[kanishka88]

Originally Posted by PrasannaDhana

In my opinion, it is overpriced by a bit.

The XZ+ should have matched Polo 1.0 tsi highline+. Polo highline plus is priced almost 50k lower than the Altroz xz+ iTurbo. While one can argue the altroz is safer and packs more features and practicality, it no more is value for money.

With just 60000 rupee difference with the diesel variant, no justification is there to opt for the 3 pot turbo petrol.

The diesel is punchy, more refined and will surely be 5kmpl more efficient in the same running conditions.

Well sir, while I am sure someone would have looked at Polo’s pricing, the deciding factor would have been i20’s pricing. Volumes speak a lot when these analysis make it to the decision rooms and you clearly want to look upwards. I own a polo and understand what you mean but then decisions here would have been for a wider market.

Also, I am unsure what else TATA could have done. Petrol non turbo and diesel variants are 1.2 to 1.4Lakhs away. They have slotted turbo right in between. The alternative would have been to drop prices on non turbo so that turbo could have been further cheaper but why would you do that when you are moving 6k units? With this pricing, Tata will ensure that the customer stays in their showroom, cross buys between Altroz and Nexon and their respective variants.

[Napalm]

Originally Posted by RM Motorsports

Here’s how the Altroz iTurbo stacks up against the other turbo-petrol hatches in the segment.

Source - EvoIndia

IMO the Hyundai has overplayed its hand by pricing its i20 too high. TATA has priced the Altroz(other engines & the iTurbo now) very aggressively and will make the most of it, as it did in its launch versions last year. I understand that Altroz iTurbo prices are introductory and but even if they are increased by Rs 15-20k few months down the line, still it will remain the most value for money offering in the segment. Current gen India Polo was never and wont ever be a volumes car.

People who are ready to spend such high asking price of i20 will end up buying a Venue/Sonet or Nexon. People who aren't, will end up buying the Altroz. I am talking about the 90% aam junta buyers and not the niche enthusiast buyer, who could even end up buying the Polo too.

[Stranger17]

Good pricing by Altroz in my opinion, Forget i20 turbo Altroz turbo xt and xz are priced at a difference of 15-20k from i20 sportz and asta 1.2 manual give or take.
Altroz turbo offers far better performance compared to i20 1.2 and respectable mileage at similiar prices making it hard to miss for someone looking for a premium hatch in 8-9 lakh price range.

[amol4184]

I usually like i20 and previous generation was in my opinion the best looking i20. However, one look at Altroz and the competition just melts. Beautiful looking car in a stunning color. I am keenly keeping an eye on AT version launch.
Despite less power and not as enthusiastic as some other hatches, Altroz just feels right in so many ways. I think this is a proper hot hatch if only looks are considered.

[Latheesh]

Altroz iTurbo XT = 7.73 Lakhs
Rapid Rider = 7.7 Lakhs

Rapid is a better choice, right?

[redCherry]

1.2 Ltr Turbo vs 1.0 L Turbo....I guess that matters too
I am assuming 1.2L Turbo more reliable than 1L Turbo in the long run.

[VKumar]

Originally Posted by Latheesh

Rapid is a better choice, right?

Did anyone tell you that you are being wicked over this one!

Skoda has set the cat among the pegions, so have you, just now.

I just realized that what a fantastic deal the Rapid Rider is, messaged it to my friend who was awaiting Altroz i-turbo price, and finalized Nexon XZ+. Now we both have been discussing the Rapid Rider since over an hour, and are feeling biased too.

For the price of XZ+ Altroz, a Rapid Rider can be had with:

• ABS + Airbags - Standard
• All power windows, electric adjust mirrors - Standard
• Skoda build, fit and finish - Standard
• Better performing engine - Standard
• Slicker gearbox and a better clutch - Standard
• Touch screen RCD with Android Auto and Apple Car play - After Market
• Nice Alloys and Tyres of 195/60 R15 - 50k
• Seat covers and all

[Benoit]

Originally Posted by redCherry

I am assuming 1.2L Turbo more reliable than 1L Turbo in the long run.

I guess the main difference is direct injection(skoda, Hyundai) vs port injection(Tata). As per a few YouTube videos, GDI engines offer better performance and fuel efficiency, but there's more carbon deposit. So i guess port injection engines are more reliable.

[Storm2.0]

Originally Posted by Latheesh

Altroz iTurbo XT = 7.73 Lakhs
Rapid Rider = 7.7 Lakhs

Rapid is a better choice, right?

Rapid is old and looks bland now also Skoda ASS is horrifying and expensive. Same applies to Polo as well.

[BoneCollector]

Originally Posted by VKumar

For the price of XZ+ Altroz, a Rapid Rider can be had with:

• ABS + Airbags - Standard
• All power windows, electric adjust mirrors - Standard
• Skoda build, fit and finish - Standard
• Better performing engine - Standard
• Slicker gearbox and a better clutch - Standard
• Touch screen RCD with Android Auto and Apple Car play - After Market
• Nice Alloys and Tyres of 195/60 R15 - 50k
• Seat covers and all

You missed 2 main points

1. A missing crash certification for India unlike Altroz which gets a G-NCAP 5*. I tried to search for Rapid crash test results for Indian made Rapid, couldn't find one.
2. Skoda horror stories.

Tata service is a hit or miss, and so is Skoda but looking at various horror stories, I personally would stay away from it.

[TROOPER]

Originally Posted by VKumar

For the price of XZ+ Altroz, a Rapid Rider can be had with:

Decade old looks which wouldn't make anyone on the road bat an eyelid - Standard

Can we imagine how this segment would look like if all manufacturers behaved like Skoda/VAG? Only then we realise how pathetic it really is.

Imagine, decade old City, SX4, Manza, Baleno and what not with blacked out wheels and and some interior touch up here and there, with no safety ratings available.

I'd rather not compare the Rapid with the Altroz on this thread. There's a lot of aspirational buyers reading it and they shouldn't be shortchanged. Just my two cents.

[VKumar]

Originally Posted by BoneCollector

1. A missing crash certification for India unlike Altroz which gets a G-NCAP 5*. I tried to search for Rapid crash test results for Indian made Rapid, couldn't find one.
2. Skoda horror stories.

The best thing is, out of the two mentioned points, none says about the product in itself being less competent. In terms of performance, comfort, driving experience, space management etc.

Coming to crash safety, Tata has done a commendable job, and it deserves a huge for it. We drive multiple cars, all the way to Toyota Fortuner, where we assume them to be safe, because we assume that either we have the international version. Similarly, the Vento (Which is a Rapid any way) scored 5 stars way back in Latin NCAP (With a crash weight of around 1380 kilo, which translates to same kerb weight as we have here), Polo has already scored 4 stars a few years back. Can we simply assume the Rapid to be around 4 stars (I am not giving it the ratings Vento got). Multiple cars we drive today, all the way from Swift to S Class, where the India specific models are not tested, and we assume them safe because we assume that their international trims have done well. This argument applies to the entire spectrum, and hence I normally avoid it. It's a fact that a few manufacturers are taking undue advantage of it, but many do give us safer cars. Don't they?

Coming to Skoda Maintenance:
I do agree that service gaps have been there, and also I agree that the maintenance and service costs are on higher side. The bills will look somewhat like this for 120k kms of ownership:

And I am not basing these costs on some assumption, they are based on my experience of owning on Laura, and currently the 2 Polos which are with me in my garage. In addition, a Rapid diesel of cousin too.

You can refer to my ownership experience here, and also note, that since it's Skoda and a TSi, I have more than considerably inflated the service bills as compared to my MPi.

https://www.team-bhp.com/forum/techn...ml#post4748621 (VW Polo - Maintenance and Service cost and dos/don'ts)

The Horror Stories Part:
Every brand has horror stories, Skoda has had a bad past in terms of after sales based issues, and they have a few greedy dealers too. But if all of us, together, do agree that Tata shall be given a chance as they are coming up in quality. Why write off Skoda or VW? On this very same platform, we have multiple examples where people are happy with their VAG car and have already crossed a lac kms without a single hiccup, why forget them? Aren't we being selective here just to deliver a judgement?

Look at the owners who are bringing home the VAG cars today, the spare part prices have come down, service quality has always been the best, now the issues have gone down significantly. I have both my cars running on factory clutch, not a single electronic issue, and a few when arisen in the TDi, they were immediately addressed and the components were replaced under extended warranty - even at 1.16 lac kms.

If the testimony of the horror victims does matter, don't we have an equality of representation for putting ahead our experience? Basic service marketing mantra, a happy customer tells to 3, and an unhappy customer tells to 300.

Originally Posted by TROOPER

Decade old looks which wouldn't make anyone on the road bat an eyelid - Standard

• Not everyone buys and drives the car to gain the attention of others - Standard!
• Skoda badge will always be considered premium to Tata badge - Standard
• A sedan is a sedan, with a bigger boot, and a hatchback is a hatchback - Standard
• A more comfortable and better rear seat - Standard
• A better performing engine with 6 speed slick gearbox - Standard

Let's not get into the debate of who offers what, everyone at their heart knows where a higher value for money is being driven.

Can we imagine how this segment would look like if all manufacturers behaved like Skoda/VAG? Only then we realise how pathetic it really is.

Point is, we Indian customers have become the victim of the greed of manufacturers. A Country where the manufacturing and labour cost is lower, the prices are higher, and they simply attribute it to taxes! Just see, Ford gave a separate chassis in India in Endy, than what Everest gets in other parts of the world, couldn't hide it from the sharp eyes of our own BHPian A.G. though which got mentioned here (Pics: Chassis of Indian Ford Endeavour has less support than the international version!), Kia has got operationally profitable within a year - facts are facts!

I am trying to imagine driving a City petrol S for 10 lac on road, and that really feels good. These days we are paying here for features, and not the basic thing in itself - the car.

decade old City, SX4, Manza, Baleno and what not with blacked out wheels and and some interior touch up here and there, with no safety ratings available.

Indeed, now we buy the compact sedans for that money. A few sedans got obsolete, and died, because they deserved to. The ones who are still good to go, they are continuing.

I'd rather not compare the Rapid with the Altroz on this thread. There's a lot of aspirational buyers reading it and they shouldn't be shortchanged. Just my two cents.

This is a forum, I am talking to you, you are talking to me. The forum nature; gives us the freedom of expression, forum rules bind us to stay on the topic. Readers consult a thousand sources, T-BHP being one of them. There can be the readers who are exploring other segments too. At times, people simply decide the budget, and then funnel down to segment.
I don't see how it is a shortchange, just because we are discussing about another option which can deliver a different ownership experience for the similar money. Or maybe my lack of understanding, will be highly appreciable if you can elaborate on the usage of the word 'shortchanged'.

[Candy$Cars]

Originally Posted by TROOPER

Decade old looks which wouldn't make anyone on the road bat an eyelid - Standard

Can we imagine how this segment would look like if all manufacturers behaved like Skoda/VAG? Only then we realise how pathetic it really is.

Imagine, decade old City, SX4, Manza, Baleno and what not with blacked out wheels and and some interior touch up here and there, with no safety ratings available.

I'd rather not compare the Rapid with the Altroz on this thread. There's a lot of aspirational buyers reading it and they shouldn't be shortchanged. Just my two cents.

Nicely out, add decade old interiors to that list as well.
The only reason Skoda has priced the rapid so aggressively is that they have saved a lot of money on R&D, setting up/changing the assembly line, training of staff etc. in comparison to a new model and the fact that they must have realised that even introducing a new generation wouldn't guarantee them any higher sales than the current rapid.
The Altroz is an all new product and very well priced as a premium hatchback, the price that suits an hatchback, not over-ambitious pricing of the i20 which is completely into the CSUV segment.
If we go comparing it with decade old products then sure, one can even have an SUV, the Bolero for the same price, much bigger, 7 seater, rugged

Off topic: Very interesting to see such opinions and all kinds of thought processes appearing only on Tata products!

[PrasannaDhana]

Originally Posted by Candy$Cars

If we go comparing it with decade old products then sure, one can even have an SUV, the Bolero for the same price, much bigger, 7 seater, rugged

Off topic: Very interesting to see such opinions and all kinds of thought processes appearing only on Tata products!

What's wrong in comparing the Rapid here?
It's a decade old platform, but has proven to be an excellent driver's car. With the latest 1.0 tsi (which definitely is a better engine than the 1.2 iTurbo) and with a superb value for money price tag, the rapid definitely should be considered by someone with a budget for altroz.

Rapid is based on the polo, which is a 4* NCAP rated car, and it is pretty solid. Interiors may be dated, but are well put together and the cabin is still a nice place to be in.

Rapid has a better image (a segment higher) than the Altroz. Though the Skoda after sales might be a scary thing, Tata after sales isn't rosy either.

Beauty of a forum is to engage in all possible opinions. In my experience of driving both the cars (Altroz n/a petrol & 1.0 tsi rapid), I find rapid better in ride quality, ergonomics, and handling too. Altroz is definitely a great product, bit that doesn't mean it's incomparable with other products.

PS: I have owned and driven more Tata cars than majority of the diehard Tata fanboys. So there is no brand bias here

[museycal]

There's no harm in constructive comparison of products. Opinions and information on their respective features/aspects/attributes based on an individual's experience and preferences should be welcome.

Altroz Turbo, like any other car in its price brackets, exists in a competitive market. So any apt comparisons between the Turbo and other cars should not be outright dismissed. If anything, such discussions will offer better insights to the prospective buyers and thus enable more informed decision making.