[IshaanIan]

Originally Posted by greatmana2000

Probably I am bad with English . Can you give me a word which is similar to "accelerate " to describe the reaching of speed by way of accelerator inputs ? Not really different meant the way , method , etc . If I had mentioned it is same , then I am stupid . You see , i ain't stupid .

How about gaining speed?

Originally Posted by greatmana2000

Lifting parts of my post and then dressing it up does not make sense .

I am not "dressing it up" I did so because you seem to forget what you said just a few posts ago or with what intent you said so, just like you did with the whole comparison between the punto and s-cross

Originally Posted by greatmana2000

A competent diesel driver does not accelerate , for that matter even with a petrol car does not keep redlining . With a diesel it is more pronounced that you are revving the engine without the engine being in the optimum power band and the engine is not making the power it should at a higher RPM than a lower RPM or vice versa . Revving the engine past its useful RPM is like planning to have babies when the woman is on a 3 day leave . It is futile .

Where in any of my posts did I mention revving or redlining (Unless you mistook feathering the throttle to mean the same) All I said was keep it in the powerband. Are you trying to tell me that at 900rpm you are in the powerband? Perhaps that is why you are so frustrated with your 1.6 S-Cross

[Whichcarnow]

Originally Posted by greatmana2000

\ With a diesel it is more pronounced that you are revving the engine without the engine being in the optimum power band and the engine is not making the power it should at a higher RPM than a lower RPM or vice versa . Revving the engine past its useful RPM ... is futile .

And keeping the engine below its useful rpm is also futile buddy. The rpm you mention is below any turbo diesels "optimum power band". No one is talking about 5000 rpm here. They are saying 1750 rpm( and for any turbo diesel). And this, so as to come into the optimum power band of the engine as you yourself said one should be in.

[Karthik Chandra]

Originally Posted by greatmana2000

Why is it not so clear that by the time the car accelerates from 120 to 160 it takes an awful amount of time and by that time , you hit obstacles in the way of buses , trucks etc .

Even on an empty stretch of highway road you have a lot of trucks ,buses , cars traveling on the wrong side of the lane lane . Even with a visual indication of DIM_DIP, Horn they sometimes respond very late and by the time , you would have again gone back to say 80-90 km/hr . After passing , you would again start accelerating and by the time you hit 140 you have a speed breaker . Again slow down and then start accelerating . I hope you get it now .

Buddy are you sure, its the DDiS 320 you bought and not the DDiS 200?

Jokes apart, Do you really find the 1.6 DDiS 320 lathergic post 120 KMPH??? because, the 1.6 has brutal top end performance and within no time you would be hitting 150+, though not advisable, it pulls relentlessly.

The below quote is from the official review

Originally Posted by S2!!!

Once past 1,500 rpm, the motor starts waking up and responding to your inputs. Get in the turbo zone (past 1,750 rpm) and there is a wild surge of power. Get this: if you completely mash the A-pedal in 1st or 2nd gears above 2,000 rpm, you can feel some torque steer (car pulling to the left). The diesel engine relentlessly pulls all the way to its 5,000 rpm redline, with power only just beginning to taper off in the final 250 rpm. What's more, the diesel doesn't sound too strained or coarse, even when it's being driven hard.

To enjoy a smooth drive in the city, you need to adjust your driving style due to the peaky power delivery. I found myself backing off on my throttle input as the revs increased, to ensure that passengers don't get pushed back to their seats as the turbo spooled up. On the other hand, for someone who drives with a light foot, upshifts can take place early. Again, there is enough torque below 1,750 rpm to keep the S-Cross moving, but just not with instant punch / throttle response. We even climbed up an incline in 4th gear at speeds of 45-50 km/h. No doubt, if you want responsiveness, you will need to seriously work the gearbox in traffic. The city speed limit (~50 km/h) is exactly where you'll be in the powerband in 3rd gear. Overtaking auto rickshaws or two-wheelers requires only a slight tap on the accelerator.

Open road performance is very impressive. No surprise as the torque-to-weight ratio is higher than the Jetta & Octavia! You can easily keep up with - and pass - more expensive cars on the expressway. Maruti says that the 0 - 100 dash is completed in 11.30 seconds (13.2 seconds for the 1.3L). That's not too impressive (turbo-lag affecting the time perhaps?). What is really strong is the in-gear acceleration with the rpm needle above 1,750 rpm. Here, the S-Cross is explosive and it just shoots forward. Given that the 1.6 diesel revs so quickly, an enthusiastic driver will find himself frequently maxing out in the lower gears. 1st gear takes you till 48 km/h, 2nd till 84 km/h and 3rd should go beyond 130 km/h.

The S-Cross can be a calm highway cruiser too. 100 km/h comes up at just 1,750 rpm in 6th (~2,200 rpm in 5th gear). Good thing is, you are in the turbo zone. At highway speeds in 5th or 6th gear, all it takes is a light tap of the throttle to surge past cars on your left. It's that simple. You'll get used to driving the S-Cross in a higher gear on open roads (due to the ample torque available). That said, slow down momentarily, dropping the needle below 1,750 rpm, and the lag catches you out - making a downshift is mandatory for a quick overtaking manoeuvre then. Here's an example: you're cruising along in 4th gear at 70 km/h and the S-Cross is lively and responsive. Drop your speed to 60 km/h in 4th and suddenly, there is very little action if you stomp on the throttle. When the speed rises to 65 km/h, you'll be closer to the turbo zone once again, with the accelerator pedal coming back to life. When you hit the turbo zone in any gear, the enthusiast in you won't be able to lift off the throttle. The wild surge of torque is truly addictive! Stay in the turbo zone on the highway and she just pulls & pulls.

The only downside of the 1.6 is the turbo lag because of the bigger turbo and that too isn't too bad and is manageable according to owners

[greatmana2000]

Originally Posted by sou_3749

Why do I have a feeling that the last couple of pages screaming specifically "explosive acceleration" and "I don't want to drive below 120kmph". Why is it a crime for people to drive slow on highway( read 80-90 kmph) and unnecessarily blocking some cars driven so fast without an intention to use the rarely used B and C pedals which are unfortunately present.

I am sorry, but the argument is loosing it's purpose.

Because , everyone thinks that the 1.6 is a rocket which it is not . I am trying to point out it is a normal everyday car with a small bit of fun . It is like a large pizza which comes with an extra topping of cheese worth Rs.30 . We are specifically discussing the 1.6 which costs a premium over the 1.3 and all I am doing is to try and point out it is not so "special " as it is made out to be .

Originally Posted by Dr.Naren

...Why would you even bother to hit very high illegal speeds in this scenario?

Going by your logic, it doesn't make any difference if you drive Nano or 530 D. And yeah, Nano might reach the destination faster .

Yes , It is a very practical scenario if you are driving from bangalore to Kerala , bangalore to Chennai , Chennai to Vizag or from Bangalore to Goa .
I always try to reach Bangalore from Chennai before early morning 5am when there was this Other state vehicle issues . So I would try to keep my pace to enter into the city before 5 am .

Why would it not make a difference ? A nano would be slower because it has a smaller engine , smaller gearbox , smaller brakes etc . The point is 530 D would be faster because the power is spread over a larger RPM . The power delivery also would be linear enough and the car has better suspension , brakes , controls . Can you tell me which would be faster ? , Elantra , optra and the S-cross ?

Originally Posted by sourabhzen

But you don't get it, do you? Even if you had a super car, any speed above 100 on such roads is plain dangerous, not only for you but for all other occupants of the road. Please be responsible, most accidents on roads happen because of human error.

We are discussing something .. We are not in this discussion for sermons . Please go back to the earlier posts to get an idea as to what the discussion is about . We have discussed speeds , relative speed of a santro at 100 Km/hr and a BMW at 100km/hr .

[Dr.Naren]

Originally Posted by greatmana2000

A competent diesel driver does not accelerate , for that matter even with a petrol car does not keep redlining . With a diesel it is more pronounced that you are revving the engine without the engine being in the optimum power band and the engine is not making the power it should at a higher RPM than a lower RPM or vice versa . Revving the engine past its useful RPM is like planning to have babies when the woman is on a 3 day leave . It is futile .

Who is asking you to revv above the power band? 1.6 has a healthy power band from 1750-3500 RPM. Stick to that zone and I am sure you won't have any problems.

You had mentioned usable power band is 900-1700. I would say it's very very harmful for the engine. This is called lugging the engine.

Originally Posted by greatmana2000

Can you tell me which would be faster ? , Elantra , optra and the S-cross ?

Considering the trucks, 2 wheelers, speed breakers and people who jump into lanes, it's very difficult to say which car would be faster. A maniac driver behind the wheel of any of these cars would be fast (Yes, only he would try to "accelerate" in this scenario)

[bharath79]

All this discussion sounds amusing and interesting at the same time. It makes more sense to see what the excited 1.6 owners think about their machines 2/3 years from now. I still remember being super excited about the 1.5 TDI polo back in 2014 but I may not want to defend it as much now.

This gentleman might have a point that we may be willing to accommodate at a later point of time.

Regards
Bharath

[IshaanIan]

Originally Posted by greatmana2000

Yes , It is a very practical scenario if you are driving from bangalore to Kerala , bangalore to Chennai , Chennai to Vizag or from Bangalore to Goa .
I always try to reach Bangalore from Chennai before early morning 5am when there was this Other state vehicle issues . So I would try to keep my pace to enter into the city before 5 am .

Honestly I have hit higher speeds than we are talking about here on a few of these routes especially Bangaore-Chennai. Although I prefer to drive after 5 am.

Originally Posted by greatmana2000

Because , everyone thinks that the 1.6 is a rocket which it is not . I am trying to point out it is a normal everyday car with a small bit of fun . It is like a large pizza which comes with an extra topping of cheese worth Rs.30 . We are specifically discussing the 1.6 which costs a premium over the 1.3 and all I am doing is to try and point out it is not so "special " as it is made out to be .

Perhaps we have all digressed a bit too much and are focusing more on eachothers' smaller mistakes than the bigger picture. You are definitely entitled to your own opinion. Fact of the matter is that the 1.6 S-Cross produces way more shove than its other 1.6 diesel rivals. It may not have the same tractable nature but it doesn't mean that an adaptable driver cannot have loads of fun behind the wheel.

I think maybe we can conclude that it is not a very user-friendly motor. To say that it is not that fast or not that special wouldn't be right. You would need a certain level of expertise and most importantly, adaptability, to see what is so special about the motor. I have driven the old Elantra and that under stressed 2 liter Detroit diesel motor is surely a powerful yet tractable gem but you cannot expect to drive the S-Cross in the same manner and then be surprised when it does not react/behave quite as nicely as you would expect. I think the key take away from this is that yes, the S-Cross 1.6 needs to be worked hard but if you actually learn how to pilot the motor the way it is meant to be, you will find it very rewarding. I am sorry but it is clear from your posts that you haven't done that or even tried that yet.

[greatmana2000]

Originally Posted by Whichcarnow

And keeping the engine below its useful rpm is also futile buddy. The rpm you mention is below any turbo diesels "optimum power band". No one is talking about 5000 rpm here. They are saying 1750 rpm( and for any turbo diesel). And this, so as to come into the optimum power band of the engine as you yourself said one should be in.

I wish that you had a look at the torque /power graph and then infer what I was talking about .

Originally Posted by Karthik Chandra

Buddy are you sure, its the DDiS 320 you bought and not the DDiS 200?

Jokes apart, Do you really find the 1.6 DDiS 320 lathergic post 120 KMPH??? because, the 1.6 has brutal top end performance and within no time you would be hitting 150+, though not advisable, it pulls relentlessly.

The below quote is from the official review



The only downside of the 1.6 is the turbo lag because of the bigger turbo and that too isn't too bad and is manageable according to owners

You are just describing the car with the choicest of words . Nothing else . Probably ,you have not seen the torque figures and when the power produced is at the peak . What is the official review supposed to mean ? I do not know if it is a long term review . So many people have found that the car fishtails , why is it not there on the review ? Talking about bigger turbo , I was under the impression that the turbo was a VGT and it is electronically controlled . So would Fiat employ a VGT and yet produce an engine with a very narrow power band ? As far as my understanding goes a VGT can mimic a turbo depending on the engine RPM and the power needed to be produced . When the boost required is low , the turbo acts like a small one and when the boost or pressure required is higher then the turbo acts like a bigger turbo .

Originally Posted by Dr.Naren

Who is asking you to revv above the power band? 1.6 has a healthy power band from 1750-3500 RPM. Stick to that zone and I am sure you won't have any problems.

You had mentioned usable power band is 900-1700. I would say it's very very harmful for the engine. This is called lugging the engine.

Hmmm .. You are not getting it . All I said was that the power drops post 1700 RPM and you had posted the graph yourself .
Can you tell me at 80km/hr on the 6th gear what would be the engine RPM ? It would be around 1200 -1400 approximately . I am making a guess . The engine is not being lugged at that RPM . The engine is designed /manufactured to be a relaxed highway cruiser . That is why most of the power happens at 1750 RPM and at that speed you are over 110 km/hr .

Originally Posted by IshaanIan

How about gaining speed?

Did you mean the speed of the engine or the car ? haha

I am not "dressing it up" I did so because you seem to forget what you said just a few posts ago or with what intent you said so, just like you did with the whole comparison between the punto and s-cross .

I never forgot . well , you did quote from the previous post and I have clarified my take on it .

Where in any of my posts did I mention revving or redlining (Unless you mistook feathering the throttle to mean the same) All I said was keep it in the powerband. Are you trying to tell me that at 900rpm you are in the powerband? Perhaps that is why you are so frustrated with your 1.6 S-Cross

Please refer to the torque graph . You would be surprised . The engine makes power right from 900 RPM .I never said just 900 RPM . I said 900-1700 RPM . On the 6th gear if you let the car idle it does around 60-70km .

[IshaanIan]

Originally Posted by greatmana2000

Please refer to the torque graph . You would be surprised . The engine makes power right from 900 RPM .I never said just 900 RPM . I said 900-1700 RPM . On the 6th gear if you let the car idle it does around 60-70km .

The graph begins from 1000 rpm. Also I think it is easy to see that the torque curve is less steep between 1750-3500rpm than it is between 1000-1700rpm. If you don't feel the need to feather the throttle at such low revs, then I am sorry to say, but you are causing undue stress to your motor.

[greatmana2000]

Originally Posted by IshaanIan

LOL because what is the point of even mentioning it then buddy? That way even a Gallardo would experience the same thing your Punto does.

Funny that you equate a punto with a gallardo ..lol

Originally Posted by IshaanIan

The graph begins from 1000 rpm. Also I think it is easy to see that the torque curve is less steep between 1750-3500rpm than it is between 1000-1700rpm. If you don't feel the need to feather the throttle at such low revs, then I am sorry to say, but you are causing undue stress to your motor.

The torque curve is less steep because of the turbo . The engine is designed to produce more power at lower revs . The power build up is essentially btwn 1000-2000 and the engine seems to be the most efficient at this RPM band . On the 6th gear I would never drive below 80 km/hr . Else the engine gets strained .

Originally Posted by Dr.Naren

Considering the trucks, 2 wheelers, speed breakers and people who jump into lanes, it's very difficult to say which car would be faster. A maniac driver behind the wheel of any of these cars would be fast (Yes, only he would try to "accelerate" in this scenario)

You can have an ideal road without any traffic , probably test the cars with the same driver . can you now tell me which of the cars would be faster ?

Mod Note: Instead of posting multiple times please use multiquote

[sou_3749]

Originally Posted by greatmana2000

Because , everyone thinks that the 1.6 is a rocket which it is not . I am trying to point out it is a normal everyday car with a small bit of fun . It is like a large pizza which comes with an extra topping of cheese worth Rs.30 . We are specifically discussing the 1.6 which costs a premium over the 1.3 and all I am doing is to try and point out it is not so "special " as it is made out to be .



Yes , It is a very practical scenario if you are driving from bangalore to Kerala , bangalore to Chennai , Chennai to Vizag or from Bangalore to Goa .
I always try to reach Bangalore from Chennai before early morning 5am when there was this Other state vehicle issues . So I would try to keep my pace to enter into the city before 5 am .

Why would it not make a difference ? A nano would be slower because it has a smaller engine , smaller gearbox , smaller brakes etc . The point is 530 D would be faster because the power is spread over a larger RPM . The power delivery also would be linear enough and the car has better suspension , brakes , controls . Can you tell me which would be faster ? , Elantra , optra and the S-cross ?

Point taken. S-Cross 1.6 is not a rocket. But, you do agree there is fun and exactly the reason you are paying 15 big ones. The problem is you are expecting 530 D performance in a suzuki which costs a fifth of the BMW. A nano buyer will never dream of S-cross performance and a s-cross owner ideally shouldn't dream of BMW performance.

I frequently drive on all the routes you mentioned and for an instance it takes less than 5 hours from bangalore to chennai even driving within 100kmph. It all depends how comfortable you are in the driver's seat, how effortless you cruise so that you can maintain the speed for longer period without stressing your senses. I don't have some lakhs of kilometers under my belt, but what I understood is the more you push the machine, the machine pushes you back with vengeance.

Sure creta has a very linear no non-sense power delivery, but it can't do things which s-cross can do and that's fun. And hey give any car to Kimi Raikonnen and it will top the charts.

[Dr.Naren]

Originally Posted by greatmana2000

Talking about bigger turbo , I was under the impression that the turbo was a VGT and it is electronically controlled . So would Fiat employ a VGT and yet produce an engine with a very narrow power band ? As far as my understanding goes a VGT can mimic a turbo depending on the engine RPM and the power needed to be produced . When the boost required is low , the turbo acts like a small one and when the boost or pressure required is higher then the turbo acts like a bigger turbo .

Bigger turbo = more lag!!

VGT doesn't act like bigger or smaller turbo. It's a complex process. There are many maps in ECU which would control the VGT.

Hmmm .. You are not getting it . All I said was that the power drops post 1700 RPM and you had posted the graph yourself .

Please see the graph again. Power doesn't drop post 1700 RPM. It increases linearly and peaks at around 4000 RPM. Torque drops steeply after peak. But my point is even with sudden drop, 1.6 Multijet produces much more torque than the competition at 1750, 2500, 3500 and 4000 RPM. So there is hell loads of torque in the entire power band. Forget about peak torque of 320 NM not staying for long, it doesn't matter much when you have more than 250 NM torque even at 3500 RPM.

Torque = Acceleration

BHP = Top Speed

The engine makes power right from 900 RPM .I never said just 900 RPM . I said 900-1700 RPM . On the 6th gear if you let the car idle it does around 60-70km .

That doesn't mean you can drive the car at 900 RPM. There is anti stall feature. For 1.6 S-Cross car would maintain particular speed without even pressing the throttle at respective gears.

1 st gear : 10 KMPH
2 nd gear : 20 KMPH
3 rd gear : 30 KMPH

Please please do not drive the car in 6 th gear at 60 KMPH. You are just lugging the engine. RPM would be below 1500 here. I guess you strain the engine by up shifting too early and complain about no response/lag when you floor the pedal. Try shifting gears at around 2500 RPM and you would be well within turbo zone. I am sure you would enjoy your 1.6 .

Do change your driving style and try not to strain the engine by keeping it in very low RPM.

[greatmana2000]

Originally Posted by sou_3749

Point taken. S-Cross 1.6 is not a rocket. But, you do agree there is fun and exactly the reason you are paying 15 big ones. The problem is you are expecting 530 D performance in a suzuki which costs a fifth of the BMW. A nano buyer will never dream of S-cross performance and a s-cross owner ideally shouldn't dream of BMW performance.

I frequently drive on all the routes you mentioned and for an instance it takes less than 5 hours from bangalore to chennai even driving within 100kmph. It all depends how comfortable you are in the driver's seat, how effortless you cruise so that you can maintain the speed for longer period without stressing your senses. I don't have some lakhs of kilometers under my belt, but what I understood is the more you push the machine, the machine pushes you back with vengeance.

Sure creta has a very linear no non-sense power delivery, but it can't do things which s-cross can do and that's fun. And hey give any car to Kimi Raikonnen and it will top the charts.

Nope , you sure got me wrong . We put up with the payment for a car based on a lot of criteria . Not just the engine . As said in the earlier posts the S-cross is more VFM compared to an i20 or the Linea etc . To put to rest the comparision , I would not expect to have a BMW like performance on a car which costs a lot less ,but at the same time , I would not fool myself into thinking that the S-cross is as good as BMW 320D which used to have a 300NM odd motor sometime back .
I do not know which route you are talking about , but I am sure to get out from bangalore city and get into Chennai city or vice versa takes at least 2 hrs .

Originally Posted by Dr.Naren

Bigger turbo = more lag!!

VGT doesn't act like bigger or smaller turbo. It's a complex process. There are many maps in ECU which would control the VGT.



Please see the graph again. Power doesn't drop post 1700 RPM. It increases linearly and peaks at around 4000 RPM. Torque drops steeply after peak. But my point is even with sudden drop, 1.6 Multijet produces much more torque than the competition at 1750, 2500, 3500 and 4000 RPM. So there is hell loads of torque in the entire power band. Forget about peak torque of 320 NM not staying for long, it doesn't matter much when you have more than 250 NM torque even at 3500 RPM.

Torque = Acceleration

BHP = Top Speed



That doesn't mean you can drive the car at 900 RPM. There is anti stall feature. For 1.6 S-Cross car would maintain particular speed without even pressing the throttle at respective gears.

1 st gear : 10 KMPH
2 nd gear : 20 KMPH
3 rd gear : 30 KMPH

Please please do not drive the car in 6 th gear at 60 KMPH. You are just lugging the engine. RPM would be below 1500 here. I guess you strain the engine by up shifting too early and complain about no response/lag when you floor the pedal. Try shifting gears at around 2500 RPM and you would be well within turbo zone. I am sure you would enjoy your 1.6 .

Do change your driving style and try not to strain the engine by keeping it in very low RPM.

Sorry for the mix up . Torque = Acceleration .

Tell me what does the VGT do ?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Variab...y_turbocharger

I never said I drive the car at 60km/hr . On an earlier post I have clearly stated that I do minimum of 80 Km/hr in the 6th gear .It is quite ok to drive the car at 80km/hr in the 6th . The 1.6 has a normal clutch and not a DMF . So I think the engine would not experience lugging .

[Dr.Naren]

Originally Posted by greatmana2000

Sorry for the mix up . Torque = Acceleration .

Tell me what does the VGT do ?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Variab...y_turbocharger

I never said I drive the car at 60km/hr . On an earlier post I have clearly stated that I do minimum of 80 Km/hr in the 6th gear .It is quite ok to drive the car at 80km/hr in the 6th . The 1.6 has a normal clutch and not a DMF . So I think the engine would not experience lugging .

Buddy, you have only posted Wikipedia link. Please read .

I slot into 6 th gear only above 100 KMPH. At 80 KMPH, It would be around 1500 RPM in 6 th gear. Engine doesn't feel strained at 80 in 6 th gear. But I always prefer keeping the car above 1800 RPM.

Maintain low RPM by up shifting early, you will lug the engine, it would jerk and finally stop.

For 1.6 S-Cross Owners :

Fellow 1.6 S-Cross owner just texted me in FB about software update. This has reduced the turbo lag and engine feels smoother according to him. He had complained to SA regarding poor low end/turbo lag. When I took delivery of my 1.6 S-Cross in May 2016, SA did mention to me about updated tune for recent batch. I too had felt that turbo lag in my car was less than TD cars. I hope this information is true and I suggest fellow 1.6 owners to confirm about this.

Thanks to Rahul Rayer from Chennai!!

[sou_3749]

Originally Posted by greatmana2000

I do not know which route you are talking about , but I am sure to get out from bangalore city and get into Chennai city or vice versa takes at least 2 hrs .

That's what smooth cruising all about. Try it and you will be surprised to feel the difference. To put things into perspective, I tried couple of times to drive fast and I ended up saving 15 minutes, a lot less FE and a lot more stress. It's pretty easy to maintain speeds between 80-100 kmph and the in gear acceleration takes care of the braking and acceleration. At these speed you are just touching the turbo zone and there will always be power available at those rpm's. But, at 120 kmph+ the characteristics of the engine changes drastically and you surely need time to get back into these speeds again after braking. I hope I am clear now.