[vasudeva]

I would rather have a longer interval for facelifts than the annual done by some Korean car makers. I can easily buy a Hyundai except for the fact that almost all models undergo frequent facelifts. On Delhi roads, one can see so many versions of the same model. The older versions then look aged. So a midlife facelift of 3 years is good enough for me.

[Sanidhya mukund]

Well, in Maruti cars, it is always better to buy the first iteration. Almost all their face-lifted models are ugly.
Also, have a look at this video by YouTube channel Sonpreet Singh, it clearly shows the quality difference in the facelifted Brezza as compared to the original one:

https://youtu.be/UjIhZQFt3uA

[landcruiser123]

Good topic aniyo.

I think the use of parts with lower grades might just be equivalent of replacing imported parts with locally sourced parts OR tier 1 suppliers with tier 2. It'll be a reliable guess that the limits and mean of the tolerance stays the stays the same, but the average deviation maybe more from the second degree parts.

Here's my take: (Different brands have different strategies for different products)
1. The utterly rubbish facelift- eg: Toyota Innova. Other than the BS4 and ACC, can't think of any changes with the 4 facelifts it had. Let's not talk about the ugly grills.
2. The non-visual but heart-lift- eg. VW Polo/Vento/Skoda Rapid. I'm happy that they have upgraded the engine/transmission combo but I hardly see any visual changes from the launch.
3. Purely visual- Mostly Hyundais and Marutis. Just visual elements are changed with a few new features. Ciaz was an exception.
4. Significantly improved/critical bits improved/added: 2015 Verna(much improved suspension,) Tata Hexa(from Aria,) Honda City (ZX- 6 airbags,) XUV 500 (new engines for Delhi, increased power etc)
5. The MISERS(=The LOSERS)- Tata Hexa, Ford Ecosport, Jazz (no magic seats,) Verna(no rear disc brakes,) S-Cross (no 1.6 diesel)

[Reinhard]

A topic that most of us had in thoughts but never found words to express properly. Thanks aniyo! A good thread. Provocative for thought.

Personally I don't like facelifts. Generation uplift I'm okay with as that brings a car upto latest technological advances while retaining the badge identity. Facelifts are at the most 10% of times good. Rest are all cheap bumper-sticker jobs and molding changes. Things that hardly make a difference in regular driving and travelling experience. Sticker and software jobs are never to my liking. I'd rather see the same car proving its mettle without needing these plastic surgeries over a long time. Now a days car makers like MSIL bring facelifts to make existing owners feel their car is now old.

For example, suppose a person has a Swift since some years. In comes a "facelift" (Not talking about a generation change to Heartect here.) with new bumper design, HID lamps, roof rails, wide touch screen, spoiler. Price bump by 30k. Is the existing owner really losing out a lot in his existing good car? No! Its still the fun to drive Swift. But at every traffic stop when a new Swift is besides, the customer will feel he/she is driving an older car now. When he/she bites the bullet - 90% of the times the customer will upgrade to a sedan/compact SUV now.

So IMO the facelifts are not only to keep the car in question fresh, but to make existing owners of that badge in previous look to move up to the next segment car bringing more footfall to the showroom. Quite a complex marketing & sales strategy. Kudos to those who get it right of course.

I'll be beaten for this - but I actually love VW for the way they are doing their facelifts on the POLO-AMEO-VENTO family. Almost unnoticeable. This way they don't make existing owners feel "old car" and keep new owners happy too.

Originally Posted by GTO

On a few cars, features are deleted (stingy brands like Tata & Ford), while we have also seen a quality dive on some.

You are not right there. Tata doesn't even wait for facelifts to do that. The Nexon for example, dropped a feature at average rate of 1/month since launch & its yet to get a facelift per se.

Couldn't agree more about the Innova. That image is etched like glasswork in my retina. See that walrus face every time I close my eyes!

[CrAzY dRiVeR]

Speaking of bad facelifts, I wonder why this one was missed out? The original was a decent machine but the facelift was emoji on wheels.

[21Archer84]

Valuable thoughts shared here, as always. As someone working behind the scenes, guess I can give some insights too.

Firstly, it's not true that every manufacturer builds a vehicle to the best of the quality. Each to his own. It all depends on the segment and market they are serving to. While some develop a truly Global car ( no major differences between say Made For India and Made For UK,, etc), some develop as per the local market.

As most might be aware, it takes up to 3-4yrs for a product to be developed and launched in to the market. The development timelines are so tight, that it's very difficult to address all the issues in the vehicle. Generally, only the ones that the Program Manager feels critical are ironed out before launch, though Engineers could be working on the other issues even after the launch.

If a car is launched today, a facelift of it could be already in the works behind the doors. Facelifts are like a pit-stop before a new vehicle is developed, to keep the customer occupied with their brand and to iron out the issues that could have been observed during the development or based on customer feedback.
OEMs do not invest too much on facelifts, they could however try to save money by optimizing where possible( localisation could be one, though not all benefits are passed to customer).

My hands on experience has been with my 2008 Fabia. Split Rear Seats vs Bench seat, Adjustable FR Passenger Seat vs non-adjustable, No vanity Mirror, No heated SideView Mirror, No Grab Handles, No 3-point Seat Belt for the Rear Center Passenger in the facelift were few changes that I noticed. The cost of the vehicle however did not have much of a difference if I remember correctly.
There are lot of factors involved and difficult to conclude which is better. That said, most manufacturers try to give the best in the segment product and that sometimes could be seen in the cost of the vehicle ( let's not get to the greedy Manufacturers with low quality versions of Established products).

PS: Purchase decision should be taken, irrespective of whether it's a facelift or a Brand new platform, after taking a test drive and comparing against the competition. If you wait for the Best to arrive, you will never be able to purchase one.

[lrsays]

Originally Posted by aniyo

This brings me to the question, should be buy car in the first launch or wait for the Facelift. I typically wait for a year to so after launch.

I prefer to wait as some critical fixes do arrive in a year or two, sometimes this wait can result in deletion of features! Tata Hexa deleted 12V socket to save cost
Toyota worked on suspension and ground clearance after first version of Etios, so waiting for at least 1 year seems to be best option.

[SmartCat]

Moderator note: A poll has been added!

The poll is about your preferences when it comes to looks and design (and not about missing or added features)

[King_pin09]

Not necessary that a facelift would always mean betterment. As we have seen in many cases a facelift has in-fact turned into a blunder in certain or many aspects.

Appearance blunder:

The Verna 4S (Ugly) which evolved from the Fluidic Verna (Good Looking) vanished into thin air without any trace.

The Tata Vista Sedan class (Ugly) also evolved from a rather good looking first generation Indica Vista and was majorly picked up by fleet operators than by individuals.

Safety Blunder:

Verna Again. The Fulidic Verna of 2011 came with all wheel disc brakes whilst the 4s facelift shed off the rear discs and replaced them with drums, the same trend continues even today with the 2017 facelift.

Dimension compromise:

The first gen Dzire was a full size sedan with 4160 mm length which was reduced by way of facelift to 3995 mm.

Overall quality blunder:

Honda City – The name says it all. Just compare the present generation Honda city to those of the 1st and 2nd generation cars.

[VWAllstar]

We must hand over this thread to Volkswagen India.

Their facelifts prove that not all of them are good. VWs facelifts means a lot more badges, chrome, ugly seat covers and alloys (although I love their design here)

At the same time our home grown brands prove that facelifts are better. Tata and Mahindra's facelifts are more of fixing all the bugs that the previous gen cars have, and they have plenty. With them it is always wise to wait for 2 years and then buy one or if there is a facelift launch soon then wait some more.

Renault has also started to make a mickey of us. I am yet to digest they called the Duster 2019 a facelift

Maruti does a faily better job. They have more so a generation change most times than a facelift per say. Since this thread is only for Facelifts, Maruti may not be a good example.

[fastturtle10]

I think it depends on the car; take for example the MS S-Cross; in my opinion, its first generation model was not attractive (sorry to the owners) and I even saw a news that MS was forced to cut the price by LAKHS! However, the second time around the S-Cross was a winner and welcomed a spiking increase in sales.



Although not a completely identical situation, many have the opinion that the Harrier is not a completed product and still has many quirks; when the next generation of the Harrier comes out, I bet it will sort out the quirks and offer way more features to stay ahead of the Hector (I still believe the Harrier is better than the Hector). I am quite optimistic and cannot wait for the next generation of the Harrier.

[arindambasu13]

Originally Posted by volkman10

Brace yourself for the shocker coming soon and already launched in China,

Form this,

Attachment 1918293


...To THIS,

Attachment 1918294

Ha ha , indeed. I was just about to post the same thing because the Creta's example immediately came to my mind as well. But as mentioned, this is not a facelift and therefore technically outside the purview of discussion on this thread.

Generally speaking, facelifts are usually better, whether cosmetically or mechanically. Case in point which I can immediately recollect: the Honda City new-gen which came out in 2014 was a design I immediately disliked, because to my eyes there were quite a few non-cohesive design elements on that car. But, Honda evolved the design very capably with a large number of subtle changes and refinements, and as a result, the currently available City looks fab, with the right areas sharpened and made way sleeker.

[amods]

It's amazing how I was thinking about the same topic while in my car enroute office.

Facelifts are completely subjective and depends on car models and individual opinion. But, I prefer timeless designs(Love my Polo) more over facelifts coming in to market and spoiling the older version's relevance and market price.

An example for my '14 Grandi10, there are at least 2 or 3 facelifts arrived till date - It makes the older version look and feel out of date and anyone in used car market would prefer newer versions of the same car.

[Santoshbhat]

Originally Posted by GTO

Oh, my eyes! That ugly grille on the 7-Series facelift:

BMW has more in store for you. The upcoming 5 series facelift is rumoured to look like this



Image source : https://pressfrom.info/ca/autos/news...rendering.html

[VJ05]

Originally Posted by nikhilthegunner

What would people here say for the facelifted Duster?



Picture is from Autocar India through Google search.

I like the design of this Facelifted Duster, saw it physically in the showroom. Looks more macho and muscular in the new look.