[ani_meher]

How can we forget Spark? First spark with the dull gray interior and high price was not received too well. But the next iteration with beige interiors and reduced pricetag really gave a second life to the car. The LT and LT OPT versions of spark are so cute and surprisingly big and loaded inside. It was creating a dent on it's bigger sister Beat PS (base model) sales, because in around same price, you could get a fully loaded Spark.

So what GM did? They crippled the cute Spark to great extents. Gone were the rear fog lamps, rear wiper, 60:40 split seats, rear headrests :( It was very sad. In fact last week I actually suggested my friend who is considering spark that he should buy 2011 LT/LT Opt models and not the present one. Those LT models were really the 'fully loaded' ones. Bad move GM!

[kmirchia]

Excellent thread, must-say.

Couple of cars, which I wonder why no-one's mentioned:
1. Old Fiesta compared to the claustrophobic new one.
2. W140 compared to the crap Mercedes is peddling as an S-Class these days. (or ever after it as a matter of fact)
The Zen and the OHC will of course always be on the list.

[deetjohn]

I guess this thread is about main stream cars. I agree, the current Health, Safety, Environment regulations play a massive role in making the newer generation a lot less sharp, blunt & fun... than the model it replaces. Is it a good thing? I don't know.

The Estlio was not technically a new generation model replacement of the Zen. The Estilo was nothing other than a WagonR with a different body shell. It was a very stupid marketing ploy by MSIL which backfired.

The actual successor of the Zen was the Alto (Our current Alto and then the A-star).

For high end sports cars, this is a very good discussion with Chris Harris on the topic.

Is Technology Making Cars Worse? - ROAD TESTAMENT- YouTube

[ashis89]

My list includes:

1) ZEN and New Zen(refresh),Zen Estilo

2) Indica(1st gen) and Indica with flared wheel archs,Indica Vista

3) OHC and NHC

4) Accord(2nd gen) and Accord(3rd gen-current avatar)- The earlier one looked beautiful,new one is aggresive.

5) Ambassador and Avigo.

6) Verna and Verna Transform.

Currently I can remember these.

[ghostrider]

Originally Posted by mayankjha1806

Excellent topic, although i would respectfully disagree to the title Older model better.
Why? because better is a very subjective word. Something that looks better to me may not look the same way to many others. All the time the manufacturers try to change things for the better (In whatever department they deem fit) some folks like it and some dont, so its a mixed bag.

I wasn't talking about looks at all - if you read my original post you'll see that I was talking about the functional / performance / joy / fun aspect of the car in question. There are enough models where you can easily claim that the older model, was in fact, better. Check the bottom of this post and you'll find nothing subjective about those choices.

Originally Posted by vb-san

Completely agree. Nice topic, but most of the replies are on just personal preferences I guess.
I personally like the newer versions always. In some cases it just take time to get over the goodness of the old one - for e.g.; the 5 series. When the current 5 was launched, I initially thought its a step backwards, but when I look at it now, I feel the current 5 is really a well sorted out piece of engineering from the German giant.
One car with which I really thought the old one was better - The Honda City which replaced the first gen in India was really a bad work.

I completely agree with you - I was (and still am) a HUGE fan of the E60 5-series. When the F10 came out I thought it looked drab in comparison, but the more I see it the more I appreciate it's overall proportions and stance. But my post wasn't about the looks, it was about the car as a whole.

Originally Posted by deetjohn

I guess this thread is about main stream cars. I agree, the current Health, Safety, Environment regulations play a massive role in making the newer generation a lot less sharp, blunt & fun... than the model it replaces. Is it a good thing? I don't know.
For high end sports cars, this is a very good discussion with Chris Harris on the topic.

I've seen this, and it's an excellent video. I for one, think that the bigger and heavier our cars get, the less involving they are to drive. Weight KILLS feedback.

Originally Posted by kmirchia

Excellent thread, must-say.
Couple of cars, which I wonder why no-one's mentioned:
1. Old Fiesta compared to the claustrophobic new one.
2. W140 compared to the crap Mercedes is peddling as an S-Class these days. (or ever after it as a matter of fact)
The Zen and the OHC will of course always be on the list.

I haven't driven the new Fiesta so I wouldn't know. I'm a massive fan of it's looks in the hatchback avatar, but like said this isn't about looks alone. Strange that you feel it's claustrophobic... have you seen this video by any chance? Jeremy tests the Ford Fiesta (series 12, episode 6) - BBC Top Gear

Originally Posted by vb-san

In Ikon’s case, I guess the downgrading was more to give space to the Fiesta. It started with the introduction of the Flair variant. I remember, in 2003 I went to check out the Flair, and went back home with a 1.6 ZXI NxT
In actual fact, the Ikon’s successor was the Fiesta (now Classic), which by itself is quite a good car.

Its the same story with me - my Mom wanted to buy a car in 2004 and was looking at something basic like a small hatch. I took her to the Ford showroom and quietly told the salesman that if he showed us the 1.3 Flair he could forget about making the sale. We were only interested in the 1.6L. Was the Fiesta really the successor to the Ikon? I don't think so... I think they were two separately distinct models. The Ikon was really the Ford Ka with a boot.


My personal list of cars where I felt the old one was better. This is based on personal experience or reports from close friends, and goes beyond looks.

1. The Type-2 Honda City (the 'dolphin) wasn't as good as the previous generation. Yes it was more comfortable, better equipped, and much better ergonomically, but it took away the essential Honda-ness of the model - the high-revving engine, the performance, and the handling.

2. The W210 Merc E-Class wasn't as good as the outgoing W124. I drove both, and the W124 seemed like it had a better chassis, and a more precise germanic feel when you drove it. It just seemed like a better sorted out car.

3. The 1.2L K-series Swift Petrol engine was nowhere near as much fun to drive as the old 1.3L engine. The punch was gone, and if you take away the driving joy from a Swift then you've compromised the entire essence of the car.

4. The Zen Estilo was such a bad, bad, piece of machinery compared to the original Zen (regardless of whether the Estilo was nothing but a re-bodied Wagon R, it was still sold as a Zen). And I'm not just talking about looks - the handling, the quality, the performance - everything seemed substandard in that car.

5. The Palio Stile was such a pale shadow of it's former self. They neutered the car by taking away the only two great qualities it had - performance and handling.

[Screwdriva]

Original Honda city VTEC is the most involving car to drive sold in India. The new Honda City iVtec feels like a family barge in comparison

[vb-saan]

Originally Posted by ghostrider

Its the same story with me - my Mom wanted to buy a car in 2004 and was looking at something basic like a small hatch. I took her to the Ford showroom and quietly told the salesman that if he showed us the 1.3 Flair he could forget about making the sale. We were only interested in the 1.6L.

Good one! Those days, I felt that the 1.3 Flair was a total disgrace compared to the 1.6 NXT

Originally Posted by ghostrider

Was the Fiesta really the successor to the Ikon? I don't think so... I think they were two separately distinct models. The Ikon was really the Ford Ka with a boot.

IIRC, the Ikon was the booted version of 4th gen Fiesta, and the the sedan version of the 5th gen got to India with the original name. I maybe wrong here.

[kmirchia]

Originally Posted by ghostrider

I haven't driven the new Fiesta so I wouldn't know. I'm a massive fan of it's looks in the hatchback avatar, but like said this isn't about looks alone. Strange that you feel it's claustrophobic... have you seen this video by any chance? Jeremy tests the Ford Fiesta (series 12, episode 6) - BBC Top Gear

Well, I should've been more specific I think, it's not the looks which are bothersome about the new Fiesta, in fact, I actually was excited when I first heard and saw international pictures of the hatchback version, and I do remember seeing the video you've mentioned. And, AFAIK, the 1.6 he's talking about in the video isn't even sold in India. But even in the video, you can clearly see how the rear seat would only seat 2, and that too with almost no legroom. The boot looks too much of an afterthought as well on the saloon.

But, talking about Clarkson reminds me, he had this awesome video a couple of years ago where he talked about exactly this fact - Were old cars better than newer ones. The name of the episode was Hot Metal, there's some parts which are a must-watch in the one hour video. Watch the 2:00 - 2:30 mins and you won't help but smile.

Jeremy Clarkson - Hot Metal

[mycarhasablower]

I am surprised no one has mentioned the baleno. it was an enthusiasts car which the sx4 is not. it was not only faster but also a better handler, more sporty, fuel efficient and more reliable. Similarly the dezire is just boring compared to the very wild esteem, thanks to the extra weight and ugly looks.

[quickdraw]

Originally Posted by Gautam Misra

As already mentioned in an earlier post the older Skoda Laura was much better in the looks department. The present one has lost the "masculine" touch.

However in terms of gizmos probably the present one is better.

Originally Posted by 46TheDoctor

Functionally newer is better in almost all the cases.
But, looks wize:

2. Old laura better than current one.

Actually Old Laura not only looked better but had a Sun-Roof in the L&K Trim, Skoda removing it from the current model makes no sense.

[arindambasu13]

Originally Posted by ghostrider

3. The 1.2L K-series Swift Petrol engine was nowhere near as much fun to drive as the old 1.3L engine. The punch was gone, and if you take away the driving joy from a Swift then you've compromised the entire essence of the car.

I would disagree with you on this.

We have owned the 1.3 for the last 5 years (we still do) in my hometown, and I now own the 2012 K12 Swift, and have extensively driven both. The one place where you could say the older one was clearly better was probably at the top end, where the extra 100 cc may make a difference in terms of pulling power, top speed etc. However, in terms of refinement, steering feel, gearshift quality, ease of power delivery, etc. the new Swift is definitely a generation ahead. I look at these factors purely from the fun to drive perspective, and both are almost equally matched.

The punch which you talk about has most definitely not gone. What you could complain about the new K12 is that it lacks bottom end (south of 1200 RPM)- from my daily driving, once you cross 1200 RPM, it pulls well and cleanly. Take it above 2500, and the solid pulling power right up to the redline delivers enough punch for most enthusiasts to get an awesome buzz!!

There are of course other factors like the refurbished interiors (I just love that cockpit) and other (some subjective) aspects which make the new Swift even better. Chassis and handling wise I feel both are equally matched.

There is no doubt about the fact that the 1.3 Swift is awesome fun to drive as well, however, the 2012 Swift inherits almost all the good characteristics of the initial gen Swift, while improving upon a lot of the problem/unsatisfactory areas. All in all, the new gen is clearly a better package, whether you consider the fun to drive factor solely, or look at the entire package with all other factors considered.

[ghostrider]

Originally Posted by arindambasu13

I would disagree with you on this.
The one place where you could say the older one was clearly better was probably at the top end, where the extra 100 cc may make a difference in terms of pulling power, top speed etc. However, in terms of refinement, steering feel, gearshift quality, ease of power delivery, etc. the new Swift is definitely a generation ahead. I look at these factors purely from the fun to drive perspective, and both are almost equally matched.
The punch which you talk about has most definitely not gone. What you could complain about the new K12 is that it lacks bottom end (south of 1200 RPM)- from my daily driving, once you cross 1200 RPM, it pulls well and cleanly. Take it above 2500, and the solid pulling power right up to the redline delivers enough punch for most enthusiasts to get an awesome buzz!!

There is no doubt about the fact that the 1.3 Swift is awesome fun to drive as well, however, the 2012 Swift inherits almost all the good characteristics of the initial gen Swift, while improving upon a lot of the problem/unsatisfactory areas. All in all, the new gen is clearly a better package, whether you consider the fun to drive factor solely, or look at the entire package with all other factors considered.

I was talking about the older Swift - when they replaced the 1.3 with the 1.2 it felt like the engine had been neutered.
Speaking as an ex-Swift (Vdi) owner I completely agree that the new 2012 Swift is a much better package than the old one in all aspects except the engine and the brakes. There are, however, a LOT of detractors when it comes to the 'new' 1.2L engine in the 2012 Swift.

Here's an excerpt from GTO's review of the 2012 Swift:

"With variable valve tech on the intake (Maruti says this was necessary to improve fuel efficiency), the power output has been bumped up to 86 BHP (@ 6,000 rpm) and 114 Nm of torque (@ 4,000 rpm). That's 2 BHP more than in the older Swift, and about the same torque made at 500 rpm less. Should make the motor even better, right? Wrong. Maruti insists that the engine has been tuned for fuel-efficiency, and the tamer nature is immediately evident at the bottom end. The engine feels weaker at lower rpms, where the older car felt distinctly sprightlier. The low rpm behaviour of the engine is completely different from what the specs sheet would have you believe. And yes, you will need to downshift more often than in the Ritz / outgoing Swift, or a car like the i10 Kappa2. On the positive side, the engine remains very revv-happy & refined throughout the rpm range. The feel above 4,000 rpm is just awesome. Plus, the engine & exhaust note at high rpm sound great. The 1.2L revvs clean right up to its 6,400 rpm redline, and feels at home on the limit. Still, due to the detuned nature, don't expect the outright pace of the older Swift 1.2. Other petrol hatchbacks like the Brio / i10 Kappa2 will leave you in nthe dust in a drag."

I don't know about you, but I've never driven any of my cars consistently at the redline. My daily driving is 1200 - 3200rpm, so giving me lots of punch @4000 is useless. As a driver, you'd probably be a lot happier if you had more horses and torque lower down on the rev range.

Anyway, wer'e going off-topic. Yes, the NEW 2012 Swift is a better overall package than the old one. However, the engine's tamer which is unfortunate.

Originally Posted by mycarhasablower

I am surprised no one has mentioned the baleno. it was an enthusiasts car which the sx4 is not. it was not only faster but also a better handler, more sporty, fuel efficient and more reliable. Similarly the dezire is just boring compared to the very wild esteem, thanks to the extra weight and ugly looks.

The SX4 was a replacement for the Balen - it was not a later model of the car, it was a whole new car. I was referring to newer models within the same product line. For eg: the new Laura vs the older one.

[EdgedNTaken]

The one exception to this is the Tata Indica Vista. While some have mentioned that the first gen Indica was better than the Vista, I really do not see how. Ask any Indica Vista owner (the current "Sedan Class" or the earlier chrome-less one if you will) and he will tell you how the Indica has gone from strength to strength with every makeover. In terms of build quality, interior plastics, ride & handling, features, performance, quality of equipment used, Tata has outdone itself on each iteration of the Indica/Vista. Lets give credit where its due, and Tata definitely deserves some for the Vista.

[sureshshanmugam]

Originally Posted by ashis89

My list includes:

1) ZEN and New Zen(refresh),Zen Estilo

2) Indica(1st gen) and Indica with flared wheel archs,Indica Vista

3) OHC and NHC

4) Accord(2nd gen) and Accord(3rd gen-current avatar)- The earlier one looked beautiful,new one is aggresive.

5) Ambassador and Avigo.

6) Verna and Verna Transform.

Currently I can remember these.

One I can remember of is :
Maruti DZire - older ones looked better

[FrankMartin]

Originally Posted by bluevolt

Well looks are always subjective, some people prefer the old i10 front face than the current one.

Apart from looks there are few things which are better in old model than in new model. Consider example of WagonR - the new one is better in all aspects but the 3 cylinder engine lacks low end torque and vibrations are more than compared to old engine.

But in maximum cases new gen models are better than old gen.

The new facelift models are nothing but an attempt to rectify the mistakes made in old models. Like poor gearshift of old wagonr is rectified in current model.

It is not that the current facelift models are ultimate/perfect. Every five years cars are replaced with newer technology.

Quite agree. Even after 7 years I am still not ready to let go of my Waggie of 2005. Though the exterior is quite bland and the poor gearshift, I find her a great utility, the rear seat has a 50:50 split and the rear seats fold down to a true flat base to provide a humongous boot which is now messed up in the current gen model. The old gen boot was also wider and could carry three full size suitcases. Last year it carried 1 driver+ 2passengers , 1 Window AC (1.5 tonne), 2 large suitcases, 2 small suitcases from Mumbai to Pune with one rear seat folded down without any fuss.
About the engine - enough has been said already. Its a gem, absolutely smooth at idle. With good low end torque, the driveability is very good, very nifty to drive around the city and manages a decent 80~100 kmph on the highway without a fuss.
In my view the current 3 cyl engine is a compromise in favour of FE, however the suspension and chasis have been improved in the current gen which was the sore point in the previous gen models.

Coming to the looks the current gen Waggie is a love it or hate it design, with the exterior front and side profile design bearing a distinct Japanese signature. I quite like the exterior design. I am waiting to see what they do to the Ritz