[fawad0222]

Originally Posted by any23

If I am out there shopping for my next car the only things that will put Slavia out of the list is -
1)Raised GC, to be honest GC offered in Rapid is enough for me (but for some GC is of prime importance as they want to fly over speed breakers without slowing down, would like to mention here something that I read here on this forum - 'Slow down at speed breakers, they are there for some reason', but some of my friends want higher GC as they can't spot breakers on time (don't know what % of attention they are devoting to driving when doing triple digits on speedo)).
2)Pricing of variants,
Rest other things are manageable. Still I will neglect above points if the drive strikes a chord (and I believe it will for sure)

In your case I will say go with your heart not mind while making the final decision, mind will always confuse you but heart - never.

I believe having a higher GC car is a need for Indian roads. In North India where I stay and drive, there are unavoidable craters, himalayasque speed brakers lurking around very often on non highways and sometimes on highways too. Also sometines one is forced to drive through a submerged road as well, where high GC could be literally life saving for the car. Very recently I came across a swift dezire which had to go through one such pond leading to seizure of engine, whereas another car managed to cross uneventfully, perhaps due to difference in GC.

Regards

[Venkatesh]

Glimpse of the Drive with Slavia media drive and Fans of Skoda drive.











Video

[any23]

Originally Posted by fawad0222

I believe having a higher GC car is a need for Indian roads. In North India where I stay and drive,

Regards

Thank you for your inputs, I did Hyderabad-Gorakhpur(UP) round trip in October-2021 and not even a single underbody scrape, I feel all that matters is how attentive we are while driving.

January-2022 when I took a cab from Bhiwadi(Rajasthan) to Delhi, just to avoid the toll gate the driver diverted to interior roads driving in pool of water, I told him what you gained from driving on slushy and waterlogged roads full of traffic, I am sure he might have burnt more fuel instead of saving by avoiding toll and probably taken more risk by diverting. It all boils down to choices we make, if I ever see a pool of water ahead which I can't gauge I will prefer a U-turn and a different route rather than risking car mechanicals.

and I believe Indians roads and highways has improved much in last decade.

[Meph1st0]

Have a question on the Slavia 3-point seatbelt design. The 3-point seatbelt for the middle passenger in the rear seat is not bolted onto the chassis at the top. From the pic below, it looks like the seat belt passes around the rear seat.
When the rear seat folds down, the seatbelt does not seem to be attached to the chassis anywhere at the top.

On the contrary, if I check the design in Yaris, the seatbelt is bolted to the chassis at the top.

It is also evident when the seats fold down.

The design in Skoda Slavia seems to better and leads to better utilization of space when seats are folded. But am wondering will such a design be as effective as that in Yaris is holding the passenger? It looks like a two-point seatbelt but wound around the seat to make it three-point.

[Sach_511]

Originally Posted by Steer-safe

Strangely my heart is stuck with Scross, i took test drive on very bad patch of road and ride comfort has struck a cord in my heart. It is a old school model and peer pressure is der to buy something new. It drove similar to any automatic till 110 kmph ( max i could try on td). Not sure what to do..buy something just for outside look or buy Scross.

If you are stuck at S-Cross, please wait for upgraded model which is around the corner, you won't feel good checking out the new S-Cross on roads while you were sitting in your old one down the line.

[nitkel]

Originally Posted by Meph1st0

Have a question on the Slavia 3-point seatbelt design. The 3-point seatbelt for the middle passenger in the rear seat is not bolted onto the chassis at the top.
The design in Skoda Slavia seems to better and leads to better utilization of space when seats are folded. But am wondering will such a design be as effective as that in Yaris is holding the passenger? It looks like a two-point seatbelt but wound around the seat to make it three-point.

Quite an observation that! The only thing preventing the middle passenger from being propelled into the front will be the quality and load bearing ability of the seat back locking clips. Hope Skoda has actually designed them to bear the load during an accident, but prima facie it looks like a jugaad!

[ToThePoint]

Originally Posted by Meph1st0

Have a question on the Slavia 3-point seatbelt design. The 3-point seatbelt for the middle passenger in the rear seat is not bolted onto the chassis at the top. From the pic below, it looks like the seat belt passes around the rear seat.

The design in Skoda Slavia seems to better and leads to better utilization of space when seats are folded. But am wondering will such a design be as effective as that in Yaris is holding the passenger?

Keen Eyes there ...In Slavia the middle seatbelt is part of the rear seat itself. Even though this frees up space and might look like good design, from safety point of view, the Yaris design is anyday better and will hold you in place tightly in cases like rear ending. NOT CLEVER on SKODA's part!

Edit: Or may be they know it's at best a 4 seater and hence came up with this?

[Turbohead]

Originally Posted by ToThePoint

Keen Eyes there ...In Slavia the middle seatbelt is part of the rear seat itself. Even though this frees up space and might look like good design, from safety point of view, the Yaris design is anyday better and will hold you in place tightly in cases like rear ending. NOT CLEVER on SKODA's part!

It's actually a Toyota thing to hook the seat belts to the chassis.

Was checking out the BMW X7, even that has the seat belts like you see in the Skoda.
Reference: https://www.google.com/search?q=bmw+..._okt3KosEzRrTM

https://www.google.com/search?q=bmw+...MKcjtu_ZupVHXM

As long as the design is tested, verified and signed off properly, there is nothing to worry about unless you drive like a hooligan and crash at unmentionable speeds.

[Vid6639]

This has already been highlighted before but I am going to stress upon this point once again.

1. The Slavia has the same engine and gearbox as the Kushaq
2. The Slavia is better built than the Kushaq atleast from initial impressions which were really bad for Kushaq from people visiting showrooms.
3. The Slavia is considerably bigger in length than Kushaq
4. The Slavia is based on the same platform as Kushaq
5. The Slavia has more features vs Kushaq - virtual dials, electric folding ORVM etc
6. The Slavia has better dynamics both in ride and handling than the Kushaq

The Slavia is 1.1L cheaper for the top end 1.0 TSI AT Style vs the Kushaq Style 1.0 TSI AT.

There is only one thing the Kushaq does better and thats the ground clearance which the Kushaq has 9mm additional over the Slavia.

Remember when going to the showroom that Skoda is charging 12K per mm extra for the Kushaq's ground clearance vs the Slavia.

To me this package seems far more complete and a no brainer even if I wanted a SUV badly. I would change and get the Slavia.

[gopi_rm]

Originally Posted by Meph1st0

Have a question on the Slavia 3-point seatbelt design. The 3-point seatbelt for the middle passenger in the rear seat is not bolted onto the chassis at the top. From the pic below, it looks like the seat belt passes around the rear.

It is same in my Mk7 Golf which has 60:40 split. I’m sure the safety mechanisms have been properly designed and tested because the same design is used in almost all VAG cars for decades.
The main disadvantage with Yaris design is that the folded down space cannot be utilised properly.

[speedracer05]

I did a slavia 1.0 automatic TD today.. it tugged at the heart right away! Had a big smile driving this thing. 1.0L turbo reached high speeds effortlessly and I could confidently carry a lot of speed into corners (no drama at all).
Plastic quality, features, price premium etc etc aside.. to me its the best drivers car south of 20 lakhs by a mile!. It’s a true successor to rapid that offers a lot of features, space and creature comforts while still being super fun to drive.
It drives a LOT better than Kushaq due to lower GC and lower weight. The GC is high enough and this is a better choice over Kushaq for most.

[audioholic]

Originally Posted by Vid6639

There is only one thing the Kushaq does better and thats the ground clearance which the Kushaq has 9mm additional over the Slavia.

Not just the ground clearance. The Kushaq has better seating at the rear. The seats are placed higher, there is greater headroom and the legroom also seems to be better. I didnt believe this in the first place but after sitting back to back in the rear seat of both cars, I found the Kushaq to be better and had to believe the salesman. The length advantage of the Slavia over Kushaq only shows in the boot and not in the cabin space.

But yes, on the other hand I do not see a point buying the Kushaq unless someone is really insisting on the compact SUV factor. Another issue being the ingress and egress of the rear seat. In the Kushaq you just turn around and walk out of the rear seat whereas in the Slavia, it is slightly tougher.

[TheHelix0202]

Not too off topic, but you know that sedans are a dying breed and are watered down so much when you see them being compared to a compressed SUV (regardless of them sharing chassis). Meme material right there. That’s all I see everyone talking about: Slavia-Kushaq; Kushaq-Slavia…

[Vid6639]

Originally Posted by TheHelix0202

Not too off topic, but you know that sedans are a dying breed and are watered down so much when you see them being compared to a compressed SUV (regardless of them sharing chassis). Meme material right there. That’s all I see everyone talking about: Slavia-Kushaq; Kushaq-Slavia…

That's the only ways Sedans will sell now.

Nobody wants low slung sedans that handle like its on rails but can't clear a Bangalore speedbreaker. Those days are long gone.

[audioholic]

Originally Posted by Meph1st0

Have a question on the Slavia 3-point seatbelt design. The 3-point seatbelt for the middle passenger in the rear seat is not bolted onto the chassis at the top.

But am wondering will such a design be as effective as that in Yaris is holding the passenger? It looks like a two-point seatbelt but wound around the seat to make it three-point.

Good observation. But, it is just a matter of Japanese design v/s German design. I would have the opposite opinion as you, that the Toyota design is much more of a challenge compared to the German one since you need to have a strong cross member there just for the sake of providing a safe mounting for the third row seats. In my Innova, the last row middle passenger has their three point seatbelt coming out of the roof. I would call this an eyesore.

Originally Posted by nitkel

Quite an observation that! The only thing preventing the middle passenger from being propelled into the front will be the quality and load bearing ability of the seat back locking clips. Hope Skoda has actually designed them to bear the load during an accident, but prima facie it looks like a jugaad!

Sorry, those are armchair comments and must be taken with a pinch of salt. In continuation to my reply to the OP, the idea of having a center seatbelt within the seat itself is not unique to the Slavia or Kushaq. The same is present on practically any German car be it Kodiaq, Tiguan, and a lot of other brands sold in EU which also means it would be Euro NCAP compliant. They cant pass that with a jugaad setup. The same has been carried over to these cars as well. For this arrangement to work well, all we need is a rigid locking mechanism for the seat that doesnt give way during a frontal impact and a seatback which doesnt flex. The Kushaq as far as I saw has a rigid seat back locking mechanism. The seatbelt would be routed from the top of the seatback and then bolted to the floor itself and not to the seatback.

Compared to this, the Yaris has the center seatbelt mounted on top of the cross member which is a sheet metal structure, which can also be compromised if we doubt. But unfortunately all these cars have met certain crash test standards and hence, each manufacturer has done their own homework and chosen what works better for them.

If you notice another thing, in the Yaris, even the ISOFIX mounts are welded to the floor compared to the seatback as in these German cars. Neither would have passed crash tests if they were any sort of jugaad.

The other aspect is, the presence of rear seat belt pretensioners. Both the Kushaq and Slavia have pretensioners for all three occupants at the rear. This is typically done to ensure that whatever is the small flex that the seatback offers, is compensated by the retraction of the pretensioner. I believe this is a segment first and similar to the approach taken in the higher priced siblings of the VAG group. So considering all this, I am sure that the sort of arrangement of these seat belts at the rear do not pose a risk, and are definitely not afterthoughts in any way. So please do not speculate on these matters. Hope this clarifies.

Originally Posted by ToThePoint

Yaris design is anyday better and will hold you in place tightly in cases like rear ending. NOT CLEVER on SKODA's part!

A rear ending will hold you in place tightly without the need of a seat belt, forget pretensioner. You just need a seatbelt during rear ending to hold you from moving laterally or due to subsequent collision. Why would the passenger move forward in a rear ending? Did I get my physics wrong?