[ARAY]

We have a verna 1.6 NA petrol back in WB.
Every time I drive it on a straight stretch I just grinn with happiness but since it's a Hyundai the happiness is short-lived because of the dead steering and vague handling and super soft suspension.

The engine is really good but rest of the vehicle snatches away that fun. However it's a sedan end of day and is a charm on the highways.

[SavoyWalrus]

We have a Ford Fiesta 1.6 and a Maruti Esteem. Both cars bring a big smile on my face when it's revved and taken to its limit. Sure, they may not be blisteringly quick, but the emotive experience of it all is worth a lot.

[shancz]

Originally Posted by GTO

Still, for the sheer joy of driving, I’m switching loyalties to turbo-petrols. They’re coming in all segments, including the mass market (e.g. Magnite, Grand i10), mid-market (Thar, Seltos) and pretty much the entire luxury segment. The German marques have moved exclusively to turbo-charging & don't sell n/a petrols anymore.

Thanks for the thread GTO.

I feel NA petrols have a natural progression and feel to them. That entire sequence of flooring the pedal, revs climbing, sound and vibrations increasing, speed climbing just seems second nature like any other activity. In turbos when the boost kicks in, it feels "whoa" but also not natural, especially the manuals. The first couple of times on manual turbos I was caught unawares in a Swift 1.3 diesel when the boost came in(haven't driven a manual TC petrol yet).

But like GTO mentioned the world is heading towards smaller turbo charged petrols and that's the way forward. Smaller TC petrols are more efficient when driving at moderate pace than a comparable NA and ready with power/boost when needed. In 2015-16 I drove a BMW 316i(I4 TC 150hp) in UAE(ideal roads and less traffic) for 1000+kms, 85% sedately in EcoPro and 15% in Sports mode it returned 17kmpl(tank to tank)! and never felt underpowered. Also it had the engine sound being "played" in, not a fan of the concept but that was an excellent job done by BMW.
This was a perfect demo of what technology can do in real world, and I knew then that this would be the future and I was ok with it.

The turbos are more adaptable to driving styles than a comparable NA except high rpms where they might be worse than a larger NA(I just read about the fuel-dumping to cool the turbo, I am not mechanically competent on the topic though). Manufacturers benefit by claiming better FE and in the long run their A.S.S. might benefit from the increased maintenance. And given our roads and traffic most of our driving is in the mid range so more VFM for the buyer as well(except if extraordinary maintenance costs happen).

So to answer the question, do I still enjoy NA petrols ? Yes, especially the good ones already mentioned across this thread. Nothing beats the feeling of accelerating in 2nd and 3rd gears and holding the revs waiting for another clear stretch. For me driving is an involving sport not an effort but it is also true that most of the time is spent in traffic and so the chances to enjoy it are getting lower by the day.
But do I also enjoy smaller turbo petrols, Yes and they are best enjoyed with a competent automatic transmission (e.g. VW 1.2TSI with the 7 speed DSG).
But IMHO the turbo petrols shouldn't drop below 1.2 and with competent 1.2-1.5 NAs around it will be a good situation to be in as an enthusiast and also a regular buyer.

Originally Posted by greenhorn

To draw a parallel, driving a turbo is like watching a high def video without sound. Objectively it should be better. Driving a VTEC is like watching an sd video with sound. That sound triggers a response in a way it has no right to. At least I've become a believer. A NA petrol done right is a sinful pleasure.

Very well put greenhorn, I have been a fan of the Honda petrols and even today they are on top the list for NA petrols.

Originally Posted by adneo

While I enjoy the outright performance of the TJet and TSI, I would like to see how the latest generations of TSI and Fiat FireFly(if they launch it in India) have matured as a platform and solution and how well they sync with the Indian conditions before handing over the crown to them.

Going by numbers a NA will never be able to match the power torque curves we would come across on a Turbocharged engine and that's why the entire globe is downsizing and turbo charging for emission gains. But it's the other pieces of the puzzle which are more relevant for our climatic and operational conditions which make the choice a difficult one and the wait more interesting.

Thanks adneo, same here.

The biggest concerns I have are the maintenance issues and costs of a TC petrol(also the downtime if its the only car).
For example, the Polo GT TSI with DSG is a very good car(dated but still potent) but the maintenance issues/cost around this combination in our operational conditions/realities are a big concern if not a deal-breaker. The same would apply to any TC petrol on similar lines.
Lets see if the wait turns up something interesting

[evil_grin]

Yes. I do enjoy NA petrol engines.

What I care about is that the engine be powerful, smooth and fun and silent, especially when starting off and at low speeds. Because that's what my cars spend the most time on in the city. And that's why I hate diesel cars' dead low end and ridiculous NVH. And on the highways, I need power to overtake easily. So I need a large engine (wrt the car size)

I drive great examples of both camps: a Honda City and an Octavia 1.8 TSI. I love them both. I also love my Dad's Ritz and my brother in law's i20 petrols. All of them are fun to drive.

And I don't care about the turbo blowing. If it does under 6 years, then Skoda will replace it for me. If it blows after 6 years, then my EMIs would have been long over and I could buy a turbo with the equivalent of just 2 EMIs of a new car. That's quite cheap.

[karanddd]

NA petrols that have at least 8 cylinders are great.

[shashank.nk]

Voted NO. I was in a dilemma whether to sell my Swift diesel and move to a Baleno CVT.I already have a DSG and didn't want another, especially the DQ200 in my garage so Polo was out. Baleno appealed to me the most out of the Jazz and i20.

However, one TD was enough to convince me to stick to the Swift or try my luck with the Polo GT TSI. I have nothing against the Baleno but the 1.2 as good as it is, simply pales compared to a turbo-charged 1.2 like in the TSI. DSG v/s CVT may also be at play here, but the turbo charged engine felt special wheras the NA engine, though being supremely refined and free-revving, simply failed to impress the enthusiast in me.

[Romeo_Mike]

I recognize the fact that the game has moved on towards turbo petrols in the current market. Circa 2016, this discussion would have been irrelevant w.r.t. the indian market as the the number of mass market turbos (if my memory serves right) was exactly one - the 1L ecoboost from Ford. Fast fwd to present day and every notable player is offering one (or did so *wink*).

This Fifth Gear (yeah I used to watch them besides the famous trio too) video clearly demonstrates the split emotions many of us are having towards the small capacity turbos. Tiff (and honestly, I) just could not believe that the 1.6L was beaten by the tiny 1L. But it it is a fact that outright performance of a modern 1L turbo might put a ~1.5L NA engine to shame.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=20FVyIYy3NE

I would like to reiterate that I have nothing against forced induction and would welcome addition of a turbocharger at similar displacement. Case in point - 1.4 L Hyundai turbo over 1.5L Hyundal NA anyday. (off topic - Too bad the Korean duo will not be in the race for my next car).

However, I am not a fan of the concept of a smaller displacement turbo (say 1L) replacing a bigger NA (say 1.5L) engine. Honestly, until the turbo makes its presence felt, it would be, for that lack of a better analogy, a case of a Celerio engine pulling a Skoda Rapid. Although I have't driven a 1L turbo long enough or owned one yet, I have a feeling this will get tiresome after a while. I am also cognizant of the various reasons behind this industry shift towards small displacement Turbos, But I have my democratic right to sulk .

So as far as living with it in a real world Indian scenario goes, the equations in my book still remain unchanged-

1.5L turbo>1.5L NA
1L turbo< 1.5L NA

[FAIAAA]

Voted Yes in favour of NA petrol engines. Interesting thread - Thank you GTO.

Have driven ~300,000 Kms across India in NA petrols and Turbo diesels across
- various body styles (hatchback, MUV, SUV, mainstream and luxury sedans)
- spectrum of terrains - plains /hills/ghats, expressways /unpaved/cratered or no roads.

Have also extensively test driven most of the modern Turbo petrols (Seltos MT/AT, Polo and Rapid TSI , Octavia & Superb TSI).

Would say it depends on several factors such as the torque and power delivery (way it builds up), gearbox (MT or smooth AT) , ability of the chassis to handle the surge/speed, type of roads and so on.

Personally, I have found turbocharged engines (esp. ones with smaller displacement) 'tricky' in at least 2 situations - slow moving /bumper to bumper city traffic and steep inclines /hilly areas.

Given that I find myself driving a lot in NCR and in the hills with steep and narrow roads, Voted for the NA petrol for it's all rounded nature

[supremeBaleno]

My regular drive for the last 15 years is a NA Baleno 1.6, while I recently got a chance to drive the TC BalenoRS, both of which are comparable in power, torque, PTW ratio. Infact if you go by the specs, the RS beats the NA Baleno in almost all aspects.

Baleno 1.6 : NA petrol, 94bhp @5500rpm, Max torque of 130Nm @3000rpm
PTW ratio of 95 BHP / ton & a TTW ratio of 131 Nm / ton

Baleno 1.0 RS : TC petrol, 101BHP @ 5,500rpm, Max torque of 150Nm @ 1,700 - 4,500 rpm
PTW ratio of 106 BHP / ton & a TTW ratio of 158 Nm / ton

But drive them side-by-side and the picture is quite different. The RS is no doubt good and I found the power delivery in 2nd and 3rd gears to be good and seamless. But the first gear was a disappointment - starts off quite good, but runs out of steam around 4500rpm or so. I thought maybe it is that particular car, but read the same in a tbhp review.

The 1.6 on the other hand, is a joy in all 3 gears - with the first taking you till 50kmph, the 2nd taking you to 100kmph and the 3rd being good till 160kmph, though getting a road to try this is tough.

Ofcourse we don't drive like this everyday and the 1.6 is a joy for daily commutes in traffic or highway cruising, where the torque that comes in early helps avoid gear changes in traffic or in highway cruising where in 5th you can just stomp on the A-pedal to overtake without downshifting. It's like driving an automatic. Ofcourse I don't have data on how the RS does this as my TD was limited to how it does in the first 3 gears.

And inspite of the 1.6litre engine, it is more FE than many hatchbacks with 1.2 litre engines, with Chennai traffic commute giving me 12+kmpl and a steady 16kmpl on highways with pedal to the floor driving. All figures with a/c on 100%. Again don't have FE figures for the RS to compare.

I don't have anything against TC petrols and actually welcome small displacement TC engines that can put out more power & possibly better FE. But the right NA car can be fun. With the right driver.

[ButterRider 7]

Voted for yes as, with its extra boost turbos have more power than their NA counterparts but acceleration is where they lag. As turbos use exhaust gas to power themselves they need to build said gases and as you might have guessed there are no exhaust gases when you start the car. There are new technologies being made however that allows for better acceleration and almost no lag. NA’s have no lag when starting and you get a steady rise in power, unlike turbos. With its variable valve timing, it gets high torque at lower RPMs and high power at higher RPMs without any delay.

[dhanushs]

Well, I think I have another very relevant comparo here. I live in a considerably less traffic infested town and I have a Palio 1.6 and Vento 1.6 in my garage. While the Vento is obviously more powerful and better dynamically, I think I still enjoy the Palio for short bursts till 90-100.

The feeling of revving the nuts off an NA is something else.

That said, have this poll somewhere outside team-bhp and you’ll have entirely different results!

[Swapnil4585]

I voted in favor of the naturally aspirated.

Have a bit different topic to discuss here and that is a comparison of drivability amongst the naturally aspirated petrol engines.

I own a 1.8 Altis. From a couple of months, I also have my neighbor's Ciaz 1.5 petrol. Among these two, the latter is rev happy. Whenever I drive it on an open road, even with my conservative style, it goes up to 4500 rpm easily, while I don't "feel" like revving the Altis in that range. If any other driver drives both these cars back to back, he has no such "feeling" and he redlines both the cars easily.

My question is how do I find logic in my "feeling"?

[Somil07]

Unable to vote but it would have been "Yes" for me and it's purely based upon the the choices in 10-15 lac budget where you either have 1.0 lt turbo petrols or 1.5 lt NA from Maruti. For someone like me who's primary usage is lugging the car in first 3 gears in Pune city traffic where a pothole or a 2 wheeler can literally appear out of thin air, I need much more precise control over the power delivery which a small turbo petrol engine can't deliver. I go by 80/20 rule where I would invest my money to be happy in 80% of the circumstances rather than running after 20%.

[IshaanIan]

For someone that derives pleasure in driving flat out, there is simply no replacement for a naturally aspirated engine. The precise power delivery and crisp throttle response allows you to play with the weight balance and steer the car like no turbo petrol would. There's a reason why the GT3 and Cayman GT4 are all naturally aspirated; there's simply nothing like it. For someone that finds going on a roller coaster fun, a turbo petrol might be enjoyable just for the way it pushes you back in your seat but for someone that enjoys making the car dance just by driving it well, there's no replacement for a solid naturally aspirated motor. Obviously the VAG MPis and Hyundai motors don't count because they are rubbish when compared to a Vtec or a Suzuki motor like the G16 or the M16 or the J24. The MPi and old Hyundai petrols felt averse to revving and just not as harmonically well balanced as most Japanese NA engines. At the end of the day a good NA motor delivers something unmatched in its crispness and simplicity.

[d_payne]

My opinion is simple: it depends on where you are driving.

Within a typical Indian city, a turbo is a godsend, and an NA will frustrate you.

But out on an open road, or on country roads, or the ghats, an NA will satisfy you like no other.

Essentially, if this question is for commuting or traveling, then a turbo is what I'd prefer. But for going for a drive, just for the sake of the drive...nothing beats an NA.