[AdvanceStarter]

Originally Posted by 07CR

I have owned Ecosport for 1 year (total age of car =3 years), and I have watched various video reviews of Kushaq for a total duration of more than 4-5 hours. I am sure from whatever I have seen, known and understood about the car, it was sufficient for me to remove it from my shortlist.

Originally Posted by 07CR

I agree. But the question is, it that better than the Korean twins in terms of build and driving feel? It's hard to pass a judgement at the moment, not having even seen Kushaq in real.

With all due respect, I found your statements quite contradictory. I feel anyone seriously considering buying this car needs to get a test drive and analyze the car themselves to see if it suits their requirements. It is a little hard to get a sense of perspective about this car by just going through reviews and spec sheets because it has been compared to everything starting from other VAG group cars, to the Korean twins to sedans like the City and sub 4m crossovers.

[prajwalmr62]

Originally Posted by 07CR

So everyone knows the Kushaq lacks in specs, yet is priced at par with the Hyundai/Kia Twins. But how much does it lack? Was surprised to find out by a massive margin! Just check the below snaps.

Comparison is good, and here's my thought on the same.

• There's no way pre-tensioners are left out of a car like Kushaq. May be they felt it is insignificant to highlight it as a feature.
• Rear camera with static guidelines is just pathetic. I mean they have cornering function, which means car already has all the sensors required already. Then why skip it out for rear camera? For me, guidelines have been very useful while parking.
• DRVM, again might be not important enough to highlight it out. It is just feeding rear view camera while on the move. But worth verifying it out.
• As long as sound system is good 7 or 8 speakers won't make much difference.
• Front parking sensor would have been a really nice addition. Even Creta doesn't get it.
• MT version gets TPMS and 6 Airbags. It is not required for AT because this group generally have super-human ability to sense tire pressures and usually have extra airbags lying around to put it on their cars (/s). I'm assuming this is the case, because none of the companies actually release AT version with proper features of an MT version ( Hyundai's SX+ category). Now Škoda is also doing the same.
• Width can be a deal breaker for some. It is smaller than Venue by 1cm, and seems to me space is not utilized properly.
• Engine also can be a deal breaker ( 3-pot Turbo vs 4-pot MPI). I prefer Turbo, but one might not want to. (There has been a good amount of discussion regarding this on the forum anyway).
• Boot space seems to be whopping 50l less, but usable space might be same. This should be verified.
• Reclining seats for passengers is sort of expected in this segment? Even S-cross has it.
• MID is okay. It is nothing fancy, but gets the job done.

If I must get Kushaq, I'd prefer the lower variant (Active-MT/Ambition-AT), and add other stuff as accessories. I'm neither enthusiast nor expert, and I feel Kushaq is not a good package. May be I was expecting something like Octavia of this segment? Overpriced, but still plenty of features? Anyway, I see Kushaq is a competent product, by no way I would consider it as segment best.

[Vid6639]

Originally Posted by Mr.Perera

Just after a short test drive, the decision to buy the Karoq was made. Even though it was a huge stretch of 9 lakhs, the car made us feel like we were inside a 45 lakh car. Its been a year with the Karoq, and do I miss the air purifier ? No.
Do I miss the heads up display ? No.
Do I feel I overpaid for a car that the whole nation labelled as 'overpriced' ? Hell No !
My suggestion would be not to judge a book by its cover. I would rather wait till I take a test drive, see few ownership reviews and then raise my voice regarding a car.

Good timing and excellent post. Actually I realised after you posted that I forgot to link to your thread. Here is the edited post:

Originally Posted by Vid6639

However after driving it, it drove closer to a BMW X1 than the Creta. It was better than the Mercedes GLA to drive. The Creta in comparison felt good but drive quality, feel, dynamics were nowhere close and it left no lasting impression on me. This thread should tell you similar thought process. https://www.team-bhp.com/forum/test-...ip-review.html (Skoda Karoq : Ownership Review) The buyer spent 10L more than a Creta/Seltos for a smaller car with lesser features.

Just give me 6 airbags please Skoda in the 1.5L DSG.

[hareshjethwani]

Originally Posted by Mr.Perera

In my books the biggest mistake done by Skoda was to skimp the 6 airbags on the top end model. A person spending 20 lakhs for the top of the line variant is someone who doesn't want to compromise on anything. Skoda being a company bragging about safety and build quality should have never done that.

A lovely car you have there sir and a great thread about it. Skoda is a premium brand.
Coming to the point of the Karoq fit and finish, it is in a totally different league and no way can be compared to what the Kushaq offers. No doubt it is a nice car but you should have a look at it to feel and compare it to a Karoq.
A lot things are a let down on the Kushaq and that in no way means it's not going to sell. I wouldn't comment on how they drive as I haven't either of them.

[Altocumulus]

Skoda and VW as a company I have always experienced, is one who focusses on usable features, some understated than blingy/ good to have stuff. Having owned 2 Skodas till date, I have noticed how small things are added to the car which you wonder why other cars donot have them. Add to that the sense of security and safety you feel, when you sit in one.

For me the equation is pretty simple. A well built car with 2 airbags is anyday more safer than a badly built one with 6/8/10 airbags. And that quality comes at a price. VWs and Skodas were always priced more than the competition. It is nothing new. However they gave a lot of discounts as well. Indians love discounted stuff, gives us a feeling of achievement, having control over the transaction. The same thing will happen with the Kushaq as well and it will end up seeming VFM.

[devilwearsprada]

Originally Posted by Altocumulus

Skoda and VW as a company I have always experienced, is one who focusses on usable features, some understated than blingy/ good to have stuff. Having owned 2 Skodas till date, I have noticed how small things are added to the car which you wonder why other cars donot have them. Add to that the sense of security and safety you feel, when you sit in one.

For me the equation is pretty simple. A well built car with 2 airbags is anyday more safer than a badly built one with 6/8/10 airbags. And that quality comes at a price. VWs and Skodas were always priced more than the competition. It is nothing new. However they gave a lot of discounts as well. Indians love discounted stuff, gives us a feeling of achievement, having control over the transaction. The same thing will happen with the Kushaq as well and it will end up seeming VFM.

1000000% Agreeed. A terrible built car with 6 airbags will still end up not saving you in a major crash but a better built car with 2 airbags will.

If safety was actually the criteria to buy, most people should save up for an year or two and pick an XC40. Its a compact SUV with all features and safety.

Someone said, Skoda isn't even offering 6 airbags, guess I'll just pick up the Seltos/City. Well City has the thinnest sheet metal in class, you would actually be better picking the Ciaz.

[civic-dk]

Originally Posted by 07CR

So everyone knows the Kushaq lacks in specs, yet is priced at par with the Hyundai/Kia Twins. But how much does it lack? Was surprised to find out by a massive margin! Just check the below snaps.

Edit-
1) Antiglare rear mirror is for the ORVM
2) No. of speakers+SubWoofer has been mentioned.

Glossary-
Green Color= Best of three
Blue Color= 2nd Best of three
Red Color= Last of three

Even if one leaves the performance parameters outside (thought by many to be the trump card of 1.5 AT over competition), Kushaq still lags by quite a long margin. Performance is more or less similar for all three cars. No wonder there is such an uproar against the Kushaq since the price unveil. Few parameters in Koreans like way better ASS, better interior room for 5, Reliability, better interior quality aren't even considered here.

Originally Posted by devilwearsprada

1000000% Agreeed. A terrible built car with 6 airbags will still end up not saving you in a major crash but a better built car with 2 airbags will.

If safety was actually the criteria to buy, most people should save up for an year or two and pick an XC40. Its a compact SUV with all features and safety.

People in our country know two things best, cribbing about luxuries they dont /wont use and aiming for safer cars while buying a car that splits in half.

What's with the sly digs being taken by esteemed forum members on cars chosen by others. Everybody has a set of criterias and they buy car as per that. I don't believe it gives right to anybody to disparage others on their choice. I have had my fill and I am not coming back to this thread. Peace!

[AnnaRocks]

Originally Posted by devilwearsprada

Someone said, Skoda isn't even offering 6 airbags, guess I'll just pick up the Seltos/City. Well City has the thinnest sheet metal in class, you would actually be better picking the Ciaz.

Anyone please guide me as my knowledge in this aspect is limited. I checked the safety ratings of City and they have a 5 star safety rating in ASEAN NCAP. Do we not consider ASEAN NCAP ratings as a standard? If so, quite a few cars which have secured 5 star safety rating in their tests may not meet the safety standards and their list has Vento too.

[greyhound82]

Originally Posted by AnnaRocks

I checked the safety ratings of City and they have a 5 star safety rating in ASEAN NCAP. Do we not consider ASEAN NCAP ratings as a standard?

Yes we can consider if the Indian spec car is the same as that tested by ASEAN NCAP. But so far it is hardly the same be it Kia, Hyundai, Jeep (rating for Compass for LHD market is not applicable for RHD market due to the protrusion of some elements to driver cabin), Suzuki, Renault etc. Unless the cars selling in India got tested all these extrapolation is in vain. That means we have no crash test rating for Jeep Compass, Tata Harrier, Hector, Creta while Indian spec Seltos fared badly compared to global model

[superguy282]

Originally Posted by devilwearsprada

Skoda isn't even offering 6 airbags, guess I'll just pick up the Seltos/City. Well City has the thinnest sheet metal in class, you would actually be better picking the Ciaz

And how does that make it unsafe? If safety was as simple as making sheet metal thicker the Ambassador or any other cars of the yesteryear's would've been Numero Uno in all crash tests, but a Google search reveals these cars folded like tracing paper upon crashing. Safety has a lot more involved including the distribution of forces to certain parts of the car where the passenger would not be harmed, making sure the engine and gearbox assemblies do not cross the firewall and breach the cabin, positioning and deployment of airbags, etc. A visual analysis of a car can never dictate it's safety regardless of whether you blew your ears hearing the door thud.

[GTO]

Originally Posted by sunikkat

Good analysis, and not surprising to see Kushaq lacks in features compared to Creta / Seltos. This was expected.
But what is missing in this is which is more fun to drive and which one handles better. Though I haven't driven Kushaq, all reviews have called out Kushaq is more fun to drive and handles better in the segment.

With the right engine options, all 3 are fun to drive. While the Kushaq might have the outright edge, the new Creta & Seltos are also pleasurable on the open road. I had a blast with the 1.4L DCTs of the Koreans, and also with the Diesel AT (although the petrols were more fun because of the power on tap + higher revs). Choosing between the 3 based on driving pleasure alone is tough because the difference isn't night & day. I think the final selection will come down to looks, brand preferences, pricing, dealership, features etc.

[pannags]

Originally Posted by Altocumulus

For me the equation is pretty simple. A well built car with 2 airbags is anyday more safer than a badly built one with 6/8/10 airbags.

Sorry, but isn't the equation better if we have both?

Skoda claims heavy localisation and no compromise on safety, but this is not exactly reflecting that. If I may add, I have no qualms about the pricing.

[AKSarkar1]

Originally Posted by car_guy1998

Well, disappointed with the prices announced by Skoda!

+1 to this. Disappointed but not totally surprised.

I think the Kushaq is definitely on the higher-end of the market but this pricing could have been easily justified had there have been more features or USPs to differentiate the car. I feel that there have been evident places of conscious cost-cutting in the car e.g. continuation of hard plastics, ugly rear wash wipe system.

At the same time, the Kushaq is offering systems such as automatic brake-disc wiping (just to name one) amongst other pragmatic ones. There is more to what meets the eye with all cars and as much as I was disappointed with the pricing aspect, I feel I would reserve my opinions until I see the car in flesh and take it for a spin.

[PatienceWins]

Originally Posted by GTO

With the right engine options, all 3 are fun to drive. While the Kushaq might have the outright edge, the new Creta & Seltos are also pleasurable on the open road. I had a blast with the 1.4L DCTs of the Koreans, and also with the Diesel AT (although the petrols were more fun because of the power on tap + higher revs).

Your post makes me feel better as it was a difficult decision for me to go with Creta diesel AT instead of Kushaq 1.5 dsg. I was eagerly waiting for kushaq launch for a long time. As a family man with grown up boys, overall space at rear was the deal breaker for me. Also, reliability of dsg/ dct, missing basic features for top end automatic (wonder why Skoda skipped on adaptive rear camera, TPMS, underbody protection etc in top end for cost control) and overall inferior interior quality of kushaq (definitely inferior by Skoda standards) played in favour of creta diesel AT. Though my running is less and loved driving creta dct, decided to go for diesel AT for reliability.

Hope I won't regret the decision made as a family man who needs a single product for all purposes when I get to drive a kushaq/ taigun in future.

Now feeling excited for Creta diesel AT delivery early next week, only PDI and registration pending. Hope PDI would be fine.

[07CR]

Originally Posted by GTO

With the right engine options, all 3 are fun to drive. While the Kushaq might have the outright edge, the new Creta & Seltos are also pleasurable on the open road. I had a blast with the 1.4L DCTs of the Koreans, and also with the Diesel AT (although the petrols were more fun because of the power on tap + higher revs). Choosing between the 3 based on driving pleasure alone is tough because the difference isn't night & day. I think the final selection will come down to looks, brand preferences, pricing, dealership, features etc.

Exactly my point. It's not like Kushaq might offer a completely other worldly feel while driving. It would be better, but the difference is miniscule, whereas the Koreans lead in almost all other departments substantially.

Originally Posted by AdvanceStarter

With all due respect, I found your statements quite contradictory. I feel anyone seriously considering buying this car needs to get a test drive and analyze the car themselves to see if it suits their requirements. It is a little hard to get a sense of perspective about this car by just going through reviews and spec sheets because it has been compared to everything starting from other VAG group cars, to the Korean twins to sedans like the City and sub 4m crossovers.

Nothing contradictory there. Maybe I wasn't clear in my explanation of why I am disappointed with Kushaq. Will try to rephrase it-

I am sure going by the Tbhp review, Kushaq should offer a better driving feel and probably the external build quality. But the issue is Skoda have cut corners in terms of equipment, size (especially interior width), interior quality, and some blasphemous decisions like top end AT getting only 2 airbags.

Was this the case with the Octavia (prefacelift) and the Superb? A resounding NO! They too offered segment topping driving feel and the external build quality. But they not only offered segment topping equipment, space,size and interior quality, but infact, they threatened the much more costly German Big Three on almost all counts, including performance.

This is where the Kushaq is lacking big time. It might be superior to it's segment's competition in driving feel (Not sure how big the difference is) and build quality, but that's not the only thing I will be looking after spending 20 Big one's.

Originally Posted by civic-dk

What's with the sly digs being taken by esteemed forum members on cars chosen by others. Everybody has a set of criterias and they buy car as per that. I don't believe it gives right to anybody to disparage others on their choice. I have had my fill and I am not coming back to this thread. Peace!

Please help me understand where I took any Sly digs at anyone else's decision. It was just my analysis on why Skoda is receiving so much flak for the Kushaq.