Maruti S-Cross AT vs Honda City CVT: Which car should I buy

Although the S-Cross felt more practical, I think my bias towards the City is blurring my decision making here.

BHPian RaghavD recently shared this with other enthusiasts.

The story

I currently own a Tata Tiago XZ 2017 manual version and a couple of months ago - one fine day, my missus wanted an automatic car that is much easier to drive and one which had greater boot space (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 the 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 a 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 include the S-Cross & City 5th-gen.

Maruti 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, okay-ish 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 manoeuvring 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's prices - they said it will be 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 on:

• Which one to choose between 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!

Here's what BHPian sierrabravo98 had to say about the matter:

I am no expert but my 2 paise anyways:

• 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.
• The S-Cross is nowhere near as spacious as the Honda City. Its interior space is at par with the Honda Amaze. The City is a much bigger car in every dimension and it shows.
• 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 the necessary features.
• NVH levels will be unsatisfactory in both cars at the speeds you mentioned.

Here's what BHPian PaddleShifter had to say about the matter:

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.

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 Paddle Shifters-equipped City.

Here's what BHPian Shreyans_Jain had to say about the matter:

There is no point going for the S Cross now. The vehicle will soon be updated with a new model: a 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 if 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.

Check out BHPian comments for more insights and information.