you're saying is in gear acceleration by not shifting. 40-100kmph and stuff, ofcourse the Vento will do better but what Mpower is saying is outright acceleration. He doesn't wait for turbo to spool by staying in a higher gear, he will downshift to get in the meat.

By the time you down shift to get in the turbo range of Hyundai 1.6 CRDi, Vento 1.6 TDi would have already gone past. Why? It makes its peak torque at 1500 rpm and is very much eager to get to 3000 rpm before you know it.

Originally Posted by Vid6639

It was quite fun sitting next to him in the Vento and the flaws of the engine were clearly visible.

Which are?

Originally Posted by Vid6639

Hyundai's handling loses the plot completely. Poor Manson was in the back rolling around like a pin ball. Then I sat in the back. It's more fun sitting in the Verna rear seat than going on a roller coaster.

You all agree the car is not a good handler, then how can you term the cars engine a monster, highway cruiser when you driving above 120 Kmph becomes difficult due to boat like handling.

Bricks and bat welcome.

[Sheel]

Aren't chassis and engine different components?

Its a common and true belief that Verna's engine is a bomb. Now, if you are comparing two Cars in an enthusiast's way, in-gear acceleration would hardly matter, would they? And if we are comparing speeds, handling would hardly be in the picture. Lets leave that out.

In all honesty, the speeds I could safely do on a public road, I didn't find the Vento breathless, but then, I have not driven a Verna or even an i20 D either, so I can't really compare, but on paper, with equal drivers, the Verna would be ahead, maybe just.

Vento scores over the Verna in handling (a common & agreed to consensus)

Give that Verna a Linea's chassis & Team BHPians buying a Car in that price range, won't even think of any other Car.

[khoj]

Thank you but No, thank you. There is a 1.6 MJD mill about to be plonked in to the Linea's engine bay very soon.

Originally Posted by Sheel

Give that Verna a Linea's chassis & Team BHPians buying a Car in that price range, won't even think of any other Car.

[sandeep3in]

Originally Posted by Vid6639

and the flaws of the engine were clearly visible.

.

It would be good if you can detail out what were the flaws of the engine.

Have driven 3 cars (vento/verna/sx4-d) i find the vento more responsive and never felt it breathless.

May be it is the way one drives and i have FELT 1.6TDI to be a gem of an engine.

To hear it flaws would be really good, so i can change my opnion and set it in the right direction.

On a lighter note i was more comfortable in an sx4-d than a Verna , you may have a monster/Godzilla or what so ever as an engine.But all the components to work together to get the best out of it.

[thoma]

With whatever brilliant engine a car have, and the pinning effect post the turbo lag, if the dynamics is way off, how can one drive enthusiastically? It is like playing with danger. The Verna literally tends to take of from the tar if you do a pedal to metal start.

If you give a 3.9 stars to the Vento's engine and a 4 star to the Verna's, you have to give a 2 for Verna's handling and a 4 for Vento's. So in all practicality and theoretically, if you cannot utilize any advantage, what good use is boasting about the same?

It is only in comparison to the Verna that the Vento a tad less eager to kick dust, when downshifting to a very high RPM in a lower gear. Breathless might not be an appropriate choice of word.

And for the NVH part, I have to admit that the Verna wins hands down. In fact, I had to take some brickbats mentioning about it on this thread when I TD'd the Vento. But I've not felt it to be as bad as my Micra. Real crude and tractorish is the 3 potters Polo and Beat, in my opinion.

[Warwithwheels]

Relevant excerpts of GTO's review from the first page of the thread. Please re read it and continue the discussion

Stats = 250 NM of torque at 1,500 – 2,500 rpm. Move over Hyundai Verna (235 Nm @ 1,900 - 2,750 rpm), the Vento TDI is the new torque king of the C segment. Not only does the diesel Vento make the most torque of all C segment sedans, it also equals its bigger brother, the Jetta (and its 2.0 L diesel). Get this, the Vento’s torque / weight ratio is superior to the Jetta as well as the Skoda Laura MT! The 1.6L unit is rated at 104 BHP (@ 4,400 rpm), 4 horses lesser than the Hyundai (108 BHP @ 4,000 rpm).

Start the engine and there is a certain amount of clatter. Once warmed up, things get better, though the diesel remains audible at all times. The 1.6 L under the Vento’s hood is a common-rail diesel, yet it sounds like the Laura’s 1.9 Pumpe Düse unit. At low rpms, marginal turbo lag is present, but it’s nowhere as bad as in the Polo. Fact is, the Vento is easy to live with in an urban driving environment. Driveability is decent and you certainly won't be using the gearbox as much. It's easy to close gaps in traffic without a downshift. The turbo has woken up at 1,800 rpm and the motor really gets onto its own after 2,000 rpm. There’s a sudden surge of torque and the acceleration, expectedly, is strong. The engine is also exceedingly revv-happy right upto 5,100 rpm. She strains after that, but if you insist, the engine will go on to 5,400 rpm. The Vento diesel's mid-range packs a mighty punch. Whilst cruising at a 100 kph in 5th gear, the rpm needle is hovering at about 2,100 rpm (turbo zone). If you want to overtake, merely press the accelerator to access instant pep (no need to downshift at all). It’s a similar situation when you are cruising in 3rd gear at 50 kph (again, revv needle above 2,000 rpm). Floor the pedal and power delivery is instantaneous. In the petrol Vento, every overtaking manoeuvre requires a downshift. Not so in the diesel Vento; the strong mid-range is the new segment benchmark. The gearing is spot-on and VW has chosen the ratios perfectly well. Learn to keep the engine on the boil and you can really make fast progress out on the expressways. Also, high speed cruising ability is exemplary. Where the Linea starts running out of breath at 130 kph, the Vento is eager to accelerate, even at 140 – 150. This car easily seems capable of hitting a top whack of 186 kph, and an indicated 200 kph (as someone else found out ). No way is the power delivery linear though. There is a sudden surge after 2,000 rpms. Don’t make your passengers uncomfortable by frequently pushing them in the back . The highest torque rating and relatively lighter kerb weight of the Vento undoubtedly play a part in its stunning performance. The short-throw gearshift is slick, albeit the one on the petrol is the segment best. Shifting in the diesel Vento definitely required more effort than in its petrol sibling. A unique feature about the Diesel Highline is the MID’s gearshift indicator. If you are in too high a gear at too low a speed, or vice versa, the gearshift indicator will suggest what gear you should shift to, along with an up / down arrow (suggesting an upshift / downshift). Refer to the picture in the 6th post below. A negative point about the diesel is that you can feel excessive drivetrain movement on the pedals (clutch especially). Pedal vibration is on the higher side, only magnified by higher revvs. German turbo-diesels are usually fuel efficient and the Vento shouldn't disappoint on that front.

[Vid6639]

Originally Posted by Warwithwheels

Relevant excerpts of GTO's review from the first page of the thread. Please re read it and continue the discussion

Thanks but do remember this review was written before the fluidic Verna was launched.

Mpower was earlier referring to refinement. This is what is mentioned in our official review:

Once warmed up, things get better, though the diesel remains audible at all times. The 1.6 L under the Vento’s hood is a common-rail diesel, yet it sounds like the Laura’s 1.9 Pumpe Düse unit.

Now talking about breathless. One thing for sure. The Vento's engine is not underpowered. This is not what we meant.

The Vento makes 250Nm from 1,500 to 2,500rpm whereas the Verna makes 260 Nm from 1,900 to 2,750rpm. Mind you this does not mean that after 2,750rpm in the Verna or after 2,500 rpm in the Vento peak torque falls off like a cliff.

Secondly, Verna makes 126bhp @ 4,000rpm vs the Vento's 104 @ 4,400rpm. That's a huge difference.

Torque will come into play when lugging at lower rpm but when you're out on the open road, outright power is what you need.

Now the word breathless doesn't mean that there's no performance on tap, just that the engine feels strained/stress at highway speeds and not effortless. This is probably nothing to do with the engine and may have to do with the shorter gearing on the Vento vs the Verna's taller gear ratios. I'm not even considering the other advantage of the Verna which is the 6th gear. Even if you take 5, the Verna ratios feel taller.

I will give examples of some more cars that exhibit this exact same behaviour but more exaggerated so you realise the difference.

Example1:
Ford Figo vs Hyundai i20. 68bhp vs 89bhp. Note that the bhp difference is similar to Vento and Verna i.e. approx 20 BHP. The i20 has way more torque at a lower rpm than the Figo but driving in city it is the Figo that trumps the i20. No turbo lag, lesser downshifts in city and overall much better to drive in city than on highway. Out on the highway, the Figo will cruise at speeds above 100kmph but the engine always sounds busy like it's doing more work. The i20 is effortless on the highway unless you are reducing speed and need to pick up again. This is where the Figo is better as it doesn't need a downshift.

Now in above example replace the Vento with Figo and Verna with i20. Looks similar doesn't it?

Example2:
Altis vs Civic. This is a stark contrast. You can drive the Altis in any gear at slow speeds. 5th gear will pull effortlessly from 35Kmph. Try the same in the Civic and you will either stall or fall asleep. On the other hand, revv the pants of the Civic and once the Vtec kicks in, you will be smiling like a kid who has got a bowl of favourite ice cream. In contrast the Altis hates to be revved but will still hit the redline. Out on the highway, the Altis feels like it's doing much more work for maintaining the same speed as a Civic.

In the end both the cars Vento and Verna are explosive but have different driving characteristics.

PS: The above comparison is engine alone and I'm not getting into handling as we all know which is better and there's no doubt in anyone's mind.

[Sheel]

Originally Posted by khoj

Thank you but No, thank you. There is a 1.6 MJD mill about to be plonked in to the Linea's engine bay very soon.

Yup, that would be like having your cake & eating it as well Did forget about it, thanks for pointing out.