[audioholic]

Those who are considering the petrol should also bring in this aspect of the history of Mahindra with petrol engines. Either they have not got it right, or it was just not accepted by the market in huge numbers or both. This time it is a turbocharged petrol engine from what I believe is a Compared to this, they have evolved the MHawk into an excellent and a very mature state with time and this has the track record, great after sales support since this engine is quite popular now in the M&M circle and would also be accepted in the used car market when the time comes to sell the car.

[vb-saan]

Voted for Petrol.

In 2020 the diesel definitely looks like a better option – diesels are Mahindra’s strong point and also better FE and related aspects. However, considering the way the engine scene is evolving, I feel in 5 years or so, the diesel footprint in the passenger car space will diminish further, and it will probably become a niche choice of fuel. That could be an issue for buyers who go for the Thar as a keeper, say for next 10-15 years.

[landcruiser123]

Voted 2.2 diesel due to Mahindra's lack of expertise in petrol engines. I'm not worried about resale, FE etc as Thar will be not be a daily driver.

Originally Posted by GTO

- A diesel SUV will sell much faster in the used market. I owned a Civic and know what a pain it is to sell a slow-selling car nobody wants.

I think times have changed. I hear about used Cretas and Ertigas going at prices that'd raised eyebrows 5 years ago.

[vikred]

Voted for diesel.

This is not just for the Thar. When it comes to turbo-diesel vs turbo-petrol, which are in most cases priced so closed to one another that it's very difficult to justify the purchase of turbo petrol when diesel is still the cheaper fuel (FE is another obvious reason) in many cities.

1. Kia Sonet: 1.0 iMT is priced close to 1.5 turbodiesel.
2. Kia Seltos: the real pricing difference between 1.4 turbo petrol and 1.5 turbo diesel is obfuscated the fact that these two engines are not sold with the variants and/or equipment levels
3. Ditto for Venue and Creta
4. Grand i10 1.0 turbo vs 1.2 turbo diesel
5. XUV300 looks like an exception with on-road price difference being 70k-100k

[KPR]

Kitna deti hai may be last consideration for a thar owner but still that smile a car brings when mileage is in double figure is priceless. So diesel it is for me.

[roy_libran]

Originally Posted by vb-san

Voted for Petrol.

...I feel in 5 years or so, the diesel footprint in the passenger car space will diminish further, and it will probably become a niche choice of fuel. That could be an issue for buyers who go for the Thar as a keeper, say for next 10-15 years.

Exactly my thought process and Vote! Add to it the benefit of a relatively quieter vehicle when I am out in the jungles stalking birds or other mammals.
That said, I am not overly enthused by that TC on the AT version and would have been happier with actually even an AMT, if not a DCT. So, it's wait and watch for me for real world performance reports and issues.

[amol4184]

Originally Posted by KPR

Kitna deti hai may be last consideration for a thar owner but still that smile a car brings when mileage is in double figure is priceless. So diesel it is for me.

Yes. On a full tank, diesel will go much farther too. FE won't be a concern if you are just traveling on highways with fuel stations on both sides but can be handy in rural areas or if you do proper off roading.

[charanreddy]

Voted Diesel. Though I am not averse to Petrols, my last two purchases have been diesel. I may buy a petrol hatch or compact sedan or sedan but when it comes to heavy suv like vehicles, diesel is a no brainier.

[Taruns_Hah]

I test drove the diesel automatic and found it a little bit under-powered, which made me think that the petrol would be a better choice.

Also, i know this sounds a bit naive, but is there any specific reason to think that the fuel economy figures for the petrol will be less than half of what is being claimed by the company, while the diesel will only be 20 - 30% less than their claimed figures?

This can't lead to an apples - to - apples comparison. Either we believe both their numbers or none at all, and go on real life numbers which would take a few months to come out.

But going down to the crux, if the FE figures are so diverse, it would be Diesel. But if the difference is not so drastic, then considering the lower initial cost and also more power, I would prefer the petrol.

[Pancham]

Normally, I prefer petrol but when it comes to the Thar it has to be the diesel. This car begs to be driven and only Diesel can do justice to that. Petrol with the poor FE and range will certainly cut down on the fun.

So, diesel any day.

[teknophobia]

Originally Posted by Taruns_Hah

Also, i know this sounds a bit naive, but is there any specific reason to think that the fuel economy figures for the petrol will be less than half of what is being claimed by the company, while the diesel will only be 20 - 30% less than their claimed figures?

This can't lead to an apples - to - apples comparison. Either we believe both their numbers or none at all, and go on real life numbers which would take a few months to come out.

Historically, this has been the case for pretty much all vehicles. Part of the reason is the efficiency characteristics of the engines across the rpm curves, combined with our typical driving cycles.

[SPIKE ARRESTOR]

Originally Posted by audioholic

Those who are considering the petrol should also bring in this aspect of the history of Mahindra with petrol engines. Either they have not got it right, or it was just not accepted by the market in huge numbers or both.

Sometime around 2008 while I was in the Vehicle Testing Team with Dhabhar Sir, we had a discussion about Scorpio Petrol. M&M had developed Scorpio Petrol for some export markets, like Russia, the engine was from Renault. Don't know how many were sold, but the Petrol version wasn't much successful. It was a very powerful, smooth and refined engine, but with a host of problems back then.

Dhabhar Sir had a Scorpio LX Diesel as his CTC car. On asking him if he would buy a Scorpio Petrol, this is what he answered in his typical style :

"If it is a CTC car, then it doesn't matter to me, as the company pays for my fuel bills, mereko to bas chamcha dabane ka hai (I only drive it hard). But if buying as an ordinary guy, then NO. Do you think I'm mad to buy a Petrol vehicle which gives me 6 km/l? My Fiats have a better FE and if I go pedal to metal 6 would reduce further".

So there you go.

Spike

[travelling owl]

Voted Diesel. Petrol for SUV's make no sense, i have a Compass Diesel and i get around 14 km/l mileage which is pretty good compared to single digit mileage on Compass Petrol. Plus i like the diesel clutter sound and the feel of diesel over petrol engine.

[swami69]

Irrespective of all the advantages mentioned above in choosing a Diesel, particularly on a Thar, to me, Diesel Sound means - rugged, making presence felt through that clatter, defines character, making a statement - Sound & Size matters like a Diesel Locomotive

Swami

[anshu1101]

Voted for the diesel.

The reasons are already listed in the opening post. The petrol is neither sufficiently cheaper than the diesel nor is the motor high revving. Whereas in the diesel we get that low end torque, a more refined engine than before, an extended tank range, plus it burns a smaller hole in the pocket to run it.