[navdeep.rana]

Originally Posted by Dr.Naren

You have claimed Nano has better build quality than Ciaz, that means more safer? Who is misleading people? Do read about NCAP crash tests too instead of searching for accident pics

NCAP crash test is of Suzuki Ciaz sold overseas and not of the one sold in India. The one sold in India has less safety because of Maruti ripping off build quality for cost cutting. Nano costs like 1/6th of the price of Ciaz and got 0 stars in NCAP. A car with 0 star rating in NCAP did this much damage to Ciaz. Can you explain how am I misleading? It's you asking people not to care about such incidents and go with cars that has no safety.

[Dr.Naren]

Can you explain how am I misleading?

Originally Posted by navdeep.rana

A car with 0 star rating in NCAP did this much damage to Ciaz

OK, I have understood how safety is judged by you . Nothing more to add here.

Cheers!

[autorahul]

This seems like just a rant thread. Anything sells for what people are ready to pay for it.

This is not just for cars. People value gold more than they value silver. They value different varieties of apple differently. People have bought iPhone for years at cost 4-5 times the cost of manufacturing. How people value something is all that matters.

If people are ready to pay 9 lakhs for Swift, they will pay. That is Maruti cashing in on an established product. Like Honda is cashing in on City, Toyota on Innova, Hyundai on Creta.

When Maruti have launched new products, they have thrown the cat among pigeons. Case in point Baleno, Brezza and Ciaz.

In addition, prices of Maruti's recent models have seemed high because of the Smartplay infotainment system. If the comparison is made for non touchscreen systems, Maruti comes out very favorably. There is no car which offers a pretty wonderful 4 cylinder engine, Dual Airbags and ABS at 4.6 lakhs. Guess which car? Its the overpriced Ignis.

PS: The only purpose of this thread, seems to bash Maruti, which I don't think adds much value to the conversation

[androdev]

If you consider purchase cost + ownership cost - resale value, Swift is cheaper compared to Polo, etc. Considering only the initial purchase cost is meaningless for a car.

[Leoshashi]

Originally Posted by navdeep.rana

Being a customer yourself (I reckon), stop misleading other people against the importance of safety dear Sir.

Now coming to this thread, unless we hail from Maruti's R&D wing, no one can exactly speculate why Swift is so expensive and how much Maruti is earning per car. And isn't this thread for the wrong car?? After the introduction of the 1L MPI Polo, shouldn't you start a new thread for Polo as well?? Why is Polo 1.0 as expensive as the Polo 1.2?? Food for thought!!

[Skyline_GT]

Originally Posted by Dr.Naren

I don't understand the logic behind this thread. The thread title itself is wrong. The cars mentioned don't cost the same.

I completely agree with this.

But still for those who wish to continue on the Swift v/s The Rest debate here's an interesting article as to why the newly launched 2018 Swift has already crossed the 25,000+ units sold mark-
https://www.cartoq.com/new-maruti-su...g-reasons-why/

[audioholic]

Originally Posted by navdeep.rana

You still believe other wise? Well that's the beauty of democracy right?. We can Agree to disagree!
Although I have posted just one picture, I can post a whole lot of library if you want me to.

Having a Maruti garage at home, I wont comment on title of the thread, or rather find the thread like a rant like many others.

But working in the field of automotive safety, I would say you have got your logic wrong in the Ciaz incident. Search for rear end collisions and you will find that this is the norm in which the vehicle in front gets damaged.. Of course, compared to a Polo the Maruti family feels flimsy. But using a rear end incident and comparing the safety offered by a Nano vs the Ciaz is just absurd.

And If I were to upgrade my hatchback now, it would be a Diesel Polo or a Petrol Swift. The Petrol Polo had a weak case earlier, and now it is a goner with that 1.0L engine. Speaking on the same lines of this thread, why didn't VW reduce the price of the Polo petrol if they downsized the engine?

[a4anurag]

Why Swift is priced same with i20 and Polo is a question that only Maruti can answer because they have decided to position it in the premium segment. Interested buyers will pay that price and get it come what may.

I remember the time in November, 2010 when I had gone to get the replacement for WagonR that I'll be using full time for 3K kms a month, my choice was only Swift but Maruti asked me to wait 7-8 months more due to huge bookings. I had to compromise and get the Ritz VDi instead. Come November, 2013 and I am in the market again for replacement of the Ritz and this time I was adamant I get Swift ZDi. It was almost 8.3L OTR and IIRC there was a small amount of waiting time when I purchased it in December, 2013.

Did either the long waiting period or price of the Swift or features offered by the car versus competition stop the masses from buying it even when prices reached almost 9L in some cities in 2013 itself? Answer is No!! It sold 14K units on an average.

Pricing is one of the few factors in the buying decision but the ease of maintenance, peace of mind during the ownership, reliability are also to be considered when deciding which is better!

Yes, build quality on the Swift etc isn't in the league of Germans but my basic problem is we as citizens don't wear helmets and seat belts which is primary need to be fulfilled when on the road (I am talking of the aam junta / mango man who wears seat belts and ₹500 helmets to fool the Traffic police and avoid challans). Till this attitude doesn't go, nothing can be done in terms of safety, build quality etc. It'll take another 5-6 years minimum for masses to understand importance of ABS, Airbags in a car and choose it while buying!

Swift is a brand in itself and has created many fans across the nation since it's launch and this has been understood by Maruti Suzuki. They cashed-in the opportunity well and are reeping benefits happily.

As rightly pointed by Audioholic Sir, if features, engine options etc were kept in mind while pricing a car, then VW is cheating the Indian customer more than Maruti by launching the 1.0L engine at the same price as 1.2L. If this pricing strategy is justified then Maruti Suzuki pricing the Swift in the same category as Polo and i20 too is justified.

[navdeep.rana]

Originally Posted by audioholic

Having a Maruti garage at home, I wont comment on title of the thread, or rather find the thread like a rant like many others.

But working in the field of automotive safety, I would say you have got your logic wrong in the Ciaz incident. Search for rear end collisions and you will find that this is the norm in which the vehicle in front gets damaged.. Of course, compared to a Polo the Maruti family feels flimsy. But using a rear end incident and comparing the safety offered by a Nano vs the Ciaz is just absurd.

And If I were to upgrade my hatchback now, it would be a Diesel Polo or a Petrol Swift. The Petrol Polo had a weak case earlier, and now it is a goner with that 1.0L engine. Speaking on the same lines of this thread, why didn't VW reduce the price of the Polo petrol if they downsized the engine?

Even Polo 1.2 Petrol was never a good option and new 1.0 L is even more foolish. My friend has 1.2 L Polo petrol and it is not very good in driving department and mileage is something I would not even talk about. The new 1 L Polo petrol is indeed a shocker and no one knows what VW was thinking and it indeed is a cheating with customers.

Now how come cheating on safety by Maruti is not a cheating with customers (as all the Maruti fanboys are arguing here to death- *no pun intended)? Why can't Maruti customers like adults deal with the fact that Maruti compromises on safety, features and power, and still prices the car similar to rivals that provides all these things? Whats so hard about it? I had a Maruti as my first car, Hyundai as second and VW as third, and as a customer I will always accept any criticism about any of these manufacturer, rather than defending it. I am the car owner here. Buying one car of them doesn't makes me the owner of whole company who starts defending the manufacturer instead of asking more from them. Realize this fact.

How come one should not even question Maruti for compromising on safety? How come asking for better build from a car manufacturer is thrashing them when other manufacturers are doing it under same price point?

The answer is simple. When people on TBHP doesn't gives much priority to safety, I can only imagine how much importance normal car buyers would give to it. Its all resale and maintenance. I don't understand, people before even buying a car, starts thinking about selling it. Are you getting a car to drive for yourself or to sell it to someone else?

[audioholic]

Originally Posted by navdeep.rana

Now how come cheating on safety by Maruti is not a cheating with customers (as all the Maruti fanboys are arguing here to death- *no pun intended)?

How come one should not even question Maruti for compromising on safety? How come asking for better build from a car manufacturer is thrashing him when other manufacturers are doing it under same price point?

In simple words, you as a customer in a democratic country have the freedom to choose the car you want. If you make an informed buy then there is nothing like it. The way you are putting it sounds like Maruti is pushing cars down customers throat and we have no other choice. This is why most people here are debating. If according to you the Swift is unsafe, then definitely you can protest by not buying it. Instead, trying to find the worthiness of the product and it's price from your own point of view and declaring it as cheating is absurd.

Going by your logic, if Maruti sells the same unsafe cars at say 1L rupees lesser then will it be a genuine trade? Its rubbish IMO. I personally found the exterior build of my Celerio to be flimsy. Hence I might look towards a different brand in the future. But then, thats my choice. Instead, I cant stand outside a Maruti showroom with my new car from a different brand laughing at the buyers that they have been cheated. It will be a waste of my time, just like this thread.

Hence, there is no necessity to classify the community as a whole. The discussions, reviews here are pretty straight forward which also highlights any issue with safety, build quality and so on with any car irrespective of the brand. End of the day, its a persons choice on where their hard earned money goes.

[deep_bang]

Two viewpoints:
Consumer: need a decent hatch, nice looking, powerful, decent service. VW has shocking stories to talk about - fear of being ripped apart on the service front. Hyundai - is the middle ground. Maruti is not the cheapest of them all, BUT they sell spares. That to me is the single most advantage that Maruti cars have cause then even complex repairs can be done outside. It actually translates to peace of mind.

Maruti: we have spent years/decades in India. What do we want to give the consumer - reliable, decent cars and superb service and also sell spares, so dealers can't monopolize the service scenario. Well, in the process we also should make money. So let's price it as consumers pay - in other words as long as competitors offer just incremental benefits, without any significant betterment of service/experience, we can afford to price it high and make money.



In fact maruti provides the fairest service scenario compared to ANY other manufacturer. So, people often tend to ignore the smaller things. After all, not everyone is an auto enthusuast and most just need a car to go from point a to b, in decent comfort, and be reliable.

[sureshkishore]

Why the Swift costs the same as I20 and Polo?:


1. Because Hyundai and VW are trying their best to compete with Maruti Suzuki to gain volumes, easiest thing for them is to bench mark the market leader in Pricing.
2. The I20 or Polo for the matter could be costlier to make but, if they were to be priced higher than the market leader, the manufacturer feels that there wouldn't be enough buyers.
3. Considering the volumes that these cars sell for the respective manufacturer, the dealer margin on Polo and I20 would need to be significantly higher than the Swift, so that the dealership remains viable. Thus pricing of these cars can't be further reduced without significantly reducing their bottom line.

Any seller would be interested to set at a higher price for his product, however it is the consumer who ultimately corrects the pricing by means of his buying decision. Blame it on 'Market Dynamics' and not Maruti Suzuki, this is the real reason why 2 products may sell for a similar price however their cost price would be very different.

Pricing is purely a commercial decision, let's not get too emotional about it on the forum.

[gunsho]

Originally Posted by navdeep.rana

What specific part, or special feature is Maruti putting in this car that makes it cost so much that its price goes up all the way close to a Million Rupees on Road?

Keeping out resale value and maintenance cost, I want to know that as a PRODUCT, what Swift has to offer that other cars of similar price as a PRODUCT don't? What are the USP's of the car that makes you fall in love with it?

I believe the fact that you want to keep out resale value & maintenance cost, may be you already know the answer and just doesn't want to accept it . Cost of a car is just not for the PRODUCT. It includes a package of various aspects, along with product (Brand / Market acceptance / Resale / Maintenance / Ease of ownership and many more things ).

If Product is the only thing that one will use to decide the sale price, whom do you think will cost more? Madavan or Rajinikanth or Sharukh or Amithab?

[sandeepmohan]

Originally Posted by navdeep.rana

Although both costs almost the same, I want to know why Swift (as a product that you get) costs so much when it doesn't comes close to its rivals (Polo 1.5 TDI & Elite i20) in terms of driving factor (Polo wins), build quality (Polo wins), space (i20 wins), features (i20 wins).

I don't really know what these cars cost but I bet they cross hop each other with each variant.

I would put the question the other way round too. Why should I pay 7lac for a 1.2l (Now 1l) 3 pot Polo when I can buy a lovely 4 cylinder petrol motor found on the Suzuki Swift. The 1.2l Suzuki engine is hands down the best in this trio.

Diesel. Yes; the Hyundai and VW rule but that is not to say the old Fiat sourced Multijet 1.3l is bad. 8 years on and the refinement levels can be compared to anything else there is at its price point.

To go in order of your points;

From a drivers perspective, I see no reason to consider the VW or Hyundai. The Swift is still the most fun little run about you can buy and is incredible value for money.

In line with the above, lets talk NA engines. In this group, the Suzuki demolishes all of them (Except for the VW Tsi motor which is almost 12lac territory). It is also the most efficient.

The Swift may not have the immaculate build quality of the VW and Hyundai but it holds up well. Nothing falls apart.

Space. Yes; the Hyundai wins but I could ask the same question on why VW want so much for a Polo which has less room than a Swift. Premium VW badge? Maybe.

Features. I am not sure what the Swift misses (or missed) apart from a fancy touch screen stereo.

You can say all you want but you can't beat the biggest benefit of owning a Swift and that has already been said a million times, peace of mind. The Swift is without doubt the most proven super mini you can buy. Cheap to run too. The latter is what we care about the most.

[volkman10]

Originally Posted by navdeep.rana

I don't understand, people before even buying a car, starts thinking about selling it. Are you getting a car to drive for yourself or to sell it to someone else?

Before this thread reaches its destined fate, and having a car each from Volkswagen and Maruti Suzuki, here is my take on this.

Car ownership is not just buying a car. It has a bonding with the owner in its entire life-cycle, which a major chuck is the experience with the dealerships and the reliability of the product.

Volkswagen though has exemplary built in its cars, the other two - its reliability and the dealership experience ( After Sales and Service) is pathetic.

When asked to recommend a car , I nowadays never even mention a VW, having gone through the ordeal of owing one, especially if it your only car.

Regarding Safety, the upcoming safety norm should suffice and give the customer enough direction on which car to purchase based on the Star ratings achieved. Until then it is all speculation on the built quality.