[Sankar]

Originally Posted by Venkatesh

Innova Crysta vs Innova HyCross

RWD vs FWD
Body on frame vs Monocoque

The Crysta will age more gracefully than the Hycross. To my eyes the Crysta, especially the pre-facelift, has cleaner looking front end design compared to the Hycross' more fussy elements. A well maintained 2006 Innova still looks good on the road.

Both Crysta and Hycross have inset wheels but the Hycross' is more inside the body similar to the Qualis'. The inset look is accentuated by the bulging fenders of the Hycross. Although it can be corrected using neg-offset alloys/spacers it will change the scrub radius. Based on these pictures the wheel size to body proportion seems to be better on a Crysta with 17" wheels compared to Hycross's 18" wheels.

[volkman10]

Toyota to sell Innova Hycross to fleet operators too.

However, only the base ‘G’ trim of the MPV can adorn the yellow plates

Although the G trim is the entry-level option of the Innova Hycross variant lineup, it does offer a rather premium experience thanks to it being fairly loaded. The G trim comes with auto LED headlights, LED taillights with reflectors, power windows, push-button start/stop, electrically adjustable ORVMs and adjustable rear headrests. The G trim comes with both seven- and eight-seater options.

Toyota to offer the Innova Hycross in five broad trims: G, GX, VX, ZX and ZX (O).

The G trim gets auto LED headlights, power windows and push-button start/stop.

Safety equipment includes dual front airbags and front and rear parking sensors.

It will be offered in both seven- and eight-seater layouts.

To be powered by a 2-litre naturally aspirated petrol engine with a CVT gearbox.

Toyota to keep offering the Innova Crysta; likely to continue offering it to fleet operators as well.

Prices of the Innova Hycross likely to start from Rs 20 lakh (ex-showroom).

Link

[Livnletcarsliv]

I am just wondering about the following

Crysta is a BOF vehicle that is built to last longer and for rugged use (meaning more abuse) compared to a monocoque. How is this Hycross (a monocoque) platform will be as abuse friendly as a Crysta? Isn't it a clear advantage for the Crysta in this space where the road infrastructure in India is always a pity state?

Generally, the ground clearance of a BOF vehicle is way more than a monocoque vehicle. Again, how is it almost similar for both Hycross and Crysta? Even if it is so, how can this raised monocoque be fun to drive compared to the Hycross?

Crysta is also available in a 2.7 NA petrol powertrain. This Hycross comes with a 2.0 NA petrol and 2.0 NA hybrid-petrol powertrain. So apart from the looks (subjective though), probably easy driving (monocoque vs BOF), and features is there anything that is significant enough to replace the Crysta? Going by Toyota India's pricing approach so far, this Hycross will most likely be priced higher than Crysta petrol. I don't see this price increase as appropriate.
And while the Hybrid is going to cost significantly higher than even the Hycross non-hybrid variant, how does this price increase make sense (economically and environmentally) even if it is delivering the claimed fuel efficiency?

Additionally, if this Hycross is bigger in dimensions than a Crysta, how is it supposed to be more fun to drive with its disproportionate tires/wheels (smaller)?

[trail_lover]

All your points are valid, and great questions. Here is my take on why Toyota is trying to replace the Crysta with the Hycross.

I think the main reason why Toyota is doing this is impending stringent emission regulations which are going to kick-in not just in India, but in global markets as well. For any OEM it doesn't make sense having an outdated high CO2 emitter on one market, and a more advanced one in another international market. They would rationalize for economies of scale.

There is also some strategy involved. When Toyota has invested upwards of 2000 crore on the Hycross, they would not have an older Crysta completely cannibalize on the Hycross! My take is that when the Crysta Diesel returns to sale next year it will be pretty highly priced at par or above Hycross full hybrid so as to dissuade customers from going for a diesel.

The world is moving away from diesel, and all OEM have jumped on the bandwagon. Even Hyundai which will continue to offer diesel engines post RDE emission norms has stopped development of ALL NEW diesel engines. This has been announced in several media articles.

In order to satisfy the impending stringent BS6 Phase II RDE emission norms more equipment might have to be put into diesel engines, driving up the price. I wont be surprised if the Hycross full hybrid is priced very competitively with the diesel.

The petrol Crysta ofcourse might not be preferred in large volumes, due to its relatively lower fuel efficiency, and due to the psychological barrier that petrol will burn a hole in the pocket for such a heavy vehicle! A BOF on petrol! Scary for many even without logical reasoning.

Another major factor going against all BOFs is their heavy kerb weight. Higher kerb weights consume more fuel/energy, and in turn more CO2 emissions in any vehicle be it IC engine, hybrid or EV. Monocoques are 200 to 300 kg lighter compared to BOFs leading to higher fuel efficiency. The sweet spot is to be around 1500 to 1600 kg kerb weight in this market segment, in order to meet emission norms in today's level of regulations. And let us remember kerb weight is calculated "with fluids" i.e. kerb weight includes fuel in the tank, engine oil, transmission oil and coolant. So we are looking at stringent weight targets to meet.

It is a myth that monocoques could be less sturdy than BOFs. Monocoques can take as much abuse as a BOF. The XUV500 which is a monocoque is a good example. But the suspension parts in the XUV500 monocoque were made very sturdy and vehicle had a kerb weight of close to 1900 kg if I am not mistaken. So it could all boil down to "Weight". Also, we have to be aware that there are lighter but stronger alloys that could be used in suspension system parts of monocoques, ofcourse with a higher cost. But fact remains that monocoques can be made as sturdy or sturdier than BOFs.

You have many monocoques in the world that can take abuse from the stables of Landrover, Jeep etc. that have kerb weight around 1500 to 1800 kg that can take a good amount of abuse! I mean they can even do offroad, due to which bad roads wouldn't be a problem. For that matter for all that I know a Renault Duster monocoque at 1200 kg was very tolerant to bad roads. Gem of a vehicle!

Monocoques usually have much better handling and dynamics, due to lower unsprung mass i.e. lighter suspension components. But not sure if that can be termed as "fun to drive". W.r.to ground clearance GC you have a lot of components even BELOW the frame/chassis of the BOF, and as far as I know is just the distance between the lowest part in the vehicle and the ground. You could even create a higher GC in a monocoque when compared to BOF.

With respect to Hycross/Crysta segment, the product is positioned as a MPV people carrier with passenger comfort as a key attribute. Crysta had a very good balance between ride quality, being rugged and handling. But generally speaking BOFs have a poorer ride quality when compared to monocoques, or the suspension has to be improved with advanced tech like frequency dependent damping etc as you see in Scorpio N. More cost and complexity!

So an OEM might decide on monocoques due to cost and weight considerations! When Toyota transitioned from older Innova to Crysta by hiking up the price significantly, by then their focus customer had been upgraded to include chaffeur driven luxury customers as well (just few notches below premium segment).

Atleast catering to rural off-road customer profile is not their utmost priority right now.

However, it remains to be seen how the taxi segment perceives the HyCross. The taxi segment might be asking the same set of questions you've put across. But it looks like Toyota hasn't positioned the HyCross for taxi segment. That was their intention when they upgraded to Crysta, but it still made business sense for Crysta to be operated in taxi segment. Not sure what will happen with the HyCross in taxi segment.

Having said this, I totally respect your thoughts on the Innova Crysta and Hycross comparison and I'm a big fan of Crysta too for the practicality it offers.

Originally Posted by Livnletcarsliv

I am just wondering about the following

Crysta is a BOF vehicle that is built to last longer and for rugged use (meaning more abuse) compared to a monocoque. How is this Hycross (a monocoque) platform will be as abuse friendly as a Crysta? Isn't it a clear advantage for the Crysta in this space where the road infrastructure in India is always a pity state?

Generally, the ground clearance of a BOF vehicle is way more than a monocoque vehicle. Again, how is it almost similar for both Hycross and Crysta? Even if it is so, how can this raised monocoque be fun to drive compared to the Hycross?

Crysta is also available in a 2.7 NA petrol powertrain. This Hycross comes with a 2.0 NA petrol and 2.0 NA hybrid-petrol powertrain. So apart from the looks (subjective though), probably easy driving (monocoque vs BOF), and features is there anything that is significant enough to replace the Crysta? Going by Toyota India's pricing approach so far, this Hycross will most likely be priced higher than Crysta petrol. I don't see this price increase as appropriate.
And while the Hybrid is going to cost significantly higher than even the Hycross non-hybrid variant, how does this price increase make sense (economically and environmentally) even if it is delivering the claimed fuel efficiency?

Additionally, if this Hycross is bigger in dimensions than a Crysta, how is it supposed to be more fun to drive with its disproportionate tires/wheels (smaller)?

[int3]

Booked ZX(O) with Ravindu Toyota. Selected Blackish Ageha Color, looked great in the pics posted here and on Toyota site.
waiting for 6th to check the detailed reviews.

[teknicsand]

Booked the ZX(O). Looks fab in the Black Ageha colour, and the proportions in most angles look good.

We've been looking for a touring car/SUV with lots of luggage space, and this car seems to tick all the boxes. I suspect the ZX(O) will hit the 40L mark OTR in Bangalore though.

[ron178]

Originally Posted by irdevanand

Sir - For Toyota's fault why penalise our kith and kin? A 6 airbag version is safer than a 2 airbag one, especially in such a big people mover. Have you seen such child seat installations? Does it work for you? I am not saying it is the perfect answer but it could be a good tradeoff without compromising on safety. There are lots of videos in Youtube for xl6 / carnival/ carens child seat.

Wouldn't having an unrestrained passenger in the centre seat be a worse compromise than losing curtain airbags?

[CEF_Beasts]

Originally Posted by irdevanand

Have you seen such child seat installations? Does it work for you? I am not saying it is the perfect answer but it could be a good tradeoff without compromising on safety. There are lots of videos in Youtube for xl6 / carnival/ carens child seat.

This won't work for the ZX HyCross, reason being the side folding table that is present between the two captain seats.

For the Crysta ZX with captain seats, this temporary seat worked because the folding tables were placed on the seatbacks, which is unfortunately not the case with the HyCross.

[irdevanand]

Originally Posted by ron178

Wouldn't having an unrestrained passenger in the centre seat be a worse compromise than losing curtain airbags?

With no seat belt reminders for back seats and loosely implemented regulations on back seat violations (Cyrus Mistry effect in few states for few months), VX is less safe at the moment as it puts 6 out of 8 passengers in harms way compared to 1/8 passenger in ZX.

It's like Toyota asking us to choose between a rock and a hard place. Both are bad options in my opinion and Toyota should consider giving 6 airbags in VX and 8seater option in ZX/ZX(O) for an additional price. In the absence of both, people will either risk 1/8 or 6/8 based on their use case and we can neither blame them nor stop them. We can only pray to God to impart some common sense to at least one party in this 3 way game (users, govt, makers).

Originally Posted by CEF_Beasts

This won't work for the ZX HyCross, reason being the side folding table that is present between the two captain seats.

Noticed that side table. We can remove them maybe? We will know for sure once the car hits the showrooms and we can see for ourselves. I have confidence in the car seat makers . If they sense a good market fit they will do something that works. Seen many of these products in Amazon too.

[josephkarthic]

Is Hybrid EV cars safe? We can see so many fire accidents all over the world, Is it wise to invest on such a car?

[iTNerd]

Originally Posted by josephkarthic

Is Hybrid EV cars safe? We can see so many fire accidents all over the world, Is it wise to invest on such a car?

Hybrid cars are technologically complex with an additional risk of battery hazard. However, if I have to buy one, it will be from the stable of Toyota who are inherently the pioneer of this technology.

Mod Note: Our Toyota Innova Hycross Review has been taken live at this link. Please continue the discussion over on the new thread. Thanks!