[abhinav.gupta88]

Originally Posted by Shan2nu

Ive seen the gear ratios, they're pretty similar. Infact, the G3HC has a slightly more aggressive 4.294:1 final drive as compared to 4.058:1 on the OHC.

So its not like the OHC had a gearing advantage.

Shan2nu

THE OHC was less than a tonne i guess
this one is 1.1 tonne.
That will be the difference i guess

[Max]

Originally Posted by GTO - Touring

Absolute Rubbish! ACI has conveniently "missed" doing a proper FE run of the new City. Read their review again.

There is no ways that the ANHC will be as fuel efficient as the iDsi NHC.

I never got more then 13.5 from my NHC. how people get so much mileage!

i guess they are lying or too much obsessed with their cars or i guess do not have traffic like bombay

edit: wait, i even driven on express ways with 100-120 never got more then 13 on express way!

[SLK]

Originally Posted by Max

I never got more then 13.5 from my NHC. how people get so much mileage!

i guess they are lying or too much obsessed with their cars or i guess do not have traffic like bombay

edit: wait, i even driven on express ways with 100-120 never got more then 13 on express way!

I second that!

13.5 is the max in City I got from my NHC. [which is good if you ask me]

And highway has been always between 11-13. [The car gets thirsty at speeds over 100km/h]

[csentil]

That's the 10-20% effect in play. Right from salaries to fuel economy there is a 10-20% inflation in figures. Hey I'm not suggesting everyone does it, so don't get me wrong here. I own up to doing it myself at times.

I've seen my friend get approx 14 in his city in his City !! He says how much ever he tried he couldn't get 17 or 18 as claimed.

[Guna]

Originally Posted by SLK

13.5 is the max in City I got from my NHC. [which is good if you ask me]

And highway has been always between 11-13. [The car gets thirsty at speeds over 100km/h]

City figure better then highway FE?
I agree that it gets thirsty on highway due to short gearing(which itself is to make up for the lack of power?). Engine gets boomy(probably doing 3200 RPM) over 100 kmph.
Even in city I cold never extract good FE which I felt is beacsue one has to keep the engine on boil to keep up with the traffic.

[SLK]

Originally Posted by Guna

City figure better then highway FE?

Well, this is just a practical figure. I tend to drive harder on the highway than the city as highway is only leisure trips.

Verymuch like the small Marutis the NHC also strugles to be economical over 100-110km/h.

The city economy is very good as the short gearing lets you drive in higher gears most of the time.

I dont' think ANHC would be in the league of the NHC for FE in the city, otherwise it might be an efficient car.

[harry10]

Originally Posted by csentil

That's the 10-20% effect in play. Right from salaries to fuel economy there is a 10-20% inflation in figures. Hey I'm not suggesting everyone does it, so don't get me wrong here. I own up to doing it myself at times.

I've seen my friend get approx 14 in his city in his City !! He says how much ever he tried he couldn't get 17 or 18 as claimed.

I second that. My friend gets a max figure of 13-14 in city driving so i wonder about the claims of 17-18!

[Shan2nu]

THE OHC was less than a tonne i guess
this one is 1.1 tonne.
That will be the difference i guess

Yeah but this car has an extra 10bhp/14nm as well.

The 10.23s what ACI got was what it should have done in all the tests. That sounds more like a 105bhp/ton car.

Shan2nu

[srishiva]

Originally Posted by Shan2nu

Not really, bhp is bhp irrespective of what sort of engine norms it has to face.

The P/W ratio of this car is 105bhp/ton while the OHC was 107bhp/ton. A 2 bhp/ton drop wont cause such a difference in performance.

Either the G3HC is not producing 116bhp or the OHC had more than the claimed 106bhp.

Shan2nu

Do you know if the power output advertised is with restrictive emission control being in place ? Is it something similar to SAE net ?

[oss]

Originally Posted by hellspawn

Just read the review of the city in autocar,and it mentioned a 0-100 time of 10.28sec.In the article they also mentioned that the honda city returns a similar average as the previous city of 10.5kmpl.So according to them the previous nhc vtec returned 10.5 which isn't actually the case.So im assuming that the new one will also return close to 14-15kmpl in the city.

Originally Posted by GTO - Touring

Absolute Rubbish! ACI has conveniently "missed" doing a proper FE run of the new City. Read their review again.

There is no ways that the ANHC will be as fuel efficient as the iDsi NHC.

I agree with you totally. I am sure they tested the FE, and chose not to mention it and given this excuse.

Originally Posted by Guna

Well they have admitted that they could not do a proper FE test to their usual standards but have come up with a 'guess' based on the short drive, which is 10-11 in the city and 16-17 on highway.

When they did the return journey from Jaipur to Noida, they could very well have tested the highway figure.

City figure could have been easily gotten from the MID. This is to say that they themselves agree that the displayed FE figures are rubbish, and its just a gimmick. Otherwise why can't they quote that figure.

I think the FE would definitely be less than iDSI by few kms, and may be closer to the vtec. That's the reason Honda would have buttered instructed these guys not to talk about it; and they gave the excuse that they didn't test it.

[vivekji05]

Originally Posted by GTO - Touring

Absolute Rubbish! ACI has conveniently "missed" doing a proper FE run of the new City. Read their review again.

There is no ways that the ANHC will be as fuel efficient as the iDsi NHC.

Actually during the media drive from Delhi to Jaipur and back to Delhi, there was very little time to check the FE. Honda had organised a mileage run but again the methodology was not full to full, so that's out. ACI will do a proper FE run later on, when they have a comparison test.

[Shan2nu]

Do you know if the power output advertised is with restrictive emission control being in place ?

They should do it actually coz when you claim a particular bhp fig for a production car, you would want it to produce that power with what ever intake/exhaust layout it is sold with.

If Honda didnt do it to the G3HC, then they prob didn't do it for the OHC also.

Shan2nu

[f50xj13]

hi,
My dealer has told me that the fuel average of the AHNC will be equal to the old VTEC and not to the iDSI car.
However the reality will only be known once the car is out on the road. After the success of the iDSI car, ?I dont think Honda will do hara-kiri and get the average down--it will be a sure sales downer.

One funny scrap of info:- Averages of AHNC cars on display in mumbai.
Hallmark- 2.3
Apex- 5.5
Linkway- 7.7
Note :- these cars are display vehicles, so dont go by the figures. However if the trend continues me thinks my car when delivered will give atleast 11.

[lalitk25]

Originally Posted by vivekji05

there was very little time to check the FE.

Somehow I dont agree to this argument....... Please pardon me if I am a bit harsh here.
But you can at least figure out what was the approximate figure.
IMHO I dont think in any way ANHC would give better or even close to NHC (iDSI) FE figures.

[SLK]

Originally Posted by lalitk25

Somehow I dont agree to this argument....... Please pardon me if I am a bit harsh here.
But you can at least figure out what was the approximate figure.
IMHO I dont think in any way ANHC would give better or even close to NHC (iDSI) FE figures.

Lets pardon him for that!!
The point is its not so simple. They drove on the Highway and were in a mindset to test the car so its not so obvious to get/ quote the FE. Also, I'd go to say that NHC was/ is so bad on the highway that the ANHC would return better FE when driven 120-130+ [which they did!]