[vista_qjd]

Firstly i think your title of the thread is very misleading. What is your benchmark against tagging something as horribly costly? Do you have any comparative figures from other manufacturers.
Secondly, since you got a synthetic oil, they usually come in 1 liter packs, so I don't think they can charge you for 3.2 only. That only happens when you use the regular oil (non-synthetic) which comes in big barrels.
The labor charge seems to be fine for a 10K service and the coolant could have been completely replaced given the recommendation as per the manual.

[bejoy]

Originally Posted by petroguzzler

I had given my Indica Vista QJD for its 30,000kms service. I had instructed them to fill Exxon Mobil Super 1000TM.

The capacity mentioned in the manual is 3.2lt. But i'm billed for 4lt at Rs.1,044.

Coolant at Rs.678.

The labour cost for a general oil service is Rs. 1,544.

The total cost is Rs.4,004. I will upload the bill tomorrow. Is this amt. correct?

Well, I am not surprised. This is quite normal for TASS, I would say. please share detailed bill.

Originally Posted by deep_bang

Well. I am of the opinion that the service representatives get their salaries based on the amount of the bill ata TASS.

May not be true but it's just my opinion. My 60k indica was serviced at Tass till 40k and I realized service costs were going way more than normal. I actually had compared the cost from 2007 to 2010 and some of the portions of the bill have actually nearly doubled in just 3 yrs. I will try to dig the exact details if I can.

+1 The TASS charge for general service was Rs. 650 in 2006. It is Rs. 1350 now. This is excluding brake cleaning, that is around 350-450. There was an era when the brake cleaning was part of service cost. It went up every year. Inflation effect?

Also looks like TASS have different charge or Tier 2/3 cities.

Originally Posted by theexperthand

Friendly advise: Things like coolant can be checked and topped up by our-self easily in almost any car. I think it is better if we our-self take care of doing small jobs like this.

It doesn't look like a top up. And it is recommended to flush coolant after 30k kms.

[petroguzzler]

Originally Posted by vista_qjd

Firstly i think your title of the thread is very misleading. What is your benchmark against tagging something as horribly costly? Do you have any comparative figures from other manufacturers.
Secondly, since you got a synthetic oil, they usually come in 1 liter packs, so I don't think they can charge you for 3.2 only. That only happens when you use the regular oil (non-synthetic) which comes in big barrels.
The labor charge seems to be fine for a 10K service and the coolant could have been completely replaced given the recommendation as per the manual.

I have used only non synthetic mineral oil that comes in barrels. Why could they bill me for just 3.2lts.???

[vista_qjd]

Originally Posted by petroguzzler

I have used only non synthetic mineral oil that comes in barrels. Why could they bill me for just 3.2lts.???

If it is regular oil from barrel then the charge should be just for 3.2 litres. You should check with them on this and have this corrected. At least at the Bangalore TASS they charge only for 3.2 litres.

[govigov]

does any body have the list of must do to be done for the DDIS engine at 20k? cost / part wise break up of costs would be really helpful.

[ghostrider]

A little bit of context....

In my entire family, I'm the only petrolhead. I'm the only one that would be a part of a forum like TBHP, the only one who thinks that a test drive is important before buying a car, and the only one who'd take the trouble to do a pre-delivery inspection. I'm the only one who would only buy a car that will put a smile on my face when I drive it, and I'm the only one who rates the Engine & Performance and Drive & Handling amongst as the topmost parameters when buying a car.
The rest of my family falls into the Average Car-buying Public, which means they buy cars based on brand value, cost of ownership, comfort, and what the brochure says.

Now that we've gotten the context out of the way, allow me to present the question at hand.

Both my Mom as well as my in-laws are in the market (coincidentally) for new C2 Segment cars, and both are quite keen on the new Honda City. I'm not a fan of the City (never have been) primarily because I've always felt it's overpriced. Now that there's been some serious price corrections, however, I think it's a car that meets their needs so I've given both sets of parents my blessings to go ahead with their choices.

I was discussing this with a friend, and he asked me why I hadn't told them to consider the Vento petrol? Minor OTR price differences aside, the Vento would offer lower costs of maintenance over a 5-year horizon.

Is this true?Is the Vento really cheaper to maintain than a Honda City? I'm not talking only about service costs, I'm also talking about parts that WILL be replaced during the lifespan of the car (tail lights, headlights, bumpers, grills, brake pads, clutch plates, etc.)

MODS: Please move this if I've posted it in the wrong forum.

[bluevolt]

Originally Posted by ghostrider

I was discussing this with a friend, and he asked me why I hadn't told them to consider the Vento petrol? Minor OTR price differences aside, the Vento would offer lower costs of maintenance over a 5-year horizon.

Is this true?Is the Vento really cheaper to maintain than a Honda City? I'm not talking only about service costs, I'm also talking about parts that WILL be replaced during the lifespan of the car (tail lights, headlights, bumpers, grills, brake pads, clutch plates, etc.)

MODS: Please move this if I've posted it in the wrong forum.

Really?

In no way the cost of servicing and parts of VW will be cheaper than Honda. On what basis your friend told you this? Please ask him to quote some source.

Servicing costs of VW is at least 1-2K + over Honda cars. Go through few ownership threads and you will know what I mean.

For your convenience I am posting the expenditure (Service) of Honda City and VW Vento (Source - Team-BHP ownership threads)

VW Vento 15K Service interval - Rs. 8000

Honda City 5K Service Interval - Rs. 1850 => Rs. 5500 for 15K KMs. Difference -> City cheaper to maintain by 2.5K as compared to VW.

[joslicx]

^^

When you are spending a million ruppes to buy a car, does nitpicking of a couple of thousand matter! I would say over a wider horizon (read 5 years) costs might eventually be more or less the same for both.

Some more food for thought:
* Same version of City is more expansive than same version of Vento which means more initial commitment + more insurance costs every year.
* Runnings costs are also almost same. From FE reported here on most AURs (actual user reviews) both are within 1KMPL of each other.
* Some bits are better in Vento and some in City. Lets call it equals here!

City though has an ace up its sleeve - the CE version. Thats the only City that is worth it! Others are slightly/mighty overpriced (depends on how you want to look at it.)

[sgiitk]

I find maintaining my Civic cheaper than the earlier Accent. I am not including the price of oil as now I use a synthetic. So City vs Vento is a no contest.

[v.anand]

From costs point of view, its City all the way. Cheaper to sevice thanks mainly to mineral oil, definitely better FE than the age old and not so advanced engine in Vento and cost of spares in Honda which is probably as cheap as Maruti. Also, City is has better FTD factor and better rear seats.

Vento feels better built with everything more solid in the feel and the gear shift is the sweetest of all MT cars sold in India. Vento suspension is better and City steering is better.

My choice would however be City for a sedan and Polo 1.6 for a hatch.

[bluevolt]

Originally Posted by joslicx

^^

When you are spending a million ruppes to buy a car, does nitpicking of a couple of thousand matter!

Mate here we are not debating Vento Vs City , we are discussing on the maintenance costs as started by TS.

Let's be unbiased and stick to the topic!

[joslicx]

Originally Posted by bluevolt

Mate here we are not debating Vento Vs City , we are discussing on the maintenance costs as started by TS.

Let's be unbiased and stick to the topic!

Sorry if it looked offensive. I agree that maintenance costs would be more for the German.

However I still think overall ownership costs over any relevant time scale (lets say 5 years) would more or less be same. City is more expansive to buy to begin with! And since it is more expansive, Insurance premium costs would also be more. Certain things like ORVMs would be more expansive for City (as it has turn indicators) etc etc.

[mayankjha1806]

Although i have never owned a European car but a simple visit to one of the car service centers like Carnation or Carz will be enough to figure this out by anyone. Just talk to your regular SA.

When i looked at used cars briefly and saw a few in carnation (Including a VW Vento), when specifically asked on maintenance costs, the response was Altis or Civic would be cheaper to maintain as compared to Vento from my regular SA there.

[bala80]

If you are only looking at the regular servicing/maintanence cost, then honda might have a slight advantage here, you also need to factor in the service intervals of both cars, where honda is required to be checked-up (whether oil change or not), every 5k km's where as the vento needs to be serviced every 15k km's.

I'm a vento TDI owner, and it is a estblished fact that european's are a little expensive on the pocket compared to the Japanese when it comes to total cost of ownership and vento is no different. Having said that, the parts of the honda city arent any cheap either compared to the vento and are priced at par with each other (fog lamps, bumper's, etc).

If I have to pick a petrol sedan out of this two, I will definitely go for a honda city over the vento, but the decision will not be influenced only by maintanence costs of the car.

[ghostrider]

Thanks bala80, mayankjha1806, joslicx, bluevolt, v.anand and sgiitk. Your replies corroborate the impression that I had - that a City would have the edge in maintenance costs over a 5 year horizon. I'm guessing the difference isn't much, but still.

It's interesting to note that my criteria for evaluating a car for them is completely different from the criteria I'd use for evaluating a car for myself. For my parents and in-laws I'd look at safety, comfort and ease/costs of maintenance, and while the City and Vento probably tie for the first two, it seems that the City's got the edge in the third.

Of course, it helps that both sets of parents prefer the City in the first place.

Thanks, all.