[thesilentone]

As per Topgear, Audi has just launched the 208 BHP 2.0 TFSI Q3 at a starting price of 27.37 lakhs. Honda has got quite a battle on the opening day itself.

[anandpadhye]

Originally Posted by thesilentone

As per Topgear, Audi has just launched the 208 BHP 2.0 TFSI Q3 at a starting price of 27.37 lakhs. Honda has got quite a battle on the opening day itself.

Yes yes yes.
If I can afford to buy this contraption for around 25 lakhs (and more importantly, believe that so much money should be spent on a vaporizing asset), I will definately blow a little more money and get the TFSi Q3. That car is definately high-tech stuff. I will enjoy driving it and also feel good about myself that I funded some real R&D engineers...

[spinfreak]

Originally Posted by anandpadhye

Yes yes yes.
If I can afford to buy this contraption for around 25 lakhs (and more importantly, believe that so much money should be spent on a vaporizing asset), I will definately blow a little more money and get the TFSi Q3. That car is definately high-tech stuff. I will enjoy driving it and also feel good about myself that I funded some real R&D engineers...

CRV Top at 25 On-Road.

Audi at 28 ex-s/r translates to at least 33-34 Lacs On road! Definitely not 'Little more money'?

[agambhandari]

The diesel Q3 is actually the bigger problem for the CR-V.
For 3-4 lakh more, you get the brand value and cheaper running costs.

[pgsagar]

New CRV looks great. I see lot of concern for FE. Concern is not misplaced but looking at the way European diesels are breaking down, it is not unusual to see a 3/4 year diesel blowing 2/3 turbos and other parts, too. That money alone will take care of differential fuel money on CRV for a couple of years.

[anandpadhye]

Originally Posted by spinfreak

CRV Top at 25 On-Road.

Audi at 28 ex-s/r translates to at least 33-34 Lacs On road! Definitely not 'Little more money'?

True.
But what is Honda selling for 25L? Pretty much same engine as the 2004 CR-V/Accord? I hate this attitude.

Originally Posted by pgsagar

I see lot of concern for FE. Concern is not misplaced but looking at the way European diesels are breaking down, it is not unusual to see a 3/4 year diesel blowing 2/3 turbos and other parts, too. That money alone will take care of differential fuel money on CRV for a couple of years.

European diesels? Try European petrols. My TSi Laura gives me @12kmpl even when I drive it like it is supposed to be driven. Ask Honda to match that (with equal fun)...

[316kmph]

Originally Posted by anandpadhye

True.
But what is Honda selling for 25L? Pretty much same engine as the 2004 CR-V/Accord? I hate this attitude.

European diesels? Try European petrols. My TSi Laura gives me @12kmpl even when I drive it like it is supposed to be driven. Ask Honda to match that (with equal fun)...

As sad as it may be, most automakers cycle their engines over a very long time. For example your Laura is powered by a 1998 engine that powered the old Octavia, Passat, A4 and the TT and is likely to be carried over to the new gen Octavia expected here in mid 2013!!! (That's 15 years and running) Even the Jetta 1.4 is powered by an engine from 2005, and VW is betting big on this engine, guessing another 5 years!! Ditto with the 2.0. Not just VW, Mercedes, BMW, Maruti and dozens out there do this. Besides, Honda's have some of the lowest powertrain warranty claims (IIRC, it's zero claims in the V-tec engines,) so don't fix it if ain't broke is not a bad approach. Honda just updated the engine.

The aircons in most of the European cars are a joke in the summer. The European cars' reliability, After sales service (some Marques) and costs are not the best - there are several threads elsewhere in this very forum adding weight to this point.

No one car is perfect, but Hondas do a stellar job in their pursuit.

And comparing a crossover's fuel economy to that of a sedan is not reasonable.

Though cross-shopping between CRV, Q3 and X1 will happen, the CRV is in a different segment. Obviously CRV will not match the Q3 for interior quality or the X1 for fun. But, both these cars will not match the Honda for space (passenger and cargo), comfort, value for money (equipment), reliability and the list goes on.

The CRV may not appeal to a lot of folks who are buying their first 25 lakh car, unless he / she puts practicality (less diesel) over everything else. But, it will appeal to people who already have one too many 50 Lakh plus car.

Just to give a perspective someone owning a Q5 or a Q7 may not find the Q3 appealing and may on the contrary may get a feeling that the Q3 is a me too own an Audi - poorer brother of his/her Q5/Q7.

That's where the CRV's advantages will start to glow and outshine the Q3s

CRV may not be the best buy among all cars. But it certainly is the best mid sized crossover (non luxury) SUV in the market.

The best built for purpose car is the Mercedes S class - the perfect luxury car - best does what it's supposed to do - transport rich guys in the most comfortable manner.

Only two other cars come to my mind in the criteria of best built for purpose- Tata Nano and the Honda CRV. (This is my opinion and I ain't saying other cars don't serve their purpose, it's just that IMHO, though most cars do a great job, it's these there that stand out at what they do.)

The CRV is indeed a genuine Comfortable Runabout Vehicle.

[asr245]

Originally Posted by anandpadhye

Isn't it like going for diploma after 10'th because you are seeing others not doing well enough in 12'th to get into degree?

No, it's like taking a longer/reliable (traffic free/good road) route to get somewhere rather than taking a shorter but troublesome route.

Originally Posted by anandpadhye

BTW, maintaining diesels and turbocharged engines needs some care and knowledge on part of the owner. For those who don't want to get into it, there are Honda's and Toyota's (in leighter vein)...

Strange. I would have thought Maruti & Hyundai have sold maybe 10 times more turbo diesels than than all the Czech/Germans combined. Yet you hear less complaints about them than the Germans/Czech. Or maybe Germans/Czech tend to invite more of the "ignorant" lot.

[Santoshbhat]

Originally Posted by 316kmph

Honda's have some of the lowest powertrain warranty claims (IIRC, it's zero claims in the V-tec engines,) so don't fix it if ain't broke is not a bad approach. Honda just updated the engine.

Agreed Honda's VTec engines were the benchmark in petrol engines about 15 years back and we all loved them. Compared to petrol offerrings from other car makers it was head and shoulders ahead. But the competition has caught up. Hyundai's Kappa engines or Maruti's K10 engines are right up there and the car buying public is no mood to give Honda any premium for superior engine technology which it used to command in the earlier days. Remember the days when Honda was charging a premium of over a lac for the 1.5 City Vtec over the regular City? which itself was over priced compared to competition. In today's age if they print that the All new CRV puts out 190 PS from a 2.4L Vtec engine, the public is going to yawn. Come on Honda we need some new ground breaking stuff from you. Forget diesel engines, give it to us in petrol engines atleast!

Even the new Sonata has a GDI engine that produces 200 PS of power from a 2.4L engine. With the all new CRV, an all new Honda engine with some new engine tech like direct injection would have made this CRV 'exiting'. Turbocharing is here to stay and in future even small hatches are going to get small engines with turbos. Its eco friendly too as it cuts emissions and helps the small engine produce higher output. A new CRV with 2.0 L turcbocharged engine putting out 220 ps even a 1.8L turbo unit producing 180 ps would have been far more attractive. The smaller engines would help with better FE figures too.

Originally Posted by 316kmph

As sad as it may be, most automakers cycle their engines over a very long time. For example your Laura is powered by a 1998 engine that powered the old Octavia, Passat, A4 and the TT and is likely to

I don't think TSI engine technology is as old as 1998. IIRC VW pioneered it in 2006. You may say that they basically took Audi's FSI engines, added a Turbo and called it TSI.

THe CRV as a package is great car there's no denying that. Just that it would have been that much more desirable if a) It had a sensible diesel motor under the hood or b) An exciting new petrol motor that can be fun as well as frugal.

They are stretching this 'don't fix it if it ain't broke' philosophy too much IMO. Honda as brand had its distinct identity for innovation and pioneering technology. Its Toyota that's known to play it safe.

[316kmph]

Originally Posted by Santoshbhat

THe CRV as a package is great car there's no denying that. Just that it would have been that much more desirable if a) It had a sensible diesel motor under the hood or b) An exciting new petrol motor that can be fun as well as frugal.

I agree with this part, that a diesel would have made the CRV more practical than what it already is.

I also would like to add that the AT gearbox should have also been changed or heavily updated.

As far as turbo charging goes Honda did try turbos, IIRC from the late 1980s in the Legend (in fact it was a VGT!!) Even until recently, the 2012 Acura RDX was turbo charged. Why Honda is favoring V-tecs over Turbos is something only the company can tell - but I am sure they have a sound logic.

Sonata GDi vs CRV V-tec, put them on a drag race and track race and factor some bias for Sedan vs Crossover I am sure the Honda will impress, if not beat the Hyundai. Lets reserve comments till then.

I remember the, guess 2008 Autocar India track day with Narain Karthikeyan where the CRV was faster than the Fiesta S and the Civic around the Madras Race Track!! Impressive for a Crossover!

[Santoshbhat]

Originally Posted by 316kmph

Sonata GDi vs CRV V-tec, put them on a drag race and track race and factor some bias for Sedan vs Crossover I am sure the Honda will impress, if not beat the Hyundai. Lets reserve comments till then.

Oh I am not doubting the capabilities of the Honda Vtec engine. It can still hold its own against the competition. But its just the lead that Honda had in engine technology is diminishing if not vanished, esp if you compare it to TSI engines from VW and Ecoboost engines from Ford. Companies like Hyundai and Suzuki are fast catching up. Honda needs to respond. Hope we are not going OT.

[mxx]

Originally Posted by pgsagar

New CRV looks great. I see lot of concern for FE. Concern is not misplaced but looking at the way European diesels are breaking down, it is not unusual to see a 3/4 year diesel blowing 2/3 turbos and other parts, too. That money alone will take care of differential fuel money on CRV for a couple of years.

Originally Posted by asr245

No, it's like taking a longer/reliable (traffic free/good road) route to get somewhere rather than taking a shorter but troublesome route.

Strange. I would have thought Maruti & Hyundai have sold maybe 10 times more turbo diesels than than all the Czech/Germans combined. Yet you hear less complaints about them than the Germans/Czech. Or maybe Germans/Czech tend to invite more of the "ignorant" lot.

Originally Posted by Vid6639

It's not just the engines. You get electronic issues, air conditioning issues and such other stuff which one needs to know of to be able to tackle them effectively with the ASS.

Originally Posted by asr245

With Honda, you get peace of mind. With a Skoda/VW/German car, you probably need to keep the number of a towing chap handy. For me, no amount of trim/driving pleasure can equate to peace of mind. Never mind that inspite of that Honda's A.S.S. is way better than any European brand.

If I had the money, I too would fall in this category.

I agree that german/european cars may not be as reliable in the long run as japanese cars. But, things are taken too far here and things are not as extreme as it is mentioned here. You only have to see honda sales and compare it with the competition to see that.
Even skoda's flop yeti sells more than CRV.
I understand that you guys like honda, but that does not make people who have purchased german/european cars are not idiots.
The problem is that CRV does not have a USP. Someone with 25lakh rupee car does not have an strong reason to select CRV over santafe, captiva, fortuner. Nowadays the person can go down a segment and consider a xuv or yeti too.

[aniketi]

One of my friend has 2 CRV at home. He can easily go for higher cars like Audi, BMW etc. But he sticks to Honda for its reliability, comfort it offers, good engines etc. His simple argument is if he gets something for 25 L, why should he waste like 50-60 Lacs or even more for bigger cars which offers almost same package. I agree with him on this. He is happy with Honda's peace of mind. He buy Honda mainly for that.

Anyways, i liked this car. But i guess Honda should have priced it a lac or two cheaper. It would have gained them lots of customers IMO. Lets see how market responds. I guess it will sell around 100 per month

[316kmph]

Originally Posted by aniketi

His simple argument is if he gets something for 25 L, why should he waste like 50-60 Lacs or even more for bigger cars which offers almost same package. I agree with him on this. He is happy with Honda's peace of mind. He buy Honda mainly for that. )

Crv is no doubt a fantastic car, but I wouldn't go as far as saying that its better than an X3 or Q5 and definitely not the ML250.

The Honda might pip these in one or two areas such as space or Value for money, but I am sure it will fall way back in terms of Engine, gearbox, performance, refinement, ride, handling, build quality, safety technology, fun to drive, and fit and finish.

Originally Posted by aniketi

I guess it will sell around 100 per month

Sounds ambitious, one Chennai dealership's showroom manager said that they don't plan on having a test drive car, a crazy joke!!! If his claim is correct, my guess is that Honda wants at best a couple of dozen a year sold in Chennai.

[sridhar-v]

Had a look @ the new CRV in the showroom. The main concern is that they have dropped the Ground Clearance to 170mm. The underbody protrusions, mostly in the centre of the car, were pretty bad, though covered in plastic cladding. All Honda cars have a tendency for the rear suspension to settle down quite a lot under load. So I forsee clearing of bad humps etc. to be a problem with a fully loaded car. So it definitely is only a Softroader. Definitely not to be taken off tarmac even for the 4X4 model.