[yzfrj]

Originally Posted by supremeBaleno

How could I sound like that ? Because that would be like calling myself a nut because I happen to own a large-engine (OK, large in the context we are talking here) car myself.

I was kinda hope'g you'd say you are "one".

In a nutshell, the reason this madness does not end is because there aren't enough Riju's out there who have their wallets drawn to not only shell out bucks for a performance car, but also to pay for the extra fuel it would supposedly guzzle.

Hold your thought. The mileage or rather the usage of the car per month is so low for me that I don't really care about FE.

If your usage is high and you need a petrol rocket then your wallet will burn.
Considering my usage I'm fine. But all Riju's are not.

[avishar]

I think the Indian government should dispel with this archaic rule about 1.2l.According to them smaller the displacement the more fuel efficient the engine.However now with modern technology larger displacement engines are giving same or even better FE.This will allow the manufacturer to have the flexibility to offer more options to a greater segment of the buying public.

[amulu10]

Originally Posted by Ricky_63

Slurp & another slurp for the above 2 options, provided they happen & happen soon.

Those should be real "performance oriented" machines

Would look forward to these & any other like these.



Cheers

yup! the fiesta hatchback 1.6 duratec is undergoing testing. One of my friend who happens to have his Inplant training in the Ford factory has confirmed the same.

[supremeBaleno]

Originally Posted by yzfrj

The mileage or rather the usage of the car per month is so low for me that I don't really care about FE.

While there surely are people (eg. Riju) who keep different cars for different purposes, how many of us have the dough/time/parking for multiple cars - one for daily use and one for rare hi-octane drives ? For most of us, 1 car needs to serve all functions.

Originally Posted by yzfrj

If your usage is high and you need a petrol rocket then your wallet will burn.

Not necessarily. There are ways to have a quick car without it being a guzzler. Weight-reduction is one way to achieve this. A better designed engine is another way.

Originally Posted by avishar

I think the Indian government should dispel with this archaic rule about 1.2l.

Rules will always be bent, but that does not mean we should do away with rules. IMO the rule is good because it gives incentive for those that use smaller & FE cars - a good thing since it is a step towards env-friendliness.

But manufacturers should use discretion in applying this rule. A 1-tonne Swift/Ritz mated to a 1.2l engine is a win-win situation for all. Same is the case with an i10 weighing 860kg and with an 1.2l engine.

But when Hyundai puts the same 1.2l engine in a heavier i20 (1066kgs) just for the sake of claiming that excise benefit, that spoils the fun of the car. Same for the even more heavier Punto that comes with a puny 1.2l engine.

For these heavier cars, either they should get more-cc engines or have turbo-charged versions of the 1.2l engines.

P.S.: Since the kerb-weight for the i10/i20 were not mentioned on the Hyundai site, the numbers posted are from some other site - not sure of the accuracy.

[agbenny]

It was .8L madness earlier, then 1L madness arrived, later 1.1L madness and now its 1.2 L madness. :-)

As long as people need more cars for city commuting such lower capacity engines will be in demand. This is my understanding.
People in USA uses 2+ liters as they have areas to live and cover in suburban areas, But take Singapore as example- people have to drive only within the city and 2+ liters are less moving on the road.

[bhp_maniac]

How we can say an engine's capacity with respect to is cubic capacity, especially in an era where lower cubic capacity engine with high BHP are ruling. We can't simply say a 2.0 litre engine to be more powerful than a 1.2 or 1.3. For example the 2.0L engine in Ambassador classic is capable of an output of around 51 bhp (correct me if am wrong) where the 1.3L DDiS or MJD is capable of doing a neat 75 bhp and even 90 bhp in some other countries. So I don't think we need to worry about 1.2, 1.4, 1.6 or any cubic capacity. As far as we are getting a decent power/weight ratio then who cares !!!

[Abhi_Automobile]

Guys,

Engine capacity isn't the only thing. VW 1.2TSI is a 1.2, right. Look at it go!

What we do get is companies trying to get the best FE out of 1.2 engines by detuning etc. They are mostly archaic engines which are shopped to make them fall under the 1.2 l capacity.

If we get 'better' engines (forget 1.2TSI, even HONDA 1.2iVTEC or simple Kseries), the this capacity is ideally suited for small cars. The fuss should be companies giving crappy engines.

[vishwas]

Originally Posted by supremeBaleno

Since you mention mpg, I am assuming the figure is from the US - on an Accord, I guess. A closest match to Indian conditions would be an Accord giving 12.6kmpl on highways, which is normal I would think. Which smaller-engined cars did not match this FE ?

Which version of City, because we have atleast 3 major versions running here? The NHC-iDSi was the most FE of all but I don't think even it can match the 1.2l K-series engines in FE.

I heard from a friend that the City (2008 pre-ANHC) gives 14kmpl in city driving with AC. My new i20 has barely managed 10.5 till first service.

A Ford Focus (smaller sub-compact) Manual 2.0L gave me ~ 25mpg. A Protege 1.6L gave 31mpg with the best effort, but very underpowered. So the Accord was much better for a heavier mid-size vehicle. (and a larger carrying capacity - hence more carriage per unit of fuel).

Attached is a table with some cars that I have had exposure to. The Accord had the best weight to power ratio. However the worst is the M-800, and still gives the best FE in my table - a data point in support of the small-engine is better argument.

[yzfrj]

Originally Posted by supremeBaleno

For most of us, 1 car needs to serve all functions.

Assumptions are dangerous SB, anyway just for the record I sold the Zen.

I was shocked when my dad said "ok" for the OHC, my friends were in sheer disbelief that my dad actually gave the green flag. He want low fuel bills (as he drives around a lot).

The point to ponder here is how many of the "new" car owners (who are the obvious targets of this 1.2Ltr cars) will actually "drive" enough distance.

The tax norms are just bull to get an extra "cut" from the so called higher capacity engines. Think of this anything under 3Ltr is puny in US, for us 1.5Lts is huge ?

As I mentioned earlier the tax should be based on the "pollution" factor (CO2) and not the cubic capacity or the power generated.

Power is never enough, increasing the cubic capacity is the relatively easy way of increasing the power .

For all the "mileage kya hai" brigade, damn...! drive a diesel nano. (when its out)

Given the options we have now "hot" hatch will be just a figment of our imagination soon. The illiterate politicians are killing the dream of petrol heads.

Tax benefits eh ? then why in the world we have road tax and then NH's are toll roads ? Total crap.

[Thad E Ginathom]

Originally Posted by Thad E Ginathom

Will a 1.6, these days, power any car from 0-100 in less than 10 seconds?

Answering my own question... I see on the VW site that the Polo 1.6 is expected to do 0-100 in 11-poin-something. Not bad. Almost exciting!

And I do agree that we should not get hung up on engine capacities, it is the power that matters.

[Rahulkool]

Originally Posted by Thad E Ginathom

Answering my own question... I see on the VW site that the Polo 1.6 is expected to do 0-100 in 11-poin-something. Not bad. Almost exciting!

And I do agree that we should not get hung up on engine capacities, it is the power that matters.

Don't get too excited, Palio 1.6 supposed to do 0-60mph in 9.8secs. Got this from some international site of Fiat. but in India its 11secs(not sure). I think this has to do with detuning of the engine for the quality fuels we get here.

[mxx]

This madness will only end if a day comes when people dont care about FE. Till then this will continue. Specially in the small hatch segment. And a lot of people use their cars for city use or shorter drives, 1.2 is enough and more. Why do you think a non-enthusiast will go for a 1.4/1.5 L hatch when there is a 1.2/1.3L available? Check out the ratio of palio 1.2 to 1.6.


Now cribbing about govt exemption is stupid. India is not the only country which provides tax incentives to small engines. Only difference may be that here it is done in form of excise duty.Elsewhere it could be some other method like registration tax. Though the reason given is emissions and FE, the real political reason is to reduce dependency on oil which is imported. Now, that is a factor that cant be ignored by countries, which does not have these resources.

[Gooney]

It is not a madness. It is a conscious effort on part of different governments to coax manufacturers and consumers to reduce fossil fuel consumption.

It seems weird in India because we never had performance cars to start with. It is like telling us to give up something we never had but always hoped to have one day. I guess that's why this frustration.

I am game for small engines, for the greater good.

[yzfrj]

Originally Posted by Gooney

I am game for small engines, for the greater good.

Just so that other folks know, cars are not at the front line is "fossil fuel" consumption. I'm not saying less car will not help the cause, there are better things to do for the "greater good".

PS: No sarcasm intended just stating the fact.

[bhp_maniac]

Originally Posted by yzfrj

Given the options we have now "hot" hatch will be just a figment of our imagination soon. The illiterate politicians are killing the dream of petrol heads.

Tax benefits eh ? then why in the world we have road tax and then NH's are toll roads ? Total crap.

If the act of these "illiterate politicians" was the motivation behind many of the car manufacturers to seek for better options than increasing the cubic capacity to squeeze out power, then my for the politicians. My old 1.4L engine was giving only 70PS, while my new 1.2L engine is giving me 75PS and a much better FE. If the reason behind this change is the politicians at act, then I am a happy customer. As per test results the 1.3 DDiS or MJD or Quadrajet is having an efficiency of 54%, even though it convinces us to be more fuel efficient. So even in this award winning engine, the rest 46% is wasted. Let the manufacturers increase the efficiency of their engines and convert it to more power/FE than letting them mere increase it to 1.6 or 1.8 and make it less efficient. The matter is, we will be running out of fuel one day, and lets try to make the day farther.