[Rajeevraj]

Test Drive Report from Autocar: Autocar Ford Figo Review

Unlike the Aspire, the Figo Hatch DCT AT is part of the TD fleet. Extract from the review.

Time to shift attention to the petrol automatic Figo. Again, like the Aspire this version uses a 1.5-litre petrol engine and a six-speed dual clutch automatic transmission. The engine’s peak power of 109bhp helps make this the most powerful of the automatic hatchbacks in India. In town, the engine’s good bottom end responses help this version of the Figo build speed smartly. However, in slow-moving city traffic, you can feel the clutch engage so shifts aren’t super smooth. But once on the go, the gearbox settles into its rhythm and responds well to changes in throttle position. At light loads, the gearbox shifts at about 2,200rpm but drive hard and it will hold to about 6,300rpm. The gearbox has a Sport mode too. It won’t hold gear beyond 6,300rpm but lift off the throttle and the gearbox does well to downshift and bring revs right into the heart of the powerband. Those driving on hilly roads will particularly like the engine braking effect in this mode. Drivers also have the option to shift gears manually in Sport. However, there’s no Tiptronic here, only small ‘+/-’ buttons on the gear lever for this and that’s a bit of a downer. Performance on the whole is good and you won’t have much trouble getting to and maintaining three-digit speed over long distances.

[#ish]

The car looks good and specs are very solid! I bought Polo GT TSI 8 months ago and now I am wondering if I should have waited. New Figo is a lakh cheaper, bigger engine, more power and a dual clutch 6-speed AT! Spec-wise is also better than the Polo. Damn.

[sasi@8689]

Originally Posted by #ish

The car looks good and specs are very solid! I bought Polo GT TSI 8 months ago and now I am wondering if I should have waited. New Figo is a lakh cheaper, bigger engine, more power and a dual clutch 6-speed AT! Spec-wise is also better than the Polo. Damn.

Not trying to take away anything from ford but if interior space is not a concern, then i believe the one lakh extra you had spent for polo is well worth it. I had checked out aspire and has a polo in my extended family. The interior quality, overall finesse and solid feeling you get in polo is well worth the price difference. Not tried personally either ford dct or vw dsg, but read great things about the vw dsg on this forum. So, chill and enjoy your baby tsi.

[puneeth2]

Grille and the headlamps make the car look mature. It's a good looking hatch but for the side profile which rather looks bland for my liking. Overall a mature design which appeals to the most of us. If it drives as good as a Ford should there is no reason this can't win some hearts. But how I wish Ford would introduce Focus in India.

[dheepak10]

Went to the showroom to checkout the car, today. Wanted to do a TD of the Automatic variant. Since, they didnt have one, I ended up doing a TD of the Aspire AT.

Coming to the Figo, the front seats are not that supportive - they are almost flat. The rear seats are decent and has loads of space. The boot size is decent as well.

However, the biggest problem is that if you are 5'7" and above, your head will constantly hit the roof at the rear seats - Bummer!!

The rear neck restraints are almost non-existent and offer no whiplash protection.

And the tiny OVRMs and IVRM are carried from Aspire. The rear view is however better than the Aspire.

These tiny things can actually lead to a make/break decision and that's what happened in our case - When we drove the AT (Aspire), we liked the engine and the convenience the AT offers, but decided against the Figo as the above mentioned -ve points are something you can't live with for the next few years.

[neil.jericho]

The sales folks from Kairali Ford had promised to bring the car over to our home for my Dad to check and though they were a little late, they did make it here with the new Figo. The car looks quite smashing in this orange colour on a nice sunny day. Long story short, we booked the 1.2 Trend with a waiting period of around 15 - 20 days.


My wife and I were looking for a sub 4 metre automatic and have made bookings for the Jazz CVT and the TUV 300. The pricing of the Figo automatic and the prospect of the 1.5 litre engine though is causing us to consider making a third booking


Here are more pictures of the car.

[StarScream]

Originally Posted by #ish

The car looks good and specs are very solid! I bought Polo GT TSI 8 months ago and now I am wondering if I should have waited. New Figo is a lakh cheaper, bigger engine, more power and a dual clutch 6-speed AT! Spec-wise is also better than the Polo. Damn.

You're a TSI owner and you say the Figo has better specs? You must correct your mistake and buy the Figo. But then when at a red light the TSI blows away the Figo, go back and look at the torque figures - 175nm vs 134nm.

Realize that engine size means very little in the day and age of direct injection and turbo charging.

[linuxmanju]

Originally Posted by #ish

The car looks good and specs are very solid! I bought Polo GT TSI 8 months ago and now I am wondering if I should have waited. New Figo is a lakh cheaper, bigger engine, more power and a dual clutch 6-speed AT! Spec-wise is also better than the Polo. Damn.

A very good decision mate, please go for a Figo and sell your TSI to me .

But honestly, I am just shocked at your comparison.

1) Bigger engine:- seriously ?. By that logic, why not Ashok Leyland then ?. That sure has the biggest engine of all.

2) More power :- What matters is how it is delivered and the torque. I would trade any engine to a TSI. Moreover, though unconfirmed, VW HP is true wheel BHP as opposed to other manufacturers crank figures.

3) Dual clutch AT:- hmm, so better than DSG?. Please elaborate.

I had a chance to TD aspire before I booked a Fiesta. Trust me, it was no where close to traditional Ford feeling. No offense to aspire owners, its still best in comparison to others. Just that they set a very high benchmark which makes you expect a lot more.

Yet to TD a new Figo. I owned a old Figo earlier, hope the same handling characteristics are carried forward in the new one.

I don't know where Indian market is heading.

1) Ford makes an SUV ( or close to it ) for the mass market and plonks a sweet 1.0 ecoboost engine to it. Very few non enthusiasts buy an SUV with a petrol engine.

2) Ford makes a car for pure enthusiasts and calls it Fiesta and it does not get the ecoboost. Instead, it decides enthusiasts do not deserve their top of the line engine.

3) They wake up and launch a 100bhp diesel, and takes out earlier the picture perfect suspension which was suitable for high-speed drives to a softer suspension.

Is it me, or Ford marketing folks started smoking something bad ?.

[printh]

@ linuxmanju - maybe he would have said so because ford gives 90% of tsi in some aspects and 150% of tsi in some aspects at a lot cheaper price.
Though newer fords handling is not as the former ones,vw is not a corner craver though. IMHO ,the things better in tsi are better build ( not always directly proportional to safety factor being a subjective feeling ),interior quality and German blah blah (no offence as I too own a vento tdi). The dsg is more problematic than praiseworthy.

[rageshgr]

The GT might have the upper hand w.r.the Figo in the performance department. But if you compare the Jazz CVT to Figo AT, Jazz cannot justify its pricing, especially for the VX variant as it is the only one with airbag

[Ragavsr]

Originally Posted by linuxmanju

1) Bigger engine:- seriously ?. By that logic, why not Ashok Leyland then ?. That sure has the biggest engine of all.

2) More power :- What matters is how it is delivered and the torque. I would trade any engine to a TSI. Moreover, though unconfirmed, VW HP is true wheel BHP as opposed to other manufacturers crank figures.

3) Dual clutch AT:- hmm, so better than DSG?. Please elaborate.

I am still one of those people who still believe in there is no replacement for displacement.

He might be wrong in saying that the Figo has more power but I would say power isn't everything

Turbocharged engines might be better to drive because of the torque but apart from that they don't have any other advantage.
Turbo engines are invariably unreliable.They have poor real world fuel efficiency and game the fuel economy tests be it the ecoboost , tsi or whatever. Thse turbocharged engines might be running at rpms below the turbo operating rpms to achieve such high fuel economy numbers. Isn't that gouging the tests because they are not giving the advertised power output if they are running below turbo rpms.

Non turbocharged engines have longer engine life.Before anyone talks about diesels, diesel turbos have robust mechanicals .

This mileage difference has been proven in vehicles have similar power outputs from both turbocharged engines like Ford Edge , Ford Explorer which have turbo 4 cylinders which produce ~240 hp and non turbo v6 producing ~280 hp. Though both cars are equally fast , ( the torque of the turbo 4 helps) the v6 usually ends up getting 20%better fuel economy and is $1500 cheaper to buy and will have a longer engine life.

[linuxmanju]

Originally Posted by printh

@ linuxmanju - maybe he would have said so because ford gives 90% of tsi in some aspects and 150% of tsi in some aspects at a lot cheaper price.

Agreed that everyone has their own priorities. I don't own a VW or rather, did not dare to own one myself.

However, a close friend of mine owns one and he is kind enough to lend me his car whenever I wish for long drives. So, my perception is not based on the internet reviews or influenced. I owned earlier Figo as well, which was a gem.

With that, except for the rear leg room, could you please substantiate your 150% claim ?.

BTW, as far as Polo not being a corner craver. I have said this before and saying it again, Polo does not handle badly. Rather it handles quite well. The steering is not in the league of Ford or FIAT. But its definitely not the worst in the market. If you are in Bangalore, please PM, we can sync up and go for a spin. I am sure, I can borrow my friends car.

The dsg is more problematic than praiseworthy.

I think, you are referring to earlier issues. I don't see VAG cars getting lined up in the service center for DSG issues.

Originally Posted by Ragavsr

He might be wrong in saying that the Figo has more power but I would say power isn't everything

Except for the no replacement for displacement part, I agree with rest of your comments mate .

[carwatcher]

Its me or others also feel that the Figo and Aspire top AT models are touching 8 and 9 Lac and Diesel top variants are touching 9 and 10 Lacs which are too much IMO on-road Mumbai.

[landcruiser123]

Originally Posted by Ragavsr

Turbo engines are invariably unreliable.

That's hard to believe. Turbo petrols are just catching up in the market, they'll surely be as reliable as Turbodiesel's. Downsizing has been a trend in the recent past, so Turbo petrols have picked up.

They have poor real world fuel efficiency and game the fuel economy tests be it the ecoboost , tsi or whatever.

I would differ by saying that they aren't extraordinarily fuel efficient.

The EcoBoost engine produces 123 BHP, that'scomparable to City's NA motor. The fuel economy figures of a City petrol and Ecosport Ecoboost are similar. I would not be complaining here at all.

The Ecoboost also produces much more torque and will have better acceleration.

Just because you have a 1.0 L Turbo petrol, don't expect it deliver Alto K10's FE okay?

Non turbocharged engines have longer engine life.

This won't be true. Companies surely have tested their engines in various conditions (varying fuel, inclines etc) for a couple of lakh Km before release.
The engine components are surely beefed up for a turbo petrol engine.

[Ragavsr]

Originally Posted by landcruiser123

That's hard to believe. Turbo petrols are just catching up in the market, they'll surely be as reliable as Turbodiesel's. Downsizing has been a trend in the recent past, so Turbo petrols have picked up.



I would differ by saying that they aren't extraordinarily fuel efficient.

The EcoBoost engine produces 123 BHP, that'scomparable to City's NA motor. The fuel economy figures of a City petrol and Ecosport Ecoboost are similar. I would not be complaining here at all.

The Ecoboost also produces much more torque and will have better acceleration.

Just because you have a 1.0 L Turbo petrol, don't expect it deliver Alto K10's FE okay?



This won't be true. Companies surely have tested their engines in various conditions (varying fuel, inclines etc) for a couple of lakh Km before release.
The engine components are surely beefed up for a turbo petrol engine.

The turbo petrols might be new to India but they have existed for long in markets abroad. Companies like audi, saab,bmw,vw are known to favour turbos since the 90's.

Look at what happened to those vehicles . You can find them at junkyards with engine issies,turbo issues , lack of pressure in one cylinder of an engine etc whereas a comparable lexus v6 would still be on the road.p00

All this claims of downsizing with turbos are based on financial gains made by gaming the system interms of high on paper fuel efficiency and restrictions and taxation based on engine size. Even in countries without engine size based taxation like US, turbos are being favoured by manufacturers because it helps them in claiming higher onpaper FE.

I am not expecting alto level of FE. I don't know the FE of an alto and I have never driven it and haven't travelled in it for more than a couple of km maybe.

The City and Ecosport may feliver same FE or the Ecosport may better the City when driven ssedately at 80kmph. Drive it a little enthusiastically or floor the accelerator then the FE will drop dramatically in the Ecoboost Ecosport compared to the City.

O drive a diesel turbo Figo which BTW is very sensitive to driving style. I owned a Santro before which used to deliver 11-12 kmpl when driven hard and 13-14 kmpl when driven sedately in the city whereas the Figo stretches anywhere from 11-17.