[aseem]

Originally Posted by Gangsta

oh man you forgot to add Accent executive 4.99 lakh in the list of sonata and santro.. or is it overpriced?

Verna CRDi = failure ?? now that's a news for me.

Let me clarify, Accent during its day was selling at 6 lakhs ex showroom, there was no good competitor from Maruti (no SX4 or Dezire at the time) and Honda was expensive proposition. However as it became dated, and as competition increased they reduced the price of the car significantly. To the point its close to 5 lakhs now, however with better propositions in the market now, I really dont consider Ikon or Accent to be any good anymore. They are way past their prime and therefore I didnt include it in my list.

As far as Verna is concerned, it mainly sells because its Diesel. However it hasnt really set the sales chart ticking. The Accent during its day was much more popular in both Petrol and Diesel than Verna. Verna petrol is a dud, and diesel sells in ok numbers as MUL with SX4 or Honda City dont have a diesel in their lineup yet. With Linea launch and possibly SX4 diesel in the future, you would probably see even more dwindling sales for Verna.

[Fountainheader]

Originally Posted by vinayasurya

For those who say i20 is overpriced, I would like to know where Maruti places the Splash/Ritz. I guess it will be above Swift, thats where Maruti will feel the heat.

I guess the Splash will be positioned between the Swift and the A-Star. And MUL might as well launch the ZDi to take on the i20 diesel, if at all its going to be launched in the next 4-5 months.

[lancer_rit]

Originally Posted by GTO

So I had someone fetch me the on-road prices of the i20 (Mumbai).

The difference between the mid-equipped Swift and i20 is a whopping 1.54 lakhs! And the ZXi vis a vis Asta O differential is nearly 80,000! A 1.2L hatch for 6.5 lakhs? I can hardly wait to see how the numbers settle down once the new launch dust has settled

I agree on-road prices matter in the end. They do vary though - Delhi will have low difference, while BLR will have highest.
Let's see what we get extra in i20Asta over Swift VXi for the price difference of 1.5l

+ Usable boot (almost 300l)
+ Great interior space - much more legroom @ back + shoulder room
+ ABS/EBD (don't know if price includes it since there is a VXi with ABS option)
+ 2x Front Airbags
+ 5xdoor remote lock vs 4xdoor central lock
+ Audio controls on steering
+ Climate Control over Manual aircon
+ Rear AC ducts
+ Tilt and Telescopic steering wheel
+ 5-seat seatbelt warning vs driver seatbelt warning
+ 3-point seat belt for rear middle passenger
+ 60:40 split folding rear seat
+ Cooled Glove box
+ Rear parcel tray
+ 4 speakers + 2 front tweeters
+ 2DIN CD+MP3 music system with Aux and USB inputs
+ Electrical adjustable and retractable ORVMs
+ Rear wiper and defogger
+ Illuminated Power window switches with 1 touch down for driver
+ Height adjustable driver seat
+ 185/65 R14 on 14" alloys vs 165/80 R14 on steel rims
+ Electronic multi-display meter
+ Body colored ORVMS, door handles,
+ Fit/finish and build in a different league to Maruti cheap plastics/dull interior

- Headlamp levelling
- 78bhp vs 85bhp, 11.4kgm vs 11.5kgm (though peak for swift at higher rpm)
IMO, its totally not comparable to take i20Asta vs Swift VXi - VXi is comparable roughly to Magna and that is how Hyundai sees it. If someone thinks otherwise, they are welcome to that view, but I can't share it.

Originally Posted by GTO

Sure. And if their sales targets are low to begin with, we can stop discussing the products success. As I just posted, lets wait and watch to see what customers really prefer.

Agreed to that. We need to watch and see how things develop. Most importantly, whether the gearing and torque do justice in the city needs to be established by longish test drives.

Originally Posted by GTO

In performance, the Palio 1.6 is an equal match. However, both the Palio 1.6 and the Fusion 1.6 bombed. Why? They didn't serve the markets needs, which is of efficiency. Heck, efficiency matters even to the Indian customer who has a 15 lakh rupee budget.

Yes, Palio 1.6 is in the same league. Just on paper though, Fusion 1.6 has higher peak torque. However, my point was the car which won the segment was not having the biggest or the highest bhp engine. Hence, it is not must for i20 to do that either. As far as FE is concerned, i20 will more or less equal Swift Petrol which is pretty average in city FE. So, this is what I have been trying to point out.

Originally Posted by GTO

Correct. But my problem is this : The i20 is so premium priced with the 1.2L engine, they simply haven't left room for the 1.4 and (God forbid) a common-rail diesel. How much will the 1.4 sell for? 7.25 lakhs? Diesel at 8 lakhs? Good luck, Hyundai. You gonna need it.
I am curious to know what pricing you think is appropriate for the larger engines. Please reply back with on-the-road numbers.

I guess Hyundai will after some months, reduce i20Asta features, and make an intermediate model. They will add the 1.4l engine at some premium to i20 1.2 Asta, and make further models. They may even have a 1.4l xx model at same price point as current Asta with some reduced features. One thing the i20 is not shy of, is functionality and features. Its highly practical unlike the Swift. i20 base with lesser whistles can be positioned near VXi levels
Ideally, i20 Asta positioned @ 30-35k lesser ex-showroom would hit the sweet spot. For larger engines, I guess Hyundai will have to reduce margins on the car for petrol to compensate some amount of excise aspect. For the diesel, they have a 1.4CRDI (77 or 89bhp, 220Nm) in Europe, so diesel premium of 70-80k will be charged based on current Getz CRDi pricing ...

I do agree though that unlike developed markets like US, where Hyundai discounts its cars compared to Jap competition, they don't seem to follow the same yardstick in India :-( Neither are the warranty terms as flattering. To that extent, they seem to think India will bear with this!
OTOH, Hyundai is a premium offering compared to what Suzuki can dish out anywhere else in the globe and also has higher quality ratings.

Originally Posted by GTO

Top speed is irrelevant. I have cruised at over 200 kmph in the C180 and it still was a pretty under-powered car.

I agree but I also mentioned that the torque curve seemd to allow pretty good response upto 140-150kmph, and in 3000km, I overtook hundreds of other vehicles on the Autobahn comfortably. I also mentioned that for practical purposes, it was not underpowered - for enthusiastic driving, this was definitely not the engine for the heavy Passat. In fact, a 1.6l Mazda3 was much more sporty, speedy and much better handler ...

Originally Posted by GTO

Spot on! They have shown their incompetence in handling the 6+ lakh segment.

The results they achieved does not leave any room for another conclusion.

Originally Posted by GTO

The market caught up with the Civic, didn't it? It is currently languishing.
Incorrect information. At the end of 2008, the Civic experienced 15 straight months of a sales decline. That was way before the Altis even came into the picture.

True, but so did the sales of every competitor in that segment (unless it was too small to be useful for trends). There was general decline in car sales over months in that category, and the Civic started its innings with unrealistic high numbers. Till Altis was launched, it still sold more than any of the competition to the last month.

[aseem]

Originally Posted by lancer_rit

I agree on-road prices matter in the end. They do vary though - Delhi will have low difference, while BLR will have highest.
Let's see what we get extra in i20Asta over Swift VXi for the price difference of 1.5l

- Headlamp levelling
- 78bhp vs 85bhp, 11.4kgm vs 11.5kgm (though peak for swift at higher rpm)

You've got some facts wrong. Swift is 87 bhp versus 78 bhp (80ps) for i20

Swift is 1000 kg kerb weight for Vxi, Hyundai i20 is 1066 kg meaning even lesser power to weight ratio.

Swift develops max torque at 4500 rpm versus 4000 rpm for i20.

As far as more leg room is concerned, its debatable as I found the rear leg room cramped, but boot space is a definite USP.

However the price of i20 Asta, Ford Fiesta ZX becomes an interesting proposition, which has a bigger boot, more power, more space, at the compromise of safety features of course.

Originally Posted by lancer_rit

IMO, its totally not comparable to take i20Asta vs Swift VXi - VXi is comparable roughly to Magna and that is how Hyundai sees it. If someone thinks otherwise, they are welcome to that view, but I can't share it.
.

I agree, I had mentioned that in response of GTO's thread. Magna and Vxi are comparable.

Originally Posted by lancer_rit

Agreed to that. We need to watch and see how things develop. Most importantly, whether the gearing and torque do justice in the city needs to be established by longish test drives.
.

Wishful thinking to expect it can come near close to Swifts responsiveness.

Originally Posted by lancer_rit

Yes, Palio 1.6 is in the same league. Just on paper though, Fusion 1.6 has higher peak torque. However, my point was the car which won the segment was not having the biggest or the highest bhp engine. Hence, it is not must for i20 to do that either. As far as FE is concerned, i20 will more or less equal Swift Petrol which is pretty average in city FE. So, this is what I have been trying to point out.
.

Fusion lost as at its price point many Sedans became an interesting proposition. And those looking for hatches latched on to Swift.

Originally Posted by lancer_rit

I guess Hyundai will after some months, reduce i20Asta features, and make an intermediate model. They will add the 1.4l engine at some premium to i20 1.2 Asta, and make further models. They may even have a 1.4l xx model at same price point as current Asta with some reduced features. One thing the i20 is not shy of, is functionality and features. Its highly practical unlike the Swift. i20 base with lesser whistles can be positioned near VXi levels
Ideally, i20 Asta positioned @ 30-35k lesser ex-showroom would hit the sweet spot. For larger engines, I guess Hyundai will have to reduce margins on the car for petrol to compensate some amount of excise aspect. For the diesel, they have a 1.4CRDI (77 or 89bhp, 220Nm) in Europe, so diesel premium of 70-80k will be charged based on current Getz CRDi pricing ...
.

I dont buy this argument that Hyundai would reduce features/price after launch etc. If they had to do that, they would have been better off doing this right at the onset of selling the car, rather than few months after it. Also, there is no point discussing the hypothetical future outcomes of Hyundai's policy, as nor you, nor me are in a position to discuss and more so base our arguments based on that.

Originally Posted by lancer_rit

I do agree though that unlike developed markets like US, where Hyundai discounts its cars compared to Jap competition, they don't seem to follow the same yardstick in India :-( Neither are the warranty terms as flattering. To that extent, they seem to think India will bear with this!
OTOH, Hyundai is a premium offering compared to what Suzuki can dish out anywhere else in the globe and also has higher quality ratings.
.

Hyundai's sells in US as its cheap and offers VFM. Suzuki was never really was a serious player there. They need to be a vfm player in India like they are in other world markets rather than positioning themselves as a premium brand. Pricing plays a key role here.

Originally Posted by lancer_rit

I agree but I also mentioned that the torque curve seemd to allow pretty good response upto 140-150kmph, and in 3000km, I overtook hundreds of other vehicles on the Autobahn comfortably. I also mentioned that for practical purposes, it was not underpowered - for enthusiastic driving, this was definitely not the engine for the heavy Passat. In fact, a 1.6l Mazda3 was much more sporty, speedy and much better handler ...
.

If someone driving a 1.8T Passat wants to cruise at 130 kmph, someone driving an Audi TT wants to cruise at 120, and you doing 150 in 1.6 Passat overtake them, doesnt mean anything! Period!

Originally Posted by lancer_rit

True, but so did the sales of every competitor in that segment (unless it was too small to be useful for trends). There was general decline in car sales over months in that category, and the Civic started its innings with unrealistic high numbers. Till Altis was launched, it still sold more than any of the competition to the last month.

Civic has already seen a price correction with Honda reducing the price of Civic E to 9.99 Lakhs ex-showroom and 1.8V being offered with discounts. Dont be surprised to see a S model soon if sales continue to dwindle.

[lancer_rit]

Originally Posted by aseem

You've got some facts wrong. Swift is 87 bhp versus 78 bhp (80ps) for i20

Swift is 1000 kg kerb weight for Vxi, Hyundai i20 is 1066 kg meaning even lesser power to weight ratio.

Swift develops max torque at 4500 rpm versus 4000 rpm for i20.

As far as more leg room is concerned, its debatable as I found the rear leg room cramped, but boot space is a definite USP.

Aseem, you got me wrong. I wrote those points as -ve for i20 over Swift (see the '-' sign before those points, compared to '+' signs for others). Therefore 78bhp to 87bhp is the right figure (i20 - 78bhp, Swift 87bhp)
If you have ever sat in a swift, i20 is spacious - even i10 can compete with Swift at the rear. The poor rear window shape and fat C pillar make Swift a claustrophobic car in the rear.
I did miss out on listing the weight disadvantage of the i20 to Swift, thanks for pointing out

Originally Posted by aseem

However the price of i20 Asta, Ford Fiesta ZX becomes an interesting proposition, which has a bigger boot, more power, more space, at the compromise of safety features of course.

Probably, legroom for Fiesta is more - but interior width of Fiesta is much less. Fiesta is a good car no doubt.

Originally Posted by aseem

Wishful thinking to expect it can come near close to Swifts responsiveness.

In low revs, Swift is far from responsive. In any case, I don't think i20 needs to compete with Swift for responsiveness (that was not my idea). It just has to have good driveability in the city, and most buyers would be happy - if you go to Delhi, a huge chunk of cars never make it out on the highway (and Delhi has the highest car population in the country by a mile)

Originally Posted by aseem

I dont buy this argument that Hyundai would reduce features/price after launch etc. If they had to do that, they would have been better off doing this right at the onset of selling the car, rather than few months after it. Also, there is no point discussing the hypothetical future outcomes of Hyundai's policy, as nor you, nor me are in a position to discuss and more so base our arguments based on that.

That's your view, not mine. In i10, they did exactly similar things to what I have mentioned. I know because I test drove the i10 on launch and a friend bought an i10. Just a few months later, comes i10 Kappa, and whole model range is overhauled. The high-end features you can only get now on the i10 Kappa (1.2) engine rather than 1.1

Originally Posted by aseem

Hyundai's sells in US as its cheap. Suzuki was never really was a serious player there, but there engines are better (at least used to be) than the Korean counterpart. Hyundai though has come a long way and I appreciate that. Having said that, they need to be a vfm player in India like the other world markets rather than positioning themselves as a luxury brand. Therefore pricing plays a key role here.

Suzuki is a small car company compared to Hyundai - Suzuki does not even have many models and engines. Definitely, they don't play in the upmarket space. Hyundai, Kia etc used price and warranty as the differentiators in US. Without a doubt, Hyundai has the edge in engine tech over Suzuki - both petrols and diesels in range and power.
I fully agree that Hyundai should be vfm in India, but Suzuki is baseline vfm everywhere else. And atleast, Hyundai is launching their very latest models without noticeable delays in India - i10, i20. This is a trend which hopefully gets other manufacturers to also do the same.

Originally Posted by aseem

If someone driving a 1.8T Passat wants to cruise at 130 kmph, someone driving an Audi TT wants to cruise at 120, and you doing 150 in 1.6 Passat overtake them, doesnt mean anything! Period!

You missed my original post where I mentioned about an average car buyer who's not the sporty type. He buys a Passat 1.6, and can drive at legal speed limits with good acceleration, and overtake other vehicles with ease - then, he may not feel it is underpowered for his requirements of the car. In the A-bahns of Germany, I drove at avg 160-180kmph unless there was congestion, and in Austria, I drove at 140-150kmph as speed limit is 130kmph. I talked about whether I felt the car was underpowered while overtaking on some of the fastest highways (legally speaking) in the world at those speeds , and didn't find an issue. That means everything to me as a car buyer if I am not a sports car fan ... You didn't do the 3000km over a week, so you may not get what I am saying (comfort, ride, easy overtaking, fast journeys to destination, little exhaustion).
In the context of an Indian hatch, city speed limits are 50 and 60kmph if not lower, and if traffic permits. So, for the regular car buyer, what good is 120bhp in stop-go traffic of Bangalore, esp if it comes with a lag ? What he needs is low-end torque and driveability.

Originally Posted by aseem

Civic has already seen a price correction with Honda reducing the price of Civic E to 9.99 Lakhs ex-showroom and 1.8V being offered with discounts. Dont be surprised to see a S model soon if sales continue to dwindle.

The reduction is also due to Cenvat cut, and almost every car manufacturer has reduced. If one is in BLR through, the Civic E has become good value for money. Since the ex-showroom price has dipped under 10l, you can save about 2% in road tax :-) The good thing is effective competition moderates premiums being charged.

[aseem]

Originally Posted by lancer_rit

Aseem, you got me wrong. I wrote those points as -ve for i20 over Swift (see the '-' sign before those points, compared to '+' signs for others). Therefore 78bhp to 87bhp is the right figure (i20 - 78bhp, Swift 87bhp)
.

You had originally mentioned Swift to have 85 bhp, as opposed to 87 bhp and I corrected that!


If you have ever sat in a swift, i20 is spacious - even i10 can compete with Swift at the rear. The poor rear window shape and fat C pillar make Swift a claustrophobic car in the rear.

i10 has cramped shoulder room, even the drivers seat is cramped compared to Swift!

Originally Posted by lancer_rit

I did miss out on listing the weight disadvantage of the i20 to Swift, thanks for pointing out.

Which is the single biggest factor apart from being underpowered. To claim things like gearing ratio, drag coefficient, aerodynamic efficiency etc is a joke, as this is a cheap hatch from Hyundai not an F1 car that has spent millions of dollars in the wind tunnel

Originally Posted by lancer_rit

Probably, legroom for Fiesta is more - but interior width of Fiesta is much less. Fiesta is a good car no doubt..

SRV, Fusion, Fabia all have essentially failed not because they are bad cars, but because at their price points, many sedans become affordable. And thats the point I am trying to make. Hyundai is playing a dangerous game pricing it so high.

Originally Posted by lancer_rit

In low revs, Swift is far from responsive. In any case, I don't think i20 needs to compete with Swift for responsiveness (that was not my idea). It just has to have good driveability in the city, and most buyers would be happy - if you go to Delhi, a huge chunk of cars never make it out on the highway (and Delhi has the highest car population in the country by a mile)
.

i10 kappa is also very bad in low revs. Add to that the additional weight of i20, so you might as well rest this argument and put it to rest.

Originally Posted by lancer_rit

That's your view, not mine. In i10, they did exactly similar things to what I have mentioned. I know because I test drove the i10 on launch and a friend bought an i10. Just a few months later, comes i10 Kappa, and whole model range is overhauled. The high-end features you can only get now on the i10 Kappa (1.2) engine rather than 1.1
.

Its not my point of view, its a fact! I cant argue based on your assumptions of what Hyundai may or may not do in the future as they did it with i10. You cant draw conclusions like that.

Originally Posted by lancer_rit

You missed my original post where I mentioned about an average car buyer who's not the sporty type. He buys a Passat 1.6, and can drive at legal speed limits with good acceleration, and overtake other vehicles with ease - then, he may not feel it is underpowered for his requirements of the car. In the A-bahns of Germany, I drove at avg 160-180kmph unless there was congestion, and in Austria, I drove at 140-150kmph as speed limit is 130kmph. I talked about whether I felt the car was underpowered while overtaking on some of the fastest highways (legally speaking) in the world at those speeds , and didn't find an issue. That means everything to me as a car buyer if I am not a sports car fan ... You didn't do the 3000km over a week, so you may not get what I am saying (comfort, ride, easy overtaking, fast journeys to destination, little exhaustion).
.

I have driven on autobahn between Stuttgart and Paris in Audi A3. I have also done over 100,000 miles in US. Having driven cars like BMW, Volvo S80, Passat 1.8T, Civic, Corrola, Pontiac Grand Prix, Grand AM, Merc E Class, Audi A4, Camry, Accord, Oldsmobile Alero, Eclipse, Accura t o name a few. I have also owned VW 1.8T and I know the difference between driving fast and having a responsive fast car. You probably are basing too many conclusions on simply experiencing a VW 1.6. Its not like that. Drive in a better car over the same stretch and you'd know the difference almost instantaneously. I rest my case.

Originally Posted by lancer_rit

In the context of an Indian hatch, city speed limits are 50 and 60kmph if not lower, and if traffic permits. So, for the regular car buyer, what good is 120bhp in stop-go traffic of Bangalore, esp if it comes with a lag ? What he needs is low-end torque and driveability.


The reduction is also due to Cenvat cut, and almost every car manufacturer has reduced. If one is in BLR through, the Civic E has become good value for money. Since the ex-showroom price has dipped under 10l, you can save about 2% in road tax :-) The good thing is effective competition moderates premiums being charged.

What about over 40k discounts?

[reppy]

Originally Posted by GTO

So I had someone fetch me the on-road prices of the i20 (Mumbai). Comparing ex-showroom is pointless, and the taxes & insurance are proportionately larger with more expensive cars.

Hyundai i20 On-road Mumbai:

Magna : 559,094
Asta : 651,195
Asta O : 676,513

For reference, here is the Swift

Swift on-road Mumbai:

LXi : 462,895
Vxi : 497,023
ZXi : 589,095 (Note that the Swift ZXI, its additional features, currently accounts for a small percentage of Swift sales.)

The difference between the mid-equipped Swift and i20 is a whopping 1.54 lakhs! And the ZXi vis a vis Asta O differential is nearly 80,000! A 1.2L hatch for 6.5 lakhs? I can hardly wait to see how the numbers settle down once the new launch dust has settled

Comparison of a VXi and an Asta! Let's talk about ZXI vs Asta buddy -
Price difference in Mumbai: (Asta-ZXI) Rs. 62,100.
Not as skewed as you're making it out to be.

And is it a rule to compare mid-variant to mid-variant??

[lancer_rit]

Originally Posted by aseem

If you have ever sat in a swift, i20 is spacious - even i10 can compete with Swift at the rear. The poor rear window shape and fat C pillar make Swift a claustrophobic car in the rear.

i10 has cramped shoulder room, even the drivers seat is cramped compared to Swift!

I compared i10 rear space to Swift not the front seats. Interior width of the swift is one of its worst weakness in the rear due to the bloated exteriors. I have sat in the i10 rear and I keep my point.

Originally Posted by aseem

Which is the single biggest factor apart from being underpowered. To claim things like gearing ratio, drag coefficient, aerodynamic efficiency etc is a joke, as this is a cheap hatch from Hyundai not an F1 car that has spent millions of dollars in the wind tunnel

Well, it looks you haven't read what I posted in totality. bhp/tonne is very important, however, 1066 vs 1000/1010 is about 5-7%, right ?
Gearing ratios and torque curves make all the difference esp in city driveability. You seem to trivialize technical aspects related to performance
(which itself means so many different things like 0-60, 0-100, 20-80 3rd gear, 40-100 4th gear) - so I guess I am not the one joking here ;-)

Originally Posted by aseem

i10 kappa is also very bad in low revs. Add to that the additional weight of i20, so you might as well rest this argument and put it to rest.

Yes, I have heard so about i10 kappa too. But, i20 has different gearing ratios than i10 Kappa as per automags. If you know your automobiles like you claim to, you should figure out the same engine can feel different based on many factors in different cars. I never said i20 will be fast, I only wanted to get more TD reports on in-city driveability - infact, I, quite, realize that performance is a weak point in the i20 (pointed to the torque figure has more concerning than the 78bhp). FYI, Honda Civic is one fast car (in its segment) if you do 0-100kmph, but crawl from 10-40kmph, and a Lancer with just 85 horses will surge forward and has better city driveability due to flatter torque curve with more torque at lower rpms.

Originally Posted by aseem

Its not my point of view, its a fact! I cant argue based on your assumptions of what Hyundai may or may not do in the future as they did it with i10. You cant draw conclusions like that.

I can only say to read the posts carefully before adding your comments. I have nothing to add or change from what I said.

Originally Posted by aseem

I have driven on autobahn between Stuttgart and Paris in Audi A3. I have also done over 100,000 miles in US. Having driven cars like BMW, Volvo S80, Passat 1.8T, Civic, Corrola, Pontiac Grand Prix, Grand AM, Merc E Class, Audi A4, Camry, Accord, Oldsmobile Alero, Eclipse, Accura t o name a few. I have also owned VW 1.8T and I know the difference between driving fast and having a responsive fast car. You probably are basing too many conclusions on simply experiencing a VW 1.6. Its not like that. Drive in a better car over the same stretch and you'd know the difference almost instantaneously. I rest my case.

Whoa, peace buddy! I did not say you have not driven this car or that or at whatever speeds or you don't have relevant experience. That seems to be your own interpretation and consequent overreaction. OTOH, I have also driven in many parts of US and Europe in many, many cars include those having 300+bhp over last 10+ years. So, please don't assume I don't know what a fast car is ? And that includes driving or being driven in Jap, Korean, American, and European vehicles - including the luxury ones.
And once again, please read carefully before making strange conclusions. My post was specific to a series of long drives on expressways and alpine roads in the Passat 1.6. And I tried to explain that the car felt premium and despite its 'under-speced engine' and peformed creditably for high speed motoring (wherein, i refer to high average speed over the whole trip as in 200km drive in 2hours). Infact, I feared it would be sluggish and make overtaking a chore. But it wasn't, and it was very comfortable, and 8 continuous days of driving , hiking, touring the sights etc still left me in pretty decent shape - I referred to you not getting 'this experience'. So, I concluded one can make very quick trips over long distances in the Passat 1.6 (where gaining a few seconds to 150kmph does not matter as much because one is driving for hours)

[/quote]

Originally Posted by aseem

What about over 40k discounts?

I say good for consumers :-) Honda had it too good for a long time though I admire most of their cars. They charged any premium they could, now wi.th better competition and the downturn, they will be pushed to more reason

[gunbir]

Originally Posted by aseem

Hit the nail on the head GTO. Couldnt control my laughter after reading that. Actually its quite funny that many ppl bash MUL for making cars that are succesful, and when shown the sales figures they refer to the same old 800 argument. Comparing cars in different segments to make a false argument.

@Aseem: I'm glad I put some humour in your day. Enjoy!

@lancer_rit: While your posts make perfect sense to a lot of us, there is no end to this argument... Sadly, every new non-Maruti launch is the feeding ground for bashers.

[aseem]

Originally Posted by lancer_rit

Well, it looks you haven't read what I posted in totality. bhp/tonne is very important, however, 1066 vs 1000/1010 is about 5-7%, right ?
Gearing ratios and torque curves make all the difference esp in city driveability. You seem to trivialize technical aspects related to performance (which itself means so many different things like 0-60, 0-100, 20-80 3rd gear, 40-100 4th gear) - so I guess I am not the one joking here ;-)

You are confident without even driving the car that it has better gearing ratios, etc etc. I am not trivliazing anything my freind (in true spirit), all I am saying is that this is not a sports car having spent time in wind tunnel. I will give you an example, Renault F1 R28 (2008 spec car) engine was supposedly underpowered by as little as 30 horses compared to the likes of Mercedez, Ferrari and BMW (less than 2%). Even though it is believed they had the best chasis on the grid, yet they were off the pace by a good margin. It was only Alonso's driving saving grace, but left to Piquet, it was a joke.
Now I dont know about the drag (its actuall funny that we are discussing this for a sub 6 lakh rupee hatch ), aerodynamics, gearing ratios of i20, and how they compare with Swift. Unless you have concrete proof that they make i20 faster/responsive than Swift, I would still say 7% more weight + 9 bhp less on top does make the car sluggish and underpowered imo. Lets just leave this here as we can go on and on...

[vinayasurya]

@ aseem and lancer_rit, You both can test drive i20 and see other than speculating on tech specs.

I don't think it is fair to compare i20 with Fusion. Fusion is more of hatch + MPV hybrid and interiors are not upto competition. And I doubt Swift Vxi will be affected by i20 at all.

Hyundai should have brought King Khan for i20 ads.

[vinayasurya]

Originally Posted by aseem

I would still say 7% more weight + 9 bhp less on top does make the car sluggish and underpowered imo. Lets just leave this here as we can go on and on...

7% more weight or -9 bhp in maximum power doesn't matter much for the car buying public. If i20 can bring that premium feeling above its price, the normal car buyers are likely to overlook that -9 bhp engine or 7 % weight. Nobody is going to buy i20 to go race with Swift. May be i20 climb a slope 5 km/hr less than Swift but who cares. And those who care about engine more than anything else there is always the Palio 1.6 .

[StarScream]

Originally Posted by GTO

"One of these" : Rs. 5,000 (alarm system). "Two of these" : Rs. 10,000 (Basic CD player + alarm or fogs). Sure, I can see how the lack of Rs. 10,000 worth in accessories can make a car look over-priced. 10K BTW is 1.3% of the value of the car, so even if it is over-priced (by your perspective), that's a pretty minute percentage. There is a subtle (yet significant difference) between a car lacking features vis a vis an overpriced one.
Does Honda charge a premium for its cars? Of course YES (and so does Toyota). Honda have learnt with the Civic that they can't always get away with it.

GTO, we are veering off-topic. You throw numbers to disprove a point and then make exactly the same point later.
But just to bolster what I said about feeling short-changed: the alarm was 5000 alright, original Honda fogs were 15k and Alpine CD player comparable to the tape deck in the car was 13k. The difference was pushing 20k - all of 2.6% of the cost of the car!
Now you'll say why those accessories and not cheaper ones. Because I wanted original and because my Esteem (the car I was upgrading from) came with fogs and alarm.
It doesn't matter whether it was 1-2-3% of the cost. I had to spend extra to get those things when I was already spending 7.2l lakhs and I didn't like the feeling. And feelings are subjective. Rational arguments don't work.
I understand all about subtle differences but here is my point: the lack of features made me "feel" the car was over-priced. Whether that carries weight in a rational argument or not three years hence, doesn't matter. I carry that "feeling" to this day.

[lancer_rit]

Originally Posted by aseem

You are confident without even driving the car that it has better gearing ratios, etc etc. I am not trivliazing anything my freind (in true spirit), all I am saying is that this is not a sports car having spent time in wind tunnel. I will give you an example, Renault F1 R28 (2008 spec car) engine was supposedly underpowered by as little as 30 horses compared to the likes of Mercedez, Ferrari and BMW (less than 2%). Even though it is believed they had the best chasis on the grid, yet they were off the pace by a good margin. It was only Alonso's driving saving grace, but left to Piquet, it was a joke.
Now I dont know about the drag (its actual funny that we are discussing this for a sub 6 lakh rupee hatch ), aerodynamics, gearing ratios of i20, and how they compare with Swift. Unless you have concrete proof that they make i20 faster/responsive than Swift, I would still say 7% more weight + 9 bhp less on top does make the car sluggish and underpowered imo. Lets just leave this here as we can go on and on...

Thanks for the somewhat off topic analogy to F1 :-)
Drag, wind tunnel and chassis - additional factors you point out.
i20 is heavier and it has a smaller engine, lower bhp and mildly lower peak torque - no disputing that.

For my part, I have only talked about gearing and torque curve which can aid a vehicle with lower 'peak' bhp/torque to be more driveable in the city than another. And I have not claimed anywhere that i20 is faster, peppier than Swift - I am, frankly, less interested in whether it is or not ? I am interested in whether it is driveable and has good city motoring characteristics without lag - if not, then i20 will suffer and not sell much - even if price is lowered somewhat ...

[SkyWalker]

Originally Posted by lancer_rit

The results they achieved does not leave any room for another conclusion.

Really? - lets see how they fared in the 6L+ segment

• Accent - good success (only competition at that time - ikon & corsa)
• Getz - failed miserably
• Verna Petrol - failed badly
• Verna Diesel - doing decent - no competition - lets wait what happens when Linea D & SX4 D gets launched
• Elantra - failed so bad - and they don't have a replacement yet
• Sonata - failed miserably

my friend, they are skating on thin ice here. Getz,Sonata are good cars. And you can be sure that i20 is going in that list as another good car failed due to overpricing.