Team-BHP (https://www.team-bhp.com/forum/)

-   Official New Car Reviews (https://www.team-bhp.com/forum/official-new-car-reviews/)

-   -   4th-gen Honda City : Official Review (https://www.team-bhp.com/forum/official-new-car-reviews/145656-4th-gen-honda-city-official-review-10.html)

Success is not always defined by numbers. The 1.2L petrol i20 combined with the AC running is average to be termed best.. Apparently, Hyundai offered 1.4L with the 2nd gen i20; there is no reason otherwise.

Now coming to the City, Honda is traditionally known for performance. City specifically is known as an enthusiasts car. If you talk about the price point for the diesel, it is expected to be in line with the Verna ( above 9 lakhs). A person with that budget would not be so much bothered about the fuel economy. At least I won't; and definitely not with the diesel.

Having said that, Honda already have the amaze in their offering to prove their liberal stand wrt fuel economy. Then why to duplicate the same strategy with city? I'm sure they are not going to have grand success with the City diesel. Again, success is not always defined by numbers. Let's wait for the ownership feedback from the bhpians.

I'm personally disappointed to learn that the City (!) lacks outright performance. I would call this as a missed opportunity!

I believe that's purely for marketing. This 'unveil' will help them bag precious 'Car of the year' awards from various media houses. Good publicity ahead of actual sales.

Sunroof is in VX variant. I think ACC should be in one lower variant also i.e. 'V' MT.

Autocar's video review says base variants will come with a single, driver-side airbag and ABS will be standard across the range:

http://www.autocarindia.com/auto-vid...ew-367798.aspx

I guess the starting price will be keen - Honda is learning the tricks of the trade fast in India.

Off-Topic::

I agree the 1.2 is quite under powered for i20. But I am sorry, from what I recollect, the sales of petrol i20 was actually more than diesel (petrol-diesel split) for quite some time, contradicting the usual Indian market trend.

GTO, 5 stars for the fantastic review.....

I am still wondering why Honda India removed rear disk brakes since it was available for 2nd gen VTEC + 2008 version.

However they have brought back the rear seat cushion support near rear doors instead of the plastic cladding of 3rd-gen City.

All in all a good CAR and a great review.

City was not traditionally known for performance. The bulk of the first gen sales were from 1.3 and 1.5 non-vtec engines. 1st gen vtecs are hard to find. In the second gen, it had a ~75PS engine. Honda was very much vocal about the fuel efficiency of the IDSI, when it was launched. The vtec variant was introduced towards the end of the lifecycle.

The city is known as a well rounded family car, not a scorcher. And its suspension and steering were never befitting a drivers car.

When did Hyundai offer I20 with 1.4L engine and manual transmission?
I20 still sells with the same 1.2L engine as I10 (though the new one has VTVT) for the manual transmission, which accounts for almost all the sales.

Only the Automatic one has a 1.4L engine which was the case in the 1st generation I20 as well, but it hardly sells any.

While I agree that petrol I20 felt underpowered with AC on and car fully loaded, it did not stop the car from becoming a huge success.

Sorry for going OT, but wanted to correct the misinformation.

Imagine, the Amaze and the City starting parallelly and the Amaze cruising ahead because of its light weight!? The city diesel owners will be left furious, disappointed and embarrassed for their mistake of paying 2-3 lakhs of premium. What is the justification Honda will have for them? I mean, how did they arrive at this conclusion to run both the cars at the same state of tuning?

You may quote the interiors, build etc... But at the end of the day what matters is, what is under the hood!

Well, the above scenario sounds logical, AMAZE is electronically limited at 140kmph, while CITY can go up to 160kmph.

But how often would you see this scenario, given the target segment for the CITY ?

I agree with you that they should have created a differentiation between both the cars, but may be market research suggests otherwise.

OR

They are saving it for second cycle. Presenting now your CITY with VGT and 120PS power, in 2 years from now.

Sorry but a crazy logic. Not many will fume if a lower priced car overtakes other cars. Ultimately, most of them care for themselves and passengers, and won't be racing on highways.
I see several cars (cheap or expensive) cruising between 80-100 range on Highways. Not many bother if others overtake

+1

Each of us are driving based on our driving styles and preferences. If you buy an expensive car, there is an option of driving fast. But that doesn't mean that each of us has to drive fast.

Whenever i hit highway (be it mumbai-pune expressway), I always try to keep my top speed around 100. If I cross it, I will slowdown. Because, I am driving to reach my destination and not hospital bed. That is my driving style. Many time I was overtaken by small cars who is driving more than 130km/hr (just guessed by judging how fast they move away from me)

Thanks to GTO and other members for the effort taken to draft review that is so presentable and fact full. Beautiful comparisons with links - Things like that need a lot of effort and purpose fullness.

After reading the entire review I had a sore feel that Honda has still left out some things like:

Still Bumpy on not so soft roads

No mention about ABS, EBD and Air Bags type and count

Poor NVH levels of Diesel.

Poor finish at some points like Boot.

Once again thanks for the long nice review.

Sorry, that is not the context I'm putting forward. Nobody will bother when others overtake. However, one will definitely complain when they are not able to overtake (at that need of the hour) despite paying a premium.
Indians do have a soft spot for the City. But that does not mean we will start to take everything that Honda throws at us. Although, an oil burner option for the City was long due, I expected a sincere commitment from Honda when they do make it available. But the one for the city seems like, it is there just for the sake of being there. They have compromised a lot to achieve ARAI rating. What is the need for it? History is the proof that the mileage was not a deterrent of the City sales.

GTO, another amazing review. I think your nuanced eye gets sharper with each passing review.

I'm on the fence with the current car. While the other manufacturers are bending over backwards to make sure the current generations of their cars are miles ahead of the outgoing models, Honda seems to be adopting the "Evolution, rather than revolution" strategy.

The 4th gen looks far too similar to the outgoing car for my liking. In my opinion, the 2nd gen city had the best interiors, while the 3rd gen car had the best exterior styling. It seems they toyed with the old looks a tad bit much, rather than going all out and creating a new design. Then they decided to slap on those hideous rims! While the small cubby holes, the improved boot space, new "anchored" floor mats would make one think that they've paid attention to detail, the high parcel tray, partial omission of wheel well cladding & boot lid cover sticks out like a sore thumb.

I really like the central console and the dash layout, but I'm against having touch buttons on the dash. If you're driving alone, merely changing the AC temp will have you looking down wondering if you've hit the right touch buttons; while in most cars, the drivers intuitively know how to operate the console, AC etc, without having to take their eyes off the road.

Decent effort from Honda overall, but not better than that with the Amaze. VW & Hyundai have some competition, although based on the review, I do not think the City surpasses any of its prime competitors (obviously excluding cars like the Linea). But I may change my mind when I get a chance to drive it