[lamborghini]

Originally Posted by d3mon

This hurts both 0-100 times, and day-to-day driving.

Anyway, coming back to the Baleno, the slow time is definitely suspicious. You're right we should wait for the actual drive reports, but if it really does have 110 BHP/tonne, it should show in the 0-100 sprint. That's the one place where raw power wins all the time, torque ratings be damned. I challenge you to find me another car with 110BHP/tonne that takes 11 seconds for 0-100.
Here's an incomplete list of cars with 0-100 in ~11 seconds (or less) with power to weight ratio of <<110 BHP/tonne.

GT TDI (90 bhp/tonne) ~10.5s
Vento/Rapid (87 bhp/tonne) ~11s
Yeti (4x4) (90 bhp/tonne) ~11.5s
S-cross 1.6 (92 bhp/tonne) ~11.5s
Aspire (95 bhp/tonne) ~10.5s
Jetta (97 bhp/tonne) ~11s
Octavia (101 bhp/tonne) ~10.5s
Cruze (105 bhp/tonne) ~11s
Laura TSI (125 bhp/tonne) ~8 seconds.

I'm sorry, but I'm just disappointed with the 11 second number. Should have been closer to 9 seconds, with the 110 bhp/tonne rating, going by the 0-100 numbers the other cars above put out.

If you ask me, a lot of it depends on the tuning and the gearshift (including clutch).

Just look at the S-Cross for an example (as I am driving one) - turbo-lag aside (which doesn't impact the 0-100 much as post 10kmph - 100kmph you're in turbo-zone); the car loses out on it's 0-100 just because of the extra time taken to shift gears. IIRC the OHC VTEC could have posted faster acceleration times if the 2nd gear didn't get limited at 95-96kmph.

I believe this is also evident from the numbers you've posted - the GT TDi though it has a poor BHP/tonne figure, is still quicker than the Cruze (105bhp/tonne).

As for me, I am just trying to get my head around the fact that the Laura TSi was just 0.5 seconds off the latest 320D. Also, isn't the Figo/Aspire meant to be sub-10s for the 0-100 dash? Please check the numbers as weather and what not may play spoilsport during testing by these auto-mags.

That, and I am pretty sure my S-Cross killed (butchered may be a better word) a stock Rapid diesel in a drag of sorts - something that numbers seem to be lying about (or I am just a better driver, either ways - happy camper here!)

Honestly, wait for the car to be launched in India, and see how it performs on Indian fuel. As a turbo-charged engine, I wouldn't be surprised if better fuel resulted in better numbers.

Also, more than these numbers - looking at the in-gear acceleration would be a better story about day-to-day performance that one can expect.

But yes - prima facie, the poor 0-100 timing is definitely disappointing on the face of it!

[timuseravan]

Originally Posted by d3mon

Off topic: Every single S-Cross 1.6 owner has complained of the copious amounts of turbo lag. Of course, they are more than happy when the turbo does kick in. Eventually. This hurts both 0-100 times, and day-to-day driving. Owners have complained about how it's hard to drive in the city and how inclines need you to be in the right gear at all times.

Anyway, coming back to the Baleno, the slow time is definitely suspicious. You're right we should wait for the actual drive reports, but if it really does have 110 BHP/tonne, it should show in the 0-100 sprint. That's the one place where raw power wins all the time, torque ratings be damned. I challenge you to find me another car with 110BHP/tonne that takes 11 seconds for 0-100.
Here's an incomplete list of cars with 0-100 in ~11 seconds (or less) with power to weight ratio of <<110 BHP/tonne.

GT TDI (90 bhp/tonne) ~10.5s
Vento/Rapid (87 bhp/tonne) ~11s
Yeti (4x4) (90 bhp/tonne) ~11.5s
S-cross 1.6 (92 bhp/tonne) ~11.5s
Aspire (95 bhp/tonne) ~10.5s
Jetta (97 bhp/tonne) ~11s
Octavia (101 bhp/tonne) ~10.5s
Cruze (105 bhp/tonne) ~11s
Laura TSI (125 bhp/tonne) ~8 seconds.

I'm sorry, but I'm just disappointed with the 11 second number. Should have been closer to 9 seconds, with the 110 bhp/tonne rating, going by the 0-100 numbers the other cars above put out.

BHP/Ton is not the only factor. The BHP is the maximum possible for the engine. The torque lower down may be bad resulting in poor acceleration at start. Secondly 0-100 also depends on the gear ratios and the general performance and efficiency of gears and clutch.

[landcruiser123]

Originally Posted by d3mon

With 20 More horses and 50NM more torque, the 0-100 of the boosterjet is just 1 second better than the dualjet?

0-100 times don't just depend on the engine. There are various factors like aerodynamics, gear-ratios etc which affect the 0-100 timings.

The Baleno engine might or might not have turbo lag. Let's wait for a review in India. But I'm pretty sure it'll be better than the 1.2 petrol.

And Maruti might be slightly conservative with the tune to get good rated FE.

Originally Posted by S2!!!

Point out one S-Cross 1.6L owner who is disappointed with the car's 0-100 time after living with it on a daily basis.

S2 is right here. Assuming people drive at legal speeds, they buy cars with higher power just to get better in-gear acceleration, hence a better feel on the highway.

Else, why would I buy an S-Cross 1.6 when I can buy a Jazz and save some money.

A better indicator of performance is in-gear acceleration.

[kpzen]

Source :
http://www.zeroto60times.com/compare-cars/

Note: 1.2 TSI is with Manual transmission !

[volkman10]

Baleno 1.0l variant reviewed,



Baleno Boosterjet

[GTO]

Thanks to Sainyam Kumar for sharing this pic! He caught the Baleno 1.0 turbo-petrol in Navi Mumbai. If Maruti wants to test & tune the car in bumper to bumper traffic, all they have to do is drive from Navi Mumbai to Nariman Point.

[Vik0728]

Originally Posted by GTO

Thanks to Sainyam Kumar for sharing this pic! He caught the Baleno 1.0 turbo-petrol in Navi Mumbai.

Pardon my ignorance here GTO, but how can one really determine that this is 'Possibly' the Baleno 1.0 Turbo Petrol?

If my memory serves me right, none of the petrol variants of the Baleno have any badges on the front fenders right?

[volkman10]

Originally Posted by Vik0728

Pardon my ignorance here GTO, but how can one really determine that this is 'Possibly' the Baleno 1.0 Turbo Petrol?

It is more or less certain the Baleno RS will be in black( as one of the colors variant ?) since the first test car( 1.0l boosterjet) sported in India was in black.

[Leoshashi]

Originally Posted by Vik0728

Pardon my ignorance here GTO, but how can one really determine that this is 'Possibly' the Baleno 1.0 Turbo Petrol?

If my memory serves me right, none of the petrol variants of the Baleno have any badges on the front fenders right?

Originally Posted by volkman10

It is more or less certain the Baleno RS will be in black( as one of the colors variant ?) since the first test car( 1.0l boosterjet) sported in India was in black.

Also note the red plates which are usually found on test cars. Secondly, note the alloy wheels-these were present only in export variants. Dr. Naren had also spotted similar black colored Baleno with suzuki badging and all, undergoing tests with the boosterjet engine.

Regards,
Shashi

[methecupid]

Originally Posted by GTO

Thanks to Sainyam Kumar for sharing this pic! He caught the Baleno 1.0 turbo-petrol in Navi Mumbai. If Maruti wants to test & tune the car in bumper to bumper traffic, all they have to do is drive from Navi Mumbai to Nariman Point.

Attachment 1524965

Thanks to Sainyam for the clear picture, they have already been doing those bumper-to-bumper rounds on a worse stretch - had caught the car jostling for space on the SCLR at peak hours 😊

What I wasn't very sure was as to why an HR registered number would be test driven in Mumbai?

[tharian]

Originally Posted by methecupid

What I wasn't very sure was as to why an HR registered number would be test driven in Mumbai?

Test mules and media cars are usually temporarily registered at the RTO where the factory is located and then driven across the country. Hence the HR registration.

[volkman10]

Baleno 1.0L again spotted on test in Mumbai, Maruti Suzuki is likely to add black color for the Baleno RS.



Link

[volkman10]

Baleno 1.0L boosterjet tested by the Germans, Autobild test data!

[reignofchaos]

Originally Posted by volkman10

Baleno tested by the Germans, Autobild test data!

Attachment 1528336

So it is slower than a 1.2 TSi in simple words inspite of having less weight to lug around.

[Vik0728]

Originally Posted by volkman10

Baleno 1.0L boosterjet tested by the Germans, Autobild test data!

Baleno 1.0L tested by Germans??

Was this test done out of curiosity to compare the performance with the GT TSI??

So it is slower than a 1.2 TSi in simple words inspite of having less weight to lug around.

Guess that reinstates the proverbial belief in the auto industry:

There is no REPLACEMENT for DISPLACEMENT !!