[avisidhu]

Originally Posted by zalaps

Believe me 80% of 6+ passenger personal buyer does not look for offroad/sports kind of thing. You do not want your 60+ & 6+ passengers in jumping state in rear seats. That's where Innova/Xylo comes in to the picture.

That's where Innova does come into picture, however not the Xylo. It has many strengths no doubt, but high speed behavior isn't one of them.
This is OT, but why do people think that the Xylo hasn't been successful? Hasn't it been garnering respectable numbers every month?

Also, fully agree that the Innova is no slouch on road. You can notice one going in a stop go traffic and will come to the same conclusion. Might be having a low top speed though (140-150 types).

[suhaas307]

All other positive parameters aside, there is one reason why the Innova has done exceptionally well in the Indian market. It's the Toyota badge that has helped the Innova fly out of Toyota showrooms all over the country. As simple as that.

[avingodb]

Durability of the vehicle as a whole is important. Recently travelled in a 2007 Innova to Agra. Despite the 180,000 kms under its belt it did exceedingly well. And not to forget, this was a tourist vehicle so one can only imagine the kind of abuses it must have gone through in this journey!

[aravind84]

Originally Posted by suhaas307

All other positive parameters aside, there is one reason why the Innova has done exceptionally well in the Indian market. It's the Toyota badge that has helped the Innova fly out of Toyota showrooms all over the country. As simple as that.

Perfect.. Also add on it , innova came out to the market as a roll up version of the qualis.

Qualis already set the tune in the market and innova being a new addition was instantly caught on the wagon .. This i think is the key success

[SS-Traveller]

Originally Posted by ajay0612

...the power is not much. Is it due to it being an obsolete technology engine? I am sure there is some catch which I am unable to understand. After-all it is not selling in such huge quantity for no reasons.
- If it has obsolete inefficient engine than why it is still so popular, selling almost double than Xylo which is much cheaper?

Could you please elaborate on the reasons why you consider the Innova's to be an obsolete inefficient engine? Do you consider the Xylo to have a more modern and efficient engine?

Is the torque enough to make Leh ladakh kind of trip carrying 6+ adults?

How much torque would you consider to be "enough" to do a trip to Ladakh? Would you consider a Chevy Cruze with 327 N-m of torque to be a better vehicle to do such a trip in?

[ajay0612]

Originally Posted by SS-Traveller

Could you please elaborate on the reasons why you consider the Innova's to be an obsolete inefficient engine? Do you consider the Xylo to have a more modern and efficient engine?

..........................Innova.. .. ... .. Xylo
Displacement (cc) .. 2494 . .. . . . 2498
Power (PS@rpm) .. 102@5600 ... 114@3800
Torque ( Nm@rpm) 200@1400 ... 260@1800
Why use so much of cubic capacity when the similar specs can be delivered by a lighter more fuel efficient smaller engine (like that of Swift)?
(Edit: I have gone through the whole thread and now know some reasons for it. Thanks)

How much torque would you consider to be "enough" to do a trip to Ladakh? Would you consider a Chevy Cruze with 327 N-m of torque to be a better vehicle to do such a trip in?

I consider Swift's torque just enough for such a trip i.e. around 18Nm/100Kg (kerb wt. 1060Kg). In case of Innova it is around 12.5Nm/100Kg (kerb wt. 1585Kg).

[avisidhu]

Originally Posted by ajay0612

I consider Swift's torque just enough for such a trip i.e. around 18Nm/100Kg (kerb wt. 1060Kg). In case of Innova it is around 12.5Nm/100Kg (kerb wt. 1585Kg).

Strictly it terms of taking such a trip, how much torque a vehicle generates shouldn't be major deciding factor IMO. You might have already seen no_enthu_da taking an Alto in that epic leh travelougue. Someone has done it on a Nano for crying out loud!

In fact being a diesel, the Innova posseses enough low end grunt for such a trip. It's the high revving petrol vehicles that might pose issues, BHP figures nowithstanding. Besides, no other vehicle can fulfill the main criteria for such a trip to the extent Innova does (in it's price bracket): Comfort, GC and reliability.

[raj_5004]

Originally Posted by avisidhu

Also, fully agree that the Innova is no slouch on road. You can notice one going in a stop go traffic and will come to the same conclusion. Might be having a low top speed though (140-150 types).

if you are talking about acceleration, I dont think the innova is quick. infact competitors like scorpio, safari, XUV5OO & even xylo eats it.

if you are talking about drivability, it has decent drivability but still nowhere near the best.

Originally Posted by SS-Traveller

Could you please elaborate on the reasons why you consider the Innova's to be an obsolete inefficient engine? Do you consider the Xylo to have a more modern and efficient engine?

Yes, i do think the innova has an outdated and inefficient engine. Tata's DICOR & Mahindra's mHawk is not only quicker but is also more refined & fuel efficient as well.

Many here claim that innova is more refined that scorpio & safari. Guys, do a back to back test drive to find out the difference.

[Aroy]

Low tech engines in general mean lower revving engines, which translate into a long lasting engines. For commercial users it is the longevity and not performance that is of paramount importance. Do you think that a taxi driver will drive all out at 140, if the FE is low? I do not think so.

Another thing that we tend to forget is that diesel engines, especially "low tech" and relatively slower speed have enough torque at the lower RPM to propel the vehicle effortlessly. Have you ever thought how the 40-60 HP engines of the older geeps allowed them to traverse pretty awful off-road conditions, where the modern high speed 120+ HP vehicles can get stuck? In the end it is the torque at the working speed that matters, and not "Peak" torque or "Peak" HP. That is why both Qualis and Innova are so successful - they have the torque where it matters, speeds sufficient for commercial use and longevity which beats competition hollow.

Higher capacity, lower speed engines generate a lot of torque at lower end of the torque curve, while lower capacity higher speed engines at the upper end.

[raj_5004]

Originally Posted by Aroy

For commercial users....

Do you think that a taxi driver will drive all out at 140...

speeds sufficient for commercial use and longevity which beats competition hollow.

Agreed... for commercial purposes & taxi drivers. what about the private sector? so innova should be tagged a "taxi" now?

And i dont agree that all modern diesel engines suffer from low end torque. infact, mHawk feels more peppier at lower rpms than D-4D.

[Aroy]

Originally Posted by raj_5004

Agreed... for commercial purposes & taxi drivers. what about the private sector? so innova should be tagged a "taxi" now?

And i dont agree that all modern diesel engines suffer from low end torque. infact, mHawk feels more peppier at lower rpms than D-4D.

1. Commercial users are excellent judges of VFM. If they vote with their money, then you can be assured of
. Long life
. trouble free ownership
. low cost of repairs
. good reliability

Now I am all for the above. Performance for sheer performance is fine if I have a separate vehicle for each function - fun (Joy?), commuting, off roading and carting the whole family & a few relatives to picnic. As most of us have neither the finances nor space to indulge in multiple vehicle ownership, we look for an all round performer. Remember that the Mercedes were the first choice of Taxi Operators, till new fangled electronics ruined the reliability. Toyotas are the taxi drivers first choice in most of Far East. So do you stop buying Mercedes or Toyota? I believe the Four Seasons Hotel has just acquired a fleet of 7 series (There goes BMW).

2. In this and other forums, there have been quite a few comments on the low speed performance and apparent torque of the new breed of engines - 2.2L Scorpio and Safari with the older 2.6L CRDI and the 3.0L engines respectively. Most of the users who had used both, were of the opinion that the older higher capacity engines could some how pull the vehicle at low speed through mud easily, while the newer engines required clutch slipping at times. As I have no experience in any of these engines, I am relying on their say so.

[aaggoswami]

Originally Posted by raj_5004

Agreed... for commercial purposes & taxi drivers. what about the private sector? so innova should be tagged a "taxi" now?

And i dont agree that all modern diesel engines suffer from low end torque. infact, mHawk feels more peppier at lower rpms than D-4D.

I agree. Raj, you have a point here.
As the Swift is now also dragged into this discussion, I would give example of Swift. The diesel engine of Swift needs no introduction, its a small diesel unit powering relatively large car. The car is quick, and for sure an Innova cannot catch an aggressively driven Swift.

We all agree that Innova engine lasts long. But at the same time can we say that Swift motor does not last long ? I have seen 2.5 lakh kms. done Swift without issues, and many more Swift with more than 1.5 lakh kms. Modern motors also last quite long and newer materials do have a positive effect.

Innova motor is too much of a compromise in the present times, specially on power front. And biggest negative point is that Toyota they have kept the engine almost 40% detuned on power front ( internationally the 2.5 unit produces 143 bhp or so with VGT, look for my other post/s in this thread ) and almost 70% down on torque ( VGT 2.5 internationally produces 34 kgm ).

The 102 bhp, 20.4 kgm of torque is good for Taxi, but what about private users ? Xylo, XUV500 and Scorpio prove that power and engine life do not come at a high cost of power. Why only Mahindra examples, even Fortuner is another case where engine life is not coming at cost of Power and/or FE.
Fortuner has a bigger engine, is more unaerodynamic but still get almost similar FE and is a faster car than Innova.

In case of Innova, Toyota is definitely keeping Indians short changed. I believe that a VGT equipped Innova motor detuned to around 120 bhp would help in favor of higher gearing leading to more FE.

[a4anurag]

Originally Posted by SS-Traveller

It's a 2.5.

If it were outdated, it would not have met the BS-IV norms, would it? Technologically, it's got everything a modern engine should. Just because it runs in detuned form with lesser noise suppression (and with slightly less than optimum FE), doesn't mean it's outdated. By that standard, a Harley engine would belong to the 19th century considering the noise it makes and the fuel it guzzles.

+1 SS-Traveller.

Innova is one the biggest success car I have seen in the market and I love this car and would love to buy it. Absolute dream to drive and looks fantastic. The D-4D engine yes is noisy but I love that roar when the engine is revved hard. The Innova is my company's taxi vehicle which has clocked 2.3 lakh kms in just 1.5 years. Its driven rough but still delivers a decent mileage.


Would be nice if guys at Harley read this!

[SS-Traveller]

Originally Posted by raj_5004

Yes, i do think the innova has an outdated and inefficient engine. Tata's DICOR & Mahindra's mHawk is not only quicker but is also more refined & fuel efficient as well.

Many here claim that innova is more refined that scorpio & safari. Guys, do a back to back test drive to find out the difference.

Raj, how do you equate an engine that is less fuel-efficient than another, to be technologically more back-dated? Which are the components (technology) lacking in the D-4D that the mEagle / mHawk engine has?

Also, if your Scorpio engine is turning over at 2500 rpm/100 kmph, and the Innova engine is turning over at 2700 rpm/100 kmph, is the FE a function of technology or just plain physics? Toyota had a reason to put in that gearbox-differential combo, wherein FE suffers but the car gains a few other things as a tradeoff.

Originally Posted by ajay0612

..........................Innova.. .. ... .. Xylo
Displacement (cc) .. 2494 . .. . . . 2498
Power (PS@rpm) .. 102@5600 ... 114@3800
Torque ( Nm@rpm) 200@1400 ... 260@1800
Why use so much of cubic capacity when the similar specs can be delivered by a lighter more fuel efficient smaller engine (like that of Swift)?
(Edit: I have gone through the whole thread and now know some reasons for it. Thanks)

In the Innova vs. Xylo debate, which do you think is a more outdated engine - the D-4D or the mEagle?

Originally Posted by ajay0612

I consider Swift's torque just enough for such a trip i.e. around 18Nm/100Kg (kerb wt. 1060Kg). In case of Innova it is around 12.5Nm/100Kg (kerb wt. 1585Kg).

So you would consider a Cruze to be a better vehicle than the Innova / Scorpio / Safari to take to Ladakh? What is your logic for choosing 18 N-m/100 kg as a minimum torque requirement, without taking into consideration gearing & final drive ratio? One of the poorest torque figures is generated by a Gypsy, yet it can be driven to Ladakh far better than any high-torque large displacement diesel-powered car. What do you say to that?

[ajay0612]

Originally Posted by SS-Traveller

In the Innova vs. Xylo debate, which do you think is a more outdated engine - the D-4D or the mEagle?

I don't know!

So you would consider a Cruze to be a better vehicle than the Innova / Scorpio / Safari to take to Ladakh?

GC is a factor gentleman.

What is your logic for choosing 18 N-m/100 kg as a minimum torque requirement, without taking into consideration gearing & final drive ratio

My experience of driving Swift in hills is the basis. I don't want any less pulling power. Yes, gearing & final drive ratio are factors which can reduce/enhance engine torque output. I don't have such data about Innova/ Xylo/ Swift that is why I had asked the question. Please enlighten me with facts and figures.

One of the poorest torque figures is generated by a Gypsy, yet it can be driven to Ladakh far better than any high-torque large displacement diesel-powered car. What do you say to that?

I agree. Facts and figure would be of great help :-).