[pmvelu]

Originally Posted by deehunk

I own a petrol variant and have never felt any need for more performance, this opinion is derived after owning a 1.6L TDI Rapid, 1.5L dci Duster and 1.5L TDCi Ecosport. I have clocked 12K kms in 6 months and have driven on all kinds of roads.

Great to know deehunk . Thanks for your response. It's very helpful indeed. As My local dealer doesn't have petrol TD vehicle, I thought of trying out with other nearby locations before finalizing it.

Originally Posted by pk_del

I would say try Nexon 1.5 Diesel. its an awesome car which satisfies all your criteria.
-PK

Due to the mixed reviews of Tata vehicles(both online and offline), we thought of not going for that brand. Thanks for your recommendation.

Originally Posted by Traveler

My father just bought a WRV and he is thrilled. The rear seat is so spacious and comfortable..

Originally Posted by koushik

Honda WRV diesel can comfortably cruise at 100 km/h and that too at just 1800 rpm in sixth gear . Uphill climbing is very easy and better than Vitara Brezza and diesel ecosport. I am yet to drive tata nexon uphill but have used extensively Honda WRV diesel in the hilly region of Arunachal Pradesh. The most important feature of Honda WR V is bullet proof reliability. If you have a heavy usage no other crossover can come even close to it.

As our usage is going to be maximum 500 Km/ month, Diesel doesnt' look like a feasible option for us. Thanks for sharing your driving experiences Traveler / Koushik.

[vineetg84]

Was a tough choice but practicality and family members inputs helped me book the Petrol Honda Wrv instead of the Ford Ecosport petrol .
Didn't consider the diesel WRV mainly because of its rattling sound.Ecosport diesel is truly leagues ahead when it comes to performance and NVH.But family members(Ladies in particular) who will be driving the car as well wanted a butter smooth and light steering wheel car.
Took a test drive of the Petrol WRV with full occupancy.total 5 adults in the car weighing an average 80kgs each
I was in the driver's seat first .Even with full occupancy i was left pretty amazed with the power delivery.I got a good test drive of the car in bumper to bumper traffic,a highway run to test the outright performance,on an incline slope of a flyover where there was a traffic jam,there was enough pulling power from the petrol motor of the WRV and not once did i feel the car rolling back or the engine needs to be revved hard to keep the car moving forward on the steep slope.
Honestly the car didn't feel underpowered one bit.Of course its not a rocket like the Ford Ecosport,but it fared really well and much better than my expectation.
Next in line to drive the car was my dad who is 6ft 2 inches tall,before shifting places,i was mentally prepared to be squeezed in the rear seat behind his driving position.But that was not the case to be,the WRV had the best amount of rear legroom space even with his driving position

Personal Opinion
If the car would have been used alone by me with only a co passenger,then i would have definitely booked the Ecopsort.
But there were emotional inputs from family members.
They wanted SPACE, good boot storage.Little kid loved the sunroof of the WRV.Ladies wanted a silky butter smooth driving experience.

So,in the current scenario i feel i have made the right choice.
I already own the ford ikon tdci 2008 model which has clocked 1,10,000 kms which is still running as good as new.
A first gen Figo Tdci 2010 model which has clocked 75,000 kms and is still refined and butter smooth.

This will be my first Honda car and a shift from the hydraulic steering system to an electrical power steering system.It is not direct as the Ford ,but still was much better than what i had expected.Looking forward to the WOW rv experience.Will get the delivery next week.

[deehunk]

Originally Posted by vineetg84

Honestly the car didn't feel underpowered one bit.Of course its not a rocket like the Ford Ecosport,but it fared really well and much better than my expectation.

Congrats for booking your first Honda car, on paper Ecosport looks like a rocket but runs out of steam pretty early. WR-V will not disappoint sedate drivers, even the FE averages between 14-16 kmpl.

[AdityaDeane]

Got a chance to go for a drive in a Diesel Honda W-RV VX on Saturday with a few friends from Dehradun to Mussoorie/Dhanaulti. Loved the interior space, sound from the OEM speakers, ride quality. But was disappointed by a few things,
1. There was no centre armrest for rear seat passengers,
2. No ISOFIX Child Seat mounts or split folding rear seat back in a vehicle that costs a bomb to purchase,
3. Even though the rear seat back has got a nice reclining angle, but the plastic bits of the doors kept hitting my head on the winding hilly roads, either the seat back should have been more upright, or the plastic should have been covered by a thin layer of foam or something to dampen the impacts for rear passenger,
4. No height adjustable seat belts up front, no auto headlamps, wipers etc.

What is the use of spending this much money and not getting all these important features, most of which can easily be found even in Tata Nexon for that matter?

[Traveler]

I agree, we bought a WRV VX in December and do miss the goodies. However we bought it for the space, peace of mind and reliability plus the exceptional mileage. No other vehicle matches it on these parameters in my humble opinion. I can live without automatic wipers and lights but cannot compromise on reliability and mileage. Rest each to its own.

On a recent trip on the mountains, the vehicle performed brilliantly, no lack of power, no problem accommodating 5 adults in comfort and returned 19 kmpl. This is when the vehicle had just done 200 kilometres.

[ani_meher]

A wild thought:

WR-V needs automatic, but 1.2L is not enough to pull it well in automatic guise. I doubt they will get the 1.5L automatic, because they will lose the <4m benefit, and will push the price at 13L or so (like ecosport).

Insteady, I think they may use the diesel CVT that is scheduled to come in New Amaze. That way, they will still get the <4 meter car benefit because diesel engine is <1.5L, and can price the car comparably. A diesel automatic WR-V will be a market favourite.

[deehunk]

The assumption that 1.2L i-VTEC engine is not powerful is a myth, I have done enough trips with 5-6 occupants in last 3 months, the car has never let down even once. I think it is the driving skills that matter most rather than the 1.2L engine.

[joy_swift]

Originally Posted by ani_meher

A wild thought:

WR-V needs automatic, but 1.2L is not enough to pull it well in automatic guise. I doubt they will get the 1.5L automatic, because they will lose the <4m benefit, and will push the price at 13L or so (like ecosport).

Insteady, I think they may use the diesel CVT that is scheduled to come in New Amaze. That way, they will still get the <4 meter car benefit because diesel engine is <1.5L, and can price the car comparably. A diesel automatic WR-V will be a market favourite.

With the market moving more towards petrol and electric cars as Porsche and FCA have decided,dont think it would make a lot of sense to have a diesel CVT.I may be wrong

[AdityaDeane]

Originally Posted by Traveler

On a recent trip on the mountains, the vehicle performed brilliantly, no lack of power, no problem accommodating 5 adults in comfort and returned 19 kmpl. This is when the vehicle had just done 200 kilometres.

Kind of agree with you about the mileage bit, the MID in my friend's car was showing a Trip Mileage Average of 23+KMPL even after the drive up the hills with 4 adults and an infant on board. His car had done a little over 3.5K Kilometres in the 2 months of ownership.

[deehunk]

Originally Posted by AdityaDeane

Kind of agree with you about the mileage bit, the MID in my friend's car was showing a Trip Mileage Average of 23+KMPL even after the drive up the hills with 4 adults and an infant on board.

My petrol WR-V consistently delivers a FE of 16-16.4 kmpl with AC, infact during the run-in period I achieved the ARAI certified mileage of 17.5kmpl. I have completed 13,000 kms in 7 months. Space, reliability and FE are the USP of WR-V.

[strawhat]

Originally Posted by deehunk

My petrol WR-V consistently delivers a FE of 16-16.4 kmpl with AC, infact during the run-in period I achieved the ARAI certified mileage of 17.5kmpl. I have completed 13,000 kms in 7 months. Space, reliability and FE are the USP of WR-V.

Wow-R-V!

Your usage certainly justifies a diesel. Any reason why you chose a petrol instead?

[Rocketscience]

Originally Posted by deehunk

Congrats for booking your first Honda car, on paper Ecosport looks like a rocket but runs out of steam pretty early. WR-V will not disappoint sedate drivers, even the FE averages between 14-16 kmpl.

Originally Posted by deehunk

The assumption that 1.2L i-VTEC engine is not powerful is a myth, I have done enough trips with 5-6 occupants in last 3 months, the car has never let down even once. I think it is the driving skills that matter most rather than the 1.2L engine.

Originally Posted by deehunk

My petrol WR-V consistently delivers a FE of 16-16.4 kmpl with AC, infact during the run-in period I achieved the ARAI certified mileage of 17.5kmpl. I have completed 13,000 kms in 7 months. Space, reliability and FE are the USP of WR-V.

Well, not meaning to offend you but i recently drove my friend's WRV extensively and it truly is the slowest, most frustratingly lethargic car i've driven since my i20 petrol, which if i remember had a little bit bitter low end than this but supremely disapointing overall.
The performance is unacceptable in regular driving and even on the highway it is difficult to have fun, driving my City diesel after this felt so much better, the performance these days (with AC off) is extremely good in City and decent on the highway too, whatever performance it has to offer is extremely easy to extract and actually usable on day to day basis unlike the petrol. But then it has horrible noise and harshness issues so it also won't get my recommendation.

Not that all 1.2 petrols are like this, another friend's Baleno feels much better and that could be attributed to its lower weight and tuning maybe. But WRV, like i20 petrol is something i won't recommend to anyone either for performance or efficiency which brings me to the fuel effeciency part.

Now, a number of times on team bhp i have seen members posting insane mileage figures which seem totally unachievable in the driving conditions they talk of but when i ask my friends and relatives i get to hear numbers which are totally in line with my expectations.

My friend (one who owns WR-V) who is a sedate driver claims 9-10 kmpl max in city driving conditions and this is what i got with my i20 Petrol too (considering both of them are a bit on heavy side and underpowered they can be compared), a lot of people driving similar petrol cars have reported similar figures (around 10) in City.
The guy who drives Baleno and my uncle who drives Swift (both of which are lighter and use the same engine) report 12 kmpl for their cars which again lines with my expectations and the balance in the world is restored.

Now 16.5 in City that too a city like Bangalore does'nt seem believeable at all, are you calculating it wrong?

Even my City diesel in hands of my dad (once again not a very enthusiastic driver) with 80-20 City-Highway driving (since we travel mostly on NH8 with much lower stoppage than in City) is around 14.5 (well this is way beyond our expectations and our family has never owned such an economical car) but still lower than what you claim you're getting with your petrol WR-V.
I was compelled to write this post as i honesly have'nt been able to get my head around all this.

[deehunk]

Rocketscience, I have clearly mentioned in my earlier posts that I am a sedate driver and monthly average FE is 14-16 kmpl, on highways it is 16 kmpl. I am well versed with the poor performance of Hyundai petrol cars and kind of FE they deliver in city and highways. Some of the good habits I have developed in 20 years are finding alternate routes, avoid driving during peak hours and not using car for short rides. I am very particular about my vehicle condition and rigorously follow the maintenance schedule. I have no reasons to exaggerate or quote insane numbers as I have downgraded from a Rapid to WR-V plus who would like to drive a car with sluggish performance for 13,000 kms in 7 months.

Strawhat, my preference for petrol was due to less driving in city and more highway rides. I have plans to upgrade to a luxury brand in future, this car will be with me if possible as a spare car.

[vineetg84]

I beg to differ that the WR V has a lethargic petrol engine.When you compare it with the diesel it will feel lethargic.But for a petrol motor it has even grunt once you get the hand of when to hold the gear and when to shift.For city 80 percent and 20 percent highway run if daily usage is not much petrol is satisfactory.
It all depends upon your usage,for spirited driving its definitely diesel,but it has the annoying clatter noise inside the cabin which keeps buzzing in the ears.
If refinement and laid back driving pleasure is what one seeks,then petrol anyday.Big thumbs up for the refinement of the petrol motor.Even when revved hard the petrol engine makes a soothing sound.

[deehunk]

A decade ago, people had the habit of buying petrol cars as their first car due to less options. Then came the Swift DDiS which changed the equation, I have personally seen people who started first time driving diesel cars struggling with petrol cars when encountered, it is the experience that matters most. I don't know the percentage of diesel cars bought by first timers, but it has certainly increased over last 7 years. There is always a difference of opinion but driving skill is something which you cannot correlate between person to person.