[Poitive]

Originally Posted by dr_TJ

... I currently own a Thar Diesel AT Hardtop, I was looking at the Scorpio-N Z4 Diesel AT as a replacement for Thar. But I have a pretty short daily commute of 15-20 kms a day. Weekend drives of 70-100 kms mostly or sometimes more.
...
I desperately need some serious help.

Do I actually replace the Thar with the ScorpioN Z4 or a Grand Vitara. Or keep the Thar and get a Hatchback for my daily commutes like Ignis or WagonR.

Or wait for some concrete news on the Jimny 5 door to add to the mix and get more confused?

Originally Posted by dr_TJ

Ok, let me elaborate.
1. I have a family of three right now, Me and my Parents.
2. Weekend drive is to the country side with my parents (Visit to home construction site and some work).
3. Not into serious recreational offroading but because of our country side visits, did require to engage 4High to cross a muddy portion of the road. I admit, this doesn't justify me owning a Thar. 4x4 is not an absolute must in my use case, but having 4x4 works like a safety net for the muddy roads we sometimes travel through...
4. So budget won't exceed the price I paid for my Thar (17 lakhs approx), might even go lower.
5. Automatic transmission.
6. Now due to some health issues of my parents this year, I feel it's better If I get a 5 door car soon.
7. Cannot get a secondary car along side the Thar because of financial constraints as well as garage space constraints.

Haven't been able to write normally on the forum for the past week or two, hence the delay in replies.
--------

Mate, just adding some thoughts to the approaches ahead:

Unless you have much benefit from having a 2 car garage (such as an extra car for family visitors, a standby car for emergencies etc), there is a case for having one good car:

• It gives you better overall experience of a higher priced car - your daily drive could be in a 17 lakh car than a 7 lakh car.
• You are also likely to save on maintenance, as whether or not you use your car, you'll anyway need to get it services periodically, and 2 cars are likely to cost more.
• Save on insurance.
• Parking space, if relevant.

Now, one car to work both as a family 5 door vehicle and as a 4x4 off-roader, I don't think there is much choice besides the Scorpio N, which comes with it's disadvantages too as a family and daily vehicle. (I hope you read the extensive test drive report on page 16 of this thread)

• High ingress-egress of the Scropio-N would not be comfortable for aging parents.
• The ride quality is much better than typical smaller vehicles, but really not as good as the unibody competition. Harrier, XUV700, Hector etc are much better; Nissan Kicks too. I expect the Scorpio-N would tire you and your parents significantly more on a long highway trip.
• For regular city and highway use, the unibody vehicles are better suited, as besides comfort, they would also provide better control and should be safer (in preventing an incident).
• FE of the Scorpio N is likely to be a lot worse than others (check the FE post in the TD in this thread - suggested a 24% lesser distance on this vs the XUV700)
• Questionable ergonomics (at least for me - check TD report)
• Niggles of a new Mahindra product.

So, I would say that you should really look hard at whether you need the 4x4 ability or of you can do without it. For the kind of use you describe, if one has the option to turn back and visit another day, being without a 4x4 should not be an issue. Some basic understanding of terrain, the vehicle's capability, and having some caution can usually keep one from getting stuck.

My feeling and impression is that you might be better served by a single, good, non-4x4 unibody vehicle, than distributing the money on two or a Scorpio-N, as this would improve your daily ride - something I give value to.

Suggestions on which specific vehicle would make sense once you are more clear of the direction, and you have checked the Scorpio-N TD report on this thread - link here

~~~~~~~~

Originally Posted by RijuC

For the Scorpio N, I have the following query for use in the hills:...

Mate, will reply properly soon. In the meantime:

• Which car are you comfortable and used to driving?
  (Instincts of someone driving at said speeds on the hills in, say, a Wagon R would be different from someone driving a Swift)
• In case you already aren't, it might help you to go through the posts on HPS vs EPS linked in the post you are talking about.
• I wonder if you've read the Guide to Effective Test Drives thread (link).

PS: My hunch is that while Scropio-N might be an okay vehicle for you, you might be better served by other vehicles.

[RijuC]

Originally Posted by Poitive

Mate, will reply properly soon. In the meantime:

• Which car are you comfortable and used to driving?
  (Instincts of someone driving at said speeds on the hills in, say, a Wagon R would be different from someone driving a Swift)
• In case you already aren't, it might help you to go through the posts on HPS vs EPS linked in the post you are talking about.
• I wonder if you've read the Guide to Effective Test Drives thread (link).

PS: My hunch is that while Scropio-N might be an okay vehicle for you, you might be better served by other vehicles.

1. I have experience of only two cars in the hills- my Swift Petrol MT and my relative's IGNIS AMT. Why I always mention petrol since the characteristics is much different than Diesel.

Apart from the convenience part of AMT in IGNIS, I like my Swift crawling up the slopes. Also, the steering is heavier than the new generation cars, hence I feel better at the extreme turns. For bad roads, low sitting in the Swift is inconvenient. For good tarmac in hills, this sitting position feels superb, exciting and sometimes thrilling- when the road surface edge is above your eye level, just reach the edge and you find a surreal 3D view of the mountains!

Regarding EPS and HPS, I didn't find any issue in Harrier during the brief TD. I don't like the super light steering of new cars, biggest issue in Scorpio N. And you have explained it in details what is the importance of various physical feedbacks.

[Poitive]

Originally Posted by RijuC

For the Scorpio N, I have the following query for use in the hills:
.... Whether these restrictions will be good enough for Scorpio N considering the higher CG and Roll centre and the lack of feedback that Poitive have explained in the Scorpio N review thread (it was an excellent technical article, I won't say it was just a post)? My ETA is always based on average speed of 30 kmph for the destinations in the hills.
...

Originally Posted by RijuC

1. I have experience of only two cars in the hills- my Swift Petrol MT and my relative's IGNIS AMT. Why I always mention petrol since the characteristics is much different than Diesel.

Apart from the convenience part of AMT in IGNIS, I like my Swift crawling up the slopes. Also, the steering is heavier than the new generation cars, hence I feel better at the extreme turns. ...
...

~~~~~~~~

Originally Posted by Poitive

Safety Equipment in Cars
(and some notes on the safety of the Scropio N)
------------------------------------------------------------

.....

Is Scorpio N safe? Prone to toppling? (Part 1)
(I meant to post this on the Choosing and SUV thread, but due to the current context posting here)

While driving a car, what is very important besides the car obeying our commands (dynamics) is also that it gives us the right feedback about it's interaction with it's surroundings and it's limits. Most focus on the first and tend to ignore the latter - I guess it even skips the attention of most.

Many rejoice the low bodyroll in the Scorpio-N. Yes, it is good on that front. If car designers want, they can eliminate bodyroll. It is very much doable by having a roll-centre at the height of the center of gravity of the vehicle. Why don't they do it? Besides other reasons (jacking effect leading to instability etc), bodyroll is also a feedback mechanism, which tells the driver of how close the vehicle is getting to it's limits, allowing the driver to adjust and drive accordingly.

Lower bodyroll also means lesser feedback for such situations. Sedans and hatches having a low centre of gravity are much lesser prone to rolling over, so it is lesser of a issue. For a high centre-of-gravity vehicle such as the Scropio N, the cost-benifit stacks up differently.

The issue of lack of required feedback further gets enhanced by the Scropio N having an EPS which is quite devoid of such communication - something which the HPS typically provide well. (HPS vs EPS: Link 1, Link 2)

To add insult to the injury, I read about people "upgrading" to much wider tyres, without considering the cons. This can be a double edged sword.

(Part 2) Wider tyres typically mean more traction. How can this be bad? Read on:

If one is moving a car in a circle and keeps increasing it's speed, what will happen? It will either lose traction (skid) or roll over and topple. Right? So, what tells the driver that he is approaching the limit? Bodyroll, steering feel, and understeer/oversteer. The first 2 are iffy in the Scorpio N. Your chance now is for the tyre to skid a little for you to know that you are crossing the limit. Tyres with higher traction delay that signalling (feedback) till you are closer to toppling over.

Further, bear in mind that the Scorpio N is a RWD so would be more prone to oversteer than understeer, which is more unnerving and more difficult to control. The petrol engine, especially, is immensely powerful too.

This is the reason I had suggested @RijuC earlier in the thread to be careful while trying out the Scorpio N in the hills, and also why I suggested those who do not need the abilities of the Scropio N to consider other options (including the XUV700) in my elaborate report on the Scropio N on the Choosing an SUV thread (link to said post here).

The above further emphasises the importance of roll-over-mitigation and ESP in a high CoG vehicle such as the Scropio N, and especially so with it's high Roll-Centre design (which reduces the bodyroll).

I say the above out of concern for fellow-mates. If/when you get your Scorpio-N SUVs, please do drive accordingly and not get carried away. This one has the ability to get emotions flowing. If you plan to upgrade tyres, do keep the above in mind.

[Disclaimer: Though the above is highly likely correct, I do not claim to be any specialist auto-engineer, and am sharing what I understand, how I understand it, and it forms a part of my assessment of vehicles, including for our own purchases.]
~~~~~~~~

For the convenience of the readers of this thread, for proper context, and that I meant to post those points on this thread, have quoted the relevant section of the post, which @RijuC kindly referred to as a technical article.

Scorpio N, RijuC, and a bit on safety.

The below isn't only for RijuC, but also a more general sharing of thoughts on the subject.

• Short answer: Keep margins for going slower, if you want to keep the actual risk of an accident similar or lower. Also, low speed crawling should not be an issue in any high-torque diesel. Now for details:
  .
• Had you said Wagon R, I would have been more comfortable saying that the Scorpio N was likely to be workable at similar speeds with a similar risk of an accident; with a Swift as a benchmark, unlikely to be so, as the Swift has a pretty low CoG better weight distribution (been long since I experienced either of them, though). However much depends on the driver, and what they perceive as acceptable risk on the road. Hence, I don't think one can answer about specific speeds. Much also depends on driver skills, perception, familiarity with local conditions, comfort with the kind of vehicle, condition of vehicle etc etc.
  .
• Like many SUVs, Scorpio N has a disadvantage in the hills with a higher CoG and excessive width (for the internal space provided) - and it is more than other SUVs. This too slows one down, and would be prominent on busier roads, narrower roads, roads with more bends, and while overtaking buses and lorries safely, etc. The petrol variant's engine should help, but I would be very careful with it on low-traction surfaces, due to it's immense power and it being a RWD (oversteer nightmare on a bend on the hills!).
  .
• Had you been used to something like the old Scorpio for a decade, as @JKBKS has, things might have been somewhat different, as instincts would be different. One instinctively interprets feedback differently based on the vehicle they are used to (also the reason for diverse views on the same car by many).
  .
• Regarding Oversteer: The other issue, more so on the hills, is how one might unexpectedly end up being on a low traction surface - oil spills, (soapy?) water overflow from an adjoining property, sand/gravel on the road, etc.
  .
• When a vehicle goes from a condition of control and composure to being in little control/out of control, there is a transition. This transition has to be gradual for the average driver to sense it and be able to adapt before going out of control.
  
  Of course, one can't be sure, but there are indications that for the Scorpio N, for on-road use, this transition would be lesser than the typical car one is used to driving. This raises a concern. One might feel that all is well, and quite suddenly, things can go bad.
  .
• With the above in mind, while many might go around at speeds without realizing how close they are to the limit. This would only really be realized when one is in a tight spot, or nearing an accident - which might be too late. This would be more so in the case of ones without the extra safety aids of modern cars.
  
  This aspect would get a bit reduced for someone who mainly drives only a Scropio N, as instincts would gradually adapt, but this adaption might only be a smallish factor, as one might still not realize enough about how close one is to the limit.
  .
• As roughly said in the Scorpio N report, most cars can go at high speeds, what matters is how they prepare us for bad situations (feedback etc), and how well they can handle them. Scorpio N does not seem great at either (though it may not be as obvious, as it would 'feel' confident); which is why I suggested that one should not get carried away with the marketing talk.

Didn't want to elaborate further on an already way-too-lengthy TD report, but the above were also reasons to recommend those who do not need the 4x4 to consider other options seriously. For those who will actually use the 4x4, there is little else in the price range, and this is a wonderful package.

[The disclaimer in the last quoted post, of course, still applies, as it would to all my posts.]

~~~~~~~~

Regarding EPS and HPS, I didn't find any issue in Harrier during the brief TD. I don't like the super light steering of new cars, biggest issue in Scorpio N. And you have explained it in details what is the importance of various physical feedbacks.

With this in mind, please check my older lengthy reply to you - worth considering the Harrier, and the Kicks is certainly worth a TD for you. They are the only ones in the the segment (besides Innova) which have an HPS. They also have a lower CoG than a Scorpio N, and even the XUV700, and Hector (which also has lesser track width). They would be a good stepping stone from the stable low Swift to the high CoG vehicles.

Originally Posted by RijuC

... Here I have to tell something about myself- due to my background, the actions and reactions, control and out of control scenarios always play in my mind.

They would also help with the above scenarios. My gripe with the Kicks was it's engine character due to my being used to the immense torque of the Magnum Diesel. Coming from the Swift, it is likely to be exciting. A gizmo filled version might be within budget, but please check on other aspects - my TD was done for a limited purpose.

I would urge you to go through the links mentioned earlier before further details. I have avoided short answers which might lead to improper understanding and it takes a lot of time. The HPS vs EPS post also touches upon other things, as does the Scorpio N report, and some points in the Guide to Effective TD too.
~~~~~

OT Rant:

The other thing also is how I have written posts with much details for some, sometimes asked other's to reply, and they have quite disappeared without even so much as an acknowledgement of the post (not talking about you, @RijuC), and are seen posting in other threads, and that leaves a poor taste.

Our forum is more than a buyer's market-place with a FAQ/Q&A - it is a community, and let us try and keep it that way.

Cheers, and thanks for bearing the rant.

[BleueNinja]

Originally Posted by Poitive

~~~~~~~~

As roughly said in the Scorpio N report, most cars can go at high speeds, what matters is how they prepare us for bad situations (feedback etc), and how well they can handle them. Scorpio N does not seem great at either (though it may not be as obvious, as it would 'feel' confident); which is why I suggested that one should not get carried away with the marketing talk.

One gripe i have with ScorpioN is that it's steering wheel is quite deceiving. While many praise the steering for its "lightness" which has become the norm these days it isn't so confidence inspiring and doesn't provide you appropriate feedback of what your SUV is going through which is important specially when driving a Huge SUV like scorpioN.

I also felt that it doesn't match the character? Or scorpioN. It reminded me of Hyundai's of old. A easy manuverable car need not have light steering but a precise one. [ I mean no offense to prospective buyers or people who are set to receive their SUV]

Originally Posted by Poitive

They are the only ones in the the segment (besides Innova) which have an HPS. They also have a lower CoG than a Scorpio N, and even the XUV700, and Hector (which also has lesser track width). They would be a good stepping stone from the stable low Swift to the high CoG vehicles.

Scorpio Classic and ScorpioN (z2-z4) also have HPS
Personally, i was apprehensive about HPS (you would know Poitive ) but now after driving Harrier close to 1300 kms in 3 weeks or so since i bought it, it's been super fun.

[RijuC]

Originally Posted by BleueNinja

Scorpio Classic and ScorpioN (z2-z4) also have HPS.

Only Diesel manual in Z2 and Z4 variants get the HPS, petrol and AT variants get the EPS.

During the brief TD of Harrier, I didn't face any problem due to the HPS. In fact I didn't understand it is HPS.

[BleueNinja]

Originally Posted by RijuC

Only Diesel manual in Z2 and Z4 variants get the HPS, petrol and AT variants get the EPS.

That's correct, I didn't explicitly mention Diesel+Manual because Poitive's requirement is Diesel Manual hence i just stated the variants.

Originally Posted by RijuC

During the brief TD of Harrier, I didn't face any problem due to the HPS. In fact I didn't understand it is HPS.

It isn't a problem as such. The general concensus amongst masses is that steering is heavy and cumbersome during traffic snarls or at parking speed.

To be honest i never felt so and i wouldn't question anyone's judgement on that as well because what car we currently drive or what experiences we have had with our previous vehicle shapes our preferences and feedback we get from our potential next vehicle. Ofcourse condition of Test drive vehicle matters as well

[RijuC]

One technical query:

A large size turbocharged Petrol engine vs. Diesel engine- which one would be better (considering BS6 regime) at an altitude beyond El. + 3500 mtrs above MSL, i.e., the tree line where air pressure is low and oxygen level is insufficient to support plant growth? Or this aspect does not matter and performance is dependent entirely on engine output parameters, tuning and performance characteristics?

[Behemoth]

Originally Posted by RijuC

One technical query:

A large size turbocharged Petrol engine vs. Diesel engine- which one would be better (considering BS6 regime) at an altitude beyond El. + 3500 mtrs above MSL, i.e., the tree line where air pressure is low and oxygen level is insufficient to support plant growth? Or this aspect does not matter and performance is dependent entirely on engine output parameters, tuning and performance characteristics?

The best in this situation are Naturally aspirated diesels like the Mahindra Pikups and boleros. They are ones which can run pretty well in the hills. I have also seen previous gen Scorpions and Innovas running flawlessly even in Leh. The newer generation of Turbo cars be it petrol or diesel both suffer challenges even though they are taken through intense high altitude testing. These often suffer loss of power and sensor errors. Your best best would be high capacity NA diesel engine if your usage is very frequently at such high altitudes.
If you still need a turbo car, a turbo diesel will still be better as it has more low end torque and can take the inclines better.

[Poitive]

Originally Posted by shancz

- Asian would be more apt, as long as the Koreans don't start to "maximise profits" by cheapening their internal components

OT: Rants
- ... that rounded plastic frame on the rear of the XUV700 which was there to house the previous Mahindra logo reminded me of him...

- I am less mad at cheapening which is obvious and visible. When things like safety are compromised under the hood, and kept away from public, it stinks. The visible part is a part of the offering and the consumer has a choice whether or not to accept them.

What has been good about them is that they are generally reliable and Hyundai has a widespread network, making it a practical choice as they too have several dealers in major cities.

- [OT: I so much prefer the older Mahindra Logo. It had a gentler appearance. This one is like it is trying too hard to stand out, whereas the older one was more graceful. If I happen to end up with a Mahindra, I think I will try to get the old logo installed.]

Originally Posted by shancz

Agree and TML's service has to partly shoulder the blame. Although its quite intriguing as it had a pretty easy market when it was launched and there was a lot of interest but the sales didn't measure up.

- The value of money in today's automotive world needs a thread in itself.
- Agree Hector still fits your requirements best except your sour sales experience and future of MG concerns.

- Partly agree. With a hyper-connected world, we find issues with the service of most manufacturers. One just needs to dig in a bit. Tata appears to suffer from a poor image, carried over from the time when Maruti was the predominant other player in the market; later Hyundai too. It was clearly worse than them, but in today's market, I am not so sure it is as bad as it is made to seem.

A lot of what we read are opinions based on other's views and experiences. Once a view has gained sufficient traction, the ones who favour it tend to be more vocal about it (as there will be little contradiction from others), and ones who differ tend to avoid it ("needless" hassle). This further propagated popular views. This also goes for aspects about cars and their design - the steering (HPS vs EPS) being one such example.

- 20 Lakhs which seemed like a healthy sum to get a good car suddenly now seems barely adequate! All in a year.

- Hector: It wasn't just the dealer, but also what I saw of the company which really put me off. Another story for another day.

~~~~~~~~

Originally Posted by BleueNinja

One gripe i have with ScorpioN is that it's steering wheel is quite deceiving...

I also felt that it doesn't match the character? Or scorpioN. It reminded me of Hyundai's of old. A easy manuverable car need not have light steering but a precise one. ...

Interestingly enough, both have been well received by the market. Hyundai too was praised for such (not talking about the forum).

On the precision matter, for a vehicle of it's size, bulk, and high CoG, I did not have any complaints with the Scorpio N. In fact, IIRC it was decently good. I expect the suspension design played a bigger role here, with the high roll centre making the transfer of weight from one side to the other a bit easier, I suppose. The suspension design also allowed it to be quite agile, and a bit more sedan/hatch-like than what it's size might suggest. My issue was with the lack of feedback and it being way too light, and totally out of character with the rest of the vehicle, and not conducive for proper control of such a vehicle.

Originally Posted by BleueNinja

- Scorpio Classic and ScorpioN (z2-z4) also have HPS

Personally, i was apprehensive about HPS (you would know Poitive ) but now after driving Harrier close to 1300 kms in 3 weeks or so since i bought it, it's been super fun.

- Ah, yes, they do. The lower powered models were off the radar for me and totally skipped off my mind. Thanks for pointing out, BleueNinja mate. IIRC both have a similar state of tune of the engine in diesel.

- I sure do!
So happy that you're enjoying your new vehicle, and wishes for you to continue to do so. It has so much to offer, this one.

~~~~~~~~

High Altitude - Turbo Diesel vs Turbo Petrol vs Naturally Aspirated Engines

Originally Posted by RijuC

One technical query:

A large size turbocharged Petrol engine vs. Diesel engine- which one would be better (considering BS6 regime) at an altitude beyond El. + 3500 mtrs above MSL, i.e., the tree line where air pressure is low and oxygen level is insufficient to support plant growth? Or this aspect does not matter and performance is dependent entirely on engine output parameters, tuning and performance characteristics?

Not sure exactly which parameter you are looking at for being better (power, FE, reliability, drivability etc). Sharing some points generally (as I might not be able to write a long answer very soon). A lot of the following will be with lesser certainty than usual, as a lot of it is based on only a general/conceptual understanding on my part, and based on casual readings over time; but yes, some experience too:

1. Most importantly: a large Turbo Diesel would mean a DPF, and there are reports of them having issues at high altitudes. I have heard of XUV700 and Alturas from the Mahindra stable have issues, but can't say how reliable the reports are (typical online stuff, not from friends). I don't think this would be a Mahindra-specific issue. This could also well be due to the driver not taking adequate precautions.

With Covid interrupting, the DPF based BS6 vehicles appear to have had lesser testing than what they may otherwise have had. It is new technology, so some things might still need to be fine-tuned for such conditions. I too have this concern, but am prepared to take due precautions before any such trip.

2. As we to go higher altitudes, the air is less dense, so the mixture in the combustion chamber has lesser oxygen to burn, leading to a richer mix and poor combustion - lower FE and lesser power. Diesels are said to get affected a bit lesser than petrols.

3. A naturally aspirated engine, as a broad rule of thumb, loses about 3% of power for very 1000 ft of height gain over sea level. So calculate the power available accordingly. At 10,000 ft, one loses 30%.

4. A turbo engine, by some accounts loses about 1% per 1000 ft height gain. This is highly subjective and with many conditions in the case of Turbos.

Why do turbocharged vehicles lose lesser?
The air loss they have is significantly compensated by the turbo running at a higher level. Turbochargers, after all, do push in air into the combustion chamber to provide the extra torque and power, so this is quite a part of their design.

Would the compensation because of turbo be the same regardless of elevation?
No, since the Turbo has to work extra to compensate, it would differ based on how much extra load the turbo system can handle (there are other factors too). To prevent the system from overburden and consequent failure, the ECU could have limiters for the turbocharger in place; limiters which would work based on various sensors feeding it info.

Remember, air pressure is only one parameter. The ambient temperature too has a role to play (cold air is denser than warm air), as do other factors like load, incline etc.

So, for lesser heights, depending on the design of the system, a turbo-charged vehicle might have very little loss as the turbo compensates, and after a certain height, ambient temperature, design, and the turbo nearing the limit, the losses in power (and FE) would increase.

This is why it is more difficult to generalize the loss in case of turbo vehicles.

5. Further, what will matter is how powerful the vehicle is. If it has lesser power to start with, the reduction would make things tedious and strain the system more, increasing the chance of failure. It would also be more tedious to drive.

6. Where NA engines would have the advantage would be that their torque and power curves are relatively smoother as compared to Turbos, thereby not having the lag and turbo-boost. Turbolag and boost can be bothersome for many people who are not adept at handling it, especially with lower power at disposal and while managing steep inclines. (Turbolag: changing gear shifting patterns - also by using a suitable mode in AT - and some change in throttle input can manage it after getting used to it)

7. Further if they (NA) have sufficient power, they will be easier to drive. Also, being simpler in design, with lesser parts, fewer sensors etc, they have lesser points failure; also as they would need lesser management of factors than the relatively complex management of turbos in such a situation.

8. To see how powerful a vehicle it to take in the loss in power due to elevation can be somewhat tricky. the figures we see are peak figures and are often not the range one usually drives in. More true for NA petrol engines, as the peak power would typically be at a very high RPM.

Turbo peak figures too could be misleading as the power delivery is more peaky, and suffers relative to peak power at lower RPMs.

Sufficient torque/ton at lower RPMs would be a good factor to consider.


All the above said, barring the DPF issue, for occasional use, most vehicles would be able to handle the above heights, despite lower power with due breaks and sensible driving. One might need to be in a lower gear, which would cost fuel and might mean heating up of the engine and other parts thereby needing more frequent breaks.

[shancz]

Originally Posted by Poitive

1. When things like safety are compromised under the hood, and kept away from public, it stinks.
2. What has been good about them is that they are generally reliable and Hyundai has a widespread network, making it a practical choice as they too have several dealers in major cities.

1. I meant the same by cheapening of internal components like the issues with brakes, steering, reports of uncontained engine failures which have been reported on the forum. Won't list them here to avoid sidetracking.
But if you haven't, do check out some insights on the platform/structure in the following threads :

• RSR: Hyundai (Are Indian Hyundais different from developed market Hyundais? If so, how?)
• RSR: Kia (Are Indian Kias different from developed-market Kias? If so, how?)

2. Agree and their cars also have a very uplifting feel to them(especially the Asta trims) along with the features on offer making it a hard to resist buy. Case in point being the i10 Nios and the i20. Exudes quality and good workmanship and I hope, going forward, this extends to safety as well.

Originally Posted by Poitive

1. Tata appears to suffer from a poor image, carried over from the time when Maruti was the predominant other player in the market; later Hyundai too. It was clearly worse than them,
2. I am not so sure it is as bad as it is made to seem.
3. Once a view has gained sufficient traction, the ones who favour it tend to be more vocal about it (as there will be little contradiction from others), and ones who differ tend to avoid it ("needless" hassle). This further propagated popular views. This also goes for aspects about cars and their design - the steering (HPS vs EPS) being one such example.

1. Agree, most issues seem to be reported from large and legacy dealers who in cases span across cities/regions. During the early days of the Swift, Maruti dealers and salesmen were high headed too, Hyundai was clearly the opposite and better. But over time Maruti seems to have brought them back to ground.

2. It seems worse as Tata cars(especially the Harrier/Safari) haven't been trouble free and dealer apathy(which impacts all brands) makes it worse, so the number of complaints increases. Like the recent issue where the ASC was going to change one of the rear seat to change a broken latch/cable and bill the customer. After posting on the forum(maybe some other places too) the seat was replaced free of charge IIRC. This also highlights the cluelessness of TML/ASC in handling which prima facie seems like a simple repair job. Persisting issues with the infotainment system is another issue.
But the most unfortunate part, to me, is that quite often Tata sides with the dealers and only on pestering/social media outrage is when the HQ accepts any mistake and makes amends. Although Jeep India is aiming to dethrone Tata from that spot

3. Absolutely and involuntarily we contribute to the same. But seems like the trend these days is to take it to social media for a quick resolution/last resort and it has its pros and cons which is for everyone, including manufacturers and buyers, to decide. I would always go for a robust internal feedback and redressal mechanism over any media, any day.

Originally Posted by Poitive

20 Lakhs which seemed like a healthy sum to get a good car suddenly now seems barely adequate! All in a year.

True, a friend booked the XUV700 AX3 Petrol MT for the same amount and it had steel wheels with wheel caps
I couldn't believe what I was witnessing.

Originally Posted by Poitive

I think I will try to get the old logo installed.

They should've changed the shroud by now.

[BleueNinja]

Originally Posted by Poitive

Tata appears to suffer from a poor image, carried over from the time when Maruti was the predominant other player in the market; later Hyundai too. It was clearly worse than them, but in today's market, I am not so sure it is as bad as it is made to seem.

A lot of what we read are opinions based on other's views and experiences. Once a view has gained sufficient traction, the ones who favour it tend to be more vocal about it (as there will be little contradiction from others), and ones who differ tend to avoid it ("needless" hassle). This further propagated popular views. This also goes for aspects about cars and their design - the steering (HPS vs EPS) being one such example.

You are on point here. TATA really needs to up it's game here.
However, tata seems to be working to rectify this. In addition to 1000 kms checkup, TATA arranged a home visit by service folks to see if i have any feedback to share or if i have any doubts/queries or if everything is right with the car, something similar to what VW does.
There are regular feedback calls after service/showroom visit.

Originally Posted by Poitive

- 20 Lakhs which seemed like a healthy sum to get a good car suddenly now seems barely adequate! All in a year.

Originally Posted by shancz

True, a friend booked the XUV700 AX3 Petrol MT for the same amount and it had steel wheels with wheel caps
I couldn't believe what I was witnessing.

Tell me about it

I initially had a budget of 16 lacs for myself. I naively thought i will get everything that i am looking for in this price bracket. Boy o boy How wrong i was.

XUV 700 AX5 D MT, Safari XTA+ and Harrier XZA (post discounts) were costing me the same (i opted for BH number plate)

What you will also see is that variants distribution and those variants are priced as such that you are compelled to move towards a higher variant.

I personally feel Kia Seltos and VW Virtus have variants distribution and pricing done right. Harrier with XMA-S has become a better alternative to XUV 700 AX-3.

OT: a humble request to esteemed members of this forum, please spare me the "pay up" and "business 101" theory. I ended up paying a lot more than i intended.

[chinkara]

Originally Posted by Poitive

Tata Safari (Diesel Manual)
[*]Knee-console issue somewhat better after many adjustments, though still compromised, and disturbing overall comfort.[*]Rear seats were too high for easy ingress and especially egress. Third row wasn’t checked at all.

.

This does my head in. I also could not find a comfortable driving position in my TD of the new Safari. Storme had one of the most comfortable seating for both driver and the rear seat. Why tinker?

[Kosfactor]

Originally Posted by BleueNinja

I personally feel Kia Seltos and VW Virtus have variants distribution and pricing done right. Harrier with XMA-S has become a better alternative to XUV 700 AX-3.

OT: a humble request to esteemed members of this forum, please spare me the "pay up" and "business 101" theory. I ended up paying a lot more than i intended.

You can purchase an XL6 AT which is an MPV meant for city use at ~ 18L along with some accessories, however at times you will feel that it has left it's engine in the parking lot.

Prices have gone northwards, you will pay a lot more than you intended, that is the reality.

Recently a friend of mine suffered greatly at the hands of Acko insurance, it was a case of penny wise - pound foolish. So when you are planning to spend ~20L , choose wisely. A few lakhs here and there won't matter a lot in the 8-10 years that the vehicle stays with you.

[shancz]

Originally Posted by BleueNinja

What you will also see is that variants distribution and those variants are priced as such that you are compelled to move towards a higher variant.

Agree but the XUV700's model split had some glaring omissions like the absense of auto folding side RVMs even in the AX5
If course I don't expect the ADAS to be available on anything but the top trim but auto folding mirrors and alloys missing on a 20-23 lakh car ! Clearly the times have changed and like I have mentioned earlier in the thread, I have become obsolete

[BleueNinja]

Originally Posted by Kosfactor

So when you are planning to spend ~20L , choose wisely. A few lakhs here and there won't matter a lot in the 8-10 years that the vehicle stays with you.

100% agree with you. When you are making a purchase of a car that will serve you for upcoming many years it always makes sense to spend a bit more if financially possible and feasible & get the car or variant you are liking.

Originally Posted by shancz

Agree but the XUV700's model split had some glaring omissions like the absense of auto folding side RVMs even in the AX5
If course I don't expect the ADAS to be available on anything but the top trim but auto folding mirrors and alloys missing on a 20-23 lakh car ! Clearly the times have changed and like I have mentioned earlier in the thread, I have become obsolete

The less said about XUV 700's variant distribution the better.
MX solely exists to get "starting from *" price tag, AX3 exists to get you till AX5. AX5 has to be the "entry" variant to go for if one wants XUV700.
The idea behind having ESP in AX5 Diesel but not in AX5 petrol is still lost on me.
Anyhow the strategy has worked well for Mahindra because AX7 has been the top booked variant for them and rightly so because it's proving to be bang for your buck.