[gopalnt]

Was the car not test driven to test ADAS functionality? Or will that happen later? I am eager to know how does this camera-based ADAS works compared to Radar based.

[classiccruiser]

It is with great pleasure that I recount my more than ten-year ownership experience with the 3rd generation Honda City car. This car has been a cherished member of our family, and we have traveled extensively across the southern region of India with this vehicle. It brings me immense joy to proclaim that this car has never presented any significant issues and still drives with the same level of ease as a brand new model.
Based on my extensive exposure to the 3rd generation Honda City, I wholeheartedly endorse the 5th generation version without any reservations. In my view, no other vehicle at this price range, including the Virtus and Slavia, can rival the Honda City in terms of its dependability and unwavering peace of mind.

[07CR]

I don't really understand the criticism the facelift is currently getting on this forum. I understand there's not much that has changed, but IMO for the target audience this car already satisfied their requirements by leaps and bounds.

Consider it's chief rivals which are priced similarly -VW Virtus and Skoda Slavia (1.0 AT trims). City offers better rear seat space and experience, better interior quality (VW2.0 products have disappointed greatly in this), better NVH (3 Cyl vs 4 Cyl),better equipment levels, much better ASS experience, much more reliable engine and GB combination, lesser niggles, better steering, much better AC and a cushy ride quality (<90 Kmph). The VW twins offer better high speed ride quality, but IMO that's the only trump card they have over the City.

PS-Not considering the Verna, as the new gen is just around the corner, and we are yet to receive concrete info about it.

Even in equipment levels the city beats the VW twins hopelessly. I tried to compare each and every feature of both cars (Slavia vs City) in brochure and tried to list down the uncommon features. The difference is night and day and in favor of the city.



IMO City easily is a great buy over the 1.0 VW group alternatives.

Honda did have the opportunity to bring in the RS turbo to take on 1.5 of VW's and they could have priced the hybrid models better, but other than that, the facelift makes a lot of sense over the German duos.

Over to Hyundai to challenge the City!

[tsi_niks1989]

Originally Posted by 07CR

IMO City easily is a great buy over the 1.0 VW group alternatives.

Great comparison, let me list down few positives of Slavia/Virtus compared to City and this comes after owning both cars[1L TSI and 1.5TSI] from the group and not just test driving:

1. Much better exterior build, City doors and exterior quality feels flimsy to be honest and this has been reported by the owners themselves. Virtus/Slavia on the other hand feel lesser than Polo/Vento but still good in this regard compared to other cars in the segment.
2. Infotainment system in the City is the worst one can get in this segment, feels coming from a 2010 era, compare it to the VAG twins it is miles ahead. Camera is poor in germans also but when you compare it to City you feel ohh something more worse than this can be given.
3. Boot space is marginally better in VAG twins from the 1.5 NA City, no comparison to the restricted Hybrid City models.
4. City does not give better steering feedback when compared to the twins, I politely disagree after driving 20k KMs on both of my cars.
5. City bounces on highway speeds and people mention it as a comfortable sedan, ride quality in Virtus/Slavia is sorted for both City and Highway drives.
6. If two people are sitting behind then Virtus/Slavia rear seats are more comfortable, for three people City would feel better.
7. The performance, 1L TSI has a superb mid-range which surprises you with the power this small engine has, push the throttle to experience the fun it can give. Drive the reliable TC 1L Auto and then the reliable but boring CVT 1.5NA of the City and decide which brings a wider smile .
8. VAG twins handle better, the firm suspension setup comes into play here.
9. Paint quality of Germans in general is better than Japanese. After owing both Polo and Brio for 10 years, I can easily say this.

City is the no-nonsense and reliable car but has lot of drawbacks if one sees from a different perspective.

[ashivas89]

Originally Posted by tsi_niks1989

4. City does not give better steering feedback when compared to the twins, I politely disagree after driving 20k KMs on both of my cars.

I agree with most of your points esp. about exterior build and engine performance, with the exception of the above.

My dad and I changed cars at more or less the same time. We got a city 1.5 ZX CVT for my dad and I got a Slavia 1.5 DSG for myself.

I come from an automotive (veh. dynamics) background.

The city's steering is miles ahead of the VAG twins. In fact this is the one area where the City trounces any car from this segment and the one above (the promise of Japanese reliability aside).

The dynamics of the City in terms of a sharp and pointy front end is superior to that of the VAG twins. The VAG twins offer better grip and are more reassuring during steady state cornering and in terms of high speed manners.

City is better in the, well.. city and "ghats", one can place the front end very nicely. VAG cars are better everywhere else dynamically, but the steering tells one nothing. The VAG steering is very old hyundai-esque (drove a verna for nearly 5 years).

About the interiors..

One feels that one is in a nicer car within the first few minutes of sitting in the City. However poking and prodding makes one realise that there is very little between the cars in terms of materials used. City definitely has the better fit and finish without as many unfinished rough edges of the VAG twins. Seats are also better in the City.

And oh...
If anyone is considering a manual and 1.0 tsi VAG sedan, then the City 1.5 manual is a much better bet. The NA engine is FUN!!!, you just need to rev it a bit more to extract performance. The 1.0 tsi drinks more fuel in its midrange compared to the Honda 1.5 NA on the boil...
As for the autos, there is very little between them. City's CVT is more for folks like my dad who now value comfort and peace of mind. Returns better FE too..

[TechnoBloop]

People are completely using this opportunity to bash the VAG twins. I don't understand the reason behind so much hatred against the Virtus/Slavia. Agreed that the 2.0 cars have had their own bunch of issues, but the newer cars produced have gotten much better.
All 3 cars are great and each one of them has got a completely different customer base. Make a Virtus owner drive the City 1.5NA, he/she will feel like they're sitting in the most boring sedan a person can drive. Make a Virtus owner sit inside the City and they will feel like they're sitting inside the most comfortable sedan south of 20 lakhs.
Make a City owner drive the Virtus, the moment they tap the throttle they will understand what pure driving pleasure means. And also yes, the City still cannot provide the feeling that you're sitting inside a solidly built car like the Virtus/Slavia!
And the comparison between NAs and Turbos, it is really becoming lame now. Sure that NAs are more reliable, but turbocharged engine is the new era of engines. Just because Honda isn't offering turbocharged engines in India doest mean turbo engines are bad, in fact their performance vehicle Civic Type R uses a turbo engine.
All I want to say is please avoid commenting like uncles (not targeting anyone) trying to prove one car better than the other. Both cars have completely different customer base.
That said, I think Honda City still remains a great VFM choice for everyday city drives. The comfort of back seats in the City still remains best in segment (it's main USP).

[dsr001]

How is the city steering now, in terms or self centering?

My prior experience is a bit outdated but happy to hear what you all experienced

[Shreyans_Jain]

Originally Posted by dsr001

How is the city steering now, in terms or self centering?

My prior experience is a bit outdated but happy to hear what you all experienced

City’s steering has always had proper self centering.

[pqr]

Honda City vs Skoda Slavia - Variant wise feature comparison



- Honda City has four variants, and the price is well spread out, whereas Skoda has only three variants with a huge price gap.
- Variant by variant Honda City still delivers little more value than its direct VAG 2.0 rivals, unless driving performance is the main criteria for a buying decision.
- Even the lower SV variant of the Honda City is quite well equipped in comparison.
- Honda has a proven track record of reliability and reasonable resale value in India, whereas VAG does not.
- Last year, VAG 2.0 products failed to withstand the country's harsh summer.
- Right now, both Honda and VAG are far from being perfect when it comes to their current 8” infotainment and rearview camera UX.
- The tin can feeling (subjective) from Honda City is a sore point when compared to VAG twins.
- However, this experience cannot be linked to perceived safety, as that can only be proven through a crash test.
- On the safety front, Honda and VAG sedans are well equipped, with Honda offering more airbags in lower variants.
- On the crash test front, Honda is claiming a 5-star ANCAP rating from ASEAN in its Indian brochure, and VAG sedan twins are based on proven 2.0 SUV siblings that scored 5 stars in the new GNCAP protocol.
- When it comes to interior, the cabin of the City feels better (subjective).
- When it comes to ADAS, adaptive cruise control is a must-have safety net for cruise control function in India. Honda really did a good job of introducing it in the lower variant (V).



- Overall VAG twins are certainly more fun to drive, and even 1L engine feel much more eager. Whereas City offers refinement, which VAG’s 3-cylinder engine cannot match.
- Fuel efficiency from a turbocharged petrol engine is susceptible to driving style.

[ron178]

Originally Posted by pqr

On the crash test front, Honda is claiming a 5-star ANCAP rating from ASEAN in its Indian brochure

It's baffling why a usually responsible company like Honda is resorting to such malpractice which is not only immoral but also directly violates ASEAN NCAP communication protocol.

USE IN DIFFERENT MARKETS
By default, car manufacturers may only advertise ASEAN NCAP ratings in marketing and communication material targeting the Asian market, even when the model rated is available in other markets. The use of ASEAN NCAP ratings in other markets is not permitted, except if the following two conditions are met:
• The market is not covered by or included in any other NCAP programme.
• The local car specification and equipment is identical to that offered in the South East Asian market, provided that the car manufacturer must specify the model variant
concerned.

-India is at least temporarily covered by Global NCAP's Safer Cars for India project
-I have to give Honda credit for maintaining surprisingly similar safety spec for the Indian and ASEAN variants, but there are differences that cannot be overlooked. The ASEAN City is i-Size approved and can fit a new generation of Honda OEM i-Size child restraints which they also selected for ASEAN NCAP dynamic testing. The Indian one just has regular ISOFIX anchorages and Honda Cars India still recommends older Honda-rebranded Takata (Joyson) ISOFIX restraints which implies that a three year-old child dummy would have to be placed forward-facing and could consequently have significantly different dynamics from ASEAN NCAP.
-We have no idea if there are structural differences.

[dsr001]

Originally Posted by Shreyans_Jain

City’s steering has always had proper self centering.

Thanks. Much earlier, I didn't experience the centering as sufficient. But how is it compared to VAG twins? The facelift review doesn't mention anything, I can check the main, older review though, if nothing has changed on that front

[Shreyans_Jain]

Originally Posted by dsr001

Thanks. Much earlier, I didn't experience the centering as sufficient. But how is it compared to VAG twins? The facelift review doesn't mention anything, I can check the main, older review though, if nothing has changed on that front

Kushaq, Virtus and Co also have proper self centering steerings. Only Maruti cars have this kind of ridiculous cost cutting.

[07CR]

Originally Posted by tsi_niks1989

Great comparison, let me list down few positives of Slavia/Virtus compared to City and this comes after owning both cars[1L TSI and 1.5TSI] from the group and not just test driving:

1. Much better exterior build, City doors and exterior quality feels flimsy to be honest and this has been reported by the owners themselves. Virtus/Slavia on the other hand feel lesser than Polo/Vento but still good in this regard compared to other cars in the segment.
2. Infotainment system in the City is the worst one can get in this segment, feels coming from a 2010 era, compare it to the VAG twins it is miles ahead. Camera is poor in germans also but when you compare it to City you feel ohh something more worse than this can be given.
3. Boot space is marginally better in VAG twins from the 1.5 NA City, no comparison to the restricted Hybrid City models.
4. City does not give better steering feedback when compared to the twins, I politely disagree after driving 20k KMs on both of my cars.
5. City bounces on highway speeds and people mention it as a comfortable sedan, ride quality in Virtus/Slavia is sorted for both City and Highway drives.
6. If two people are sitting behind then Virtus/Slavia rear seats are more comfortable, for three people City would feel better.
7. The performance, 1L TSI has a superb mid-range which surprises you with the power this small engine has, push the throttle to experience the fun it can give. Drive the reliable TC 1L Auto and then the reliable but boring CVT 1.5NA of the City and decide which brings a wider smile .
8. VAG twins handle better, the firm suspension setup comes into play here.
9. Paint quality of Germans in general is better than Japanese. After owing both Polo and Brio for 10 years, I can easily say this.

City is the no-nonsense and reliable car but has lot of drawbacks if one sees from a different perspective.

1. There is a perceived build quality difference between both cars, I agree. The older 4th gen city and even Jazz had even more perceived "flimsy" build, however, both cars scored a good 4 star rating in Ncap. I hope the current gen scores only better. Until then can't comment more on it.

2. I feel both cars infotainment is not so impressive. I have a Kia Sonet and Ecosport S (SYNC 3.0), but both cars infotainment was equally average for me, and miles behind both my cars.

3. True that. I purposely did not quote that point as the difference is negligible and boot space offered by both is more than enough for most occassions.

4. Disagree here. Both Virtus and SKoda steerings, while good in City are completely devoid of feel on highways. Quoting from T BHP review of Slavia-

Originally Posted by Omkar

While it does weigh up nicely as the speed increases, there's no feedback from the steering and it does feel very disconnected. For a car that has good power and also a chassis to complement that power, the steering just feels like the oddball here.

5. Agreed completely. As speeds rise, VW twins are much better in ride department over the City. That's IMO their trump card over City. However, in City, I feel the low speed ride of City is much more sorted.

6. This is subjective. On the other hand, if three people are seating on the backseat, the Honda seat is way more comfortable simply because of better space management.

7. No doubt the 1.0 engine is great performer, but IMO, the 1.5 VTEC too isn't much of a slouch. Offers great driveability with decent low end, and much better in terms of NVH (3 cylinder vs 4 cylinder). In terms of reliability it's CVT vs AT, Honda vs Skoda, NA engine vs Turbo engine. I feel most would agree the Honda to be better without a doubt in terms of reliability, be it GB, Engine or the car in general.

8. Agreed. Handling is better with VAG twins. If only the steering wasn't as disconnected, would have been a complete driver's package.

9. While I was amazed of the paint quality of Polo and Vento, I am not sure if it's the same with 2.0 sedans. The same difference was highlighted by BHPian VAGMAN.
Quoting him-

The 5 stage paint process is a bit disappointing considering the Polo goes through a 11 stage paint process as highlighted in older VW videos

. For Honda on the other hand, the paint was great for my dad's 2013 Amaze. This is how the car looked after 7 years of ownership and about 1.1L Kms and on it's last day with us.
Not too bad, eh?

Originally Posted by ashivas89

The city's steering is miles ahead of the VAG twins. In fact this is the one area where the City trounces any car from this segment and the one above (the promise of Japanese reliability aside).

The dynamics of the City in terms of a sharp and pointy front end is superior to that of the VAG twins. The VAG twins offer better grip and are more reassuring during steady state cornering and in terms of high speed manners.

City is better in the, well.. city and "ghats", one can place the front end very nicely. VAG cars are better everywhere else dynamically, but the steering tells one nothing. The VAG steering is very old hyundai-esque (drove a verna for nearly 5 years).

About the interiors..

One feels that one is in a nicer car within the first few minutes of sitting in the City. However poking and prodding makes one realise that there is very little between the cars in terms of materials used. City definitely has the better fit and finish without as many unfinished rough edges of the VAG twins. Seats are also better in the City.

And oh...
If anyone is considering a manual and 1.0 tsi VAG sedan, then the City 1.5 manual is a much better bet. The NA engine is FUN!!!, you just need to rev it a bit more to extract performance. The 1.0 tsi drinks more fuel in its midrange compared to the Honda 1.5 NA on the boil...
As for the autos, there is very little between them. City's CVT is more for folks like my dad who now value comfort and peace of mind. Returns better FE too..

I agree on all your points WRT steering feel, 1.5 VTEC and the interiors. Infact WRT steering, Honda IMO has been making great steerings for a while now. Be it Brio, Amaze, City or Civic, steering was always a big PLUS. We owned a 2013 Amaze, and IMO the closest steering that comes to my current Ecosport S is of that Amaze, on this side of 20L ofcourse!

Originally Posted by dsr001

How is the city steering now, in terms or self centering?

My prior experience is a bit outdated but happy to hear what you all experienced

Steering is self centering, IMO only Maruti makes such non self centering steerings. Infact the steering is one of the pluses of City.

[Sid13]

I was in the market for a car and considered both City and VW Virtus. I am surely leaning towards VW Virtus. my thought process in comparison was like follows ( I am driving a Polo for last 8 years so that may also have influenced my thought process)

Features: In terms of sheer comparison City wins hands down. But people mentioning the sunroof etc as a big plus is quite laughable. From my POV the sunroof is a marketing gimmick in Indian conditions. Just like pseudo SUVs are.

My point is, while City is way ahead in terms of features, you won't miss any must-have features on VW.

Interior look and feel and perceived build quality: Surely citys interior feels much better and offers a far more premium experience. However, I have also experienced City owners complaining about rattling issues. Maybe that points towards some inconsistency in the production process and hopefully is not a common problem.

In terms of interior ergonomics, VW is typical German. everything is in the right place except the Hazard Warning switch. Citys ergonomics has nothing to complain about either

Infotainment system: VW Is better. End of story

Build quality: The Cits body panels feel wafer thin and lite compared to VW. However does it equate to better safety, I don't know. But VW surely feels like a much more well-built car (For me it's a reason which heavily influences my buying decision compared to features)

Ride quality: City has exceptionally good riding quality in the conditions in which it is supposed to be driven. However, highway manners are not on par with VW. While the steering gives adequate feedback the ride is not confidence inspiring. City bounces way too much. At high speeds, it could give motion sickness to rear-seat passengers.

VW excels in this area. VW offers well-sorted and balanced ride quality on all sorts of surfaces. How they manage such good balance on very bad roads as well as a superb planted ride at high speeds is quite phenomenal. I would buy VW for this reason alone.

Steering: Citys steering is quite good at all driving speeds. VW steering is lite compared to earlier VWs however weighs adequately at high speeds.

Someone saying City would offer better driveability in Ghats is a claim really difficult to substantiate for two reasons: 1. In comparison City has a very soft suspension. 2. The 1.5 NA engine has a flat mid-range. you have to grab its neck and rev like crazy to produce good results (Which is quite fun to do on the open highways) but quite impractical on winding ghat sessions.

Whereas VWs low end is nothing to write home about. However, the mid-range and above have excellent driveability which would make it excellent fun to drive on winding roads. Whereas City would be more fun to drive on open straight highways. But the softer suspension would give up before it reaches the engines potential.


Also, the Virtus offers almost SUV-like ground clearance whereas in City you need to be conscious about the possibility of scraping the belly, especially on full loads


However, after owning VW for 8 years and comparing it with a friend's experience who owns a WRV for 7 years, I would say the experience is not that different. Also, VW has really brought down service and spare costs in the last few years. A lot of negativity associated with VWs high maintenance cost is bad experiences from the past carried forward. Also, it may have a lot to do with how a particular dealer and service advisor deals with you.

Mileage: The 1.0 turbo is very sensitive to driver inputs. However, real-world mileage tests by several reviw sites show that if driven sensibly it offers better mileage than City (ARAI figures are also better on VW)

The two products are surely targeted at two sets of audiences. While City offers great VFM, especially if you are feature driven. Also on reliability and ASS Honda should score better.

VW cars are more fun to drive, and as a driver more engaging. Someone who is driven by dynamics and stability wouldn't be fully satisfied by City after driving either of the VW twins. The added advantage is the 5-star ratings India made Taigun and Kushaq has got as well as the Virtus Latin American version

[The Rationalist]

I was looking for a replacement for my Ford Aspire 1.5 AT. Test drove the City AT, the damn thing doesn't move at all on highways! It was a torture to make an overtaking manoeuvre. My Aspire will smoke this damn thing. I took a test drive of Virtus 1.5 and that thing moves, only let down is the steering feedback when compared to Ford!!! City is only for the sedate driver, please don't buy if you are a spirited driver.