Quote:
Originally Posted by Vid6639 The Creta might be able to handle it but Hyundai hasn't specified any water wading capabilities something which Ford did and other so called SUV's do as well. So we don't really know.
Waterlogged roads upto what depth? The Yeti is only rated by Skoda for wading depth of 300mm which is lesser than the Ecosport. The reason is because the air intake in the Skoda is lower down. I would be careful next time.
Actually speaking ground clearance is the lowest point in the under body. So the 180mm might be between the wheels which will be more than enough unless you take it off road over a rocky trail. For urban roads, the clearance between the front and rear wheels and the front overhang is the one that is more important.
The 190mm in the Creta looks to be sufficient with not very large overhangs.
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by Vid6639 Try going to Mumbai, Delhi or Kolkata. Everytime it rains you need that 500mm water wading capability. My uncle has had an engine seized on his Fiesta in Kolkata.
Forget those cities. Bangalore alone has the issue. Any low lying areas and you're finished with a hatch or sedan.
It is not at all irrelevant with our roads here. With a hydrostatic lock you are looking at minimum 1 lakh in repair. If I am paying a premium for a so called crossover or compact SUV, it should atleast handle the city deluge that happens every single monsoon.
The Ecosport is 200mm and Duster is even more. It's acceptable but amongst the lowest.
The edge when it comes to manual transmission. Only thing I can see extra is the sat nav screen with reversing camera. The Automatic Ecosport is a 6 speed DSG with 6 airbags, ESP, hill hold and some extra features. The Creta Automatic is diesel with an older 6 speed torque converter and costs a whooping 6 lakhs more on road. For someone looking for an automatic crossover and is ok with the lesser space, the ecosport makes more sense. The 6 lakhs you save is more than enough for the fuel.
The SX+ diesel AT is 17 lakhs on road which is way too much for the features you get.
The SX(O) is also 17 lakhs on road but you get a lot more for your buck. leather seats, 6 airbags, larger 17" alloys with spare alloy, leather seats, ESP, hill hold, supervision cluster and a lot more small features. Atleast you get everything you can imagine for a car of that price. |
Quote:
Originally Posted by shankar.balan No defence at all. Im not even going to buy one and I really don't care too much!
1.I have used my Yeti on the waterlogged streets of Bangalore and so far so good. I have driven my old shape Maruti 800 in the Madras rains when the water actually went over the bonnet. Same with my Bolero on Koramangala 80 feet road near the present day Nature's Basket. Nothing happened.
I think the Creta can handle the Indian rainy season as well as the EcoSport or Duster but I am yet to see proof.
2. GC: The Scorpio has a GC of 180mm as does the Yeti. This may be adjudged to be amongst the lowest but they certainly suffice.
5. I appreciate the points made on pricing when it comes to the AT - as Ive said earlier, they could certainly have given us much more for the AT at that price. |
Some Points:
Shankar truly appreciate the neutrality with which you have been backing the Creta though you have no plans of buying one. It just shows the other side of the coin and a different view point. Maybe though I am more with Vid6636 on the SUVish traits of Creta vs EcoSport and Duster.
We all seem to agree that the Creta is underfeatured in AT trip or rather over priced.
When I picked up the EcoSport capability to go through Water and Ground Clearance was top priority for me. Hence I sold of my Laura AT (and also the Aria at that time) for peanuts though a vehicle from a higher segment and bought the AT EcoSport.
I have driven the Safari through about 800 mm of water (but for a short period when we had a cloud bust type scenario in Thane and the electricals did get damaged and water got into places it shouldn't in. Leading to me selling it off in a few more years due to repeat failure of various electrical parts post that.
I had have the occasion to drive even the Cielo AT with water over the bonnet and again it too did kinda cope with the short burst and was also damaged in some manner - don't recollect how exactly. Driving the Laura through a lot of water (maybe about 200-300 mm) was very scary and made me change vehicle as soon as the EcoSport AT was available. If the capability has been stated by Ford to be say 300 mm I would not have selected it and 500 mm is what I actually require at the minimum on occasion in Mumbai and this gives me a great sense of peace. The other aspect of importance to me was ground clearance and after the Aria and Safari I developed a habit of not slowing down too much for rough roads and speed bumps. This was problematic in the Laura, and is better in the EcoSport but not fully solved, as while it does not hit the bottom it does get unsettled and has a hard suspension compared to the Safari and the Aria. This was solved partially with a Rogers suspension and Bigger size tyres.
Creata and Duster have the advantage of bigger tyres over the EcoSport and this helps tackle rough roads better. It is not just the Suspension but also the tyres that help. Infact in the EcoSport sizes there are no AT tyres in 16" rims while the options exist for Duster and Creta size.
AT: The EcoSport AT is a better vehicle overall than the Creta and yet priced about 5.5L less OTR. And that is a huge difference. (Lets keep the Petrol and Diesel aspect aside for now.)
Size: Yes the Creta is more spacious compared to the EcoSport and less compared to the Duster. yet the Creta like the EcoSport is a 4 Adult or 4 Adult plus 1 kid kid of vehicle on long drives. The Edge for me for the Creta is in the rear seat arm rest that is foldable vs the fixed accessory that EcoSport has.
But if one is looking for Sedan like space and comfort then the Creta provides it better than the Duster and the EcoSport both. EcoSport and Duster both provide a more semi SUVish space, in how you walk in and sit in the vehicle. So if one wants to look at an alternative to C and lower D segment vehicles then the Creta is a better bet.
Luggage Space: Now lets look at a condition of carrying 3 adults or even 4 and lot of luggage in the Creta or EcoSport. While the Creats definitely has a large luggage space area, it does not have the flexibility of 60:40 split seats so at most you can have 2 + Lots & lots of luggage but never 3 + Lots of Luggage as the back bench cannot be folded partially.
I have travelled in the EcoSport with wife and 1 & 2 kids with 2 cycles (Including 1 full size) and infact have posted the snaps on the EcoSport thread, (Kid/s in the back seat not on the front). This cannot be done in the Creta.
It would have been good to have AWD/ 4X4 in all of the vehicle but sadly only the Duster has it and it is missed by me on the EcoSport.
A key differential in design that you see with the Creta is the very short dash board vs the really large Dashboard of the EcoSport (more than twice the size). So while the EcoSport has the Engine bay coming into the cab kind of design the Creta doesn't. Just a difference worth noting. In that sense the dash of the EcoSport is a bit like the Safari, Aria, Fortuner, Innova, while that of the Creta is a bit like the Scorpio and Duster.
Visibility: Creta has in my view better visibility than the EcoSport by a BIG margin but the seating position is a bit lower and definitely the Duster has a better more commanding seating position.
Steering: Creta missed the reach adjustment of the EcoSport. Don't know why though. But then the New Endeavour too does not have it?
On the subject of the new Endeavour the Water Wading capability has been among the first details that are available and it is rated at 800mm which is higher than the current Fortuner at least and is infact in the Land Rover territory. With the right pricing...
But in the end to me EcoSport and Duster are more of an SUV in all manners compared to the Creta which may be a better vehicle - but then at what price?