[amitayu]

I opted for a NA simply because of the linearity of power delivery, the smoothness and predictability of it.
Turbos are great fun once it kicks in, but it does feel a bit artificial.
There is also the issue of reliability and maintenance costs about which I am a bit wary as I am not well versed on turbo engines.

I have a Ford dragon series and am quite happy with it, despite Fords being heavier cars.

[Shwet]

A 1.5 Litre NA petrol is still better than a 1.0 or 1.2 litre Turbo petrol. While the latter might feel a little quick ,the maintenance costs of the same would be astronomical. Plus small engines have an inherent disadvantage. The Old adage of no replacement for displacement is actually true here. Three cylinder turbo petrols like in the Nexon are actually quite raucous. The Suzuki 1.5 NA is much better in longevity and refinement than the 1.2 litre Turbo petrols with three cylinders. Bigger engines like 1.4 Hyundai and 2.0 litre MStallion type Turbos would be better in my opinion but than the maintenance clause stands there as well.

A Turbo petrol might be the Brett Lee of the engine world but a higher displacement NA engine is actually the Courtney Walsh of petrol engines. The former might generate higher velocity for short intervals but will suffer creaking joints and sockets and require intensive physiotherapy to remain fit. The latter will continue to run smoothly at decent velocity with an extra reserve whenever the situation demands but will have more durability.

[Mustang Sammy]

Originally Posted by clevermax

Would I buy a Turbo Petrol? No. For me, the turbo fun comes at a higher expense than I can afford on fuel. You start driving a turbo petrol the way you want, FE drops to 7 or 8 kmpl. I'll stick with a turbo-diesel which has decent torque and power and has a lower cut-off of 10 kmpl for FE.

This! The single biggest reason for Turbo petrol adoption has been higher mileage and lower emissions requirements. However, if you drive these engines with any kind of enthusiasm, mileage drops like crazy.
In developed countries, Turbos in regular cars are purely regulation driven. In India, they do give the enthusiasts options other than the underpowered NA engines we are stuck with.

[Swap_Abarth]

Voted no, shifted to 4 cylinders turbo petrol 1.5 years back and loving it.

Small NA engines are uninspiring. I don't like revving the motor too hard. Turbo petrol mid-range punch is much more rewarding.

[niranjanprabhu]

Latest bookings data on the Kia Sonet tell us 40% of the bookings were for the 1.0 turbo petrol, 40% were for the diesel and only 20% were for the 1.2 liter naturally aspirated petrol engines.
Why this news is interesting is that it illustrates how quickly and how far the market is now moving towards high tech engines and the hero of just the earlier season, namely the 1.2 liter naturally aspirated petrol engine, is now relegated to the bottom of the heap and used as bait to get footfalls into the showrooms. The Maruti Swift/Dzire/Baleno, i20 (older version), Honda Jazz/WRV, Tata Altroz, Ford Aspire/Figo/Freestyle are all running naturally aspirated 1.2 liter petrol engines. If we look at the latest sales in this year 2020, the sales of sub 4 meter SUVs where this technology is predominantly at play currently, The Hyundai Group comprising Kia Sonet and Hyundai Venue have sold a combined 82k SUVs and the remaining including market leader Maruti have sold 155k in this most promising and fastest-growing segment of the Indian car market. This represents 35% for the Hyundai Group if we consider this entire year till October. But if we look at the trends over the year, a very different story starts unfolding. In January Maruti's Brezza which then had a diesel engine had 37% market share and Hyundai 24%. In October this has turned around with the Hyundai Twins cornering 39% of the market and Maruti cornering 28% of the market and the Tata Nexon coming 3rd at 13%
Now with Hyundai introducing the brilliant 1.0-liter turbo GDI (Gasolene Direct Injection) mated to the unique 7 Speed Dual Clutch DCT transmission in the 4-meter hatchback segment in the i20, it remains to be seen how customers will respond.

[Ash_vtec]

NA power all the way. Crispness of throttle response, soundtrack, winding it up to the redline, barky cold starts are all great experiences of being a petrol head. Turbos are a different kind of fun and are here to stay with turbo tech constantly evolving, the best turbo is the next turbo. However, NA is fading and one must appreciate them while they can.

I appreciate that asthmatic weezy small NA motors benefit from forced induction and make commuting easier and safer when on the highway planning overtaking etc.

Driving is more than just raw straight-line pace, because if that's the case EVs are the best way forward.

[R2D2]

Make no mistake turbo charged engines are here to stay and they ARE fun to drive too. But I prefer a large displacement NA over an smaller but equivalent output TC motor or a NA motor over TC motor if displacement is equal. There's no replacement for displacement.

NAs are more rev happy (Honda Civic 8G I am thinking of ya ) and fewer parts to wear out. And of course that 1 minute idle rule really is quite a pain. One of my cousin's Skoda Octavia 1.8 TSI had a messed up turbo within some 80K kms IIRC, Skoda quoted him 1.2L. Yeah that car is a real hoot to drive but when I see repair bills like this one I wince and say thanks but no thanks. A 130-140 BHP 1.8L NA motor will do just fine. Just a matter of personal preference and priority I guess.

[Tucker48]

Turbo is just a way to extract more power from a small block. Although it's an evolutionary process but it's not been done the right way. We have just accepted what's been offered to us. If I have my way then I will ban vehicles which fail to deliver linear acceleration. And I don't think we will ever see turbos which deliver linear acceleration, all thanks to EVs.
Drive a NA and turbo engine with similar HP and decide it for yourself which is better.

[tirumalavoleti]

Voted NO.

No offense to NA petrol owners, but anything with out the strong torque would be boring. The power of petrol coupled with the torque makes drives very peppy.

Only current issue is the reliability and FE which I believe would be sorted over years if not decades.

Bye bye NA and Diesel.

[R_Gowardhan]

Voted Yes.

With last 3 years of driving a '11 Jazz Select with a super-boring engine, I realized that sadly I had started to hate driving. I was on the lookout for a Exciting and Fun to Drive petrol Sedan/Hatchback. On paper 1.0 L Turbo engines felt a stupid idea and I felt it will have a lot of flaws. That's when I came across the Skoda Rapid 1.0 TSI. I went to Skoda showroom for the test drive and then I did not go for any other test drive . The car impressed me beyond words and was booked within 2 days. The processing and delivery is long awaited due to my busy schedule, sale of my current car and sorting of finances.

I was almost convinced by now that an NA Petrol can no longer be as fun as the Turbos. However, when I travelled back to my home town and got my hands on my father's '13 Dzire, I found it a hoot to drive. I had almost forgotten how much fun this lil' rocket was. Bottom end was ok but much better than the Jazz. Mid Range is good and can accomplish most applications without loosing the fun character. Top-end is definitely where it looses its steam. The typical Turbo witchcraft with the acceleration push-back might be missing but a linear mid-range pull manages to put a grin on your face.

Then to top it up, got a chance to drive a friend's 4th Gen City. This is the Ultimate Petrol NA Gem. This brilliant engine is exactly what you need to fall in love with driving. Its saddens me that this engine never made it to the ever-so-practical, loyal and fun to handle Jazz. Had it not been for Honda's deteriorating build quality and departure from tight suspension setups, I would have cancelled my Skoda Rapid booking and gone for the 4th Gen City.

One thing I would like to categorically point out is that None of the 3 Top Japanese manufacturers i.e. Suzuki, Honda & Toyota have a Turbo Petrol on sale in India in-spite of the trend changing. Is it because of Cost or Reliability concerns?

[rakesh_r]

Since I have a Turbo Diesel as my primary car, though I enjoy the kick and relaxed drive, i still enjoy driving my dad's 2014 Alto K10. The other NA engines I miss are the G13B and the 1.5 VTEC. Have very minimal experience driving a Turbo Petrol, Volkswagen Caddy being the first one.

[hortons15]

Voted YES. For the purposes they serve, NA petrols are silent, reliable, efficient and have enough power. I'm very happy with my new Creta with its proper NA 1.5 CVT combo, when you want a smooth and easy going ride. It can hold its own upto decent highway speeds 100-120kmph. No jerkiness, no noise and it almost feels like the Camry hybrid in the NVH department.

Its equivalent 1.4 (actually 1,348cc) turbo DCT felt like it's trying to be something it's not. I personally feel that small turbo petrols like that one are a stopgap; pretending to be performance vehicles when in reality they are just plain old boring family crossovers. But the story changes when you go larger displacement (above 2.0L).

[urban legend]

Do I still enjoy driving a NA petrol? I voted yes! But it all depends on the engine capacity and type of gearbox.
In a given segment, to keep the costs down and improve the fuel efficiency, a Turbopetrol is always smaller capacity compared to its NA competitor (eg: the 1.5 NA Honda city vs the 1.0 Turbopetrols from VAG).
In the manual versions both are quite closely matched- each has its own pros and cons. The Turbopetrols are a hoot on highways but quite tricky to drive in the city, due to lack of low end grunt there is a tendency to stall and the power delivery is spiky so one has to control it using the clutch. The NA petrols are better in the city and quite good on the highways if it’s a free revving engine. (Like the IVTEC).
In the automatic versions it depends a lot on whether it’s a DSG or TC or CVT. Ford has fantastic engines with a TC gearbox like that in the Ecosport.
(I wonder when Honda will provide a DSG or TC like gearbox with their fantastic IVTEC engines)
On a recent Sunday morning highway drive, I was in my 2.4 litre IVTEC and my friend was in his 2.0 litre TSI. For most part of the drive the cars were equally matched on performance. During overtaking, speeds upto 130 kph and even from starts, I never felt left behind. I guess size does matter!

[abhi1309]

Since I have been driving a Laura 1.8 TSI that I bought new in Sep 2011, I thought I could contribute a bit here.

1. Niggles, repairs and Skoda ownership woes aside, the engine and turbo have been absolutely fine so far, it has almost done 100,000 kms.

2. The Drive - In the past 9 years of driving, the performance has been an absolute BLAST. Turbo lag is almost zero or negligible (at least it seems to me that way), I had a Fiesta 1.4 Petrol before this car, and I am comparing it to that 'normal' engine. The driving pleasure is just crazy, the car runs absolutely tight, zero rattles or sounds and the engine is the star of the whole package. Though the 1.8L Turbo seems an absolute overkill for a car of this size in 2020 (there are puny engines with so much power these days), I am also glad that it is what it is.

3. Fuel Consumption - I drive with a light foot usually, average consumption is around 7.5 l/100 km in city. Goes up to 8.2 l/100 km when the a/c is on in city. I have rarely crossed 8.2 in the lifetime of this car. On the other side, some highway runs have been as amazing as 5.4 l/100 km. Normal aircon highway drives are about 6.5l/100 km give or take a bit. Another thing to note is that I am known to be extra gentle with my car, everyone who knows me, makes fun of me in that aspect, so these mileage figures are probably difficult to achieve by anyone else (not beating my own drum here, it sounds like that when written though). These figures are easily better than my 1.4 Petrol Fiesta, which too was a great car at its time.

4. Turbos are fun, no doubt, the thrust it gives when you slot it down from 4th to 3rd at 80 kmph, or even second will make you feel really special. It also pushes you back in the seat, it IS quite cool. I mean, you will feel like what the HELL am I driving. Also, this may not be the case in the new 1 Litre turbos, they are a lot smaller than this 1.8, I have not driven them much but I have driven the Ecosport 1 Litre Ecoboost, that too was a fun vehicle to drive. I can only imagine if it was installed in the Gen 2 Figo. The 1.8 TSI clearly meant mental performance (at least) by Indian standards.

5. TURBO - I was always worried about the reliability of the Turbo, always on my mind, another part that may give-in someday. But I can't complain if it ever decides to fold after 100,000 kms. It's alright. It did well. Also, you can hear the turbo a lot, specially with windows down, it sounds nice. You can hear it going about it's business, even at fairly low rpm's and speeds.

6. Oil Consumption - I usually keep a 5W40 can at home, this car needs refills of oil every 5k kms. About a liter. No big deal, just remember to top up before you go for a long drive, you don't want to drive too much on low oil.

7. Failures/Repairs so far - Water Pump - twice, Fuel Pump - twice. ECM issue - Once

8. Other repairs - Charcoal Canister, O2 Sensor and MFA Sensor were not defective, but they showed defective due to the ECM issue. I blame that on the service center and not the car. I still have all these extra lying in the cabinets, they are working spares.

Overall it has been mixed, as scary as it is, if something goes wrong (because of the expenses), life is a beach when you use it. The build, timeless looks and performance are just something you should experience.

PS: My car is a gently used manual transmission car, AND having a DSG (from what I have heard) complicates matters to a different level.

[Rocketscience]

Have been driving turbo charged engines pretty much since i started driving about a decade ago, and have mostly not enjoyed driving the NA engines at all, attributing to super weak mid range which takes all the useable power in the top end and that is just not something we can do everyday.

I know not all NA engines are cut from the same cloth but turbo charged engines literally offer much more bangs for the buck and frankly those who are in denial would surely be a convert once they drive a good example as their daily driver.

A few of my previous quotes for this exact topic

Originally Posted by Rocketscience

Honda 1.5 i-VTEC
The only disappointing experience i did have was in 2014 when i drove the much famed Honda's 1.5L i-VTEC engine when i finally test drove it while i was in process of purchasing my Honda City, i came in with high hopes of being blown away with the performance and at least on paper this was a 10 second 0-100 car, but when i drove it i found it to be F-L-A-T, i will sheepishly admit that i must have been spoiled by the massive 320nm torque of the Chevy Cruze i used to drive at the time but this was just opposite to my expectations, it lacked any sense of urgency at all and the low end was average and mid range was not at all entertaining, till the time i had crossed 5000 rpms the engine was screaming its lungs out (likeable note sure), my dad and the Honda executive were giving me stares, and i was running out of road since the car was already doing above 80 in 2nd gear and it had started to get a bit entertaining at that point, i knew at that point i will never able to enjoy this engine in City driving at least (which for this car would have been 100% of the time).
Maybe if they gave it much smaller gears it would have taken care of all the problems i have but this car anyways returns 10km/l as it is and that would have ruined it for almost everyone.

Originally Posted by Rocketscience

Have been daily driving turbo diesels for better past of this decade and can always vouch for turbo any which day as compared to NA, turbos are the future, although they have been around from quite some time, Take any engine even the 1.5 Honda and Turbo will boost the hell out of it, will work wonders in increasing the power but more importantly the low and mid range torque.

Now i'am a very practical enthusiast and i don't want anything which i won't use on a regular basis and revving away NA engines which have little grunt lower down and gutless in the mid range can be fun sometimes but is not practical at all 9/10 times, not to say non economical as well, Venue's Turbo petrol which i have driven quite extensively solves this problem, it has very good midrange and has power you can use all the time, almost whenever you want.
I however prefer 1.2 4 cylinder turbo petrols as the perfect upgrade to 1.5/1.6 NA engines as they have the same level of refinement as well and more power in the entire rev range so it is a win win, the unit in the Venue or any 3 cylinder 1.0 engine does not have nearly as much refinement as a Honda 1.5 so although i would still pick the turbo, it is not entirely a true upgrade.

Originally Posted by Rocketscience

My reason for buying diesel cars is very simple
Lets say a car is offered with 2 petrol engine options with a regular one and other powerful and much more fun to drive engine with a turbo charger with much more torque available from low down and midrange (which is what everyone uses most of the times) and not needing to revv it and work hard to extract the power , i will most definitely go with the latter while happily paying a lakh for the performance offered.

Now if that engine runs on a cheaper fuel (Diesel) , and even with all that performance offers significantly more fuel economy and keeps your day to day costs low , and even when selling you will fetch significantly more money than petrol ones (atleast 60k - 1 lakh more) , it makes a highly irresistible deal and the reason most cars i and my near family and friends all own diesel cars.
I was even willing to pay more if it was not offering higher fuel economy and it running on a cheaper fuel and sell for more money, but since it does all that , it is a no brainer for me.

Another recent experience reinforced this belief, just last week my cousin brought his new Baleno at my place and obviously i took it for a test drive, i just loved it and came back throughly impressed (i have driven a lot of Maruti cars with the same engine in the past but it is still great fun), it felt like 85% as good as my Creta 1.6D but at fraction of cost, it had a great bottom end, somewhat average midrange but that quickly (thanks to well judged gearing) passes and makes way for the fantastic top end before hitting a wall in the form of the most aggressive revv limiter i have encountered, it just turns the engine off for more than a second post 6300rpm.
It was all without AC because of the winters arriving early this year and with 2 passengers, i got so excited that later that evening i asked my other 3 cousins to join us for a drive and with 5 passengers on board things went south in an instant, again mind you this is without AC and without luggage (everything counts in low displacement NA engines), the engine now felt OK in the low end but extremely lazy in the mid range, it had now transformed itself into BRV , it felt sluggish, took forever to revv to that top end and needless to say i got stares and judgements from my cousins for giving the poor car such a hard time and not upshifting, they even joked none of my cars ever return more than 6km/l. (this is far from the truth though, both my City and Creta return more than 13-14 Km/l because of being turbo charged and having that strong mid range and ofcourse being Diesels)