[easterncar]

Originally Posted by Zappo

Safety Features:

\

Inside the cabin, the Verna is on the silent side. At times, it's difficult to tell that the car has an oil burner sitting under the hood. The engine has noticeable turbo lag upto 1,800 rpm, after which you see progress. But it's over 2,000 rpm that the motor really comes onto its own. Acceleration is fast thereafter, thanks to the 260 Nm of peak torque (@ 1900 rpm).

The lag is more obvious in the city and takes getting used to. Like most other diesels, the action is between 2,000 – 4,000 rpm. In bumper to bumper traffic, you will need to work the gearbox. Within the city, the Vento diesel has a distinct advantage in terms of driveability, due to its inexistent lag. The clutch is not too hard, nor too light on the diesel. You could say it's par for the course. The gears slot in place without much fuss, and the throws aren't long either. It's a good gearbox and slick enough, though not the segment benchmark.

The suspension is softly-tuned by Hyundai engineers. Hence, ride quality is excellent within the city. Even potholes are dismissed off without complaint. On rough urban roads where the Honda City would fumble, the Hyundai Verna breezes through. The soft suspension raises its ugly head at high speeds though, both in ride as well as handling. Dynamically, the Verna is just like most other C segment sedans upto 130 kph. Over that limit, you get the feeling that you are floating. One does not feel very confident to go beyond, as even a small undulation on the road surface causes the new Verna to pitch and roll. Every time I reached 120 - 140, it rocked like a boat at the smallest of unevenness on the road. The twitchy behaviour at high speed is not confidence inspiring & the ride doesn't stay flat either. At this point, the diesel engine wants to go further, but the handling remains a limitation. The diesel Verna felt a little better at high speeds; it's probably the additional weight of the engine at play here. As mentioned earlier, Hyundai has reverted back to the 4 discs arrangement with ABS & EBD. No problems with the brakes on a straight road, the car stops without a fuss. However, it is on the twisties that the Verna gets nervous; brake real hard and the tail shows a tendency to step out of line.

The above is cut short from the test drive of zappo. ( not edited to suit, just edited to point out the couple of points of verna as per him. and i agree with him on those. )

It is clearly stated that there is a turbo lag. which is less in verna and due to more torque in vento at lower rpm ( correct me if i am wrong) it does not need more gear changes where as the the verna needs and needs to be in the power band to be quick.

the overdrive mentioned the Verna to be quicker of the block for the 0-100 dash ( you spool up the engine and it is turbo mode so Verna has to be as it has considerably more bhp) and is definitely not quicker in traffic.

If you go fast on a Verna 120 above, undulations in the roads makes you feel nervous, where as in vento it does not. in fact you fell confident that this car can take it and is in control.

Handling is not on par.
ghat road is where Verna gets nervous.
Brake hard and tail could swing out. ( I Did a test drive was so nervous at braking hard on a undulated road, was doing 90 kmh)

yes it does score better on most other parameters.

[mathranik]

I quote from Overdrive, for Vento :
"Ride quality is also quite impressive, altough not as accomplished as the Verna. Shock absorber damping and recoil feels softer so you experience a lot more travel and therefore body roll."

Also, the fuel efficiency is higher on ANHV. Guess the next six months sales figures would reflect it all. We haven't even taken into account Hyundai's better aftersales service and cheaper spares. Resale value is obviously higher too.

[tabrez02]

Originally Posted by AutoIndian

Thanks Stratos, was eagerly looking forward for the comparo. All the doubts @ GC are laid to rest, so it is 163 mm finally. SX4 with 170mm sets the benchmark.

The comparision for SX4 is not right in terms of the Dimensions.
Height of the SX4 has been taken for ZXi/ZDi and GC has been taken for Vxi/VDi, which is not correct.

The actual Dimension specs in MS site for Sx4 are as below.

VXi/VDi: Height is 1550mm and GC is 170mm (which runs on 15" wheels)
ZXi/ZDi : Height is 1560mm and GC is 180mm not 170.... (which runs on 16" wheels)

As i own the SX4, i was able to differentiate. I would request others to check the comparision of the cars they own.

[jijojackson]

Originally Posted by easterncar

1. it is better equipped - i mentioned that.
2. the visibility is good - i mentioned that ( "vento better on highway" i meant on highways the visibility of vento would be at par as you don't have to see front down portion for turning, parking etc. i did not mean better.
3. it is quick of the block.
4. Verna steering is very light. that has been one complain by lot of people. the steering being light also meant that the ride handling is not fun. On high speed it feels like an Suv, you feel that the control is less and you feel scared. ( same reviews by many on this thread ) so feels like boat, when compared with vento on that parameter. Definitely not cliché.
5. Nothing i said demeans the product. It was my view only. had it not been for the ride handling i would have bought Verna. 5 friends, family told me to buy verna. not one told me to buy vento.

Fact : ride handling is better in vento. Other than that verna does take the cake.

IS it possible for GTO to do a comparison for future buyers as it would help them in choosing according to there requirements.

I had the same experience...all the odds favored verna, but I stuck to vento. As overdrive mentioned "If you need value for money, then verna is you cake, if you need a driver's car, then go for vento". Which doesnt mean one is better than the other. Both the cars are not perfect, but excellent and it just boils down to what you like and do not like in the car.

But I think, we shud agree to the fact that both the cars have its own limitations.

[prabhuferrari]

I would like to know if anyone got to TD the petrol variant and how good it is. In case one decides to go for 1.6 Verna will Petrol be a good choice? I know with the current fuel prices, diesel makes lots of sense. But I would really like to know if Verna 1.6 Petrol SX(O) is also VFM

[Chrome6Boy]

Originally Posted by easterncar

It is clearly stated that there is a turbo lag. which is less in verna and due to more torque in vento at lower rpm ( correct me if i am wrong) it does not need more gear changes where as the the verna needs and needs to be in the power band to be quick.

Perhaps this is because Vento's gear ratios are better suited for this particular scenario (bumper to bumper traffic). Even with a lower torque (250 Nm vs 260 Nm) Vento's drivability might be better in lower gears.

However I have not yet test driven the Verna to testify as to whether his point is correct.

[easterncar]

Originally Posted by Chrome6Boy

Perhaps this is because Vento's gear ratios are better suited for this particular scenario (bumper to bumper traffic). Even with a lower torque (250 Nm vs 260 Nm) Vento's drivability might be better in lower gears.

However I have not yet test driven the Verna to testify as to whether his point is correct.

I drive my vento below 2000 rpm comfortably. where as in the swift i had to above 2000 rpm within the city for the same level. In vento 4th gear at 1500 rpm is fine and as soon as you push the pedal, different game, power is there to take you off.

[oxyzen]

Originally Posted by easterncar

I drive my vento below 2000 rpm comfortably. where as in the swift i had to above 2000 rpm within the city for the same level. In vento 4th gear at 1500 rpm is fine and as soon as you push the pedal, different game, power is there to take you off.

This is something no other car can offer. A combination of extreme pulling power and minimal turbo lag. Surely this is one parameter that makes Vento Unique. Also Vento diesel will rev all the way to 5000 RPM. Exceptional for a diesel.

Originally Posted by Chrome6Boy

Perhaps this is because Vento's gear ratios are better suited for this particular scenario (bumper to bumper traffic). Even with a lower torque (250 Nm vs 260 Nm) Vento's drivability might be better in lower gears.

Yes but that is only a part of the story. Infact with 6 gears on the offereing Verna had the priviledge of keeping the gears short. But they messed up.
The other fact is what i believe they used too much of boost with the turbo. They needed a smaller turbo to get it right. So whats the point of VGT anyway if you cant stop the lag?

BTW does Vento have VGT or fixed gate turbo?

[shivasuma]

Originally Posted by oxyzen

BTW does Vento have VGT or fixed gate turbo?

As far as I know, Vento has a fixed gate turbo. The VGTs are supposed to reduce lag but most hyundai diesels have lag in them. Infact it feels more pronounced once you drive them after driving say cars like the Fiesta/Logan/Vento. Initially I used to like the turbo surge in the I20, but now its a pain in bumper to bumper traffic.

[Chrome6Boy]

Originally Posted by oxyzen

This is something no other car can offer. A combination of extreme pulling power and minimal turbo lag. Surely this is one parameter that makes Vento Unique. Also Vento diesel will rev all the way to 5000 RPM. Exceptional for a diesel.



Yes but that is only a part of the story. Infact with 6 gears on the offereing Verna had the priviledge of keeping the gears short. But they messed up.
The other fact is what i believe they used too much of boost with the turbo. They needed a smaller turbo to get it right. So whats the point of VGT anyway if you cant stop the lag?

BTW does Vento have VGT or fixed gate turbo?

I test drove the Verna CRDi SX yesterday at HMIL Chennai inside the Industrial estate.

What I liked
1. Bluetooth Audio works flawlessly with music streaming and phone calls on my Android phone.
2. Loved the rear view camera integrated into the IRVM which makes up for the poor rear visibility.
3. Driver seat adjustments and steering adjustments were sufficient to ensure a comfortable driving position for me (I'm 6ft).
4. Boot seems large enough for my family of four. The high boot lid especially allows large boxes to fit like most modern cars around today.
5. ORVM with indicators and one button closing are great
6. Clutch and gears are smooth, reverse gear is easy to engage with the button release.
7. Steering EPS is easy to use inside the city (I could not take it on the highway). Steering controls are intuitive.
8. There was barely any engine noise and absolutely no vibration in the cabin. My brother who owns a NHC felt it was a Petrol car.
9. Despite some Team BHP member's comments regarding the gear ratios, I felt it did well. I could comfortably drive the car between 10 and 20 kmph in second gear with no vibration. In my personal opinion this is quite good for bumper to bumper traffic in Chennai.

What I didn't like
1. I seriously missed the turbo pull which I get in my GETZ Crdi (same as the old Verna Crdi), I'm one of the few who like the turbo lag which gives such a rush... Acceleration feels too robotic and not really like its being controlled by the person pressing the pedal.
2. Horn is difficult to use because of the steering control buttons but perhaps its only a matter of getting used to.
3. Rear seats are really low and lack thigh support, but since I have two young kids who'll be occupying the rear seats it won't matter much.
4. Speakers were not fantastic but I read on another thread that the ICE has pre-outs which will enable us to greatly improve the sound quality.
5. While Suspension is great for the city I have my doubts about its handling on the highway. I took the car on a few rough patches and on a couple of decent sized speed breakers and there was no problem with ground clearance.
6. It was HOT in Chennai (almost 38 deg) and we test drove it in the afternoon. Even though the Auto AC went down to 15 deg, it was just managing to keep the cabin cool. Granted the car did not have sun control.

To sum up it felt like a good diesel ANHC loaded to the gills with features. I think this was what Hyundai was going for. I was not completely impressed with the car but I still liked it a lot. I'm going to wait to compare it with the Ford Fiesta before making a decision as to what car I need to buy a diesel car for my usage of 1800 kms a month of 30% city and 70% highway driving. Unfortunately Volkswagon Vento guys in Chennai did not even bother returning my call to book for a test drive and informed me that the Highline Diesel will take upwards of 9 months to deliver. Cruze is out of my budget and my brother and father will not let me even consider the Linea because of my problems getting spares for my Palio in the past. Its down to either the Verna or Fiesta.

[.anshuman]

Originally Posted by shivasuma

As far as I know, Vento has a fixed gate turbo. The VGTs are supposed to reduce lag but most hyundai diesels have lag in them. Infact it feels more pronounced once you drive them after driving say cars like the Fiesta/Logan/Vento. Initially I used to like the turbo surge in the I20, but now its a pain in bumper to bumper traffic.

Of all VGT Diesel cars i have driven which also come with same engine with FGT in another trim or model, i have seen no improvement below 2000rpm, all the VGT engines had considerably better upper midrange and top end.

Some Examples-

• Fiat MultiJet 75hp vs 90hp
• Chevrolet TCDi Magnum vs Cruze
• Skoda Laura 110hp vs 140hp(though differences are more than just VGT)

[Dieseled]

Originally Posted by mathranik

Also, the fuel efficiency is higher on ANHV. Guess the next six months sales figures would reflect it all. We haven't even taken into account Hyundai's better aftersales service and cheaper spares. Resale value is obviously higher too.

Don't agree to the above 2 points. ARAI fuel efficiency for 1.2 Kappa is very good but real life figures are a completely different story. Also the previous gen 1.5 CRDI was not very fuel efficient too compared to MJD and Duratorq.

On A.S.S. and cheaper spares, Hyundais are getting expensive to maintain, especially the diesels, since Hyundai is still sourcing Diesel engines from outside and the hence the spares are expensive. My dad's 3.5 year old Santro's 30K KM service bill this December was almost 4K. Whereas I paid 2.8K for my 2 year old Ikon TDCI in Jan ( 40K KMs)

I'm not buying a Hyundai Diesel till they start manufacturing diesel engines here. I'm pretty sure the cost of ownership of both Vento and ANHV would be pretty similar.

[mathranik]

Originally Posted by Dieseled

Don't agree to the above 2 points. ARAI fuel efficiency for 1.2 Kappa is very good but real life figures are a completely different story. Also the previous gen 1.5 CRDI was not very fuel efficient too compared to MJD and Duratorq.

On A.S.S. and cheaper spares, Hyundais are getting expensive to maintain, especially the diesels, since Hyundai is still sourcing Diesel engines from outside and the hence the spares are expensive. My dad's 3.5 year old Santro's 30K KM service bill this December was almost 4K. Whereas I paid 2.8K for my 2 year old Ikon TDCI in Jan ( 40K KMs)

I'm not buying a Hyundai Diesel till they start manufacturing diesel engines here. I'm pretty sure the cost of ownership of both Vento and ANHV would be pretty similar.

Unfortunately, I disagree with you, on first hand account. I have been delivered with no less than 18.7 kmpl over my first stint of 3100 kms. With over 8 Vento owners within my friend's circle, anything over 17 kmpl is unheard of, overall.

With respect to A.S.S., the figures tell the story. I have done my homework, but it's way too vast to discuss it all here. Vis-a-vis German manufacturers, it is no less than 15 to 20% lower to maintain a Korean. I have my figures to back my stats. Thank you.

[oxyzen]

Originally Posted by Chrome6Boy

-I seriously missed the turbo pull which I get in my GETZ Crdi (same as the old Verna Crdi), I'm one of the few who like the turbo lag which gives such a rush... Acceleration feels too robotic and not really like its being controlled by the person pressing the pedal. -Rear seats are really low and lack thigh support, but since I have two young kids who'll be occupying the rear seats it won't matter much. -While Suspension is great for the city I have my doubts about its handling on the highway. -It was HOT in Chennai (almost 38 deg) and we test drove it in the afternoon. Even though the Auto AC went down to 15 deg, it was just managing to keep the cabin cool. Granted the car did not have sun control.

All the four points are deal breakers for me. Atleast Handling has to be satisfactory. And what is the point in a diesel if you dont feel the rush of torque. You said you like the torque after the lag. What about the rush of torque without lag?

Originally Posted by Chrome6Boy

Unfortunately Volkswagon Vento guys in Chennai did not even bother returning my call to book for a test drive and informed me that the Highline Diesel will take upwards of 9 months to deliver.

[/quote] I have not yet driven Verna & I am not that interested to TD it since the Diesel Vento exceeded my expectations. Specially the Engine performance. Over and above with excellent ride and handling and decent amount of space and above average built and fit & finish it just blew me away. So please TD the car. I agree 9 months is insane. So look for other dealers as well.

Originally Posted by .anshuman

Of all VGT Diesel cars i have driven which also come with same engine with FGT in another trim or model, i have seen no improvement below 2000rpm, all the VGT engines had considerably better upper midrange and top end.

I think that means FGT is tuned to get better bottom end in these cars. So midrange ant top end gets compromised. However with Punto 75 BHP and 90BHP, I think the 75 BHP performed slightly better in LOW RPMs. The 90BHP version did not seem to be significantly better even in higher RPMs.

[souravc]

Originally Posted by mathranik

Unfortunately, I disagree with you, on first hand account. I have been delivered with no less than 18.7 kmpl over my first stint of 3100 kms. With over 8 Vento owners within my friend's circle, anything over 17 kmpl is unheard of, overall.

Being a Vento owner I would agree with the FE figures you quote , I am assuming that you are referring to light footed city driving . On highways though it easily gives 19-20 easily with eased out driving ( I am sure your ANHV would also achieve/over-achieve that ) . The 6 speed gear box of ANHV is made to achieve superb FE. I though never strive to achieve FE figures anywhere close to that, the mid range is too addictive to care about FE

Originally Posted by mathranik

With respect to A.S.S., the figures tell the story. I have done my homework, but it's way too vast to discuss it all here. Vis-a-vis German manufacturers, it is no less than 15 to 20% lower to maintain a Korean. I have my figures to back my stats. Thank you.

Agree with you on that one too , A.S.S or cheaper spares costs cannot be one of the reasons for anyone choosing the Vento over ANHV , there are of course quite a few other reasons Both are good cars but one can't expect perfection at 11 lakhs , thats too cheap !