[Shan2nu]

Not surprising that the CRV is not selling

I dont think Honda is too interested in the CR-V. A friend wanted to pick up the AWD A/T but Honda said that they would be able to deliver the car only in March.

Moreover, the CR-V and Accord are so closely priced, why would someone pay for a 2.4 CR-V when they can get a 3.5 V6 Accord for a bit more.

Shan2nu

[supremeBaleno]

Originally Posted by GTO

I do believe that the success of the ANHC can be credited to its all roundedness. Does the job whether its power, FE, handling, ride quality, interior space and reliability.

I get the power, space & reliability (to an extent - explained later on in this post) part. I am not as sure about "Ride quality" & "handling" part, but will let it pass - am no expert in those areas.

But where does this FE thing come from ? There was this other thread of yours, where the ANHC was made out to be God's gift to mankind and it also had FE as one of its redeeming factors. I could not post there because the thread was locked for some reason that I don't remember anymore. I cant find the thread either.

The 95/100/106bhp OHCs (1.3, 1.5 & Vtec) were not really known for their FE. It was the 76bhp NHC that brought FE into the picture for the "City" and inspite of not owning a NHC, I do believe that the NHC is pretty FE and the segment beater in that criteria.

But to say that the ANHC with atleast a 35% more powerful engine gives the phenomenal (or even close) FE of the NHC is well, wishful thinking. And yes, I did check owner-reports on this same forum which back my claim.

Originally Posted by GTO

It is the class-topper in some (power, FE, reliability) and even where it doesnt top out (ride quality, handling), the City does alright. Also, the City nameplate has proven itself in over a decade.

Which class are we talking about here ? Which segment is the ANHC in ? The segment which has the SX4, Verna, Linea, Aveo, Fiesta etc ? Or the one in which we have the Optra, Corolla, Cedia etc ?
If it is the former, yes, it would be class-topper in power - FE and reliability are debatable though. If it is the latter, it might be class-topper in FE & power - reliability being debatable.

Also everytime, there is a debate on reliability, we get this argument about how the City has proven itself for a decade. Big deal. We have M800s from 1983 that run around town with minimal maintenance and cost less than 1/10th of a city. What would we call that then ? I myself had an M800 for 19 years (1985 to 2004) and I think that the Indian Hondas have a long way to go before they get the long-term reliability award.

[Guna]

Originally Posted by supremeBaleno

But to say that the ANHC with atleast a 35% more powerful engine gives the phenomenal (or even close) FE of the NHC is well, wishful thinking. And yes, I did check owner-reports on this same forum which back my claim.

ANHC-MT seems to be giving 12-14 kmpl in the city (going by the ownership threads) which is what NHC nearly used to give. ACI figures for NHC and ANHC are also very identical.

[supremeBaleno]

Originally Posted by Guna

ANHC-MT seems to be giving 12-14 kmpl in the city (going by the ownership threads) which is what NHC nearly used to give. ACI figures for NHC and ANHC are also very identical.

Well, Congrats. You have beaten the NHC in FE.

BTW, 12-14kmpl is too big a range, if you know what I mean.

And as far as ACI is concerned, well...

And regarding owner threads, most refer to the FE indicator, which if taken as the standard, Skodas do 32kmpl. Truckload of salt, right ?

[shrinivasap]

my ANHC- AT gives me a FE of 10 (average) in city and upto 14.5 in long drives. That is pretty impressive in that range that too on AT

[Guna]

Originally Posted by supremeBaleno

Well, Congrats. You have beaten the NHC in FE.

BTW, 12-14kmpl is too big a range, if you know what I mean.

Congratulation should go to MT owners . Mine is an AT and I manage only about 9 kmpl. But I have owned NHC in the past and could never manage above 11 kmpl. So it depends on the driver.
Yes 12-14 is a big range but this is what you hear reported from different owners driving in fairly different traffic conditions.

Originally Posted by shrinivasap

my ANHC- AT gives me a FE of 10 (average) in city and upto 14.5 in long drives. That is pretty impressive in that range that too on AT

I agree.

[SkyWalker]

Welcome Back SB, i didn't see you around for some time. Been busy?

Originally Posted by supremeBaleno

But to say that the ANHC with atleast a 35% more powerful engine gives the phenomenal (or even close) FE of the NHC is well, wishful thinking. And yes, I did check owner-reports on this same forum which back my claim.

I am not sure if anyone's saying its more fuel efficient than NHC (except, probably salesmen ).

While i agree physics plays a big part - Sometime its not just physics. I have a Palio 1.2 - 72 bhp and i get 10kmpl on it with 100% AC. My ANHC is 115 bhp, a wee bit heavier and gives me 12 kmpl - thats a 20% increase in FE and 59% increase in power. Road conditions, time,traffic and driver are about the same.

So i guess engine plays a big part. There were some illustrations about i-Vtec and how it improves FE when AHNC was released. Discounting the sales jargon, i guess we should say there's some truth to it.

[Guna]

Originally Posted by SkyWalker

While i agree physics plays a big part - Sometime its not just physics. I have a Palio 1.2 - 72 bhp and i get 10kmpl on it with 100% AC. My ANHC is 115 bhp, a wee bit heavier and gives me 12 kmpl - thats a 20% increase in FE and 59% increase in power. Road conditions, time,traffic and driver are about the same.

So i guess engine plays a big part. There were some illustrations about i-Vtec and how it improves FE when AHNC was released. Discounting the sales jargon, i guess we should say there's some truth to it.

@skywalker, it is still physics.
Let assume that all engines are equally effficient in terms of translating the energy available in a drop of petol to the power generated in the engine crankshaft. Now, one of them is smaller in capacity and produces lesser power output then the other. If we want both of them to be used in cars of same weight and be able to cuise in the same speed, the smaller engine would have to work harder(faster) and burn the same amount of fuel as the larger engine to keep up the pace.

So, an engine, irrespective of the size, will end up consuming same amount of fuel to cope up with the power demand.

Now, bring factors like the efficiency, what RPM the peak power/torque is delivered etc and depending on how well things are optimised, the larger engine may(or may not) end up consumig less fuel.
I had owned NHC for failry long (3 years, 40 k) and concluded that it may be a very efficient engine but since it was used in a big car, it had to work harder (already mated to a transission with shorter gearing to counter the lack of power) when demanded which resulted in not so great FE.

[clevermax]

Originally Posted by supremeBaleno

Also everytime, there is a debate on reliability, we get this argument about how the City has proven itself for a decade. Big deal. We have M800s from 1983 that run around town with minimal maintenance and cost less than 1/10th of a city. What would we call that then ? I myself had an M800 for 19 years (1985 to 2004) and I think that the Indian Hondas have a long way to go before they get the long-term reliability award.

M800 for 19 years shows the reliability of old Japanese made 800s. Any brand's car running 10 years can't be termed as highly reliable. Most of the cars do run for a decade or more. But for Honda's engine alone, the Vtecs, can boast about reliability by speaking about the number of engines running around the world and the number of warranty claims raised on their engines. They are reliable for sure.

Having said that, we have the Fiat 1100 Delight a.k.a. Premier President from the 1960s running in good condition even now, though we sold it off a couple of years back but we know the present owner - now that's reliability.

Why must anyone boast about reliability with a 10 year tenure... ? I don't understand.

We sold off our 11 year old Zen-D in good condition a couple of months back, now can I make a statement that Zen-D was the most reliable compact hatch with a diesel engine?

[muralisk]

Looks like Honda has a winner in ANHC. It is a wonderful car and I am glad there are people who still see value in buying ANHC.

Coming to the FE, there is so much discussion that is going on, here is my two cents. I own a NHC Gxi model. Consistently, I get over 14 within city and over 18 on highways. However, there are certain conditions which are either related to my driving/ mood or road and traffic or certain urgent situations which does impact my mileage.

According to me, FE to a large extent is driver dependent as the same car with two different drivers with different styles would yield varying FE. So, it is quite subjective.

[Guna]

Originally Posted by Guna

@skywalker, it is still physics.
Let assume that all engines are equally effficient in terms of translating the energy available in a drop of petol to the power generated in the engine crankshaft. Now, one of them is smaller in capacity and produces lesser power output then the other. If we want both of them to be used in cars of same weight and be able to cuise in the same speed, the smaller engine would have to work harder(faster) and burn the same amount of fuel as the larger engine to keep up the pace.

So, an engine, irrespective of the size, will end up consuming same amount of fuel to cope up with the power demand.

Now, bring factors like the efficiency, what RPM the peak power/torque is delivered etc and depending on how well things are optimised, the larger engine may(or may not) end up consumig less fuel.
I had owned NHC for failry long (3 years, 40 k) and concluded that it may be a very efficient engine but since it was used in a big car, it had to work harder (already mated to a transission with shorter gearing to counter the lack of power) when demanded which resulted in not so great FE.

Just wanted to add to my earlier posting:
ANHC (i-Vtec) allows someone to either drive in a normal economy-driven mode for good FE or drive in a spirited manner. Both of these (good FE as well as great performance) many not go together but at least the engine allows flexibility.
I was reading about why Honda decided to drop i-Dsi which was a huge success in India but opted for V-tec, which could have been a great risk if it didn't deliver as good FE. They could take the risk beacsue they were confident abou the FE aspect of this engine.
Apparantly, I-Dsi engine design did not allow 4 valves/cyl as the space was restricted due to the additional spark plug. But they were able to achieve the I-Dsi level of efficiency with the i-vtec itself, which also offered the potential of great performance.

[AnonymousCoward]

Originally Posted by supremeBaleno

I get the power, space & reliability (to an extent - explained later on in this post) part. I am not as sure about "Ride quality" & "handling" part, but will let it pass - am no expert in those areas.

But where does this FE thing come from ? There was this other thread of yours, where the ANHC was made out to be God's gift to mankind and it also had FE as one of its redeeming factors. I could not post there because the thread was locked for some reason that I don't remember anymore. I cant find the thread either.

The 95/100/106bhp OHCs (1.3, 1.5 & Vtec) were not really known for their FE. It was the 76bhp NHC that brought FE into the picture for the "City" and inspite of not owning a NHC, I do believe that the NHC is pretty FE and the segment beater in that criteria.

But to say that the ANHC with atleast a 35% more powerful engine gives the phenomenal (or even close) FE of the NHC is well, wishful thinking. And yes, I did check owner-reports on this same forum which back my claim.

Which class are we talking about here ? Which segment is the ANHC in ? The segment which has the SX4, Verna, Linea, Aveo, Fiesta etc ? Or the one in which we have the Optra, Corolla, Cedia etc ?
If it is the former, yes, it would be class-topper in power - FE and reliability are debatable though. If it is the latter, it might be class-topper in FE & power - reliability being debatable.

Also everytime, there is a debate on reliability, we get this argument about how the City has proven itself for a decade. Big deal. We have M800s from 1983 that run around town with minimal maintenance and cost less than 1/10th of a city. What would we call that then ? I myself had an M800 for 19 years (1985 to 2004) and I think that the Indian Hondas have a long way to go before they get the long-term reliability award.

lol, SB - why don't you compare City with another car in the segment that it sells and suggest how City is poorer than any of them in the aspects that you think are significant?

Point is, regardless of what you and I think, City seems to satisfy the needs of significant number of customers in the upper C segment. Sale of 50K cars under an year is a fitting witness to that.

[SkyWalker]

Originally Posted by Guna

@skywalker, it is still physics.

Well i agree to what you are saying - but we are talking macro vs micro. What i meant was just looking at the macro level physics (weight,bhp etc) is not enough and we need to look at enginerring.

Originally Posted by Guna

Just wanted to add to my earlier posting:
ANHC (i-Vtec) allows someone to either drive in a normal economy-driven mode for good FE or drive in a spirited manner. Both of these (good FE as well as great performance) many not go together but at least the engine allows flexibility.

true. While i comfortably get 12 in city - i get nowhere close to the mileage some ANHC owners are claiming on highway. But then who cares if we are highrevving to glory? . But its good to know i have an option of driving sedately at 90 kmph and get 18kmpl

[SaneOp]

I own NHC and am a huge fan of that for comfort and FE at 13kmpl in heavy to moderate traffic of Delhi to Ggn via MG road or NH-8, on highway trips to Agra/jaipur I have got FE of 18-20Kmpl. Fuel meter needle take forever to dip on highways. When I bought it in 05 it was bit an upgrade for me but I was looking for Sedan that is reliable and frugal. Well NHC won over Optra and Accent in everything including looks.

Its great to see that they have another winner in terms of product, there after sales services is another selling point. Though I think that on weekends you can get really shoddy cleaning job, so I prefer going on weekdays. Anyways Cheers to Honda on this success.

[StarScream]

Originally Posted by muralisk

I own a NHC Gxi model. Consistently, I get over 14 within city and over 18 on highways.

Me too and I get similar FE.

Coming to the reliability part, my 5-year old NHC has never broken down or left me stranded. Honda does make good cars and the ANHC's sales performance is testament to that. Heck, there are two in my family. And I recommended buying them.

But I do agree with some of the other posts here about about Honda India becoming a one product company. Just the other day I was at a Honda dealership to service my car and my wife happened to be with me. Now, she doesn't really care about cars but she always did like the last CR-V and Accord. When she heard the price, her jaw dropped.

We always aspired to the CR-V when it was launched at about 15 lakhs. Today, it is out of the question. The Accord now starts at 19 lakhs. The Civic is more after the face lift. The only Honda car that I can now buy for the same price I bought my NHC in 05, is the Jazz.

Agreed, with the ANHC you're getting more power and safety features compared with the NHC. So the price is more but what about the other products? Honda cannot and does not get away with such price increases in developed markets every time they introduce a new or upgraded product.

I really wish some real competition from a company like Toyota bursts Honda's bubble. It's already happened with the Fortuner.