[ringoism]

Originally Posted by CrAzY dRiVeR

Evo India review -

Just watched this video (sorry for the double-post). Wow... Body lift allowing 35"tyres???!!! The crawl-control is something Toyota of Thailand had on pickups way back - dashboard adjustable for any fixed engine speed in that case, always thought that was brilliant. And I didn't know they'd gone to a live axle... impressive! But not sure it's ultimately a plus or minus. It still didn't look to have extreme articulation, and the IFS kind of made it a better all-rounder considering on-road uses.

Originally Posted by T2luvroads

What is hub lock and how does it help saving fuel.?

Do a thread search, there's quite a bit out there already. Disconnects hubs from drive axles. With 4x4 disengaged, they prevent the undriven front wheels from having to rotate connected axles, cross-joints, front differential gears, driveshaft, etc. A couple hp required maybe, thus the slight fuel savings. On old 4x4's they also help reduce a lot of driveline vibrations caused by worn / unbalanced components.

Originally Posted by Steeroid

...any Farce vehicle on that Trax platform, ....had a great ride. Suspension was never their weakness... It’s just put together shoddily, has next to no creature comforts, and rusts right out of the factory paint shop.

Well, that reputation or else a lack of any familiarity whatsoever is a lot of what Force has been up against, and it's where they should've focused their efforts in the modern market. The old ones did rust prematurely, including in unusual/unexpected places... from the inside out it seemed - hopefully that's been improved(?). Friends bought a new Judo back in 2001 (think they were maybe 3.5L then) and the injection pump wasn't set up right - fluctuated/surged heavily off-throttle rather than idling... I couldn't believe a company would deliver a new car like that.

They were wonderful people-movers, very crude but effective / reliable; But that that was then and this is now. I can't help but wonder whether they could've saved the money developing the live axle setup (a move which would appeal to very few hard-core sorts) and put it into the interiors/safety (which appeals to nearly everyone). With that and the new, more refined engine, IFS-ride quality/road control, 4x4 enthusiasts might've been able to sell the idea to their families (the second thing Force is up against) as general transportation, especially in five-door form. As it is, the interior's about the same (very spartan/dated), no power windows, and suspension is technically more crude than before. The new engine may truly be "better", but its alleged improvements might be largely lost on most of our spouses. It kind of seems an odd mix of stagnation / moving backwards / forwards all at once. For me personally it might be an excellent vehicle, but I'm not a normal person. And I don't have 13+L allotted to transportation.

Originally Posted by Mukund

I agree with you on all other points(used Fortuner or stretch for XUV). They either need to work on improving the interiors(at least give us a functional dashboard) and safety aspects, or undercut the Thar by a big margin or better both.

Yep. Our old Marshal 4x4, finally clad with radials, did fine on the Delhi-Chandigarh expressway night before last...though I thank God I had no need to press it into evasive maneuvers. This live-axle rendition of the Gurkha, apart from the engine (and price!) is really closer to the Marshal than ever. But being above fifty and having relatives living a couple thousand km's away by road, I do get thinking that something like a used Fortuner would work better; I suspect many others would feel the same.

-Eric

[4x4addict]

Originally Posted by ringoism

They say the same thing as all the commercial taxi-Travellers here say: the new unit is a pain to drive in the hills compared to the old - good for the plains, really underpowered up here (meaning the low-end torque).
-Eric

Hi Eric,

Since you like to talk about hills and low end torque all the time, let me give you my perspective. I too live in the hills. My usual driving is at an altitude between 5,500 to 6,500 ft above MSL. I have owned and used various diesel engines from 1.3 multi-jet, Duster 1.5 Dci (4WD), Mhawk 2.2 4WD, Ford Endeavour Thunder+ 4WD with 3.0, Montero with 3.2 Liter, Thar with MDI3200 TC, Thar with SZ-Plus, Marshal with MDI, Nissan Patrol with TD42 (Naturally Aspirated), Toyota Landcruiser with 1HD-TCE (Intercooled) etc.

So, I personally know a thing or two about driving diesel vehicles in high altitudes. Your suggestion about large capacity engines and making torque at the bottom end and completely sacrificing bhp makes sense for two kinds of people: 1) Those driving yellow board commercial vehicles, and 2) For those really old school people caught up in a time warp and refusing to accept modern technology.

But for the average joe like me using an SUV for daily drive, and off-road, a modern diesel engine which has between 2000 to 2500 cc, torque between (26 Kgm to 32 kgm Torque) and bhp around 120 bhp should be more than enough.

I have driven the pre-extreme avatar of the Gurkha and I can tell you that it is a total slouch. You cannot safely overtake in the hills. The 140 bhp version, I have not driven yet, but if it makes peak Torque at 1600 rpm, I am sure it makes reasonable torque from about 1400 rpm

So in my opinion, modern diesels in the 2000 to 2500 cc should be fine for majority of consumers except taxi operators and cave dwellers . The Japanese have been making mid-capacity diesels which give a good balance between between torque/bhp for decades. Forgive me for saying this, but the Mahindra MDI engine is not the gold standard by any stretch of imagination. It is essentially a reliable tractor engine and not to be put in a passenger vehicle. The world has seen much much better engines with the same CC and better balance of power and Torque.

For me, bhp is also equally important as Torque. I need to safely overtake/pass vehicles when going uphill and this is not possible with an MDI engine. If you feel the MDI engine is the best things since sliced bread, so be it. All of us are entitles to our beliefs. But it doesn't make sense to diss more modern engines. Just my opinion.

For those interested in the Gurkha extreme, take it from a person who has driven diesels of all capacity at 6000 ft above MSL altitudes, 99 percent of you will be happy with the performance of the Gurkha extreme with 2.2. Forget the Bruce Willis - Die Hard, macho, old-school, big bore, low-revving, low-torque, low-rpm, low-bhp diesel engines. These kind of engines are very difficult to live with for most people.

[Steeroid]

Well said, Tini.

We asked for more power, Force gave us more (even if it took its own sweet time doing so). We asked for rigid axles, they gave us that.

All they haven’t given are good interiors, safety and a reasonable price for what is on offer.

But expecting a ‘70s International Tractor engine in a 2020 vehicle, with IFS replacing the rigid axle, is IMHO unrealistic and regressive. The best option for specific requirements like that is to build to own specifications, or buy a Thar Mdi and create a usable body. Or buy a Sumo Gold which gives you a covered body with ac, a flat torque curve from 1000 rpm, and adequate motive power. Buy a army auction Sumo 4x4 and swap the drivetrain if you insist on 4x4.

The point is that Ringo’s specifications probably have an answer amongst the multiple options available, but his intention is to keep his Marshal running and justify it to himself. Which is fine, but it doesn’t mean that everything manufacturers do is pointless.

PS: I have a ‘99 Sumo 4x4 myself, which serves its purpose and is usable with no issues except for a retrofitted a/c that has a mind of its own. I’ve owned a Defender 90 which has its horrible diesel heart ripped out and replaced with a problematic BMW-era P32 4 litre, and tried to supercharge it to make it move. I’ve had a LC70 with a brilliant inline 6 4.5 Petrol engine, but a chassis that has its own navigation that wouldn’t have anything to do with the steering wheel or the driver, and a horrible suspension that rivals bullock carts.

Old school 4x4s are fun and involving (in both good and bad sense). But we will be deceiving ourselves (and everyone who is reading) by pretending that they are gods gift to mankind. They are not, no matter what the use case is. Force has given us an amalgamation, which tries to give us the best of both worlds - other than AMGs that cost a zillion dollars and the odd Puch/Unimog, this is a practical alternative, even if at an impractical price which puts it bang into modern utility truck territory. They probably aren’t going to sell many, but you have to give it to them for trying.

[dieselhead]

Originally Posted by ringoism

Just watched this video (sorry

Do a thread search, there's quite a bit out there already. Disconnects hubs from drive axles. With 4x4 disengaged, they prevent the undriven front wheels from having to rotate connected axles, cross-joints, front differential gears, driveshaft, etc. A couple hp required maybe, thus the slight fuel savings. On old 4x4's they also help reduce a lot of driveline vibrations caused by

Wonder if mahindra or gypsy fwhs will fit

[ringoism]

Originally Posted by 4x4addict

Since you like to talk about hills and low end torque all the time, let me give you my perspective. I too live in the hills. My usual driving is at an altitude between 5,500 to 6,500 ft above MSL. I have owned and used various diesel engines from 1.3 multi-jet, Duster 1.5 Dci (4WD), Mhawk 2.2 4WD, Ford Endeavour Thunder+ 4WD with 3.0, Montero with 3.2 Liter, Thar with MDI3200 TC, Thar with SZ-Plus, Marshal with MDI, Nissan Patrol with TD42 (Naturally Aspirated), Toyota Landcruiser with 1HD-TCE (Intercooled) etc. So, I personally know a thing or two about driving diesel vehicles in high altitudes. Your suggestion about large capacity engines and making torque at the bottom end and completely sacrificing bhp makes sense for two kinds of people: 1) Those driving yellow board commercial vehicles, and 2) For those really old school people caught up in a time warp and refusing to accept modern technology.

Wow, you're right, times really do change... last time I was in Chennai it was pretty much around sea-level (or do you need to update something here?)

Well, thanks for that perspective, you seem quite the expert, amply qualified according to all you cite, I admit you've driven more diesel vehicles than I have; Apparently I (and the people I live and move amongst here, who are not all on yellow-plates) are not really likely to contribute useful opinions. You - and everyone else thanking you - can take your advice and buy the 13L Gurkha Extreme and live happily with it. It will be fine for most people, including those who don't know any better.

But mind you, I am not exactly the only Bhpian with hill experience who's been complaining... Dirty Dan and Sutripta have also commented along these lines, so I think you'd better write some strenuous tirades against them, as well!

To clarify, I don't preach any gospel of displacement, I'm hearing very good things about the mHawk D70 1.5 in the Bolero, and they seem to be performing brilliantly on the steep hills of Mizoram. I'm thinking of it for ourselves - if only it could be had with 4x4!

I also definitely do NOT consider the MDI to be a universal gold standard, though it truly has done everything we needed it to quite well (including, once again, the Delhi-Chandigarh Expressway three nights ago, where we ran right along with Fortuners, latest-gen Scorpio's, etc - albeit a lot more noisily!). I overtake safely in the hills all the time, though of course one needs to be a little more selective / thoughtful about it! I owned high-revving, powerful turbocharged vehicles 25+ years ago that performed beautifully - intoxicatingly, I'd say - despite whatever turbo lag, and in a polar opposite manner than this tractor engine - but I still like the MDI very much, I'm sorry if this bothers anyone, it is a very different animal but one worthy of some appreciation in my view.

Moreover, we bought the Marshal not because I loved the DI but because it was the only reliable, serviceable, locally-available 4x4 we could find that cost under a couple lakhs and (if need be) could be successfully rebuilt on the roadside at Sarchu or Kardung-La by any third-rate local mechanic. I liked the way the XD3P Boleros ran much better, but parts supplies / cold-starting issues / warped & cracked cylinder heads, and price tags hovering around double deterred me back then... and how many of those are still running now vs. the DI variants (including 2019 derivatives) I see all around me? Wherever I go (North Delhi last week, Manali Bazar today, Manimajra Chandigarh earlier, on a back street this afternoon where someone was complaining - once again - about the 2.2 mHawk's deplorable hill performance (vs. his T-MDI Camper in this case!!)), I have people who own much more refined vehicles telling me that ours is a great car, sometimes that they wished they owned something like it! You will clearly not be among those, and it's okay, I confess I sometimes wish I had a Fortuner! There's a time and a place for everything.

Re: my actual gold standard, in my limited experience, in terms of actual performance: the original Scorpio 2.6 Turbo (90bhp?) in 4x4 form; Though I admit the FE is lower and emissions higher than present machinery - both highly valid considerations in our modern, polluted age, at least where populations are dense. Why do I love it? It's not overly biased towards low-end OR top-end, it just seems to strike the perfect balance. It did have the torque there just about right off idle, it had plenty of power to overtake anywhere, hill or highway, it could cruise at 150kmph on the expressway (I know from personal experience). It had extremely lively throttle response, unlike any modern turbo-diesel that I know of. Granted it sounded a little truck-like, but personally I actually liked that.

As for me, I'm a caveman, yes, I've always been a little "retro", even as a kid, I don't know why. I bought an AVL Machismo last year (for my wife, technically) for more than I'd have paid for the next gen, because she liked Bullets and wanted to ride one, and it was a definite throwback to the old true Brit singles, whereas the UCE wasn't quite. I occasionally throw a leg over a nearly 30-year-old Kawasaki smoker, which is just a heap of fun and about the least refined thing I've ever ridden. I like RD's and Jawa's and Wankel Mazda's and old Datsun Z cars and BMW 2002's and whatever else is old but can still get the job done on modern roads, for anyone willing to undertake it (as a certain Himalayan rally this past year proved). I believe in upgrading / modifying stuff to make it more suitable to a particular condition, and have done so on almost every vehicle I've owned over 35-odd years of vehicle ownership (in this spirit the Marshal finally, as of last week, has radial tyres!!!). In my homeland this sort of thing (old, modded cars in daily use) is not actually that unusual, I suppose I'm a product partly of that context, and for that I apologize if it creates some kind of adverse reactions and/or disagreements. As a teenager my first car was 24 years old (a '63 Rambler Classic) and I drove it to high-school and back home daily. In the late 80's / early 90's I did thousands-of-mile cross-country trips to and from college in mid-1960's Ford/Chevy pickup trucks, in '69/'72 Oldsmobiles, a '70 Chevelle, a '63 Ford Galaxie 500XL. We liked the old stuff, lived with it daily, drove these cars anywhere, any time. Modern emissions controls had come in and killed the performance of most cars from the early 70's to mid-80's, and most of us couldn't afford the current, potent turbo'd Buick GNX's and Corvettes and the like. So we bought old junkers, searched the scrapyards, built up some pretty impressive machines we restored, repainted and upgraded and slalom and drag-raced and autocrossed (and occasionally, thrillingly if stupidly street-raced) and just had great times with. If I had the Marshal over there right now I'd probably be dropping a mildly modded, efficient small block Chevy V8 (or maybe a Buick V6) into it, but I'm here, and the little (yes, I said little) DI gets about four times the FE and gets us from point A to point B in any kind of weather nature can throw at it, pretty much 365 days a year, and yeah, idles easily up the incline into its parking spot every day without half-clutching, and gets from Delhi to Manali as fast as I've ever heard of anyone else doing it (9.5hrs, loaded, with family aboard). Great memories in this thing, it is not exactly disposable. Sure, I wish it had the 2.6 Turbo, but end of the day, what's to complain about? Whereas a lot of other modern turbodiesels I'd be able to complain about daily. That's me, not you.

By the way, Moto-Guzzis were originally powered by tractor-engines, the basic design layout of which remains till this day. I don't really see this as sinful. It worked (and unsurprisingly I have long since wished I could own one). Who cares about origins, it's how you apply / what you make of it.

Getting back to the Gurkha, taking the huge jump from 82(?) to 140 bhp with the same basic engine just makes me suspect some compromises were made, and if the past is any indicator, numbers won't be telling the whole story. 1400rpm? Maybe. But the mHawk 2.2 (BSIV) was supposed to have it from 2,200 I think, where anyone up here will tell you it's dead below 3,000 at altitude.

And if 90bhp was quite sufficient in the old Scorpio for expressway overtaking, why the need to take it quite to this level bhp-wise?

I sincerely hope I will be proven wrong, but the old saying that "horsepower sells cars" has a measure of truth in it I feel.

-Eric

[ringoism]

Originally Posted by Steeroid

Well said, Tini.

We asked for more power, Force gave us more (even if it took its own sweet time doing so). We asked for rigid axles, they gave us that.

The point is that Ringo’s specifications probably have an answer amongst the multiple options available, but his intention is to keep his Marshal running and justify it to himself. Which is fine, but it doesn’t mean that everything manufacturers do is pointless.

Old school 4x4s are fun and involving (in both good and bad sense). But we will be deceiving ourselves (and everyone who is reading) by pretending that they are gods gift to mankind. They probably aren’t going to sell many, but you have to give it to them for trying.

Oh, my... I hardly spend any time / money "involving" myself with the Marshal, I scarcely ever maintain it except before long trips. I spent rs100 today getting the brakes bled and adjusted, and tomorrow, weather permitting, will get the leaf springs re-arched for rs.1600. My wife drops it off in the morning and in the afternoon picks it up from the shop. No hassles really.

The Sumo Gold doesn't have 4x4 and there's a reason it was never fitted with the Tata DI - the drivetrain doesn't clear the tall (deep) engine. Thar as mentioned is a 3-door and as we've seen in a recent thread, the SC is saying that mods are not acceptable, certainly not a 5-door conversion on a short wheelbase. Bolero 4x4 could probably work though my experience with the m2DICR in Spiti left me cold - we smoked (admittedly, in 2wd) the clutch nicely trying to get out of a spot the old DI would have idled easily out of (in 2wd). And it is underpowered in general, the Marshal is just so much more responsive. Still, the Marshal is not God's gift to mankind, though I think I could truly consider it His gift to our family, one that I am grateful for and some others truly appreciate. Detractors need not. I'd like it to be quieter and get several more kmpl... If a newer but equally useful / flexible one-vehicle solution (I mean, including hauling a ton of firewood, seating for ten, expressway driving, expeditions over the passes, and daily commuting, etc) for us came along at a price we felt willing to pay, I'd buy it. Should remind everyone that my wife also likes it... she may be as unusual as I, of course. Great woman whose probably getting irritated that I'm up writing instead of in bed with her... So good night.

I'd not be surprised if Force will sell fewer Extremes than even the previous Gurkhas, which they have hardly sold any of - and not because it lacks low end torque, but because it is even more specialized and will appeal to even fewer people than before, at much higher cost. Is it going to be feasible to use the 140bhp to take a twin-live-axle vehicle down the road at 120+kmph? Let's see.

-Eric

[gthang]

Originally Posted by ringoism

Getting back to the Gurkha, taking the huge jump from 82(?) to 140 bhp with the same basic engine just makes me suspect some compromises were made, and if the past is any indicator, numbers won't be telling the whole story.

-Eric

It's not the same engine.

Cheers

[navpreet318]

Have you even test driven one? I was one of the biggest naysayers for the gurkha. You can read it all in the tow-mator style grill gurkha review! And I faced a lot of ire from gurkha lovers pan India.

But I have extensively test driven the gurkha not once but now twice! Just so that I can clear my mind over it that my initial liking was not just because of the new engine.

Nope. It's really good! Low end torque is right there! Having suffered a lot with a 2L and 3L safari of the yesteryears I almost always check for the low end torque.

Yep. Numbers are indeed justified.

Now about the live axle. What about it? It's got decent behaviour on road. Much better than the two-mater I test drove a few years back. Yes it rolls. Doesn't every old SUV including pajeros and Montero's do it.

I'm a bit surprised at the comments here. You want gold standard DI engines of the yesteryears and then qoute driving the old scorpio at 150 on expressways and then disapprove of a live axle SUV going at 120. Indeed very surprising. And very convenient. The biggest one being creating post after post hypothetically without even a single TD of the xtreme.

The price is definitely on the higher side for what is offered inside the car and that is the biggest detrimental fact. But for all the offroaders complaining of the IFS in the Thar should now have been rejoicing about this Gurkha! Yes priced higher than what most of us would like to spend on one. That is the only downer.

Not the low end torque. Not the handling. Not the suspension. And not the engine. Which by the way is a new one and not the tractor 2.6 which truly was a downer in every which way.

[Steeroid]

Originally Posted by navpreet318

The price is definitely on the higher side for what is offered inside the car and that is the biggest detrimental fact. But for all the offroaders complaining of the IFS in the Thar should now have been rejoicing about this Gurkha! Yes priced higher than what most of us would like to spend on one. That is the only downer. .

If looked at objectively, the premium is not a lot - the price difference with a Thar is about 4.5L (!) but if you were to spec up the Thar to somewhere close to this vehicle it should cost:

+Rs 1.5L for hard top
+ Rs 1.25 L or thereabouts for 2 diff locks (ARB prices, as the Gurkha AFAIK came with Oerlikon) - that is, IF you find a diff lock for the Thar IFS front
+ Rs 50k roughly (more, really) for upsizing the Thar wheels & tyres to match up to Gurkha OE
+ Rs25-30 k for Thar seat modifications and FF seat conversion
+ Rs 25k for snorkel, etc accessories to make the Thar “look tough”
+Rs 25k for the remap to make the engine churn out similar power

That’s roughly 3.5 lakhs ++. And you can’t put a price on the additional space in the Gurkha (massive) as you can’t do that on a Thar.

If you look at it that way, perhaps it’s not priced at a massive premium. A 1.5 - 2 L discount on current price and it will make sense - to someone who’s looking for a dedicated off-road vehicle, not normal folks.

But who are we kidding? Force does not make its money out of selling off-road vehicles - this is more like a time pass for them. They are not in a pissing contest with Mahindra, so don’t expect prices to go down or volumes to pick up.

Which other manufacturer sells a fully-specced off-road vehicle in the showroom today?

[navpreet318]

Exactly my point. The only downside now is that it has become glaringly close to the Vcross and the Home Ministry is not of the approval kind on mood right now. They home ministry enjoyed the massive dose of acceleration and stupid fast feel on roads. That thing is silly fast. Makes one feel like on a really fast roller coaster! Plus the amazing feel of not being able to press the button on the Mall Parking Entry counter. Hahaha!


So now its a very very precarious position because instead of comparing it to the Thar, we are now officially comparing it to the Vcross!

[Steeroid]

Originally Posted by navpreet318

That thing is silly fast. Makes one feel like on a really fast roller coaster!

Which thing? vcross or Gurkha?

Originally Posted by navpreet318

So now its a very very precarious position because instead of comparing it to the Thar, we are now officially comparing it to the Vcross!

I hear the V Cross has a habit of snapping its axles on really tight turns if the surface has no give, because it has no center diff. I am aware of one such vehicle where this has allegedly happened twice.

I haven’t driven the new Gurkha, but the Isuzu diesel is agricultural - how does the 2.2 in the Gurkha compare?

[Dry Ice]

Originally Posted by navpreet318

Exactly my point. The only downside now is that it has become glaringly close to the Vcross and the Home Ministry is not of the approval kind on mood right now.

I would think the VCross would be atleast 3-4 lakhs away, no?

But, agree, it's not easy to pick one over the other. If only Force had also redone the interiors a bit. Sigh!

[navpreet318]

Originally Posted by Steeroid

Which thing? vcross or Gurkha?


I hear the V Cross has a habit of snapping its axles on really tight turns if the surface has no give, because it has no center diff. I am aware of one such vehicle where this has allegedly happened twice.

I haven’t driven the new Gurkha, but the Isuzu diesel is agricultural - how does the 2.2 in the Gurkha compare?

The Gurkha is silly fast on the road! You slam the throttle down and that thing pulls!

And it does not feel agricultural at all. Feels very close to the Storme 400. Though Storme has better NVH control through its body. The reference I have is the Strome 400. It is my daily drive. Due to the added height the whole acceleration feel of the gurkha on the Big Horn tires of size 245/75 R16 (Std Size is 245/70R16. incidentally same as my storme after my slight upsize) was way more dramatic than the storme. It truly pulls well. I'm actually just dreaming what a remap would do!

One off cases are something I don't consider to be relevant as we have not seen under the circumstances the vehicle was used. The storme too does not have the centre diff and yet manages steep uphill climbs sometimes which change surfaces and it suddenly becomes a hard surface. The drive train has taken that abuse silently till now.

Dry Ice: The ex showroom is about 3L away. The onroad becomes similar. And moreover if you move out of the 12L mental hurdle then the whole segment upto 20L gets open for interrogation!

[ringoism]

Originally Posted by navpreet318

.........I'm a bit surprised at the comments here. You want gold standard DI engines of the yesteryears and then qoute driving the old scorpio at 150 on expressways and then disapprove of a live axle SUV going at 120. Indeed very surprising. And very convenient. The biggest one being creating post after post hypothetically without even a single TD of the xtreme.

The price is definitely on the higher side for what is offered inside the car and that is the biggest detrimental fact. But for all the offroaders complaining of the IFS in the Thar should now have been rejoicing about this Gurkha! Yes priced higher than what most of us would like to spend on one. That is the only downer.

Not the low end torque. Not the handling. Not the suspension. And not the engine. Which by the way is a new one and not the tractor 2.6 which truly was a downer in every which way.

You really ought to try reading posts carefully before wasting time on long replies. I clearly said the DI was NOT my gold standard, merely that it had grunt and that it suited all our purposes / met our requirements (not yours) at under 2L. And I daresay we are a kind of typical hill family, which is why we also see so many Bolero /Scorpio DI / MDI-T/m2Di / m2DiCR, etc up here. You and some others here may hate them, but probably in its various forms it's just about India's best-selling diesel engine in history, even in passenger vehicles, and in 2019 people still buy them.

Still, I also clearly said in terms of power delivery the original Scorpio was my gold standard, with good balance of low/top end (and I could here add, a decent suspension for high speeds, too). Clearly said I sometimes would prefer driving a Fortuner. Clearly said re: the Extreme that we'd have to wait for more comments to come in, that my history with other vehicles concerned me that Force could've gone the hp vs torque route to please a numbers-obsessed buying public.

If what you're saying is right, that has not been the case, in which case it could be a great vehicle... but beyond test-drives, are YOU gonna buy one at that price??? And since most people want/need high bhp for the sake of expressway driving at higher speeds, is the suspension / high C.G. truly up to THAT? I'll reassert my suspicion that Force will sell less of these than previous models (which incidentally I did drive - and like - and would buy, in five-door form, once second-hand prices bring them within our modest budget). Our main thing is versatility, what we have gives us that, though it is biased towards our conditions. Plains-dwellers and occasional hill-travelers are on the opposite side of the compromises, I understand that. But still, on the surface of it it could appear the Extreme is going backwards, forwards, and sitting still all at once. My views entirely.

Eric

[Steeroid]

Originally Posted by ringoism

You and some others here may hate them, but probably in its various forms it's just about India's best-selling diesel engine in history, even in passenger vehicles, and in 2019 people still buy them.

Going by that logic, everyone in the plains should be asking for the 3 cylinder 800 from Maruti.

That isn’t the case, because the world has moved on. Your requirement is very specific to a type of engine and a manufacturer - the number of people who think along those lines is probably less than the number of customers Force will get for their Xtreme.

You’re happy with your Marshal and nobody is debating that. Let those that MAY buy the Force for what it is, buy it - just don’t expect them to build a Marshal replica because that is not what the market wants, and it won’t meet regulations either. They do sell a 5 door version with a 2.6 engine, unfortunately turbo-charged and common-railed. So you’re never going to buy a Force product out of a showroom.

There is this little lore in the Defender groups - those that buy very used vehicles cheap to build it up to their own specs shouldn’t be preaching to the factory as to what they should put in the market. Because that group would never buy a brand new Defender out of a showroom.