Quote:
Originally Posted by a4anurag I feel the 100PS motor on the City doesn't give that kick which one expects psychologically. The power delivery is more sort of linear with not much enthusiasm displayed when the right foot is buried. |
Quote:
Originally Posted by harpreetsubhi Though I have never driven CIAZ, but I fully agree to your statement that City really misses the kick. I have been driving City-D for more than 10K kms now and I fully agree to that. Being a diesel vehicle it is really no where near the petrol counterparts ( as expected ) but definitely it misses the punch. I have driven Swift VDi before I switched to City-D and that lag of kick was very much prominent to me. If in July 2014, CIAZ would have been available I would have definitely considered it. But that said City is fantastically comfortable and superb on mileage - mine one gives 24 KMPL.
Another point I agree to you is on Cabin Noise. Though it was my choice to go for Honda City over the competition and I had noticed this noise at the time of TD but truly I'm really disappointed with the grunting engine noise inside the cabin. I never realised at that point that it becomes such a pain point when you drive 70kms a day. |
Quote:
Originally Posted by Carpainter Well choosing a vehicle (and spouse  ) is absolutely a personal decision in my opinion. Others can only suggest but cannot decide on one's behalf. That said, even though I respect your choice of car, I cannot agree with your above statement.
There are so many examples where all these brands like Toyota,VW and of course Honda launched vehicles with underpowered engines and we at Team-bhp did complain about them. VW Polo 1.2L 3 cylinder petrol, Toyota Corolla diesel, Honda City diesel etc. to name a few.
My point is Ciaz is a well rounded package no doubt but it should have had a better diesel engine as well. I'm not going into the comparison of whether Ciaz diesel is better than City diesel or not since I haven't driven the Ciaz yet. All I can say is that for a car of its size, it should have had a 100+bhp engine to make the ride even smoother. Maruti have not had success at this segment of the market and now with Ciaz they have genuinely tried to break that jink. So I believe they could have done a bit more. Lack of their own diesel engine could be the reason. |
I agree that the Diesel Honda City does lack that "kick" which other diesel cars in the segment have, or even segments below (eg. MSIL Swift). The probable reason for this is the reduced/inexsistent turbo lag and an ECU tunning for better mileage. Newer cars are now more focused on mileage rather than outright power. the newer facelifts of the cruze, swift, etc have lesser turbo lag, for better in-city drivability; compared to their respective outgoing car. (It has been mentioned in the TeamBHP official review for the 2nd generation Swift and the recent Cruze facelift)
Link to TeamBHP news article for the recent refreshed swift:
http://www.team-bhp.com/news/refresh...khs?model=Mg==
In my opinion, both the Ciaz and the City are good cars and both have their pluses and minuses. I feel, the most biggest advantage for the Ciaz is that it runs on the Fiat-souced 1.3 Multijet and that there is a MSIL showroom/service centre at almost every other town. Another thing is that any road side mechanic maybe able to help you, if you encounter a problem. (I am not saying that the Ciaz or the City has any problems or is problem-prone, but if a problem is encountered in the Ciaz, it should be easier to fix). Another additional point to be mentioned, the Ciaz has a slightly more ARAI mileage than the diesel City (26.3kmpl vs 26kmpl)
Other small but significant things, each car has its own plus; like the City having a sunroof and rather soft leather seats; and the Ciaz having pretty sweet ambient lighting, bigger and better looking alloys with wider rubber, projector headlamps and better ground clearance.
PS: I have test driven the diesel City and I own a petrol City; and I have not driven neither the diesel or petrol Ciaz. I felt the petrol City has the "kick" which one looks for (mentioned by GTO in the official review) which is not present in the diesel city.
If it is of any value, the diesel City which i test drove was a VX variant, and i test drove the car in March 2014, and it had about 2500kms on the ODO.
The petrol City which I own has driven about 20,000kms in the past 9 months (purchased in March 2014). After the 3rd free service (done at 10000kms), the car felt like it had some more eagerness to move forward/ a better "kick" as some would put it.
Quote:
Originally Posted by sun_king Any clue on why this is so? Both vehicles have the same maximum torque at the same RPM with the City having 10 horses more than the Ciaz. So in theory, an experienced driver should be able to edge ahead of the Ciaz with the City.
PS: In this context you can consider me unbiased, I hate all diesels equally (except the Cruze)  . |
The Ciaz is lighter than the city, (ZDI(O) weights 1105kg; City VX Diesel weights 1200+kg) hence power to weight ratio is more and can be appreciated.