Team-BHP (https://www.team-bhp.com/forum/)

-   The Indian Car Scene (https://www.team-bhp.com/forum/indian-car-scene/)

-   -   Honda working on City Facelift. EDIT: Launched at Rs 8.5 lakhs (https://www.team-bhp.com/forum/indian-car-scene/172436-honda-working-city-facelift-edit-launched-rs-8-5-lakhs-37.html)

When looking at the City facelift, it is important to look at it variant wise and not merely go with the highest to have the best features.

I find that SV satisfies most of my requirement (barring the CVT exclusion). And that might be the top variant in most cars a couple of years ago. Add an alloy and reverse camera, it might be a good fit for most people.

One need not necessarily go for V or VX or ZX. Infact a quick comparison shows the Ciaz Zxi+ having similar equipment as City V variant with the V having cruise control which cannot be retrofitted.

If Honda manages to get a lot of booking for their VX and ZX variants, good for them. Else I understand completely if people go for the S,SV,V variants. They are still VFM IMO.

I like that sort of ambience in my car. Everything should wrap around me. The living room kind of experience in beige interior car is a strict no for me. I like everything of BRV sans dash/AVN (accessory).

Cheers!

No confusions. I mentioned the price to point out that the City is not the only overpriced sedan. Vento, based on an 8 year old platform, is as costly as a City.

Highline Plus 1.2 DSG is 12.67, not the diesel MT. Link VX CVT is still only marginally more expensive.

A better gear box alone will not make a car better. For an aam aadmi, both Highline plus 1.2 DSG and VX CVT are petrol ATs at the same price. Vento falls short, in the eyes of an ordinary buyer, in many areas. The tech that is on offer comes at the cost of reliability. Vento doesnt have many of the features that the City has - overall space, sunroof etc, which are much desirable for an ordinary Indian buyer.

Ultimately, the overall sales of all Vento variants will be much less than the sales of City.

I just called up the dealer in Mumbai to check the OTR prices of City CVT variants. Below is the break-up

• V CVT- INR 14.80 OTR
• VX CVT- INR 16.00 OTR
• ZX CVT - INR 16.87 OTR

Even 14.80 OTR for the V variant, is too expensive, considering the level of localization the car comes with. What Honda is doing is again trying to milk on its strong Brand Value. Ideally, this variant should have been not more than 13.5 OTR.

16.87 OTR for the top of the line ZX trim is a big joke from the pricing perspective. Only two things can happen because of it, either people will suddenly find the Elantra extremely value for money or people will suddenly say, why buy an Elantra when similar things the City can do for 4 lacs less.

Had they priced the ZX variant idealistically at 15.0 or 15.50, they would have easily killed the D Segment.

If Hyundai is able to offer all this and more at a cheaper price point in the all new Verna which is anyways due soon, then Honda for sure will have yet another hot selling car turning into a slow mover.

All in all I would say, Honda just refuses to learn from its mistakes, of grossly overpricing the cars and simultaneously skimping on the features. Or I think it has taken the Indian customers lightly.

PS- I did not check for the pricing of the manual car of the same variants.

The Elantra automatic comes to nearly 19.5L OTR for the SX and almost 22L OTR for the SX(0) petrol variants. How can that even be compared to City AT? And Elantra is one of the lower priced D segment sedans. Altis, Jetta, Octavia are priced much higher. Its quite apparent now that the D segment has shifted upwards and you cannot get a respectable variant below 20L OTR. Now if City VX is offering the same value proposition as the Elantra or other D segment sedans at 16.5L OTR albeit with a smaller engine, some people would still find that a steal.

For people who have the requirement of a sedan with plush interiors, reliable ASS, AT etc. but dont care much about the engine power as they need it for daily mundane driving, may find the City VX/ZX to be a good value proposition. The average buyer may settle for the V/SV trims as it satisfies most requirements.

Next gen Hyundai Verna has one big achilles heel. The rear passenger space is too cramped. The leg room is very tight and the seats are too low, compromising under thigh support. Even the Xcent has better rear space than the next gen Verna. This factor is important for a typical Indian buyer, and is one of the main factors for the success of the Ciaz and the City.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=J-PYu1tAf-I
See from 2: 43.

The biggest challenge for the City is the Ciaz. If the Ciaz facelift comes with more features and undercut the City by 1-2 lakhs, it will maintain the top spot in sales charts.

I am not comparing a C Segment car with a D Segment. But cross shopping does happen. Think about it from this perspective. If I am in the market to buy an AT, which is an need of the hour considering the way our traffic is building up, and Honda says, hey pay me 16.85 for top the line AT variant, which is still a C Segment car, and then Hyundai offers me a D Segment car for 20, which not only does what the City does, but also does it better, plus outside on the road, when my neighbors see me in an expensive D Segment car, I am filled with a sense of pride, especially when they say, "Waah Sharmaji Nayi Gaadi, Badiya Hain"

At that exact point I would say, why buy a C Segment car, when by paying 1800/ lac as an emi for that 3 lacs extra, I get much better being rich feeling.


Point taken, but how many people really think that way, Hyundai Verna was always cramped from day one, but still it outsold everyone in the segment when it was at its peak. Infact, it made Honda sit up and think, its time to give features too now. Knowing how Hyundai packs their cars with features, out-doing a City will be a piece of cake for them, at least for the Manual Variants. If they continue to give a 4 Speed AT, then its a dud for sure.

Hyundai outsold Honda from 2011 to 2013 because of the shift in market preference to diesel. And before the 2014 City was released, all cars except Sunny had mediocre rear space. When the new City was released with a diesel, the features it had was similar to the Verna except for the space, but the City thumped the Verna in the sales charts.

Features alone will not save a car in India. Most Indian buyers prefer a fuel efficient, family sedan with a comfortable rear compartment. Ciaz thumped City by offering everything the City has at a lower price point. I dont know where the next gen Verna (as seen in the video) fits.

Verna taking top spot at one point of time was because of it's Diesel engine. When fuel prices were in favor of Diesel at that point of time, it was the Verna which shined and Honda didn't have the Diesel.

Verna, despite it's feature levels was not a success later on since customers had more practical options in terms of rear seats and space mainly in the Ciaz, City. Also, with fuel price difference gap narrowing Petrol had made a come back, the first preference for a Petrol would be the City or Ciaz.

With the Creta now on top, it would be difficult for the Verna to get back into that old sales figures. There is a sort of cannibalization there.

I have prepared an excel file for variant wise feature comparison. Can be helpful for some.
Having gone through the list, I feel V MT (Petrol) at a price of Rs 9,99,990 ex showroom Bangalore is the most VFM variant. Same is priced at Rs 1,095,677 in Nashik.
I still remember a comment made by GTO on the 3rd Gen Honda City. He had said that this is a 90% Civic at 70% price of it. And see what Honda is doing to us today. They are offering a 70% Civic at 100% price. Sorry for the last line if it offends someone, but this is how I look at the pricing of higher variants of the facelift.

Problem is, this car isn't 90% the Civic. Or even 70%. I'd say its a pass muster 50% at best.

Civic had a reputation. It was well built. It had properly robust mechanicals and good quality plastics. It did not require attention frequently. It used to age very well. 5 year old well maintained Civics were known to feel and drive like new.

City on the other hand ages as quickly as an apple that has been cut. It gives out all kinds of rattles and squeaks and noises. Seats sag. Suspensions loose their edge. The rear torsion beam setup is particularity bad. Wear and tear parts need replacement lot sooner than you would expect.

3rd gen to 4th, what they did was add a diesel engine and some features. Otherwise, the City formula was diluted in every way. Fact is, the only thing that is actually good about this 4th gen City apart from the iVTEC petrol is the way it looks. Considering how many corners Honda has cut with this car and the amount of localization, it should have be priced a LOT lower than the previous gen car. They instead are charging, what, 50% more?

I drove my iDTEC today after a week with my previous gen Jazz. Those old Hondas were true gems. This is total show, with not much substance. Kind of apt for our times, one would say. :Frustrati

Have been allotted a car, got the VIN and confirmed the month of manufacturing as Jan 2017. Asking for PDI before making the payment. Just one issue, the dealer tells me that they might take upto 15 working days for registration. On further probing, understood that RTO is undergoing some software changes hence they are quoting this time, if things are alright then 7 working days should be the time taken

Can't agree with that. My City is more than 4 years old and drives like new, in fact, smoother than when new. Mine is a 3rd generation 2nd iteration ( end 2012) model. It has been driven through rough roads all these years. Hope the facelifted City regains its old glory in terms of customer satisfaction.

I think all these points are on 4th gen City

Many thanks to every one who contributed to this post - it has arrived! V MT Modern Steel.clap: