Team-BHP - Ford EcoSport : Official Review

Quote:

Originally Posted by Vid6639 (Post 3466298)

Where do you get this logic from. Do you actually think customers are so gullible that they bought the ecosport thinking it is a SUV? The minute you drive it and sit inside you know the only SUV thing about it is the higher seating position, else it drives like a regular car.

Quote:

This is like saying that Maruti diesel engines should be avoided since they get it from Fiat and themselves are not good in diesel engines. Or let's not buy Honda diesel engine cars since Honda is new to diesel engines in India. Just a silly reason to not buy the car.

The engine in the Fiesta, Figo and Ecosport is developed along with Peugeot and Citroen and that doesn't mean Ford doesn't care about it and concentrates only on diesel engines.

The 1.4 TDCI was a bench mark in driveability and the 1.5 offers the best combination of performance and driveability.

Diesel engines are popular in Europe and India mostly and there is not a single manufacturer which puts priority on diesel engines only.

VW has got the TSI engine which is now deployed in US. Honda had only one diesel engine and till recently had said our diesel engines won't work in India. Their diesel engine lineup has been the same 1.6L and 2.0L engines for a while now.

Toyota sells a lousy 1.4L D-4d engine in India and have gone to BMW for diesel engines internationally. I am not considering the utility vehicle engines like Fortuner and Innova's since those are based on the pickup trucks for utility use.

So let's leave out the silly comments that diesel engines are not Ford's Forte.

I said it before and I say it again... diesel engine is not Ford's forte.

That does not mean that it "doesn't care" about diesel engines... it simply means that in general, Europeans car-makers have more experience and expertise in diesel. I thought I had made this amply clear in my previous remark.

Lastly, keeping analogies with Japanese carmakers (Suzuki, Honda, Toyota, etc.) aside... Ford spent millions of dollars developing the petrol Ecoboost engine but till date, most of its Diesel engines have been developed by its European JVs

Quote:

Originally Posted by dsunn (Post 3466308)

Well then that's sad to see such gullible buyers. And what exactly is their definition of SUV? Some people think that a Fortuner 4X2 is an SUV as well or a Duster is a SUV.

Quote:

I said it before and I say it again... diesel engine is not Ford's forte.

Keeping analogies with Japanese carmakers (Suzuki, Honda, Toyota, etc.) aside... Ford spent millions of dollars developing the petrol Ecoboost engine but till date, most of its Diesel engines have been developed by its European JVs.

That does not mean that it "doesn't care" about diesel engines... it simply means that in general, Europeans car-makers have more experience and expertise in diesel. I thought I had made this amply clear in my previous remark.

There was a typo by me which I just corrected it. I meant to say it does not mean Ford only concentrates on petrol engines.

I don't buy that remark cause it's not just europeans. How about VW spending millions on 1.8TSI and 1.4TSI twin charger? Why did they spend millions on developing a petrol engine then?

When exactly is the point by saying it is not their Forte? Isn't saying Maruti's forte is not diesel engines the same thing?

So what if it's not their forte. Diesel engines are co developed across manufacturers. You said PSA (Ford, Peugeot Citroen) yourself, GM used to get it from VM Motori and so did Hyundai at one point.

The 1.4 and 1.5TDCI engine is made in India, has superb driveavility with low turbo lag and gives excellent FE. And it is reliable. What more does anyone need? Why should I care that Ford makes this engine along with Citroen and Peugeot as long as it gets the job done.

Quote:

Originally Posted by dsunn (Post 3466289)

General note to potential buyers:

Contrary to popular opinion, diesel engine is not Ford's forte. Ford is an American company and US is its largest market. Most Americans are petrol-heads (unlike Europeans) and therefore, Ford focuses more on Petrol engines compared to Diesel ones. Most of Ford's diesel car sales are in Europe and their diesel engines are primarily developed by European centers. The TDCi engine itself was developed by a JV with France's PSA Peugeot Citroën.

Definitely, European car-makers have more experience and expertise in diesel engines compared to their American counterparts.

I hope potential buyers don't take this General note seriously.

The American Ford is the biggest selling car brand in the UK, which is predominantly a diesel market. And most of the models sold in Europe and Asia and derived/developed in Europe. I don't think that make it any less competent (infact its a positive in my opinion). And is there something really wrong in developing an engine along with Peugeot-Citroen? With this logic, nobody should buy a diesel car from say Nissan or Suzuki, because its outsourced from Italian or French partners respectively.

Quote:

Originally Posted by dsunn (Post 3466308)

Isn't this the people's fault? The ones who without any research about the product went ahead blindly to buy it.

And yes, what is an urban SUV? I believe they meant this Nothing much more than that. And in an urban environment, you won't get to use any more of EcoSport's SUViness (if I may call it that) Must add, on demand AWD would have been the icing on cake.

And I think the ones complaining about EcoSport are mostly the guys who paid a premium or used contacts for an earlier delivery.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Vid6639 (Post 3466315)

And what exactly is their definition of SUV? Some people think that a Fortuner 4X2 is an SUV as well or a Duster is a SUV.

+1 to that! :)
--------------------------------------
Per wiki -->
A sport utility vehicle or suburban utility vehicle (SUV) is a vehicle similar to a station wagon or estate car, usually equipped with four-wheel drive for on- or off-road ability. Some SUVs include the towing capacity of a pickup truck with the passenger-carrying space of a minivan or large sedan.

Webster also adds that the vehicle is usually built on a light-truck chasis.

Even without relying on these definitions, I'm sure most buyers know that an SUV needs to at least have a "go-anywhere" DNA to a reasonable extent. So then really how many vehicles in India sold under the SUV tag really qualify to be real SUVs?

Also, when i bought the Ecosport, i bought it cause it checked all the boxes for me and not because i wanted an SUV (as per the definition above). BTW, one of the boxes was that is should not be too large a vehicle but just sufficient for a family of 3! I also know a few folks who bought Fortuners irrespective of all its qualities (or lack of) simply cause it looks like a brute!

So seriously, if there are any buyers out there who buy these vehicles tagged as "SUV" in Indian market and then get disappointed that it can't do what a vehicle that fits the above definition should do, they deserve it!

To me, this whole discussion of should I buy an SUV or a sedan or a hatchback or a truck is pointless esp. when coming from urban "commuters" who occasionally go out there on a trip. Their requirements are standard that the SUV or Sedan or MUV fulfill pretty easily - looks, tons of features, low cost of ownership, grt mileage, space enough for family, easy to park etc. Throw in a few of your own as well. The form factor only brings in options! How many of us really go out there saying i want a 4x4 cause i climb hills every weekend? Not many else the Thar would have sold like an Alto.

So if our needs were met only by sedans, then we would have stuck to a sedan and never explored the SUV space. The manufacturers are basically only providing options now that meet the same standard requirements across multiple form factors. A person buying Ecosport is buying it perfectly knowing that he is buying a vehicle that looks different to a sedan but meets his requirements that maybe only sedans did a few years ago. We are all buying "cars" that meet our needs in different shapes, at least the urban clientele is!

Did i confuse the heck out of this discussion or what? :D

Quote:

Originally Posted by a4anurag (Post 3466278)

Why don't you check the fuse once.

Hope the pipe is not twisted anywhere.

Anurag.

Didnt check the fuse. I am back in Bangalore. Left the car in Mangalore since dad wanted it for his use. Will check this weekend.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Sheel (Post 3466284)

The front or the rear? I explicitly recall my car's rear wash wipe not working (Ford Figo) and one of our members (from Team-BHP) who drove a Ford in the US said to pull the wiper control stalk for a bit longer than normal. It worked. This trait is common in Ford cars. Suggest you try this once. Should work similarly for front washer as well.

Both are not working. I tried pulling the stalk for longer than normal. It still didnt work

Coming back to the "Hatch on stilts" description for Ecosport. From the basic mechanical knowledge I have, its not easy to develop a car with 200mm of GC that drives like a car. If it was so easy then why are manufacturers still struggling to bring their versions of "HATCH on stilts". Its been more than 2 years since Duster launch and the local manufacturers still don't have an answer for Duster/Ecosport. My only complaint till date with the Ecosport is lack of few bhps in the Diesel, otherwise it ticks all the boxes for this price.

Quote:

Originally Posted by blacksport (Post 3466043)

And, if it would be of any help to you, if not for the higher ground clearance and an upright seating position, I would have bought a Vento or a Rapid instead of Ecosport.

Well, apart from High GC and upright seating position, Ecosoprt offers more space inside than Vento. It feels more wider in the front with more shoulder room. The rear bench is comparable.Ease of getting in and out is also much better.
The field Vento clearly dominates Ecosport is in-term's of Engine power, a slick gearbox and boot space.

Coming to quality of materials used i would not say they are planet apart. Both have good and bad materials, so they are evenly matched.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Vid6639 (Post 3466298)

The Ecosport is for someone who wants something bigger than a hatch but not a full blown sedan. Secondly he wants some ability to tackle bad roads which low slung sedans cannot but not full off road capability.

It's kind of everything in one package but not excel in one department alone. So ride/handling is a compromise over a sedan but better than SUV, ground clearance is way better than any sedan or hatch.

Exactly. Very true. When I was planning to get a new car, I wanted a car bigger than the Swift but didnt want the sedan as the car will be driven in the city with occasional long drives. The ecosport fits here perfectly - not big and not small. Since the rear seats wont be used for 99.9% of the time, I really didnt check the ecosport rear seat during the TD but found it better than the swift. A good driving position, decent boot, gadgets and reasonable price (perfect when I got the car), styling. And coming from a swift, the ecosport boot is pretty good and the rear leg room is good. In swift I had to adjust the driver seat when the back seat were occupied. In ecosport, nobody has asked me to adjust the driver seat. Also, it takes the bad roads pretty well. I had a chance to do a bit of off road couple of weeks back and the car took it really well. I have attached the pics in my ownership thread. The only complaint I have is the turbo surge that's there in the swift. But other than that the car is just perfect for someone with similar requirements like mine.

Quote:

Originally Posted by dsunn (Post 3466308)

Yes they are such "gullible people". I personally know 4 such EcoSport owners who have "complained" that their car is "not an SUV".

And I don't blame these poor mis-guided souls... Ford itself calls the EcoSport an "urban SUV" (go through Ford EcoSport advertisements).

There was such a mad-rush for EcoSport last year and many people went with the crowd and booked the car without doing thorough research.

This is exactly what happened and hence, my logic.

I said it before and I say it again... diesel engine is not Ford's forte.

That does not mean that it "doesn't care" about diesel engines... it simply means that in general, Europeans car-makers have more experience and expertise in diesel. I thought I had made this amply clear in my previous remark.

Lastly, keeping analogies with Japanese carmakers (Suzuki, Honda, Toyota, etc.) aside... Ford spent millions of dollars developing the petrol Ecoboost engine but till date, most of its Diesel engines have been developed by its European JVs

Now Now Now.... You very rightly mention these 4 of your known people 'gullible' .... You are very much right! What did they expect ? A Landcruiser or a Fortuner at Hatch back/ C-sedan prices? Gullible they definitely are. Its become a case of sour grapes for a lot of people. Frustration sprouting out of waiting periods, dealer attitudes etc. Lets face it, when it came out in the Indian market, there was nothing like it around. The way you put it, even Fortuner/ Pajero sport is not an SUV, its a pick up truck! What I would like to tell you is that even when you declare the vehicle spec at ARAI for a Fortuner or a Pajero, they are declared as Station wagons (You may check if you want to). So is a Fortuner, the same as a Skoda Combi or a Palio Adventure. You may even note that the majority of Ecosport owners are urban youth/working class and not fear inducing thugs or politicians. And if you tell me that in today's age people actually buy a car without researching on their needs, then its pathetic. An Urban SUV handles Urban roads or bad roads, Now if you want to take to Ladakh, that's your personal call, isn't it? Someone mentioned about buying a Vento or a Rapid instead. Why don't you buy a Polo instead. Just like a Ecosport is a hatchback on stilts, isn't Vento an elongated hatch back???:)

Most of the manufacturers are guilty in exploiting the "magic" term SUV to further their sales:Frustrati. The names that readily come to mind are Multi Utilty Vehicle, Sports Activity Vehicle, Compact Utility Vehicle, Life Utility Vehicle, Urban SUV and so on.

For a population where a "big" car mean a car with a boot (including cars such as Indigo CS, Dezire, Amaze, etc.), it is not very difficult into fooling them into buying an "SUV".

Personally, the moment I test drove an Ecosport, I felt that it was nothing more than a hatch with SUV looks, but a majority of the car buyers go by the marketing hype and without even knowing their actual requirements, end up buying vehicles which are not for their intended use. Pity most of the car buying public are not Team-BHP members:D.

Quote:

Originally Posted by thesilentone (Post 3466831)

The SIlent one has spoken :) not just for himself, but for entire Team-Bhpclap:. By the way what about Bhpians who have bought the Ecosport???

Quote:

Originally Posted by thesilentone (Post 3466831)

Hatch with SUV looks,Hatch on Steroids,Pseudo SUV whatever people care i dont mind! what matters me is its capability! based on current experience i can take ecosport with confidence on roads which only so called proper SUV/MUV can make through. Forget a hatch/sedan neither could our Innova make it to some of the roads which we went by Ecosport. That said i would definitely not recommend Ecosport to be taken on roads where 4X4 would be a necessity.
Again if size was the only criteria to define a vehicle category, i would call a Land Cruiser as very large premium Hatchback with SUV like looks!:D

Quote:

Originally Posted by PrideRed (Post 3466867)

Ecosport is not an SUV in the same lines as CRV is not an SUV or Outlander is not an SUV. But the same people making fun of the Ecosport of not being an SUV (compact or not), do not do the same when it comes to these other vehicles. The only "crime" for them is that Ecosport is small. For them something "small" is not worthy of being called an SUV.

Heck, I wanted a small car, and small does not mean "inferior". According to me, the Ecosport has bigger drawbacks than size to not attribute the term SUV to it.

BTW, I don't care a bit what it is called, but to me it is a perfect all rounder. One that is easy to drive in the city and very stable on the highway. One that can dismiss broken roads of Bangalore with ease. One for which it is easier to find a parking space in city roads and bylanes. One which is reasonably safe (6 airbags, ABD, ESP, etc). There is no other car below 10L that does all these things.

Why should I care what others call it?