[alpha1]

Products and solutions fail when they try to become everything and try to please everyone.

Thar has created an image of being a Butch 4x4.
I hope M&M does not dilute it by pandering to every Tom, Dick and Harry.

But playing the devil's advocate: even the most capable 4x4 in this world have a 4x2 variant ...

[dhanushs]

Originally Posted by Samurai

Now you got me really curious. I want to hear your score for 4WD CRDe using the same questions.

Even though the answers for the above questions remain more or less the same, it answers one big YES, and for which one is ready to compromise all the above.

My point is that the 2WD version doesn't have a big YES, to make up for all these shortcomings..

[roy_libran]

M&M may or may not launch a 2WD Thar CRDe; it really doesn't matter much, but what is indeed more important, from a customer perspective, is for them to launch an improved and "properly engineered" 4WD Thar CRDe within the same price point.

[svpatra]

In few posts, few customers were replaced their regular hatchbacks or sedans with Thar. Others admired thar’s onroad ability. If the vehicle perform well for day to day regular use with out 4x4, why not to offer for that need only. This will reduce the initial cost substantially.

just take out 4x4 and the Thar became BLING. This is one good comment. Means all SUV /MUV (without 4x4) are bling(s)and they are sold much higher numbers in compare to their 4x4 counter parts. 95 % of the 540s donated by WHO to state governments health departments are 2x2. They could have donated sedans.

4x4 just enhances the vehicle’s ability to tame different terrains.

Sri

[mallumowgli]

Originally Posted by svpatra

just take out 4x4 and the Thar became BLING. This is one good comment. Means all SUV /MUV (without 4x4) are bling(s)and they are sold much higher numbers in compare to their 4x4 counter parts. 95 % of the 540s donated by WHO to state governments health departments are 2x2. They could have donated sedans.

You missed the point. Taking the 4X4 out of any vehicle doesn't make it BLING. But what Dhanush probably meant was that a Thar without 4X4 is just bling. There is nothing else going for it

[Mpower]

I think they should go ahead and launch a 4x2 , keep the IFS and employ street tires.

The 4x4 should be changed over to solid axle front and bigger AT/MT tires for more GC which gives it OTR cred + aggressive look. Add optional diff locks

So strategy will be somewhat similar to what Chrysler is doing with its Rubicon and Overland editions.

Originally Posted by dhanushs

Performance = NO
Comfort = NO
Economical = NO
Safety = NO
Service/Maintenance Friendly = NO
Fun to Drive = NO
City Friendly = NO
Highway Friendly = NO
Weather Protection = NO

BLING = YES.

Are these in comparison to a Thar 4x4? If so, would say yes to everything except OTR capability and no to bling?

If it looks identical to the 4x4 on the outside, how does it make it more blingy?

[vivekgk]

Originally Posted by dhanushs

Guys, what will be the purpose of a Thar CRDe 2WD?

Practicality = NO
Utility = NO
Performance = NO
Comfort = NO
Economical = NO
Safety = NO
Service/Maintenance Friendly = NO
Fun to Drive = NO
City Friendly = NO
Highway Friendly = NO
Weather Protection = NO

BLING = YES.

So, is there any point in owning a vehicle just for bling? IMO, it will bring down the value of the product very much.

Also, IMO, the feel good factor now associated with the Thar owners is that, even though 90% of them have never used the 4WD lever, they have a feeling that they ride a very capable machine, and the way their machine performs cannot be matched by any other vehicle in the market, except for some pricey ones(?)..

With the launch of 2WD version of the same vehicle, I think this feel good factor originating due to the exclusivity of the product will be lost.

First of all, most of the factors that you have mentioned are thrown out the window the moment a buyer decides to go for a Jeep. A Jeep owner like you would know that you don't buy a Jeep for any of the things that you have listed out above. Still, Let me just give my 2 paise on each of the factors you've mentioned.

Practicality = NO

I think this depends on what you think is practical for you. A big mean looking Jeep with a high, commanding driving position is an enormous advantage in any road, city, highway or a backroad. The Thar is not so big that it is a pain to maneuver either. IMHO that seems immensely practical. As does the idea of not having the suspension/tyres broken to bits from unseen potholes.

Utility = NO

Again, it depends. I know several people down here in the south who use their jeeps as daily drives as well as for transporting workers, produce, livestock, machinery, feed, rubber sheets etc. Having seats that can fold down to create a flatbed body is about as utilitarian as it gets, IMO. My uncle does the same run with an ex-military Gypsy, and the only time the 4WD was used was when my cousin and I were having fun with it on a dirt road. Most of the time, RWD, big ground clearance and a nice amount of power will get you through.

Performance = NO

How exactly did you arrive at this conclusion? This is one thing that people have never said about the Thar, that it isn't powerful enough. Team-bhp's own reviews state that most of what the Thar loses out in agility, it makes up for by being able to power through. We are talking about the Thar CRDe that makes 100-odd bhp, right?

Comfort = NO

I think that this is something that most Thar buyers never really put as a priority. I think that most of them are willing to sacrifice comfort for the appeal of the Jeep experience. AC and power steering and doors is a lot of comfort for a jeep, IMO.

Economical = NO

When you compare it to say, getting 8-9 kpl on a petrol Gypsy, that too without AC or power steering, the Thar seems pretty good in terms of economy. My uncle would kill for the kind of fuel costs that the Thar has.

Safety = NO

Well, there is the inherent safety offered by SUVS by virtue of their height.

Service/Maintenance Friendly = NO

I'm guessing that a 2WD Thar would be slightly more maintenance friendly than the 4WD model.

Fun to Drive = NO

This is a matter of personal opinion. My personal opinion is that a 100 bhp RWD vehicle can be all kinds of fun to drive.

City Friendly = NO
Highway Friendly = NO

Sure the parking won't be as easy as a hatch in the city, but then that is the same for anything other than a hatch. The Thar is a lot more city friendly than say, an Innova or a Scorpio, and it's not as if people don't drive them in the city.

As for the highways, the Thar is certainly powerful enough to sustain 80-100 kph all day, has enough power to overtake, and seem well mannered enough. Depends on what you're comparing it to.

Weather Protection = NO

AFAIK the Thar is the only Jeep with a soft top that doesn't leak.

I think that every buyer who considers the Thar will have considered that the ownership experience will not be as easy as owning a Swift or a Vento. So it doesn't even make sense to be evaluating the Thar on these parameters.

Maybe the solution is as simple as offering the Thar 2WD model with a factory fitted removable hard top and forward facing rear seats. Maybe then, we would have something that could fill the niche that the Tata Sierra fitted so nicely into.

[harishpr]

I know one of my neighbor's son owning THAR with modified tyres and half dozen headlights on top, with a mean looking bullbar. This chap drives this exclusively to his college. I'm sure he bought this only for the looks and to be a little different. He isn't gonna use that 4x4 lever much.
So folks like him will be glad to get a 2wd with the same looks, and at lower cost.

[dhanushs]

Hi Vivek,

The point by point comparo looks like a Thar justification man. I can do the same in a better way, with other vehicles too. For example, a Duster? So, I'm not replying point by point.

I think that most of them are willing to sacrifice comfort for the appeal of the Jeep experience. AC and power steering and doors is a lot of comfort for a jeep, IMO.

Well, my point is exactly this. We all are definitely willing to make big compromises and post comparos like you've done above, ONLY because of the Jeep experience.. But, what is Jeep Experience? IMO, its the small lever, which can perform wonders. Not anything else... And if that is not there, why would you, me or anyone else compromise? Why done we get ourselves an SUV which offers all the above you've mentioned in a much better and modern way?

The 2WD CRDe (not the Di workhorse), IMO, has one and only one purpose: That is what harishpr, has mentioned in the post above. For the LOOKS.

[swiftnfurious]

Sorry for diluting the thread.

Originally Posted by harishpr

I know one of my neighbor's son owning THAR with modified tyres and half dozen headlights on top, with a mean looking bullbar...

Anyway you could get some pictures?

[getsurya]

A Thar in a 2x2 form is a not an authentic 'jeep' any more. That would be like many of the forms we see on the road which are wannabe '4X4 jeeps'.

However, in our country it is the 'show' factor that sells for majority of the public and not the mechanicals or 4X4 experience. Also, for M&M if 2X2 Thar brings in the much wanted revenue, why would they bat an eyelid to launch the same from the "bins" they have

[Parm]

Toyota launched the 2wd Fortuner, so did Ford with its Endy.
Force motors has a 2wd Gurkha and Force One.
Scorpio, Safari, bolero and Sumo come in 4wd as well as 2wd versions.

Thar comes in 2wd in non crde engine for the rural as well as the bling factor, I'm sure the 2wd crde will also the day light pretty soon.

But since Thar is a part time 4wd, the option exists to drive it in 2wd mode! Gypsy comes only as a 4wd and still make people go for it for bling or for off-road.

The question is will the MM management bite the bullet and come out with thar 2wd crde?

[DHABHAR.BEHRAM]

Dear all - please read my post number 12. The way forward is given. I hope somebody listens and acts.

Best regards,

Behram Dhabhar

[avisidhu]

Originally Posted by jeeva

The Bolero does that for them, albeit with an additional 2 doors and no one seems to be complaining.

One point I can say with confidence, there is minimal cross shopping between customers of Thar and Bolero. The utility offered by Bolero is just not possible with the Thar. And vast majority of Thar buying public doesn't buy it keeping utility in mind. Point being, these are two completely different segments of buyers.

Plus, there are always the Dabwali jeeps which the Thar has to complete with. 4-5 of those can be purchased for the price of one Thar

[vivekgk]

Originally Posted by Parm

Toyota launched the 2wd Fortuner, so did Ford with its Endy.
Force motors has a 2wd Gurkha and Force One.
Scorpio, Safari, bolero and Sumo come in 4wd as well as 2wd versions.

Thar comes in 2wd in non crde engine for the rural as well as the bling factor, I'm sure the 2wd crde will also the day light pretty soon.

But since Thar is a part time 4wd, the option exists to drive it in 2wd mode! Gypsy comes only as a 4wd and still make people go for it for bling or for off-road.

The question is will the MM management bite the bullet and come out with thar 2wd crde?

Originally Posted by DHABHAR.BEHRAM

Dear all - please read my post number 12. The way forward is given. I hope somebody listens and acts.

Best regards,

Behram Dhabhar

Exactly. There is a market for 2WD SUVs and it is much bigger than the 4WD market. Just look at how many 4WD variants are sold of the Safari, Scorpio or the Bolero compared to 2WD.

Originally Posted by dhanushs

Hi Vivek,

Well, my point is exactly this. We all are definitely willing to make big compromises and post comparos like you've done above, ONLY because of the Jeep experience.. But, what is Jeep Experience? IMO, its the small lever, which can perform wonders. Not anything else... And if that is not there, why would you, me or anyone else compromise? Why done we get ourselves an SUV which offers all the above you've mentioned in a much better and modern way?

I thought that it was an agreed upon fact that the Thar CRDe isn't just an MM550 with a new engine and IFS. AFAIK, there are changes to the suspension, to the chassis, to make it handle better at higher speeds, and the only thing carried over from the 550 is the looks. I recall a post where BD Sir mentioned the feel that the vehicle offers when you pull out to pass a vehicle and then pull back in. While it may not be car-like, I felt that it felt more like a road-oriented vehicle than any other Jeep I've driven before. I could actually consider going on a long drive with it.

The 2WD CRDe (not the Di workhorse), IMO, has one and only one purpose: That is what harishpr, has mentioned in the post above. For the LOOKS.

And the powerful engine, the improved chassis, the IFS, the AC, the Power steering, the better seats, the improved soft top....

I'm definitely not trying to brush off the fact that the looks are an important factor.

The 2WD Thar DI doesn't have AC, PS, IFS, lacks power for even an occasional highway stint, and is simply too unrefined. If it was just "LOOKS", then a 2WD DI with a loud paintjob and big alloys with fat tyres would do the trick. But it would not be fun or easy to drive. The Thar CRDe would be.

Aren't there things about the Jeep design that make it inherently better at off-roading, like the short overhangs, the ground clearance, the big wheels etc?

I can't help but feel that most of the opposition to the 2WD CRDe is more about exclusivity than anything else. Simply put, it's about people feeling that there being a 2WD version would dilute the credentials of their 4WD jeeps. There have been comments about how the purity of the jeep concept is lost. If I understand it correctly, this 'purity is about "the small lever, which can perform wonders. Not anything else...". Nothing is going to happen to that small lever if there is also a 2WD Thar. Heck, there are pickup trucks that have the same front end, the same chassis and the same mechanicals. Most of them are 2WD. There are more 2WD jeeps in the whole country than 4WD. The Jeep looks are already diluted. So what's one more 2WD jeep gonna do?

The point by point comparo looks like a Thar justification man. I can do the same in a better way, with other vehicles too. For example, a Duster? So, I'm not replying point by point.

Oh I'm not justifying the Thar at all. I'm just pointing out that there are more ways this issue can be lookd at. From what I've seen on the 4WD section, it is pretty clear that the Thar in its stock form cannot be used for serious off-roading at all. There have been far too many compromises made in favour of on-road behaviour.

My question is, why continue this farce of pretending that the Thar is the ultimate off-roader? Give it up, strip off the 4wd mechanicals and turn it into a proper soft-roader SUV with the Jeep looks. Like I said before, a Sierra replacement.