First of all my hearty congratulations Sandygarden for the brown hippo and a beautifully matched alloys for the brown colour. Wishing many many years of safe and happy motoring.
I thought I should share my opinion about the class of vehicle S-cross belongs to, at least clear some air on the looks and looking old part for which S-cross is receiving some flak on. Having owned two crossovers previously and experienced its practicality, it would be an injustice to sit and watch comments fly by without a mention where this vehicle actually fits.
Quote:
Originally Posted by vinit This is not a just a perception from the engineering angles of the car I suppose. Its more to do with the economics. How people will view different types of cars in terms of size and other parameters (hatchbacks, sedans, SUVs etc ) will be highly in relevance to their individual requirements. The real point is whether the "extra" that I am being charged for these crossovers is justifiable to the "extra" that i am being offered to. This is again an individual opinion and for me the answer is No. |
Quote:
Originally Posted by dZired Saw a silver S-Cross yesterday. And frankly, it looks just another car in the crowd, and does not have the road appeal of the Creta (just for the sake of comparison). While the Creta does look like a mini Santa Fe, the S-Cross is simply a glorified hatchback. Moreover, I personally think that the top-of-the-line variants with projector headlamps look a bit after-market. |
Quote:
Originally Posted by swiftnfurious Saw a silver S-Cross on road today. Just another vehicle. Unfortunately this looks old / normal already. Had seen a competitor vehicle in red too, that looked lovely & eye catchy even from a 100 ft distance. |
Quote:
Originally Posted by Aksthedreamer It is bigger than what it looks like in pictures. It might be an overgrown hatchback but the space inside is unmatched by any other hatchback, atleast I never sat in such a spacious hatchback before.
But I feel it is definitely over priced. |
This is not "hatch" for what it is, it is a wagon. And think of wagon as something that has engulfed its boot and doubled its space. Difference really is in the way rear passenger headroom and luggage area flexibility wagons offer over their respective Sedan Avatars. So S-cross is a "Sedan+" vehicle. Now coming to crossover part, crossovers usually attempt to better best of both worlds that is highway/good road cruising ability of a Sedan and bit of bad road-ability(soft road) of SUVs, I agree that there are very few vehicles which truely achieve best of both worlds. Example:- Audi AllRoad and Some Subaru vehicles etc.
About the Ugliness part, some vehicles look great when they are understated and purposeful and ugliness doesn't come in the way people choose such vehicles. A purposeful and well built vehicle gets its fan club equally well. I think there is a classic example of such vehicle that garnered huge appreciation and became mother of all crossovers that exist today and that is "Subaru Outback". It never looked nice from day one Just like the S-cross but it was built purposeful and understated in its presence. And guess what, one of the most popular vehicle for weekend getaways in mountains and recreational areas is this vehicle in many parts of the world. When this vehicle was initially launched it directly went against then what were known and meant for hitting the trails and weekend getaways in snowy areas and mud trails. But market very soon realized what Subaru had introduced and it made more sense than tall wallowy SUVs and embraced it fully.
I would say we as a market slowly maturing to that aspect and it shows the way how modern day crossovers have become extremely popular in Indian sub-continent.
I can't stop but compare the way S-cross looks so similar to "Subaru Outback" and thought will post two pictures here for reference. Of course what is really missing in S-cross to become a true crossover is "AllGrip" AWD system as standard, but I do understand the logistics on why that is missing in the initial offerings.
Crossover truely is a lifestyle vehicle and makes sense for families which are very outdoorsy. And have an active lifestyle, for everyone else it could be just another vehicle and that is when the USP doesn't really hit home. When I went to purchase my first car I happen to see the wagon sibling in the same show room next to it and I was right away pulled in for the practicality of the wagon and I was okay with the slightly compromised handling for practicality and of course the compromised looks in some cases.
Now when the "crossover" terminology didn't even exist this vehicle came into the market and created a new segment along with its more "fun" oriented siblings later on. And see how the rear looks so similar to the outback in fact.
I think we need to mature as a market to appreciate the practicality of vehicles like these. We are already at cross roads and ready to pay 10L for "premium hatch"es and the S-cross is little more than a hatch and days are not very far to see more vehicles of these sort.
About the pricing part there definitely can be many debates, but personally I still think S-cross DDiS200 is still competitively priced. Once again my heartfelt congratulations to all the S-cross owners and wishing them the best.