[RaghavD]

Here is my story:

I currently own a Tata Tiago XZ 2017 manual version and a couple of months ago - one fine day, my misus wanted an automatic car that is much easier to drive and one which had greater bootspace (our newborn ensured we were carrying an extra suitcase always). We also wanted an upgrade of sorts - wanted to go for a CSUV or a sedan that could seat 5 people comfortably.

With a budget of 10 lakhs, we were open to a second hand car and looked at the ones with ODO under 50k, but couldn't find a good one.

We decided that we will stretch our budget to 15 lakhs and find a new one. We test drove the following:
Nexon: AMT was terrible!
XL6: Suspension was bad. Very jumpy on speed breakers. And the captain seats were a put off for me for some reason
Astor: Liked the car, but base variant lacked several features. Wasn't sure if we should pay so much for something new
Amaze: Rear seats were a put off with very bad under-thigh support
Did not check out Venue or Sonet for safety reasons and crampy rears. Did not consider Rapid or Vento as they are going to be discontinued.
.

The only other two cars that were impressive:
S cross: This one surprised me. The build quality was solid. The car was spacious. The drive was not very bad - obviously not as good as CVT or DCT, but definitely was not bad. I think it is due to the bigger tyres.
Cons I noticed: Dated interiors, okayish music system, no rear ac vents

Honda city 5th gen: The drive quality was good. Has a massive boot. Paddle shifters gave me life - when I thought my maneuvering with upshifts and downshifts were over when we wanted to go for an automatic under 15 lakhs.
Cons: Only the base V CVT version was fitting the bill

Then I thought of booking Slavia online, thinking it will be priced similar to City. Called up skoda to check Slavia prices - they said it will priced similar to Kushaq - which means it will touch 20 for what I am looking for

Now with my 2 shortlists, I don't know which one to go for. S cross felt bigger and spacious. It felt more practical. But I have always admired Honda City since childhood. I think my bias towards Honda is blurring my decision making here.

Would be great to hear recommendations from experts here! Specifically:
Which one to choose among these two?
What can be realistic top speeds of these vehicles where they are stable (100-110 kmph is the max speed where I feel stable on my tiago).
NVH levels on the highway for both these cars at high speeds (100 to 120 kmph). I couldn't test drive them on the highway.

Thanks in advance!

[sierrabravo98]

Originally Posted by RaghavD

XL6: Suspension was bad. Very jumpy on speed breakers. And the captain seats were a put off for me for some reason

The only other two cars that were impressive:
S cross: This one surprised me. The build quality was solid. The car was spacious. The drive was not very bad - obviously not as good as CVT or DCT, but definitely was not bad. I think it is due to the bigger tyres.
Cons I noticed: Dated interiors, okayish music system, no rear ac vents

Honda city 5th gen: The drive quality was good. Has a massive boot. Paddle shifters gave me life - when I thought my maneuvering with upshifts and downshifts were over when we wanted to go for an automatic under 15 lakhs.
Cons: Only the base V CVT version was fitting the bill

I am no expert but my 2 paise anyways:

1.) As someone who has both the Honda City (4th generation) and the XL6 in the family, I am unable to fathom how you could possibly live with the ride quality of the Honda City when you hated the ride quality of the XL6. The XL6 is leagues ahead of any C2 segment sedan in the ride quality department. Maybe something was wrong with the test car.

2.) The S-Cross is nowhere near as spacious as the Honda City. It's interior space is at par with the Honda Amaze. The City is a much bigger car in every dimension and it shows.

3.) 5th generation Honda City (MT) maxes out at 208kmph (tested by Top Gear at NATRAX). It will do the maximum speed limit in this country all day without any trouble. The V CVT variant comes with all necessary features.

4.) NVH levels will be unsatisfactory in both cars at the speeds you mentioned.

[shancz]

Welcome to TBHP

On the quiet cabins at speed the only way to check that would be to request a longer TD for that specific use case. Identify the nearest NICE entryand talk to the showroom for arranging one on a Sunday morning to avoid traffic.

The comparison is simple and not at the same time.
If you want a sedan and are ok with the GC over the roads you drive on then its the City.

If you aren't sure of the road conditions but not inclined towards the SUVs then the S-Cross is built for that purpose, a crossover

People have reported that the softer suspension setup the City which works well in the city feels a bit too soft on the highway so you need check that based on your usage.

S-Cross owners have reported the AT to be a bit underwhelming on the highways especially during overtakes but some haven't so this depends on driving styles and preferences too.

Hence the longer TD is essential, IMHO.
Good Luck.

[Latheesh]

I am a 5th gen V MT owner and it has all the required features and accessories. All you need to add is a floor mat (and may be front sensors too). Please take a longer test drive of AT and check whether you are ok with the NVH. It is the only thing which annoys me.

[PaddleShifter]

I was confused between S-Cross, Honda City and Ciaz myself. I went for S-Cross owing to its sheer practicality and the fact that I live in mountains. Honda City or even Ciaz would have made my life difficult here.

https://www.team-bhp.com/forum/offic...ml#post4919270 (Maruti S-Cross : Official Review)

Regarding Honda City vs S-Cross, I believe they are evenly matched and you can go with either based on what you need in the car:

Go for 5th Gen City for:
- More modern sedan looks
- Honda badge and City reputation
- Bigger boot
- Better AT with Paddle Shifters
- Ok with lower GC and price


Go for S-Cross for:
- Maruti network
- Higher GC
- Taller seating than sedans
- Price savings over Honda City 5th Gen

My recommendation for you is Honda City since you are talking about highway drives, max speeds etc. where the 4 speed AT of S-Cross will look bland (although adequate) in front of PaddleShifters equipped City.

[Shreyans_Jain]

There is no point going for the S Cross now. They vehicle will soon be updated with a new model: revised cabin, lots of new tech and a 6 speed torque converter. All these will first be available in the new Brezza, coming in a few months. So you would want to wait for that.

As for City, it is a very decent all rounder. Especially the value for money automatic base variant which has all the essentials covered. Just that, it is not the ideal car of you want to do plenty of highway running or if you have heavy or rough usage. For primarily urban use, it is a fine choice.

Do note that the City as sold in India has also not been crash tested by GNCAP. This is a grey area, for the ASEAN NCAP result was of the Thai spec car.

Top speeds are basically irrelevant. The City’s rear tends to get bouncy and skittish at three digit speeds. Insulation is also poor. For highway running, Kushaq and Taigun have far better ride and handling. Expect the Slavia to have the same. Alternatively, you should take a hard look at the XUV700 and Harrier. These vehicles are much better suited to highway use than City.

[RaghavD]

Originally Posted by sierrabravo98

I am no expert but my 2 paise anyways:

1.) As someone who has both the Honda City (4th generation) and the XL6 in the family, I am unable to fathom how you could possibly live with the ride quality of the Honda City when you hated the ride quality of the XL6. The XL6 is leagues ahead of any C2 segment sedan in the ride quality department. Maybe something was wrong with the test car.

2.) The S-Cross is nowhere near as spacious as the Honda City. It's interior space is at par with the Honda Amaze. The City is a much bigger car in every dimension and it shows.

3.) 5th generation Honda City (MT) maxes out at 208kmph (tested by Top Gear at NATRAX). It will do the maximum speed limit in this country all day without any trouble. The V CVT variant comes with all necessary features.

4.) NVH levels will be unsatisfactory in both cars at the speeds you mentioned.

Thanks sierrabravo98 for those two cents.

Not sure about the XL6, as the sales guy himself suggested that the car feels planted only when you have few people seated in the rear. He also said that the feedback he has been getting is that XL6 is very under powered on the slopes at full load and overtakes. He himself suggested to go for the s cross over the XL6 - after which we test drove the s cross and liked it. We did not have S cross in the radar before that.

And on the scross feeling more spacious - honestly even i was surprised. When i checked the width on papers, scross was wider than the city by around 5 cm and it showed when we sat in the rear. The underthigh support of scross was better as well with its inclined seats. I also think it is to do with the structure of the car as behind the back, scross has more space and light.

I honestly feel more convinced with an scross. But worried if I haven't tested both these cars enough.

Also, 5 years down the line I may want to go for an upgrade and feel scross may be too dated to get a higher resale value than the city when I decide to sell it off. Just so confused about this! :(

[Vishal.R]

If requirement is not very urgent, would suggest you to wait till end of this year due to following reasons.

1. Six airbags will be available in all cars.

2. Maruti is planning to introduce new six Speed gear box in brezza, Ertiga and XL6 as per news reports. There is a high possibility that same would be introduced in S-Cross as well.

3. Some more options like Nexon DCT might be launched.

[RaghavD]

Originally Posted by Shreyans_Jain

There is no point going for the S Cross now. They vehicle will soon be updated with a new model: revised cabin, lots of new tech and a 6 speed torque converter. All these will first be available in the new Brezza, coming in a few months. So you would want to wait for that.

As for City, it is a very decent all rounder. Especially the value for money automatic base variant which has all the essentials covered. Just that, it is not the ideal car of you want to do plenty of highway running or if you have heavy or rough usage. For primarily urban use, it is a fine choice.

Do note that the City as sold in India has also not been crash tested by GNCAP. This is a grey area, for the ASEAN NCAP result was of the Thai spec car.

Top speeds are basically irrelevant. The City’s rear tends to get bouncy and skittish at three digit speeds. Insulation is also poor. For highway running, Kushaq and Taigun have far better ride and handling. Expect the Slavia to have the same. Alternatively, you should take a hard look at the XUV700 and Harrier. These vehicles are much better suited to highway use than City.

Thanks Shreyans_Jain. I have been contemplating the same things you are talking about the s cross. But the other cars you suggested are beyond what I can afford. I wanted to stick to 15 max. These are the only two choices I am left with now!

[Shreyans_Jain]

Originally Posted by RaghavD

Thanks Shreyans_Jain. I have been contemplating the same things you are talking about the s cross. But the other cars you suggested are beyond what I can afford. I wanted to stick to 15 max. These are the only two choices I am left with now!

Hard fact: there is no perfect car under 15L. They all come with a compromise or two. The overall most complete and all rounder car in this price range is the Kia Sonet diesel automatic. Yes, it’s crash worthiness is a grey area. But it is the same with most cars in this part of the market.

Personally, my suggestion would be to wait for the updated Brezza and then take a call. You can book the Sonet in meanwhile, just in case. Waiting periods are long. You would have a clear picture about Slavia as well by then.

[RaghavD]

Originally Posted by PaddleShifter

My recommendation for you is Honda City since you are talking about highway drives, max speeds etc. where the 4 speed AT of S-Cross will look bland (although adequate) in front of PaddleShifters equipped City.

Thanks PaddleShifter. These thoughts make complete sense.

On a lighter note, I am surprised you went with the s cross over city or ciaz with that profile name!

[Nav-i-gator]

I have a 5th Gen City V CVT (exact model you are looking at) and my brother just bought an S Cross Zeta (though MT version). My observations:

1. For use within City - both cars will be more or less same. CVT in the new City is quite responsive, esp in sports mode, so quick overtakes are easy. This is where S-cross Auto might feel a bit lathargic

2. In-cabin space - City, with its beige seats and door inserts, feel more airy. S cross have marginally more shoulder space, but I found City seats to be more comfy.

3. Boot space - City hands down. S Cross have boot similar to CSUV.

4. NVH - this is very important to compare thoroughly. I haven't driven S Cross on highways much, but in Honda City, there is a bit more Tyre noise at the rear. NVH otherwise are excellent and you don't hear any outside noises, nor is there any vibrations whatsoever. But, esp on concrete roads, tyre noise do get registered. This is the biggest sore point in the car. S -cross should fare better.

5. Stability at high speeds - Straight line stability of both cars is excellent and comparable to any European car of the same segment. Don't get fooled by multiple people telling you otherwise (unless you plan to drive at illegally high speeds). Over road undulations at high speeds, the rear bumps once and then quickly settles down. It is not "Bumpy" by any means.
High speed cornering is not a forte of any of these cars. S Corss being high on wheels is expected to have some body roll, but in Honda City, due the the extra confidence you get with seating relatively low, you tend to get into corners at higher speeds and will definitely feel much more body roll than expected in a Sedan. The car holds its lines though (tyres give up sooner) and long rear overhang gives the feeling of inertia.

The excellent steering will more than compensate for any error in judgement around corners though. It's precise, direct and weighs up nicely with speeds.

6. The engine need to be mentioned too - Honda City beats S Cross hands down in this department. More so, if you like to push the Revs from time to time. Put it in S mode and floor the accelerator. one second of pause (it's a CVT after all. Though it is comparable to the "slow" DCT from Hyundai), and then - it flies. And it revs all the way to the Rev Limiter (7500 RPM, no less) while the car reaching very high speed quickly. And it sounds like a much bigger engine as it roars past 5000 RPM. It's addictive!
S Cross engine, in comparison, will get boomy and run out of breath around 5500 RPM.

[mAndArk]

Welcome to the forum!

I'm from Bangalore too and got the 5th gen City CVT couple of months back. Had also driven the SCross AT as part of my shortlist but that 4speed auto box didn't feel great when driven enthusiastically.

The only thing that kept pushing me away from the City was fear of low ground clearance but in my 12 weeks and 5500 kms of ownership, boy it has surprised me with where it can go and how!

And if you're indeed getting a naturally aspirated engine in today's day and age of turbo petrols, there is nothing better than Honda's sweet revving iVtec on this side of 15L in my humble opinion

[landcruiser123]

Honda City, unless you need the extra GC and flexibility the S-Cross offers. There is upgraded S-Cross (or a replacement) round the corner - maybe wait for it?

If you're open to used, check out Corollas with more than 50k km. Don't worry about mileage (<120k km) as a well maintained Corolla can last 250-300k km easily.

[dsreek]

I very much relate to your dilemma. I booked S cross in December and while waiting did a TD of City 5 th gen. Now I have the City in my garage.

Several reasons for switching to City - much better safety features, excellent comfort for rear passengers (i have my parents traveling with me on occasions), amazing boot space, better interiors (according to my taste) and I prefer the looks of City to that of S cross.

To be fair, I loved S cross until I did a TD on City. My only concern with City was GC, but after riding it for around 500km, I'm perfectly happy with the choice. Never scratched it.

My recommendation is to go for City, eyes closed.