[Nav-i-gator]

Originally Posted by pokerface23

You would be covered for 6 years with extended warranty that Skoda offers. Again Honda can only dream of offering such warranties. It's a testimony of how confident the car maker is of their own products.

All that I thought about was whether I want to put my money in a product that is almost 12 years old and has been spruced up with some features and accessories, does not offer extended warranties and is more expensive. Or do I put it in something that is offering me a more contemporary technology, offers great build quality, comes with a warranty for 6 years and is wayyyy more fun to drive. Decision is all yours.

Sorry I couldn't stop myself on commenting on this part of your post.
So a city, which had platform changes (not mere facelifts) is a 12 Year old model while Rapid is brand new? And spruced up with features and accessories - many of them are safety features. 4 airbags even on the base variant, VSC, TC, AHA, HLA, 3 point ELR seat belts and headrests for all 5 occupants in all variants are not just accessories.

And cost plus warranty - it does not matter if extended warranty is 6 years or 10 years (Honda too give extended warranties by the way) if they are not going to honor it when the time comes.

Don't get me wrong, Rapid surely is (or at least feels) much better built (I don't think both the cars have been tested by GNCAP, so one can never bne sure if one of these is "better" built), have a peppier turbo petrol engine and IMO looks good as well. But some points you made "warranted" a counterpoint

[07CR]

Originally Posted by Livnletcarsliv

Well, feature comparison is subjective. Again it also depends on the variant/model in that specific price point. For eg - City comes with wired smartphone connectivity where kushaq comes with wireless charging + wireless smartphone connectivity. Kushaq with projector LED headlights and City with LED array setup (Though all it matters is the better visibility).

Indeed this can be subjective. But what is undeniable is that City offers much more of these features than corresponding Kushaq varaints. V vs Active, VX vs Ambition and ZX vs Style variants, in all of these, City offers significantly more number of goodies than Kushaq.

[pokerface23]

Originally Posted by Nav-i-gator

Sorry I couldn't stop myself on commenting on this part of your post.
So a city, which had platform changes (not mere facelifts) is a 12 Year old model while Rapid is brand new? And spruced up with features and accessories - many of them are safety features. 4 airbags even on the base variant, VSC, TC, AHA, HLA, 3 point ELR seat belts and headrests for all 5 occupants in all variants are not just accessories.

And cost plus warranty - it does not matter if extended warranty is 6 years or 10 years (Honda too give extended warranties by the way) if they are not going to honor it when the time comes.

Don't get me wrong, Rapid surely is (or at least feels) much better built (I don't think both the cars have been tested by GNCAP, so one can never bne sure if one of these is "better" built), have a peppier turbo petrol engine and IMO looks good as well. But some points you made "warranted" a counterpoint

Ofcourse I won't take you wrong And I second what you said regarding the warranty. That is my fear as well. Only time will give me an answer for that

Polo and rapid share the same platform and polo base varient got a 4 star GNCAP safety rating.

Honda city isn't rated. Maybe that's why they are compensating by giving it all the other 'safety' features.

All I was trying to say is that if I'm spending 15 odd lakh INR, I'd rather do it on something that's contemporary (engine wise and chassis/body wise and technology wise) rather than a dated product with latest features.

[Livnletcarsliv]

Originally Posted by pokerface23

Firstly, Honda's 1.5 NA engine is almost 12 years old. They have been updating the engine every few years to make it compliant with emission norms and that's about it. Honda's built quality has also been declining over the years with every new iteration/generation of their vehicles. They don't seem interested in bringing new technology or better products to India. Rather, they have been taking off products from their product line up every now and then (civic and crv). It rather seems like Honda is just wanting to milk the cow they have fed all these years and extract the maximum they can.


You would be covered for 6 years with extended warranty that Skoda offers. Again Honda can only dream of offering such warranties. It's a testimony of how confident the car maker is of their own products.

All that I thought about was whether I want to put my money in a product that is almost 12 years old and has been spruced up with some features and accessories, does not offer extended warranties and is more expensive. Or do I put it in something that is offering me a more contemporary technology, offers great build quality, comes with a warranty for 6 years and is wayyyy more fun to drive. Decision is all yours.

Since Honda is all about low maintenance, reliability, delightful ownership & customer experience while Skoda is all about build quality, performance, ride, handling, and of course poor customer experience and ownership experience (In India let alone globally), can you reason out your claim that Skoda is more confident than Honda? What's your idea about the number of happy customers of Honda vs Skoda in India?

Definitely (Skoda's) not for reliability and customer/ownership experience.
On the other hand, City is a globally successful product while Kushaq is India-specific (probably in the pipeline to export) test phase product.

Bad product strategy and portfolio is totally a different topic altogether.

[PetrolHead2272]

Originally Posted by Mat095

Lastly, 3 years down the road you’ll need a car to learn on for yourself, City manual would be great for that too.

Yes, that's right. After a TD in the 5th Gen City, my dad told me that the gearshifts were creamy smooth (not Hyundai smooth though) and the clutch was relatively easier to operate. Along with this, the steering was super light, however the steering wheel in our 3rd Gen City was far better in terms that it was direct and sharp. All these qualities add up for a superb car for a beginner to learn driving on.

Originally Posted by Baddychat

My vote goes to the Honda City and if you are open to the option of the CVT please TD it. Looking at the ODO of your Innova we can assume that the car that will replace it, will also clock 20-25k a year. If that is the case, then opt for City with your eyes closed.

Did TD the CVT and came out rather impressed, but its still the Manual that appealed to me more. Innova was one special case, plus we aren't buying the City to replace our Innova. This new city is a replacement for our older 3rd Gen model that had clocked just 23k kilometres in 8 years.

Originally Posted by imp!

You really ought to consider the Kushaq 1.5 DSG. While the interiors are as cheap as the Honda City, the ingress, egress, suspension and seat comfort have all been very well sorted.

There's is not even a lakhs difference between the Kushaq 1.5 TSI DSG and the Innova Crysta GX. If I would want to stretch my budget to 20+ OTR, I would go for the Innova eyes closed.

Originally Posted by androdev

If you want a long-term reliable car with low cost of ownership, just go with City. Kushaq will always be a big gamble when it comes to reliability, cost and service support.

That is exactly what I want. A car that can serve me well for at least 6-7 years, although it would only be driven in the first year itself and then would go into hibernation. Hence, Honda City seems a more practical choice.

Originally Posted by senna

Skoda India is trying to turn itself around and have been working quite sincerely towards it. Honda on the other hand are becoming more and more clueless on what they plan to do here. Honda's reliability ratings have also taken a hit globally(source https://www.team-bhp.com/news/usa-jd...ar-reliability)

I agree with you. I myself have witnessed a behavioural change with Honda A.S.S in recent times. On the other hand, Skoda are trying really hard to uplift the quality of their servicing.

Originally Posted by Asoon

Since your car Dad will be driving/ driven on this one, comfort will take a higher spot. City is the better option in this regards as well. Kushaq will feel cramped after Innova ownership.

I would say otherwise. My dad would be driving, not driven around in. After TDing both cars back to back, he preferred the more commanding driving position of the Kushaq.

Originally Posted by Anis Ahmed

Fun driving + ride and handling +better quality = Kushaq.

Comfortable back seat + reliability + better maintainance cost = City.

I agree with you, if somehow the "reliability" part could be transferred to the Kushaq.

Originally Posted by Livnletcarsliv

There are 2 situations here (based on all the details you've mentioned).

The common factors of both the situations are
1. The new car is for your dad for 1 year.
2. Your dad will be driving a new X3 in a year approximately.
3. This new car will be driven mostly in the city (NCR) limits.
4. You will keep this car for a long time (If it's only for 1-2 years, I strongly suggest you go for a used one instead of a new one for obvious reasons of depreciation)

Situation 1:
1. (Logically) Your dad wants more comfort than performance (0-100).
2. The weight on the wallet should be as much less as possible (both in initial cost and maintenance)
3. Resale value is important

My suggestion for Situation 1 is the City Automatic. If you are very particular about manual - I suggest you consider the 4th Gen City where you can significantly save your bucks.

Situation 2:
1. Performance, features are the top priorities.
2. Weight on the wallet (especially maintenance) is the last priority.
3. Resale value does not matter.
4. Assuming that you will take over the car after 1-2 years.

My suggestion for Situation 2 is the Kushaq 1.0TSI AT.

Further, the differences between both the brands/models to ease your decision making are
1. Anyday, the resale value of a City/Honda is/will be significantly better than Kushaq/Skoda.
2. Anyday, a honda is more pocket-friendly (both initial and long term) than any European brand (especially Skoda)
3. The customer and ownership experience of Honda is miles ahead of Skoda
4. Kushaq is still in the probation period while the City is revolutionarily proven.
5. Kushaq is the newer/latest between the two.
6. Kushaq is more feature-loaded compared to the City (though based on the variant you choose).
7. The characters of both cars are completely different. Sedan vs so-called SUV.
8. Honda is more "value for money" than Skoda.
9. Any car/brand can be built to last - Completely depends on how it is used/maintained.

Whether you choose the car with your Head or Heart, I strongly advise you to test the cars before.

All the common factors you have listed are absolutely right. From what I can say, its 50% of situation one and 50% of situation two. Kushaq may be better to drive, but reliability is an issue. A friend of my dad works at Skoda, and has assured us that whether something goes wrong with our car, he would try his best to get it fixed.

Originally Posted by Durango Dude

I suggest you TD automatics and decide.

We did TD the automatics but somehow we prefer Manuals in both cars.

Originally Posted by pokerface23

You would be covered for 6 years with extended warranty that Skoda offers. Again Honda can only dream of offering such warranties. It's a testimony of how confident the car maker is of their own products.

Six year extended warranty sounds nice. In case anything goes wrong, they are offering us a test car until the car we buy is fixed.
Skoda is really trying their best to uplift the quality of servicing, and that is exactly why I am considering the Kushaq.




NOTE - Since many people here have advised to go for 4th Gen City rather than the new one, I have decided to do so. By a week, we'd have made our decision between 4th Gen City "SV" or Skoda Kushaq Ambition.

[TrackDay]

Originally Posted by pokerface23

You would be covered for 6 years with extended warranty that Skoda offers. Again Honda can only dream of offering such warranties. It's a testimony of how confident the car maker is of their own products.

Just to point out that Honda does offer extended warranty bringing it to a total of 10 years. There is even a thread here on the same :

https://www.team-bhp.com/forum/india...-warranty.html (Honda India now offers 10-year warranty!)

Originally Posted by pokerface23

All that I thought about was whether I want to put my money in a product that is almost 12 years old and has been spruced up with some features and accessories, does not offer extended warranties and is more expensive.

If I am not wrong and if the time frame is 12 years, the city has seen three generations on sale (2009-2021 time period).

[pranavb88]

Hi Guys,

This is my first post on TEAMBHP !!!!

I am piggybacking on OP's Post.

I am also in a similar dilemma. Kushaq Ambition AT or City ZX CVT ?

I have long harbored a dream of driving from Mumbai to Leh and it will most certainly be in the next car i buy.
Will i be able to do it in a Honda City?

City comes loaded with all the safety equipment and then some.
Kushaq has only 2 airbags !!!!

Please help out this soul.

Thanks in advance.

[AZT]

Originally Posted by pranavb88

City comes loaded with all the safety equipment and then some.
Kushaq has only 2 airbags !!!!

In the initial review I remember GTO posting he's heard from a reliable source that the Kushaq is 4 or 5 star safety rated. Obviously we won't have confirmation till the test actually happens but if safety is the only deal breaker, then I'd say Kushaq should be good.

[lamborghini]

Originally Posted by AZT

In the initial review I remember GTO posting he's heard from a reliable source that the Kushaq is 4 or 5 star safety rated. Obviously we won't have confirmation till the test actually happens but if safety is the only deal breaker, then I'd say Kushaq should be good.

I believe it was said that Skoda is aiming for a 4star NCAP Rating. Will know only after official test.

[maskebail]

I am in this exact situation now and would really appreciate some help.
Scenario: I really wanted to buy the Skoda Rapid TSI AT (loved the Onyx blue) , but the purchase got delayed by a year and now Skoda has stopped production of the Rapid (some dealers had the last matte editions that I feel are over priced and have been in their stock yard since September).
I started with a budget of 13L for a good automatic, and currently I am at 15-16L.

The requirements are simple:
- Has to be a good automatic :: Wife wanted automatic, I wanted manual we mutually decided that Automatic is the best.
- primarily used for long distance travel :: ( 3 2-wheelers are doing city duties, cycle taking care of my daily commute if it happens )
- Spacious :: Though the car will be used for 2 people most of the time, often it needs to fit 4-5 people and family has 3 6ft folks
- decently powerful :: This will be the first car we buy and want to keep it for years; I do not want to regret not buying a more powerful car after a couple of years; after say a decade, the upgrade may not even be an ICE.

test drove a bunch of cars, but really liked these 2

Honda City V CVT (15.5L on road Bengaluru)::
very comfortable drive, CVT is actually very smooth.
The back seat comfort is too good, the driver seat is well cushioned, I felt like I sank into the driving position automatically.
The steering is light, but the car is pretty long so every-time I took a turn, i was concerned about hitting something in the back; ( the lane watch camera on the TD vehicle wasn't very useful even in day time, The mirrors are placed well though)
The ground clearance is low, I am not sure if I can get used to it, but even driving within the city (marathalli - whitefield , Bengaluru) I was worried about pot holes and speed bumps everytime - even the sales guy from Honda warned me to drive slowly as some previous customer had scraped on a speed bump on service road at relatively higher speed.
The V CVT variant is well packaged for our requirements , gets all the basics and some of the good-to-have features and 4 airbags, hill hold, traction control, projector headlight (halogen, but decent throw) etc are standard.

Hondas usual reliability is reassuring, but the quality is visibly not very good. Also, it was quite a task getting in and out of the vehicle for me (6ft tall) though once in, the cabin is good for long drives, sitting for hours at a stretch should not be a problem. But I may need to take on some bad roads (not off road, but just unpaved interior roads) and the low GC is a worry here.


Skoda Kushaq 1.0 AT Ambition ::
Since Skoda Rapid was out of the equation, the dealer offered Kushaq. They mentioned that there are a fair number of Nov-Dec manufactured Kushaqs in the plant that are being cleared for a discount. So the Kushaq 1.0 AT ambition with free accessories kit is offered at 16.8L On road Bengaluru - about 80K lower than regular price(on the higher side, but reason for considering coming up)
The car is too good to drive !! Once you see how the turbo picks up, you want to do it again and again. The turbo lag is almost non-existent, the car simply starts running as soon as you take your foot off the breaks.
The NVH is good though you can hear the engine, but the sound it makes is enjoyable from inside the cabin (3-cylinder engine sounds weird in idle).
The Breaks are amazing too.
The one thing that I loved the most is the ride and handling, the steering inputs are so well executed; within 10 mins behind the wheel, I could exactly predict where the car would go with a slight movement of the steering (Honda city is relatively sluggish in this, its soft, but did not seem as precise; the Kushaq's shorter length helps too).
The body roll is well controlled in my opinion for a crossover, the seat is comfortable and the seating position is commanding yet sporty enough.
The paddle shifters do an amazing job, the feedback is almost instantaneous and it lets you hold on to the gears to higher revs in sport mode. Quick overtakes are easy, the pull is almost instantaneous.
The space on the inside is good generally; good leg room, good head room and well cushioned seats. The back seat is not for 3 healthy adults, but can fit comfortably for short distances.
Ambition 1.0 AT packs most of the required features we want, only compromise compared to the honda city is the 2 airbags vs 4 in City; but the commanding taller seats do give good confidence.


Honorable mention:
Xuv3oo Diesel AMT was considered for a short while, but I am not too convinced with the AMT gearbox, no matter how good it is, it still reminds you that it is an AMT, plus the weird pricing makes it a hard choice (only 2 options in AMT either 14L for a bare bones car or directly the top of the line 16L small crossover).


Dilemma :
is it worth going for the Kushaq 1.0 TST AT (with the offer Dealer is giving) over the City ?

Honda's reliability is unquestionable, but service experience - I am not too sure about that. Also, I have a strange feeling about Honda India in general, oddly it reminds me of Ford's last days in India - just milking a few models without any new launch and happily missing out on the hottest selling segment of the market , not matching their own quality standards- general lack of interest in the market.
Skoda on the other hand seems to be showing a lot of interest to expand in the market, yes the initial batches did have things to deal with like EPC issues, but generally speaking the engine is well known and proven, Torque converter are reliable too, Skoda's general build quality is good (Kushaq's interior is visibly not up to Skoda's standards, but comparatively it still feels solid. Parts availability may not be a problem as a lot of parts are shared between at-least 4 known VW/Skoda cars and there is higher localisation. 4 years service package for Kushaq (includes consumables, oil etc) is about 16K which makes service costs reasonable and 6 years extended warranty is a must have.

Have been thinking about this for more than week now and its a plain simple head vs heart situation, The more I think about it, the more I am confused; so throwing this up here to get some expert opinion on this.
I wish I could add a poll for this as well, but then again, I value comments more.

[nitkel]

Originally Posted by maskebail

I am in this exact situation now and would really appreciate some help.
I wish I could add a poll for this as well, but then again, I value comments more.

The answer to your dilemma is the Slavia. Unless you want to seat 5 people in comfort (then City is the way to go), it ticks most of the boxes assuming that Skoda prices it sanely.

[stringbh]

Originally Posted by maskebail

The requirements are simple:
- Has to be a good automatic ::
- primarily used for long distance travel ::
- Spacious ::
- decently powerful ::
not off road, but just unpaved interior roads) and the low GC is a worry here.

I think all your requirements scream of a car like Slavia, which ticks all the boxes, including slight raised GC. The launch is expected to happen very soon and you should definitely consider it, before arriving at a decision. The 1.0 AT again might be priced on par with Kushaq/Honda City (fingers crossed).

[shancz]

You seem to be sold on the Kushaq, if you really want it get it.
But :
1. Keep in mind the EPC issues(haven't heard about them of late so hopefully sorted) and the new car concerns all of which you're already aware of.

2. Since the cars have been lying around for a couple of months do a thorough PDI assuming that they were in the dealer's stockyard instead of the plant and could have been flooded in the rains.
IMO, no reason for them to give you a discount for cars sitting for just 1-2 months. If its from Skoda then maybe its different but that should apply to any car regardless of date of manufacture.
Get a new Kushaq if you finalize it and VIN match it from factory. You're already paying 17 lakhs, not worth risking it for 80k, IMHO.

The XUV300 would've worked well but cannot recommend an AMT at that price point.

[tunedv8]

Hey! As a recent and proud owner of a Skoda Kushaq 1.0, I would say go for it if you take pleasure in driving. No doubt, the City is a wonderful car and there is really no reason to downplay it's competence by comparing pros and cons. I think it's just a question of preference here. I set out to get the manual but ended up with the Ambition auto because this is our weekend car. It puts a smile on your face.

The auto is fantastic. I use the paddle shifters often.
Engine is responsive and the steering is really well balanced.
Visibility is very good.
Compact dimensions make it great in the city and on the highways.
High speed manners and low speed ride are both very good.

Irritants -
The boot does not have perfectly squared out corners. If you want to place two rectangular suitcases or multiple flat packed boxes, it needs some adjusting around.
The spare wheel is a bit hard to take out. The air valve is also facing the inside of the car so it's a bit of a wrestle to top up air pressure in your spare wheel.
That's it I guess.

Good luck on your purchase! Stay safe.

[Kosfactor]

Originally Posted by maskebail

. So the Kushaq 1.0 AT ambition with free accessories kit is offered at 16.8L On road Bengaluru - about 80K lower than regular price(on the higher side, but reason for considering coming up)

Just looking at it from a budget perspective and since you are okay with CVT, MG Astor has an automatic around the same price, it looks a size bigger and has a lot of features too.