[joslicx]

Have owned a Jap (Alto) and a Korean (i10) in the past.

I would go with the Japs with my eyes closed! To the gentlemen above who think Hyundais dont rattle, well I disagree. Mine did! And during every service I would complain about that and still it kept on rattling! I gave up eventually and made my peace with the rattles and lived with them till I sold it earlier this year. And this was a car driven only in city, very sedately and carefully. I dont think I abused the car ever. So I refuse to accept now that Hyundais dont rattle.

Maintenance costs were another botheration. Regular paid service was 4.5k for the i10 while it was around 1.4k for the Alto. Is the i10 three times better than Alto? Dont think so.

Coming to reliability, both were equally good. No complains with either. Only regular services were done (all on time) and battery needed to be replaced in both cars (Alto after 3 years and i10 after 2.5).

[misquitas]

Originally Posted by joslicx

Have owned a Jap (Alto) and a Korean (i10) in the past.

I would go with the Japs with my eyes closed! To the gentlemen above who think Hyundais dont rattle, well I disagree. Mine did! And during every service I would complain about that and still it kept on rattling! I gave up eventually and made my peace with the rattles and lived with them till I sold it earlier this year. And this was a car driven only in city, very sedately and carefully. I dont think I abused the car ever. So I refuse to accept now that Hyundais dont rattle.

Maintenance costs were another botheration. Regular paid service was 4.5k for the i10 while it was around 1.4k for the Alto. Is the i10 three times better than Alto? Dont think so.

Coming to reliability, both were equally good. No complains with either.

Like you, I too had had the opportunity to own an Alto 800 and an i10 since December 2010, until I sold off the Alto in February this year.

The Alto and the i10 have given me excellent service and I have had no complaints whatsoever. Neither of the two rattled at any point in time: my Alto covered 47,000 kms before it was sold, while my i10 has covered 21,000 kms till date.

So, in my opinion it didn't really make a BIG difference whether it was a Japanese or a Korean car, as both cars served me well.

My regular paid service for the i10 has never crossed Rs 2500 till date, simply because I instruct the service advisor to strike off whatever is unnecessary. Same thing went for the Alto and my average service costs were around Rs 2000.

In terms of build quality and fit/finish/features, the i10 was clearly superior of the two in virtually every aspecty. But then again, it is unfair to compare an i10 with a lower segment Alto.

I also got great FE from both cars. Average FE in the Alto was 19 kmpl, while my i10 has an average FE of 17.2 kmpl (about 30 auto cut-off FE tests done so far).

[racer_ash]

Originally Posted by sourav21

Fun To Drive - Alto did not have enough power climb up inclines as easily.

As somebody earlier remarked in this thread and in my personal experience, Hyundai is all bling - high on flashy content, big marketing and the sort. (One can see with same with Samsung).

Our family of 4 owned an Alto and it was a terrible pain even driving it in city conditions with AC on. In malls with multi-level parkings, it was still worse at those spiralling inclines.

None of the features provided by Hyundai are bling. Rather, they are extremely useful in everyday city conditions. Features like reverse camera, electrically foldable ORVMs are a boon for our rather congested city roads. It is because of these features that the competition (read Maruti) is waking up and contemplating to provide them.

Please remember that Samsung is the one that provides processors to the much coveted iPhone and they are the ones that revolutionised consumer electronics industry in India alongwith another Korean company named LG. Worldwide they have overtaken the popularity of Sony in as early as 2005

[sourav21]

Originally Posted by racer_ash

Our family of 4 owned an Alto and it was a terrible pain even driving it in city conditions with AC on. In malls with multi-level parkings, it was still worse at those spiralling inclines.

Anyway one cannot argue with personal experience and opinion. To each his own. I have had fun driving the Alto and the original M800 (1984 which my dad bought). I have also owned an i10 Automatic for a year. Again, it was a pretty soul-less car not to mention the lousy fuel average and the heavy Hyundai maintenance bill. Anyway I have to give it to these guys for managing to tone down the NVH what with the Santro sounding as if it was running on diesel.

None of the features provided by Hyundai are bling. Rather, they are extremely useful in everyday city conditions. Features like reverse camera, electrically foldable ORVMs are a boon for our rather congested city roads. It is because of these features that the competition (read Maruti) is waking up and contemplating to provide them.

Some of the really essential ones can be added as accessories later. Yes I agree Hyundai is good in detailing, plastic quality, paint etc. and all but then they charge a premium for all this upmarket feel. But one thing which has always eluded them is fun-to-drive. Personally I would rather do up my living room if I need good ambiance. The real joy of a car is behind the wheels.

Please remember that Samsung is the one that provides processors to the much coveted iPhone and they are the ones that revolutionised consumer electronics industry in India alongwith another Korean company named LG. Worldwide they have overtaken the popularity of Sony in as early as 2005

I have two Samsung phones and pretty much disgusted with the kind of experiment they have done on the consumer with the Galaxy S - quickly launch new versions and take the older ones out of support. Pathetic wifi and GPS hardware, not to mention the slow, bloated software which hangs every now and then. In comparison my cousin's Sony Experia is doing nice (and with a better camera too). Product vision and who conceptualized it matters much more than who the supplier is, otherwise why does iPhone enjoy a cult status while Samsung is just another one from the rest of the world. I would rather put a few more grands and get a iPhone than spend 38K odd on a Galaxy S 3, because I am not sure if the Samsung touchwiz will hang the next time I need to make a call, notwithstanding all it's "close to nature, understands you" sales pitch. Come to think of it, does FIAT being the supplier of the Swift DDIS engine, detract from the fact that Suzuki was the brainchild behind this successful car. As Jagdish Khattar famously remarked, "People buy cars, not engines". Similarly people buy phones and televisions, not processors or LCD panels.

Though I appreciate LG which I feel is a much more responsible corporation.

Again in my personal opinion (and perhaps OT, not trying to put it within the confines of a Korean vs Japanese debate), for companies like Hyundai and Samsung, success has gone into their heads. Charging exorbitantly for both products and services, taking customers for granted are the visible symptoms. It would be good for them to get off their high horse and do a reality check.

[skandyhere]

Originally Posted by EasyR1der

Koreans went with a much more parasitical and VFM approach which was what suited the India psyche as a result people decide after considering the pro's and con's of different car in the price range as well as overall VFM factor.

Personally, I feel the Koreans have sneaked up on the Japs in India through aggressive marketing and well-dressed cars that may not really hold a candle to the Japs in substance.

When generalizing about Japanese & Koreans, I think we should leave build quality and 'solidity' out of the argument because these seem to vary from model to model, year to year and segment to segment. Both are capable of building cars that aren't screwed up, but rather well screwed together. Both package their products well. The core difference, I think, is in the higher art of constructing a machine that's dynamically satisfying, driven by an engine that pulls hard, revs high, runs for long and never lets you down. We're no longer talking about good and bad, but about good and better. It is here that the Koreans appear to remain a clear step (even if a small one) behind the Japanese. They do have powerful engines and decent gearboxes, but do they really match their Jap counterparts in reliability, refinement and charisma? Aren't handling and steering critical areas of weaknesses that can't be ignored in your automotive experience?

Though not directly related to the topic at hand, I'd express hesitation with using popularity in India as an indicator of anything while evaluating cars. Many will agree that it's fairly clear as to what the Indian market looks for - FE, space, size. We all know that most of the popular models in India are economical (unsafe, naturally), ugly (but practical) and lifeless to drive. If you give us Indian folks an image of stability by way of opening a service station every corner, then any ugly car that gives fantastic FE and space is a runaway hit.

[Sanjunair5]

Isnt Japanese vs Korean a very vague and too much of a generalized comparison?
We all know the term ‘Japanese’ being synonymous with reliability and fuel efficiency originated in the 80s when few Japanese car makers (you know it – Toyota, Honda and Nissan) built a reputation around reliability and fuel efficiency in the United States. No doubt it was aided by a lot of their capabilities but also by several environmental factors. But post 2006/7 that is hardly a discussion worth the time even in US. The sales charts prove it. It is the used car market where Japanese brands still command a premium.
And then think of it, there are other Japanese that never made that grade (Suzuki, Mitsu, Mazda etc.) and Koreans really is only Hyundai and Kia (but then Kia is partly owned by Hyundai). We all know about what happened to Daewoo, Samsung and SsangYong.
I also think the negative connotations attached the approach of – that of offering more for less - of Hyundai and Kia is unfortunate. In my opinion that is brilliant, how else would a David take on a Goliath?
In an Indian context this discussion should be more about brands or car makers than a generalization based on nationality. More because market reality is that the ‘Japanese’ (Honda, Nissan and Toyota) despite their well established reputation elsewhere are clearly in a situation that Hyundai and Kia were in the US some years ago. Though it is still early days in Indian auto market Toyotas, Hondas and Nissan by sticking to their perceived premiumness (and not offering enough for the money) is not exactly grabbing market share from Hyundai, Suzuki and to some extent Tata and Mahindra in India.

[Mysticeyes]

I don't want to generalize my feeling, but I feel that in some segments, both Japs and Koreans are cheating/ fooling unsuspecting customers in the quality side. For eg: Isn't Toyota charging a premium for Etios/ Liva, the quality of which is only marginally better than Tata Indigo/ Indica? How many can say with 100% assurance that the quality of components in Etios/ Liva is suitable for the segment and for the price paid? Can't fault the customers who go for badge.

Same is the case with Hyundai. The Santros and Accents of yesteryears were built with more quality and sturdiness than the present i20s/ Verna (Fluidic). Selling over 7000/4000 units both are leaders in their segments. But again, how many can say with assurance that the quality is matching for the segment when compared to Jazz/ Fabia/ Polo/ City? Doesn't the Fluidic verna interiors just feel like the i20 which got bit stretched? Leave alone the quality, does anyone have the confidence to push the new Verna over 100km/ hr as it starts wobbling after 60km/hr? The construction materials of new Verna seems dirt cheap compared to the solidity of the Rapid/ Vento/City. How can Hyundai charge so high for such substandard components?