[CrAzY dRiVeR]

Originally Posted by PrideRed

What a dumb claim by Hyundai! The other petrol engine on offer is a lame/namesake 1.2L Motor!

Let's forget the case of the Venue alone, although 44k is still a significant number.

1.0 TGDi is the first mainstream Turbo-petrol in the market. Venue was just the beginning - and the motor is already present in Nios, Aura, Verna and soon going into the i20 and Kia Sonet as well.

This is the first small turbo petrol motor in the Indian market to do such numbers, also to be present in multiple variants and multiple cars. In fact, between the Seltos and Creta - even the 1.4 TGDi is a big success for Hyundai now.

• Maruti limited the Boosterjet to only the Baleno RS. And exited.
• Ford limited the Ecoboost to only top-spec and had an on-off affair with it. It was expensive against the original 1.5 in the Ecosport, and played second fiddle to the 1.5 Dragon later on.
• Volkswagen only wanted to push the 1.2 TSi along with the DSG gearbox as a premium option - limiting it's scope. I feel the 1.0 TSi will be much more common now, with good pricing and availability right from Highline variants.
• Honda, Toyota and now Maruti - doesn't bother about turbo-petrols.
• TATA and Mahindra did a much better job than the others, with their 1.2 turbo petrols on the Nexon and XUV 3OO, till Hyundai arrived.

The motor felt competent in the Venue and fun in the Aura. Looking forward to the i20, especially if they can manage to give it the 120hp tune along with a better sporty suspension setup. These numbers should also help them to eventually be competitive in pricing as well (which they currently are not - especially with the Nios Turbo).

[dark.knight]

Originally Posted by turbo

Count me as someone who's not impressed with this engine.

Has no low end torque, is dead below 2000 rpm, struggles on hills and underground mall parkings, isn't the most fuel efficient either. Then what's it good for? Delhi-Agra highway / Mumbai-Pune expressway runs?

I have to completely agree, while I've always bashed iVtec engines for their lethargy and activation only after 4k RPM, this one comes a close second.

The Venue with the high torque, high BHP 1.0 engine paired to the DCT might sound like a dream on paper, an absolute spec monster. On the road, it is the direct opposite, getting activated after 2k RPM at the very least, the car itself has quite a bit of bodyroll as well, the 2.0 liter NA engine on the TC Elantra will absolutely destroy this box on wheels, the Venue seemed almost 4-5 segments lower in comparison and I find even the Elantra very, very slow in initial pickup across all gears.

There was a gem of a car called the Hyundai Getz which pulled to 15 on 1, 40 on 2, 70 on 3, 100 on 4 and on 5th it just pulled like a train all within 2k RPM if not lower , in a 100 meter race this car might just decimate every car in existence today.

High revving engines are like sugarless chocolate or room temperature soft drink - utterly pointless and a waste of money.

[Reinhard]

Originally Posted by CrAzY dRiVeR

TATA and Mahindra did a much better job than the others, with their 1.2 turbo petrols on the Nexon and XUV 3OO, till Hyundai arrived.

Yet of course, these are not as advanced as the Venue's. The Nexon's 1.2 Revotron for instance, while turbo charged, is still oldschool. Its not a TGDI.

[wheelguy]

Originally Posted by dark.knight

the car itself has quite a bit of bodyroll as well

Can't believe this, are you comparing it with other sub 4 meter SUVs or low slung sedans?

Given their ground clearances and overall body height, CSUVs' and SUVs' bodyroll can never be compared with sedans.

[dark.knight]

Originally Posted by wheelguy

Given their ground clearances and overall body height, CSUVs' and SUVs' bodyroll can never be compared with sedans.

I agree, but when a situation should arise that the chassis and suspension are unable to keep up with the engine and gearbox, there is something wrong with the model itself.

There is an all too familiar road near my home with a long sweeping S curvature, I've put many cars to the test there because not only can I find out how well the car hugs the curve, but also I can know how the car retains composure when I release the steering back to straight and turn the other way, at about 60+ kmph I felt a very uneasy pull of my head and shoulder and the car itself didn't feel planted as I could discern slippage and a massive sag on the side of the turn.

Granted the Audi Q3 has a longer wheelbase and wider tyres with a Quattro system but that machine felt like a leech at about 90+ on that same road with zero sag. That's the only other SUV I've driven on that road. The Venue also feels like it holds gears forever, leading to rising revs, more noise but less efficient transfer of power, when braking and releasing the throttle again, it feels... lost, maybe that's a bigger reason why I felt uneasy because when going out of a turn you need power to improve traction just before you brake into corners.

[landcruiser123]

44k Venues with the 1.0 is a really good number. For an engine that is expensive, I think these are good sales numbers.

I never gave Ford a chance at success, but MSIL definitely could have done better in terms of product planning. They could produced the engine locally and have introduced a boosterjet variant for a Swift Sport, Ciaz, Vitara Brezza, and Ertiga. Hyundai is using this engine in the i10, Aura, Verna, and Venue. It'll be a matter of time before the i20 and the Kia Sonet get this engine under the hood.

If not for the Suzuki-Toyota partnership, Hyundai-Kia would be giving MSIL sleepless nights.

Originally Posted by PrideRed

Problem with 1.0L Boosterjet was the K12 series engine which was damn good in Baleno. The performance improvement for the price was not significant and value quotient was missing.

True. Add the price to the equation- many of my enthusiast friends decided against the Baleno RS because of the 1.5 lakh premium and higher costs of spares (which were imported from Japan.)

Originally Posted by Reinhard

I'll consider the engine a robust success when it proves to be bullet proof in our terrain's proving grounds. Till then - I consider it a very good technical achievement and market success nevertheless.

Good point. Turbo petrols aren't accepted by the purists in the USA who prefer their NA V6s and V8s. They aren't easy to maintain engines.

[Shreyans_Jain]

The success of Hyundai’s 1.0 turbo GDI has a lot to do with the fact that the base NA petrol engine is rather pedestrian and is only available in the lower trims. If you want the higher models, you HAVE TO buy it with the turbo petrol. The buyers hand is forced in that sense.

That said, I will not read much into the claim of being the first 1.0 or 1.1 or 1.2 etc to be successful. Turbo petrols were pioneered by Skoda with the legendary Mk1 Octavia vRS, and were introduced to the lower segment by VW with the Polo GT TSi and by Tata with the Nexon Revotron 1.2T. It is these two who deserve credit for democratising the turbocharged petrol engine, especially Tata. They showed how small capacity turbo petrols should be executed reliably and at a cost.

Honestly, jury is still out on Hyundai’s new engine. Many owners are already complaining about lag and poor low end response. This was the Achilles heel of Ford’s 1.0 Ecoboost in India as well, otherwise a renowned, successful and award winning engine worldwide. Long term reliability in Indian conditions is also unknown. VW and Tata turbo petrols are proven and time tested engines. This isn’t.

[NiInJa]

This is another case of Hyundai doing it right the first time. They launched the 1.0L engine with most issues sorted and also at the right time when the perception was that diesel engines would get too expensive. Not offering the 1.2 NA in top versions also played the trick as I find the mid versions too 'hatchback' like and boring.

The car itself was a perfect choice to receive this engine. Imagine putting this same engine in say, a Creta, the market perception would have been different. Also, lets not forget that people have started warming up to the idea of small turbo charged engines (not me ) due to multiple reasons. When Ford launched the 1.0L turbo in Ecosport, it was way too expensive and there was a good diesel engine at a lesser price available. The VW GT Tsi was an offering for enthusiasts ten years ago. This time around, turbo petrols are going to become more and more mainstream.

P.S. I would still prefer 1.5 Liter 4 cylinder NA petrol over a 1.0L 3 cylinder turbo. They put out a little less torque but its there when you need it. These turbos have to be whacked on their rear like you do to bulls attached to carts to wake up from their day-dreams and start running (if you've ever sat on a bullock cart, you will know what I'm saying )

[ram.iyer95]

Like many have already pointed out, the success of the 1.0 TGDi in the Venue is primarily due to the fact that the other petrol engine option is the underwhelming NA 1.2 Kappa. Hyundai wanted to make this engine mainstream, and so smartly made it the only petrol engine option for the higher variants.

This is quite unlike the cases of Ford as well as MSIL, whose products, viz. the EcoSport and the Baleno, had other competent engine options. We all know how much the K12 is loved by enthusiasts as well as the masses. The arrival of the Ford 1.5 Dragon engine effectively killed the EcoBoost. I remember reading in our own EcoSport facelift review that the Dragon is the sensible choice over the EcoBoost.

I have not driven any of these vehicles, and so my observation is purely on the basis of facts.

[1100D]

I did not like Hyundais at all. Then I started liking their diesel engines. Then their designs started getting extremely desirable (before being dialled back a bit) and now this engine.

I am a person who appreciates driving with a proper gear/speed combination and although there is a dead zone at low-rpms, that would not show up much on my driving as I completely dislike pulling at high gear on lower rpms.

I am one of those people who loved the first generation swift diesel for the shove it presented at the right rpm, although it was probably one of the worst cars to drive in the "lag" zone. I love this one too!

[sabby_4c]

Originally Posted by dark.knight

I have to completely agree, while I've always bashed iVtec engines for their lethargy and activation only after 4k RPM, this one comes a close second.

The Venue with the high torque, high BHP 1.0 engine paired to the DCT might sound like a dream on paper, an absolute spec monster. On the road, it is the direct opposite, getting activated after 2k RPM at the very least, the car itself has quite a bit of bodyroll as well, the 2.0 liter NA engine on the TC Elantra will absolutely destroy this box on wheels, the Venue seemed almost 4-5 segments lower in comparison and I find even the Elantra very, very slow in initial pickup across all gears.

There was a gem of a car called the Hyundai Getz which pulled to 15 on 1, 40 on 2, 70 on 3, 100 on 4 and on 5th it just pulled like a train all within 2k RPM if not lower , in a 100 meter race this car might just decimate every car in existence today.

High revving engines are like sugarless chocolate or room temperature soft drink - utterly pointless and a waste of money.

Did Hyundai tune the engine/gearbox differently for India or is it a completely different engine than the global 1.0 Turbo GDI ? I had driven Kia Rio on Norwegian mountains with the 1.0 Turbo GDI (99bhp) and it felt quite good at the low end, much better than the 1.2 NA in my G i10. In fact, I remember the dashboard gear sign asking me to downshift to 3rd whenever I was driving below 60kmph where as my G i10 asks me to up shift to 4th at 40kmph !

[dark.knight]

Originally Posted by sabby_4c

Did Hyundai tune the engine/gearbox differently for India or is it a completely different engine than the global 1.0 Turbo GDI ? I had driven Kia Rio on Norwegian mountains with the 1.0 Turbo GDI (99bhp) and it felt quite good at the low end, much better than the 1.2 NA in my G i10.

Hyundai like most other manufacturers probably does tune (dull out) their engine or gearbox because for India they focus on fuel efficiency and minimal wear of parts, since the country is often dusty, humid and generally, overcrowded.

As for our contrasting experiences, it might be even the fact that you might prefer to push the engine a bit more than I, the initial grunting and jiggling is the only problem, once the engine goes beyond 3k RPM that engine really kicks down hard.

Let's also not discount the fact that you drove on Norwegian mountains, so you can freely push the car and make it climb the gears, unlike India where we brake to a halt every 10 seconds, the driving conditions being ideal, most cars might seem tractable but the real position might arise only in stop & go traffic. Also, the cold European air might aid in smooth engine functioning, multiple variables here.

[CrAzY dRiVeR]

Originally Posted by sabby_4c

Did Hyundai tune the engine/gearbox differently for India or is it a completely different engine than the global 1.0 Turbo GDI ? I had driven Kia Rio on Norwegian mountains with the 1.0 Turbo GDI (99bhp) and it felt quite good at the low end, much better than the 1.2 NA in my G i10. In fact, I remember the dashboard gear sign asking me to downshift to 3rd whenever I was driving below 60kmph where as my G i10 asks me to up shift to 4th at 40kmph !

Same here. We have an Xcent 1.2 NA for parents and after having driven the Aura Turbo - I'll pick the TGDi over the 1.2 NA without a second thought. Easy choice over the boring the Maruti 1.5 K series in the Brezza / Ciaz too.

That said - my daily drive is a turbo diesel. The slight lag here is mostly the lag is just a matter of getting used to!

[sabby_4c]

Originally Posted by dark.knight

Hyundai like most other manufacturers probably does tune (dull out) their engine or gearbox because for India they focus on fuel efficiency and minimal wear of parts, since the country is often dusty, humid and generally, overcrowded.

As for our contrasting experiences, it might be even the fact that you might prefer to push the engine a bit more than I, the initial grunting and jiggling is the only problem, once the engine goes beyond 3k RPM that engine really kicks down hard.

Let's also not discount the fact that you drove on Norwegian mountains, so you can freely push the car and make it climb the gears, unlike India where we brake to a halt every 10 seconds, the driving conditions being ideal, most cars might seem tractable but the real position might arise only in stop & go traffic. Also, the cold European air might aid in smooth engine functioning, multiple variables here.

That's the funny thing, I got around 18 km/l over 1700km of driving in snow, grovel, mountains and of course a fair bit of highway. Maybe the fuel quality is much superior there. Also, I meant the low end torque of the turbo engine, I didn't have to push except for the steepest climbs. In my car, I have to press the accelerator if I'm on a slight slope in Bangalore where as I had to release the clutch much slower and without any accelerator input to start on most slopes as the torque was much higher.
On the high rpm, of course you get the nice turbo kick and boy did it love to be revved compared to my pathetic 1.2 NA which begs me to up shift over 2.5k.

[PrideRed]

This is good marketing that worked for Hyundai than a fantastic engine. Imagine you go to popular ice cream shop, options in menu are as below:
Single scoop vanilla-100RS
Double scoop choco almond- 140RS
Single scoop gourmet ice cream sundae- 130RS.

Most of the buyers will go for choco almond or Sundae.
Replace ice creams with 1.2NA, 1.5 diesel and 1.0TGDI in that order.