[tejas08]

Originally Posted by DoctorKK

One point I would like to mention here is the mistake I was doing in activating the cruise mode. I used to keep my foot just over the clutch without pressing it while activating it and it never used to work. But now I realized that even the slightest pressure on the clutch deactivates it or prevents it from activation. So we have to lift the foot completely off the clutch for using it.

Originally Posted by anilagdr

Are you sure about the clutch deactivating the cruise mode? I have changed gears while in cruise control with no deactivation. Maybe you are referring to use of brakes which definitely deactivates cruise control. Pls correct me if I am wrong on this.

Originally Posted by Shreyans_Jain

Cruise disengages on its own if you downshift, but stays on if you upshift.

Originally Posted by DoctorKK

What I noticed was that even with the slightest pressure on the clutch ,cruise was deactivating. I usually used it in 6th gear only so I used the clutch only for downgearing,so may be that is one reason it getting disengage as pointed by shreyas. Using brakes definitely deactivates it.

I would like to shed some light on the Cruise Control usage, which I came to know when on a long trip to Gujrat.

The brake definitely deactivates the Cruise Control. It's a given on any car. With regards to the clutch, (all you guys might want to try this sometime) if you press the clutch slightly when on cruise control, if acts the opposite way as that of pressing the accelerator. Slightly pressing the clutch during cruise control actually reduces the speed for fraction of a second without deactivating the Cruise Control.

I used Clutch and Accelerator on cruise control to change speed temporarily while maneuvering through traffic.

Downshifting Definitely deactivates Cruise Control.

[Shreyans_Jain]

Originally Posted by tejas08

With regards to the clutch, (all you guys might want to try this sometime) if you press the clutch slightly when on cruise control, if acts the opposite way as that of pressing the accelerator. Slightly pressing the clutch during cruise control actually reduces the speed for fraction of a second without deactivating the Cruise Control.

I used Clutch and Accelerator on cruise control to change speed temporarily while maneuvering through traffic.

Pressing the clutch will obviously make the vehicle slow down, irrespective of whether cruise is engaged or not. You de-link the engine and the transmission by pressing the clutch, power is not transmitted and friction does its work!

If you use the clutch and accelerator to manage speed with cruise engaged, you are only causing avoidable clutch wear. Use the + and - buttons to play with the speed, along with CANCEL and RESUME.

[Seran Manian]

Originally Posted by Shreyans_Jain

Pressing the clutch will obviously make the vehicle slow down, irrespective of whether cruise is engaged or not. You de-link the engine and the transmission by pressing the clutch, power is not transmitted and friction does its work!

That was a good point . Another thing I noted was that in Cruise control the accelerator still can increase the speed if pressed, which I did not expect. I was under the opinion that accelerator will be delinked while in cruise control and the speed control will only be through the + and -.

[DoctorKK]

So what everyone here means is that the 'cruise control' mode can be deactivated only by two ways, by pressing the brakes or downshifting. Pressing the accelerator or up shift won't cause any effect. May be my observations are wrongly as I could not play with this mode for long enough to experiment. Before I could think of any experiments I had to press the brakes!!
But one thing that I am sure of, cruise control won't get activated even if there is a slight pressure on the clutch. This was the mistake I was making and was wondering why it was so difficult to activate this mode!! 😁

[sun_king]

Originally Posted by DoctorKK

So what everyone here means is that the 'cruise control' mode can be deactivated only by two ways, by pressing the brakes or downshifting. Pressing the accelerator or up shift won't cause any effect. May be my observations are wrongly as I could not play with this mode for long enough to experiment. Before I could think of any experiments I had to press the brakes!!
But one thing that I am sure of, cruise control won't get activated even if there is a slight pressure on the clutch. This was the mistake I was making and was wondering why it was so difficult to activate this mode!! 😁

Hmm no, there are more ways than that! You can disable CC by (1) applying the brakes, (2) by pressing CANCEL, (3) by pressing CRUISE (4) by depressing the clutch pedal for five seconds or more and (5) by causing the vehicle to reduce speed below 35 kmph. The last scenario is quite possible, engage CC at 40kmph in 5th gear just before a reasonable gradient or if you make energy bleeding turns. A downshift done within 5 seconds should NOT deactivate CC and the Owner's Manual suggests downshifts if the vehicle is struggling to maintain speed. (Page 381 in my Owner's Manual).

Originally Posted by Shreyans_Jain

<snip>
If you use the clutch and accelerator to manage speed with cruise engaged, you are only causing avoidable clutch wear. Use the + and - buttons to play with the speed, along with CANCEL and RESUME.

I agree to this. Activating Cruise Control means we are handing over the the responsibility to achieve and maintain the set speed to the vehicle in ways it deems best. Interfering with it beats the very purpose of CC. I too prefer using Brake/CANCEL to deactivate and RES(UME) to negotiate traffic or other dynamic scenarios.

Went to Kerala on Christmas eve, took the Gottigere-NICE Road-Hosur-Krishnagiri-Dharmapuri-Salem-Bhavani-Coimbatore-Palakkad-Thrissur route. Used CC for most of the way till Bhavani and when the trip meter was around 300 km mark FE showed 17.9 kmpl on the MID for my iVTEC SV MT.

[Shreyans_Jain]

Originally Posted by Seran Manian

Another thing I noted was that in Cruise control the accelerator still can increase the speed if pressed, which I did not expect. I was under the opinion that accelerator will be delinked while in cruise control and the speed control will only be through the + and -.

Cruise is only an aid which maintains a preset speed, that too provided there is no intervention by the driver. Even when cruise in engaged, you do retain 100% full manual control at all times. You can accelerate or brake or steer or change gears just as always whenever you want to or need to.


Mercedes does have a super-smart radar based cruise control system that senses upcoming traffic and automatically slows the car down as and when needed, and then brings it back to speed when the road clears. Unfortunately, it is outlawed in India.

Originally Posted by sun_king

Activating Cruise Control means we are handing over the the responsibility to achieve and maintain the set speed to the vehicle in ways it deems best.

Its not as per how the vehicle sees or deems it best, but as per how it can be done in the shortest possible time irrespective of fuel consumption or passenger comfort. You are driving at 80 and set the cruise to 100. It will simply try to get to 100 as quickly as possible by giving it maximum gas. You can verify this by watching the instantaneous FE bar plummet to near nothing. Driving with cruise engaged may or may not give you the best possible mileage, even on an empty road. Experienced drivers with measured throttle inputs can get better economy when left to their own devices.

[a4anurag]

Originally Posted by Shreyans_Jain

Mercedes does have a super-smart radar based cruise control system that senses upcoming traffic and automatically slows the car down as and when needed, and then brings it back to speed when the road clears.

This type of cruise control if fit and launched in India will create havoc.

No car would move as it would sense some or the other obstacle every minute confusing the system whether to accelerate or brake!

[CrAzY dRiVeR]

Moreover, the radar based cruise control systems cannot be brought to India because of the restrictions on the use of radar frequencies for civilian purposes in India.

Even the Linea TJet accelerates hard to get to the set cruise control speed. I tried setting a 120 kmph cruise while driving around 70kmph, but the acceleration was so hard - I backed off. Wonder why all these manufactures design these systems to act with vengeance.

[rambo1o1]

Hey guys.
I Booked a black zdi Ciaz to replace our 29 month 70,000km run petrol honda city.
Initially dad wanted a suv and test drove the xuv and the duster. Was not happy with both due to various reasons. My dad was keen on getting the diesel honda city(again:-D ), since he was happy with the previous version. We decided to test drive the city first. We already knew how it looks from inside and out since a friend had it. So when we fired up the engine , we were put off by the noise filtering through. Anywas the noise was something we thought we would live with depending on how well the car performed.
On the performance front, one word , DEAD( really no offence , but i guess everyone has that one irritant that they cant live through) , yeah the car has no lag, can potter around town at low speeds in a higher gear but really has no pickup, overtaking is painfully slow. Our petrol city smokes its diesel counterpart by a mile. Sadly going for a petrol again is not economical since we cover atleast 3,000km per month.

So why we went with the ciaz was due to better ride comfort on bad roads over the honda and a peppier 1.3 diesel over the dead 1.5 Honda diesel. Plus there were enough of features that we were getting over the V version of the city.

No doubt the city is a great car, Hopefully honda improves its diesel engine both with regard to performance and nvh and try not to cut its quality.

[pixantz]

Originally Posted by rambo1o1

Hey guys.
I Booked a black zdi Ciaz to replace our 29 month 70,000km run petrol honda city.

I seriously don't believe you sir. First time coming across someone replacing a City with..... the Ciaz! I could have understood if it was because of serious availability issues with the City as was the case recently. Also, the diesel City is supposedly purely FE centric by its dna so it wouldn't stack up to the 2012 i-vtec in outright pep.

Anyway, hope you enjoy your choice. But if I was you, with peppy performance and features as my sole criteria, moving on from the 2012 i-vtec, I would have gone for the Verna. I think it's miles ahead of the Ciaz in those areas. Or better still, got a sequential CNG kit on the i-vtec and continued the bliss(I'm in love with the 2012 i-vtec, you see), provided I had good availability in my city. It's great out here in Mumbai. Just my two cents.

[rambo1o1]

Originally Posted by pixantz

I seriously don't believe you sir. First time coming across someone replacing a City with..... the Ciaz! I....

Well i was expecting your reaction,going from a city to a ciaz!! how is this posiible and your reaction will not be the last,will echo many more peoples.

Our current city is a company owned and maintained vehicle. Since the company my dad works in was ending this scheme and giving a monthly cash out option,we needed a car that was not too expensive, reliable, easy on maintenance,spacious and comfortable with decent features and performance,something that wont be a downgrade to the previous gen/currrent gen city.

Our first choice was the City and since the fuel bills would have to be paid from our pocket, another petrol was out given our monthly usage.CNG avaliablity in Goa is suspect and we would never want to go the lpg way, so buying back our current car was out of the question.

After owning a city and having had a longish test drive of the new i-DTEC city,the only positives over the ciaz in our opinion were the modern looking interior(love the instrument display and touch based climate controls etc,though quality of plastics seemed average.) and the comfortable seats at the rear(good legroom and under thigh support).

coming to the ciaz, and this based purely on our taste, well mostly dads(i was eager for a cruze,or a jetta or even a vento/fiesta, i am still a enthusiast through and through)

The ciaz had a much better ride quality, handled uneven and rough roads way better than the city, had a much more peppier engine(major deal breaker with the city),styling was prefered over the new gen city(prev gen is still the best looking IMHO), very good features and decent seating at the rear,dad was very comfortable and happy at the rear but for my height the headroom was less.

Coming to the verna,no doubt the diesel engine is awesome but as it was at the time we got our honda city and still is, the rear seat is really not comfortable, neither in under thigh support nor with the seat angle.Hence dint consider.

ill explain why not the vento or fiesta or something from the segment above when i have my ownership thread running since ill be going way OT here.

All in all the diesel ciaz is a jack of all trades IMHO and should be really given a second look if one can stomach paying 10lakhs for a maruti.( i assure you, me and my dad had a very long discussuon on this matter).

the major

[adarsh76]

Originally Posted by rambo1o1

The ciaz had a much better ride quality, handled uneven and rough roads way better than the city, had a much more peppier engine(major deal breaker with the city),styling was prefered over the new gen city(prev gen is still the best looking IMHO), very good features and decent seating at the rear,dad was very comfortable and happy at the rear but for my height the headroom was less.

Need to respect your decision. Ciaz is really a serious contender to the City which is good. There needs to be tough competition. Drive of 3000 kms per month may just justify the decision on a Diesel. I did take a test drive of the Ciaz Diesel just for curiosity.

Coming to the ride quality, you are spot on. City does not behave good on uneven roads at low speed compared to Ciaz. At higher speeds, City absorbs the sharp small bumps and uneven roads but the thud sound filters into the cabin. Having said, that my car after 7000 kms on driving in Kerala's potholed and uneven roads is behaving much better now. The thud sound has considerably reduced and the ride quality has improved. Need to drive the Ciaz again to compare the difference. I know it will sound bluffing, but you are welcome to come and drive my car

There have been wide talks on the performance of City Diesel especially when the car is loaded full. But at the same time do not know exactly how Ciaz Diesel performs in these conditions. We cannot really judge the performance of a car from the TD model. It would most probably be ill maintained.

No offence but If I were you, would have waited for the yet to be launched New Verna. The first thing I will look in that is the rear seats of course. Performance and refinement side for a Diesel engine, Verna is hard to beat.

[Seran Manian]

Originally Posted by adarsh76

Having said, that my car after 7000 kms on driving in Kerala's potholed and uneven roads is behaving much better now. The thud sound has considerably reduced and the ride quality has improved. Need to drive the Ciaz again to compare the difference. I know it will sound bluffing, but you are welcome to come and drive my car

you are absolutely right. The coil springs need a run-in as per our Team BHPian Professor DEBUDA. As the car gets used the coil springs get softened and slightly loose the initial rigidity and behave much better on roads with undulations. He has mentioned in his XUV500 thread that his XUV behaved much better after 15000 KMs of run-in.

[DoctorKK]

Originally Posted by rambo1o1

On the performance front, one word , DEAD( really no offence , but i guess everyone has that one irritant that they cant live through) , yeah the car has no lag, can potter around town at low speeds in a higher gear but really has no pickup, overtaking is painfully slow. Our petrol city smokes its diesel counterpart by a mile. Sadly going for a petrol again is not economical since we cover atleast 3,000km per month..

I can't agree with this statement at all. After doing a 650 Kms ride over the last weekend with five adults,an infant and the boot almost loaded,the city was a champion on the highway. Overtaking was with ease and I never felt short of power even in difficult overtaking conditions on Kerala highways. I hardly remember anyone overtaking me with ease when my city was in full flow. The ride was very comfortable for me and for all my family members too. If you are really looking for only the power part,then verna might be the best,Ciaz ticking all the boxes for you is a bit hard to believe.
In the end, as was said in Dhoom, 'Tezi goli mein nahi , chalane wale mein hoti h'!! ( Speed of the bullet lies in the hands of the shooter and not the bullet itself) 😃😉

[rambo1o1]

Originally Posted by DoctorKK

I can't agree with this statement at all...

I really dint mean to offend you or any diesel city owners.

I feel most people cant fathom a Honda owner moving to a maruti, well times have changed and Honda aint what it used to be.I am sure if the diesel Ciaz came with a Toyota badge or even a Honda/vw badge it wouldn't be looked down upon as what it is currently getting.

The city diesel no doubt gives excellent mileage, has no lag and is very derivable but the extra kick wasn't present in the test drive vehicle which was just 6k km run .And since most of our driving covers the highway of Goa(rarely do we face start stop traffic) the Ciaz was better in this aspect though the Honda will be a bit better in traffic compared to the Ciaz.
Even the SA, who was the same guy when we booked our old city agreed with our displeasure of the diesel and said that many prospective diesel customers were put off by the noise and outright performance, many decided to change to the petrol version and hence in Goa the petrol version outsells the diesel by a good margin( don't know how far this is true but with cheaper petrol prices, it could be true)

Originally Posted by adarsh76

.... We cannot really judge the performance of a car from the TD model. It would most probably be ill maintained.

No offence but If I were you, would have waited for the yet to be launched New Verna. The first thing I will look in that is the rear seats of course. Performance and refinement side for a Diesel engine, Verna is hard to beat.

The TD vehicle was just 6k km old and i specifically asked the SA if that particular car had a problem but he responded with a honest answer of this being the nature of the iDTEC.
The new Verna will mostly be a face lift, i really am not sure if they are going to improve the rear seat and legroom by a big margin.But dad really doesn't seem to be interested in a Hyundai and within 3 to 4 years he would love to upgrade to a D segment car before he finally retires, so for his needs the ciaz is just fine, definatly NOT! a downgrade to the Honda city in any manner.

If i was given a car within this budget, i would go preowned with a laura , jetta, cruze or if brand new, maybe a vento tdi/tsi (maintenance be dammed )or a fiesta

cheers.