[namitkumar31]

Originally Posted by kaviprem

Namit
Its good and its clearly a step up in terms of visibility.
The accessory guy suggested to change [only] the high beam and he also mentioned all of the upgrades are done primarily for high beam for high way drive.
I told him I dont use high beam unless I want to alert others. He looked "puzzled" with this statement Though he accepted yet the reality is different that many drive with high beam on high way.

Prem.

Hi Prem,

Thanks for the inputs and I totally agree with the low beam preference opinion. I hope more and more people see the value in that but sometimes high beam is required badly. My commute sometimes involves early morning drives on the ORR and in certain sections I have to keep switching between the beams.

I avoid night highway driving as much as possible so might go for a low beam upgrade only.

Thanks,
Namit

Originally Posted by kaviprem

Few updates:

2) Asked about tyre upgrade with the accessory department.

6) I have a Bangalore-Madras scheduled tomorrow where I would be able to check up both the tyre and H11 performance in the highway/high speed conditions.

Prem.

Hi Prem,

Is the dealer Whitefield Honda and how was your highway experience with the upgraded tyres and low beam ?

Thanks,
Namit

Moderator's Note: Do not make back to back posts. Use the Multiquote option to respond to multiple people at one go. If you missed responding to someone and realize that immediately after posting you can edit your previous post for the first 30 minutes. We suggest you read the Announcements section thoroughly before you make your next post.

All the back to back posts have been merged.

[kaviprem]

Originally Posted by namitkumar31

Hi Prem,

Is the dealer Whitefield Honda and how was your highway experience with the upgraded tyres and low beam ?

Thanks,
Namit

Namit
Yes, its Whitefield Honda.

Highway experience - a couple of observations.

1) Driving felt good. Probably, its the money that was spent made me feel that way

2) Ground clearance is definitely increased - I dont know the exact number, but surely, its more now. While I was returning from Madras [in the Chithoor route], there was a speed breaker that didnt have any marking nor a board and I missed to notice that. I was in about 75+ KMPH speed and I just let the car go on the bump without doing anything !
Thank god - nothing happened except a considerable jump up and down. No bottom-scrapping happened to the car. I guess, this is due to an increase in the ground clearance.

3) Mileage - definite drop off about 1.5 KMPL in highway and 1 KMPL in City limits.

Hope this helps.

Prem.

[condor]

Originally Posted by kaviprem

While I was returning from Madras [in the Chithoor route], there was a speed breaker that didnt have any marking nor a board and I missed to notice that. I was in about 75+ KMPH speed and I just let the car go on the bump without doing anything !
Thank god - nothing happened except a considerable jump up and down. No bottom-scrapping happened to the car.

When you hit a speed-breaker at that speed, there is no chance of scraping the bottom. The car will be thrown into a jump, like what you just experienced.

[kaviprem]

Originally Posted by condor

When you hit a speed-breaker at that speed, there is no chance of scraping the bottom. The car will be thrown into a jump, like what you just experienced.

Buddy
Agreed, but I have had experience the lower bumper or the sides scrapping in such situations that didnt happen. May be, it wouldnt have happened with the stock tyres too !

Prem.

[condor]

Originally Posted by kaviprem

Buddy
Agreed, but I have had experience the lower bumper or the sides scrapping in such situations that didnt happen. May be, it wouldnt have happened with the stock tyres too !

When we hit a bumper at speed, a low Front Bumper will scrape upon landing. But under-belly will not scrape. Reason for both is that the speed breaker is acting like a ramp for a small jump.

note:
One more point when we are buying used cars - check the lower part of the front bumper for scrapes.

[kaviprem]

Summary
I should say, I thoroughly enjoy the Honda City CVT, both the driving comfort and the adequate power.

Likes

• The highway dynamics are just great and am able to appreciate more since I am coming from "tall & bulky" SUV to a low hanging sedan.
• High speed stability and the comfort that it provides me - a great feel.
• The smooth ride till I encounter a speed breaker.
• Overall, I am becoming more of a sedan lover!

A recent drive
Had been on a 1000 KM drive during the 2016 Christmas vacation.
80% highway drive - Bangalore > Trichy > Yercaud > Coimbatore > Bangalore.
Highway drive is just a cake-walk. No worries at all.

Breaking/Slowing down from triple digit speed - Good control, I would say without creating any panic situation for the passengers inside.

Drive from Namakkal town to Trichy is a single lane [two way traffic] highway. Again, I was expecting something really bad with the seating level of the sedan and the pitch dark roadway I was through. Surprisingly, it went well. I would contribute the comfort to (1) enough visibility by the OSRAM nightbreaker [only to the low beam and I don't use high beam unless needed to flash] and (2) the adequate/enough power that we get for overtaking in two traffic roads.
We all know City CVT is not a power machine, but good enough for most overtaking situations.

Above all, the CVT comfort in Bangalore city is just an amazing treat on a daily basis.

[kaviprem]

I got my City the 1 year service [20,000 KMs]. Oh yeah, its an year passed by already. But, not 20K KMs. My ODO stands at 11,000 KMs. But, this includes around 45 days of idle time [in multiple patches] due to my out-of-country visits. If not, another 3000+ KMs easily.

Every work that had to be done were on regular maintenance only, including Wheel alignment/balancing.
The total bill came up to INR 9,796/- Is this how the first year service bill would be for Honda City CVT?

Can someone [who went through recently] share their 1st year service total bill amount please?

Prem.

[kaviprem]

ODO stands at 17+K.
Honestly, I didn't have anything to complain about when I went to service this morning. So, it was all the regular checks as per their checklist.

Engine Oil [Synthetic], Air filter, liquid top-ups were done.

SA asked me about Wheel balancing and alignment. I said NO since I don't have any complaints in there. Even if I need one, I would go to a proper tire shop to get it done.

The bill came upto 4300 and odd.

Overall, I continue to like my drive. No complains.

Prem.

[kaviprem]

Driving conditions and eco-system:
Tire pressure - front 31 [1 less than the spec] and rear 30 [same as the spec]
Drive mode - 100% Sports mode from Bangalore to Chennai and Chennai to Bangalore. “Normal” within Chennai local
Route - Bangalore to Chennai through Old Madras Road and Chithoor. Chennai to Bangalore through Krishnagiri, Hosur, Electronic City Express highway, HSR layout, Marathahalli.

Driving efficiency:
Bangalore to Chennai - 299 KMs. Start/Reaching time - 12:15PM/6:30PM.
Time Taken - 6 hours and 15 mins including 15 mins break in Chithoor Coffee Day.
Delay - 1 hour for first 15 Kms to get out of Whitefield/Kadugudi and 1 hour 15 mins from Sriperumbudur to Chennai [around 20 Kms].
Highway efficiency - 4 hours for 264 KMs, ~66 KMPH.
Overall efficiency - ~48 KMPH, Abnormal due to extensive delay in both the ends.

Chennai to Bangalore - 327 KMs. Start/Reaching time - 5:15AM/10:00AM.
Time Taken - 4 hours and 45 mins including 15 mins break in Krishnagiri.
Delay - 25 mins to reach Sriperumbudur [30 KMs] and 1 hour from Athibeli toll to home [38 KMs].
Highway efficiency - 3 hours 20 mins for 259 KMs, ~74 KMPH.
Overall efficiency - ~69 KMPH.

Reasoning for Athibeli > EC flyover > HSR > Marathalli - Being Saturday morning, I chose this.
If I had taken Athibeli > Sarjapur circle > Dommasandra > Varthur, I might have reached in 45 mins and ~5 KMs less.

Driving observation:
Power on acceleration - Excellent response. I felt like Vento TSI, of course its no match. I believe, the main factor is the tire pressure of 1 less
Braking - Excellent/Quick reduction in speed from 120 KMPH. Again, the reason could be tire pressure. Any expert comments?
Mileage - 1.5 KMPL less than the usual I get. I am OK with this considering the power and braking efficiency.
Overtaking - just a breeze to cut through vehicles easily. Only one Fortuner who was driving rash went ahead. Rest all were on my rear view mirror in no time!

***Disclaimer***
Max speed - 120 KMPH. I consider this as a safe speed for Honda City and most midsize+ Sedan vehicles when the stretch of road is clean and traffic free.

Prem.

[Durango Dude]

Originally Posted by kaviprem

Driving conditions and eco-system:
Tire pressure - front 31 [1 less than the spec] and rear 30 [same as the spec]
Drive mode - 100% Sports mode from Bangalore to Chennai and Chennai to Bangalore. “Normal” within Chennai local

Ever since I undertook a trip to Kodai, I've left the Drive mode in ECO and it makes no difference to my driving style and there's enough power when you floor it and works well with a sedate driving style. I agree it feels planted with speeds upto 120kmph. With the ECO mode it gives around 10-11 kmpl in the city and 14-15 kmpl on the highway. I keep an all fours 34 psi when I travel on the highway and 32 psi in the city all fours.

[kaviprem]

Originally Posted by Durango Dude

Ever since I undertook a trip to Kodai, I've left the Drive mode in ECO and it makes no difference to my driving style and there's enough power when you floor it and works well with a sedate driving style. I agree it feels planted with speeds upto 120kmph. With the ECO mode it gives around 10-11 kmpl in the city and 14-15 kmpl on the highway. I keep an all fours 34 psi when I travel on the highway and 32 psi in the city all fours.

I stopped using ECO mode within the 1st week of ownership. Its a big NO NO for me and too sluggish to pick up the speed, even for the city traffic.

Within City, my average is 10-11 for the worst ever Bangalore traffic in the "Drive" mode and in highways, its mostly around 15 KMPL.
Flooring the accelerator pedal will eventually take you to 120 KMPH, but the question is "how long would it take?"
In the "Sports" mode, almost immediate - you are in 80 KMPH, in no time - you are in 100 KMPH and in an acceptable time - you are in 120 KMPH.
I like it this way

Did your City come with the tire spec 34 all around? If so, which model is it?

Prem.

[Durango Dude]

Originally Posted by kaviprem

I stopped using ECO mode within the 1st week of ownership. Its a big NO NO for me and too sluggish to pick up the speed, even for the city traffic.

Within City, my average is 10-11 for the worst ever Bangalore traffic in the "Drive" mode and in highways, its mostly around 15 KMPL.
Flooring the accelerator pedal will eventually take you to 120 KMPH, but the question is "how long would it take?"
In the "Sports" mode, almost immediate - you are in 80 KMPH, in no time - you are in 100 KMPH and in an acceptable time - you are in 120 KMPH.
I like it this way

Did your City come with the tire spec 34 all around? If so, which model is it?

Prem.

My City is VX CVT 2017 (the new one). It comes with two different air pressure specs for front and back tyres. But I keep it same for convenience while checking tyre pressure. I drove in D mode for 3 months and then while taking it to Kodai changed it to ECO and ever since I've been using it; may I've gotten used to it. As there is always power on demand when you flex your right foot, I let it be there. May be, to each his own

[mxh]

Originally Posted by kaviprem

Driving conditions and eco-system:
Tire pressure - front 31 [1 less than the spec] and rear 30 [same as the spec]

As per the manual, for high speed and full load, the tire pressure should be 35 front and 33 rear. I generally use these settings on the highway with 3 or more people and luggage on board plus high speeds. The recommendation for highways is generally more and never less as the higher pressures prevents flexing of the sidewalls and reduces blowout chances.
The City cruises easily at 120 but I feel there's a lot of scope for NVH improvement. The cabin noise at 120 should have been much less. I'm using Michelin XM2 185 tires and would rate them as average. Sometimes they squeal on hard acceleration, so wouldn't recommend them as an upgrade.

[kaviprem]

Originally Posted by mxh

As per the manual, for high speed and full load, the tire pressure should be 35 front and 33 rear. I generally use these settings on the highway with 3 or more people and luggage on board plus high speeds. The recommendation for highways is generally more and never less as the higher pressures prevents flexing of the sidewalls and reduces blowout chances.
The City cruises easily at 120 but I feel there's a lot of scope for NVH improvement. The cabin noise at 120 should have been much less. I'm using Michelin XM2 185 tires and would rate them as average. Sometimes they squeal on hard acceleration, so wouldn't recommend them as an upgrade.

Find attached the Tire pressure spec. My understanding is that 35/33 for front/rear is needed only when you go beyond 160 kmph.
Hence, I used to maintain 32/30 and changed it this time to 31/30.
yes, NVH is a lot more desirable. I have changed my tires to Yoko Earth, hence the road noise is much less than what it used to be with the stocks.

Prem.

[kaviprem]

Has anyone did this upgrade? https://www.autoglam.in/honda/city/a...ctor-headlight

I am surprised with the "FAQ" section of it, especially the "manufacturer's Warranty" question.

If anyone has a real time experience with this kit, please share.
Also, whats the take on its pricing?

Prem.