[adarsh76]

Originally Posted by deerhunter

Is there really another choice??

A family looking for a safe sedan with good back seat comfort and other conveniences has no other option as of now. No other car offers this kind of features with this kind of money.

For Diesel, obviously yes with the Ciaz. Better engine and may be close to equivalent backseat comfort.

For Petrol, what I am saying City is the one, but the VX and ZX are priced madly. Not worth. If the suspensions, refinement levels were improved, I won't be having any arguments.

Look beside sedans, you have Creta. I had a Hyundai Accent petrol before. Was a wonderful VFM. It never let me down till 110,000 kms.

[The Brutailer]

Originally Posted by adarsh76

Brutailer, do you want to spent hard earned 15 lakhs + on a car and hear dashboard rattling sounds? And a ride quality which is not really comforting. There is no suspension changes in the new version. If you ask a well know Service or Sales Adviser from Honda whom you know well, they won't recommend to buy the new top version of the 2017 City nor to exchange with the current one.

I too own a VX CVT, lucky enough to hear the rattles only at 31,000 kms. Fixable issue but still an irritation when I think that I spent 12.6 lakhs. Not to mention the bad skinny Goodyear GT3 OE tyres which I replaced recently.

I honestly feel, the TBHP and other reviews needs to take the price points seriously (not for affordability but for the worth).

Firstly I already own the car and have driven 5k kms and love it. I own the iVtec and have had no issues at all. In the initial days I thought there was rattle in dashboard but turns out it was a sound made by the ganesha idol.

I think servicing in Bangalore is pretty satisfactory and charges are sensible.

Nothing permanent about tyres and anyways none of the competition offer Michelins or anything. Anywho, I got Bridgestone tyres as stock which I think are pretty good.

IMO, in recent batches of City, quality has been improved and I don't find anything unsatisfactory. I'm sure they would've upped the quality more in this launch. Gotta wait for long term ownerships to see if it's true.

Don't bring down a product before experiencing it.

[deerhunter]

Originally Posted by adarsh76

For Diesel, obviously yes with the Ciaz. Better engine and may be close to equivalent backseat comfort.

For Petrol, what I am saying City is the one, but the VX and ZX are priced madly. Not worth. If the suspensions, refinement levels were improved, I won't be having any arguments.

Look beside sedans, you have Creta. I had a Hyundai Accent petrol before. Was a wonderful VFM. It never let me down till 110,000 kms.

I understand what you are saying, and I agree that the City top variants are overpriced. But customers dont have much choice, as of now.

If I want a safe sedan with good back seat comfort, I will have to go with City ZX. Ciaz diesel maybe much cheaper, but I am not sure i will overlook safety if i have the money. A 6 airbag variant of the Ciaz may turn the equations, but as of now, it is the City.

Coming to Creta, it was equally criticised for being overpriced. An overpriced Hyundai is not a better option than an overpriced Honda. The 6 airbag variant of the Creta is much more expensive than the City, and the overall comfort levels are better in the City. Creta doesnt have several features present in cheaper Hyundais and the current City.

[anachronix]

Recently used a 2016 Honda City that was on a self drive rental, the car was quite spacious and the iVTec just sprinted off a straight line quite nicely.

It was a very ordinary experience when compared to the Ritz that I usually take for the rental, except for the space may be which was really convenient for us as we were travelling with our new born daughter.

Honda used to charge a premium and the cars used to ooze the premium (from my limited ownership experience with the Jazz), the 2016 City felt very ordinary and indeed poorly built. The price vs the car, its just ridiculous!

There are better cars in the market compared to the city, the iDTEC especially has a long way to go to meet the refinement of the MJD/DDiS or even the TDCi. The premium is just for the badge and I dont think I am stupid enough to pay so much for one.

[Vid6639]

Originally Posted by The Brutailer

And if you like to drive, iVtec is one epic motor. IIRC, Jetta 1.4 makes 121 bhp which is very similar to iVtec.

Its competitors make very less power than City (Vento makes 105 bhp, Ciaz makes even lesser!)

For example Octavia costs 16-23.5 lakhs ex-showroom! Is that even comparable to City? Jetta on the other hand making 121 bhp costs 15-21 lakhs. Again very expensive compared to City.
If I see now, City actually looks like a bargain to me when it's offering so much at that price.

Are you seriously comparing a Honda City with the Jetta?

The Jetta will run circles around the city in quality, safety, interiors, dynamics and every other parameter except mileage. The performance from that 1.4TSI engine which is turbo charged is ample!

If you sit inside a Jetta, the overall drive quality is so good that forget comparing to a City, the Corolla doesn't come close....

Forget the Jetta, the Vento TSI will run circles around it as well. The 1.2TSI turbo petrol is rated for 105BHP at the wheels unlike the 115Ps from the Honda which is at crank. Put both on a dyno and the Vento's BHP and torque will shame the City.

Vento : Unreliable automatic gearbox and fuel injector issues. Very mediocre NA petrol engine. Turbocharged though good, makes considerably low power.

Considerably lower power from the 1.2TSI is completely incorrect as I mentioned before. If your'e talking of performance alone, the 1.2TSI is no match on the City period!

Let's not put incorrect information and call a spade a spade.

Originally Posted by The Brutailer

I have said this and will say it again. New City is a premium product and it demands a premium pricing.

No it's the same city as before decked with LED and features but now charging stupid D segment pricing where it doesnt belong at all.

Few years back Mercedes launched B Class making 100 BHP, nobody cribbed as it was a Mercedes. Honda increases price by lakh or two, everyone loses their minds.

Nobody complained because nobody went and bought it! It was a dud and that engine was responsible for it along with the looks.

[Durango Dude]

Of all the variants: entry level makes great sense to me with it's drool worthy ₹8.5L ex-s pricing (S-MT-iVTEC). It has the same engine, gear box and space and few features less isn't going to make that much of a difference.

[theredliner]

Originally Posted by The Brutailer

^ Okay. Maybe they all have one good feature but have multiple major problems to not just balance but to become a deal breaker.

City on the other hand is an all rounder. Gets the engine and gearbox and safety (fundamentals of a car) very right and is good enough in all other aspects.

Not a fanboy, neither going on a rampage. I own a City but I spent my hard earned money after researching well. Every car above has a deal breaker. Find the dealbreaker in the City.

IMO, the City used to be an all-rounder earlier (for most people barring those who wanted an out and out driver's car), not anymore.

The engine and gearbox combo of i-VTEC and MT is great. The CVT is boring and the i-DTEC is awful.

About deal breakers, to me, City has more than most of its competition.

This thread gives a long list.
In addition, the I-DTEC is another big deal breaker for me.

And neither do parts fall off like a cheap chinese toy nor does the engine rev like a tractor. Please drive the cars above for considerable kms before making such baseless allegations.

The I-DTEC does sound like a tractor and it cries to go to higher revs, ala truck engine. I am not making any baseless allegations. I have colleagues who own Honda City and I've seen and experienced these directly. More than anything, the thread posted above lists the issues like parts falling off and other quality issues in detail, experienced by BHPians first hand.

And if you're comparing City to a Scooter then I'm honestly at loss of words. Honda city does not make 11 BHP that you'll feel like riding a scooter while driving it.

Please re-read the post again. I was talking about the gearbox, not the engine. The CVT is as boring to drive on open roads as a scooter.

[The Brutailer]

Originally Posted by Vid6639

Are you seriously comparing a Honda City with the Jetta?

The Jetta will run circles around the city in quality, safety, interiors, dynamics and every other parameter except mileage. The performance from that 1.4TSI engine which is turbo charged is ample!

If you sit inside a Jetta, the overall drive quality is so good that forget comparing to a City, the Corolla doesn't come close....

Forget the Jetta, the Vento TSI will run circles around it as well. The 1.2TSI turbo petrol is rated for 105BHP at the wheels unlike the 115Ps from the Honda which is at crank. Put both on a dyno and the Vento's BHP and torque will shame the City.

Considerably lower power from the 1.2TSI is completely incorrect as I mentioned before. If your'e talking of performance alone, the 1.2TSI is no match on the City period!

Let's not put incorrect information and call a spade a spade.

No it's the same city as before decked with LED and features but now charging stupid D segment pricing where it doesnt belong at all.

I never compared City with Jetta in a true sense. When the pricing came into equation, only then did I mention the BHP which is just 3-4 hps higher. Unlike the Octavia which is a true beast with it's 1.8 Litre engine. And Honda overcharges? IIRC, Jetta didn't even have ACC few years back.

And Vento TSI will run circles around City? By how many less seconds? 1? Argue as much you want but the fact remains that City is a much more rounded and mature package.

It's more engaging as well thanks to manual gearbox. To extract true potential, it requires actual skills from the driver. Unlike the Volkswagen which forces you to use it's unreliable Automatic gearbox! What if I want to drive manually?

And City does not have D segment pricing. D segment has moved into 20s now. Top end D segment cars costs 7-8 lakhs more than City's top end.

[keroo1099]

Originally Posted by The Brutailer

Firstly I already own the car and have driven 5k kms and love it. I own the iVtec and have had no issues at all.

That's great, so why bother what other people have to say about the City? The bottom line is YOU are happy with your choice and that's all that matters. If you are really happy about your choice then criticism, constructive or otherwise shouldn't hurt.

Cheers.

[deerhunter]

Originally Posted by Vid6639

Are you seriously comparing a Honda City with the Jetta?

The Jetta will run circles around the city in quality, safety, interiors, dynamics and every other parameter except mileage.

Not too sure about the quality part. Maybe in the interior quality and the overall perceived quality, but not in the quality of the mechanicals.

Originally Posted by Vid6639

Forget the Jetta, the Vento TSI will run circles around it as well. The 1.2TSI turbo petrol is rated for 105BHP at the wheels unlike the 115Ps from the Honda which is at crank...
If your'e talking of performance alone, the 1.2TSI is no match on the City period!

1.2 TSI is no match for the City in terms of brute acceleration. Handling maybe better in the Vento, but it doesnt stand a chance in front of the City in 0-100 runs. Even with the faster shifting DSG, Vento/Polo 1.2 TSI is almost a second slower than the MT City. Same with 1.4TSI Jetta, City will smoke it in a straight line.

Source: 0-100 timings given in the last few pages of Autocar. Since mfrs dont give out 0-100 timings, this is the only reliable source.

[sourabhzen]

Originally Posted by The Brutailer

Don't bring down a product before experiencing it.

Sir, most of the members are complaining because of price list that is announced. If I was in market for this segment car, I will not even go and experience it at this price point. Unless, of course, TBHP review says that the money is justified for all that is offered in City 2017.

[The Brutailer]

Originally Posted by theredliner

The I-DTEC does sound like a tractor and it cries to go to higher revs, ala truck engine.

Typical characteristics of a Diesel engine. And it actually is sprightly off the mark and has no lag. Though will agree competition has better engines.

Please re-read the post again. I was talking about the gearbox, not the engine. The CVT is as boring to drive on open roads as a scooter.

CVT though not as advanced as DCT, provides a smoother and relaxing drive. Is still better than other torque convertors and AMTs. It doesn't have any gear ratios which is why I wonder why does City have paddle shifts and Vento does not?

And my point was since City makes more than 10 times power than a typical scooter, it masks any lag pretty well. So there's no sense in comparing a car and a scooter.

[Vid6639]

Originally Posted by The Brutailer

And Vento TSI will run circles around City? By how many less seconds? 1? Argue as much you want but the fact remains that City is a much more rounded and mature package.

As car to drive, the Vento is a better overall package. The city has decent motor but is not an engaging drive at all other than the engine and manual box. The CVT doesn't even come close to the Vento's DSG.

And City does not have D segment pricing. D segment has moved into 20s now. Top end D segment cars costs 7-8 lakhs more than City's top end.

The point is the City has no right being sold at 17 lakhs. Underneath it is a 8-9L car decked up with LED, sunroof and now finally 6 airbags.

The overall package is good in terms of features alone. And features do not make a car. It's still a very tinny sheet metal tin can underneath. Barely acceptable plastics inside. By making a small portion of the dash soft touch above the glove box, it doesn't become premium interiors. lol.

I drove a City diesel for a week last year and I heard nothing but complaints on the NVH, light feeling on expressway and not feeling like a solid car from dad, mom and sis. This is when we drive a Corolla!

So you may have all the features like LED lights, sunroof, 6 airbags but underneath it's the same lightweight, cost cut tinny feeling car now for 17L on road.

If diesel was my choice I would look at the S-cross eyes closed. Way better build quality, engine performance and has both better ride and handling than the City.

If it was petrol AT a must, the Vento TSI is the obvious pick.

Petrol Manual means I can stretch 2-3 lakhs and get a Corolla or an Elantra which are far superior than the City.

No car is perfect and neither is the city. The interiors, fit and finish / build quality, drive quality and solid feel are major show stoppers if I was looking at the City.

[The Brutailer]

Originally Posted by Vid6639

The point is the City has no right being sold at 17 lakhs. Underneath it is a 8-9L car decked up with LED, sunroof and now finally 6 airbags.

The overall package is good in terms of features alone. And features do not make a car. It's still a very tinny sheet metal tin can underneath. Barely acceptable plastics inside. By making a small portion of the dash soft touch above the glove box, it doesn't become premium interiors. lol.

I drove a City diesel for a week last year and I heard nothing but complaints on the NVH, light feeling on expressway and not feeling like a solid car from dad, mom and sis. This is when we drive a Corolla!

So you may have all the features like LED lights, sunroof, 6 airbags but underneath it's the same lightweight, cost cut tinny feeling car now for 17L on road.

Petrol Manual means I can stretch 2-3 lakhs and get a Corolla or an Elantra which are far superior than the City.

No car is perfect and neither is the city. The interiors, fit and finish / build quality, drive quality and solid feel are major show stoppers if I was looking at the City.

"Feel" and actual structure strength are very different. Quoting about the ACE structure in City :

The ACE Body Structure (now in its second generation) is like your vehicle’s specially tailored skeleton. Tested in Honda’s own indoor, multi-directional, crash-test facility, this skeleton has been built to disperse the force of impact across the vehicle. It features a polygonal main frame, which pushes frontal collision force away from the passengers. In an extreme frontal collision, this makes it less likely for the body of your vehicle to fold in. Also, Honda has strategically made “crumple zones” at areas that are commonly known to have difficulty remaining intact upon impact. With the ACE Body Structure, the “crumple zones” absorb force with the help of high tensile steel.

This safety technology is featured in the 2014 Honda line-up, and in many cases it helped them score some amazing safety ratings.

Couple that with 6 airbags and I'll say City is a pretty safe car!

And BTW Corolla and Elantra themselves aren't exactly an enthusiast's car.

Look, I don't have anything personal with other companies or cars but I don't think City is that bad a product to be called as pathetic, chinese toy and tin can.

End of discussion from my side.

[CrAzY dRiVeR]

Originally Posted by The Brutailer

City on the other hand is an all rounder. Gets the engine and gearbox and safety (fundamentals of a car) very right and is good enough in all other aspects.

Originally Posted by The Brutailer

Quoting about the ACE structure in City :

Small disclaimer. None of the Honda cars from the Indian market has been crash tested yet. So we can only assume about the safety aspect.

Media releases might be true, but even Maruti and Hyundai models that failed the tests were released with good claims about their safety structures. So we can only hope it's true.