[Dhanu@DJ]

Originally Posted by driverabhi

I see this the other way. For me, somehow it adds up to the safety of the vehicle. We all know how Aria is a safe vehicle. Hexa must be an add on. You better be sitting in a tank rather in a light vehicle in case if you (God forbid) met with an accident. We will not lose anything if we miss a second or two in 0-100kmph dash. As long the loaded vehicle pulls on an incline, I am more than happy.

It really will not translate to better safety. It actually translates to higher maintenance due to more possible wear and tear due to additional weight. Most of the problems that we have seen and had with our safari were related to mechanical's like turbo going kaput in the first year and uneven tyre wear and alignment issues due to camber and suspension.

Lets hope they have sorted out the mechanicals atleast this time. Looks like TML have done a very good job with cabin ergonomics compared to there earlier models. In our good old safari you can not change CD/DVD, if you are driving in few gears not enough room to eject!!!

Originally Posted by Sudeep_Kimster

All companies have different priorities in testing, as does the mule which has been prepared for Durability, reliability, performance and many other parameters. Just a mule with 3 lakhs kms on odo doesn't justify it actually did those kms on real world. Could be a long cycle dyno running vehicle also.

Tata has left no stone unturned to rectify its image, competing global automotive giants being half their age in the industry.

It isn't really hard to appreciate the commendable job done by TML, critics will always complain.

Lets stick to " Seeing is Believing" until its "Drive it to feel it" once its available for TD at nearest Dealership.

Hope they have improved. It's good for us. But we can not ignore that mechanical's were the trouble some points in aria and to improve on them they should have tested for more to ensure better reliability. Let's hope they have addressed all those negatives..

Originally Posted by RavenAvi

That tweeted reply was in response to my asking if 4x4 is offered in the top AT variant(s).

They are not disclosing anything on the variant spread/line-up right now so let's not speculate on things until we have official confirmation.

The birdies had disclosed at least four different variants with 4x4, including the mid XM trim, so I am fairly confident we shall see the 4x4 option in more than 1 variant.



In addition to what Sudeep said above, remember that unlike the Hexa, the Innova Crysta is a global product.

Considering competition and duration of product development they should have considered few more hundred thousand kms of test to ensure that they have great mechanicals

[tifosikrishna]

Originally Posted by sachinayak

Tyres are MRF Wanderers.

Attachment 1567458

I can't find MRF R19 Wanderer tyres in the market. Are they specifically developed for Hexa?

[avisidhu]

Originally Posted by Behemoth

....
I feel that Tata should have give the option of 4x4 in the lower variants too.
With the 4x4 in the highest variant, ex showroom price will probably shoot up to something like 18.5 Lacs and on road (in Gurgaon) will touch 21+. That is a very ambitious price and too close to the Innova ZX AT!
End of the day the Toyota carries great brand value and resale and customers will end up getting swayed to Toyota.
....
This purely my personal 2 Cents on the Hexa's positioning!

I'm afraid have to agree with you somewhat. But then, 20L price point nowadays is what 15 odd was just a few years back. If you see from the perspective of Hexa competing with XUV and Crysta, then 11-18 is quite competitive. Besides, people may be paying for the top variant of the Crysta, but someone with a 15-17L budget could still see value in the Hexa and be swayed. For instance at about 18L, the XUV auto (I'm guessing W8) is far more feature rich than the bare bones Crysta GX AT. But one with 20 plus has a higher chance of picking up the Crysta.

Another thing is that I personally feel that the MUVs have gained a lot of acceptance in the minds of people, specially post Crysta. 5 years back most people with 15-20L budget wouldn't even have considered going for an MUV. If the pie itself is now large enough then the Hexa has a good chance of grabbing a respectable share.

[narayan]

@Crazy Driver - your comment on the high kerb weight is correct and often made for many of Tata vehicles across segments. For e.g. - The Bolt is heavier than the Swift or Liva and likewise with Zest and Storme ( I recall heavier than even the Fortuner ).

Having said that, the Storme was returning better FE figures than a significantly lighter Innova. I wonder how Tata Motors manage that.

Pt is - if the vehicle is heavy and it adds to the overall sturdiness without compromising FE, that shouldn't be a bad thing. On that note, in the Crysta thread - noted that bhpian- Sankar's Crysta windshield cracked with a minor stone hit ( likewise with a few other owners ) and I wonder if Toyota managed to save a few kilograms by putting a thinner windshield ( am keen to know if there is a way to get info on the specs of glass, steel etc used by various car makers )

[srishiva]

Originally Posted by CrAzY dRiVeR

Sorry, I think that's wrong. Safety depends on the structural design of the vehicle. We have seen multiple cases where heavier vehicles performed poorly in crash tests.

However, given two proven safe vehicles, I would also prefer the heavier one. Momentum surely works in favour of the heavier one.



Aria 4*4 was proven to be safe, but the 4*2 had structural changes which made it 200kgs lighter and not worthy on Euro NCAP ratings as declared during the media drives.

Unless it's proven with crash tests, we cannot assume regarding safety just seeing the weight figures.

Just thinking out loud. Wouldn't momentum make the heavier vehicle plough into a barrier more ? Also the same crumple zones might not be able to handle the momentum better for the same car of heavy version (unless they change the safety mechanisms also for the heavier version of the car).

[N.r.K]

Originally Posted by narayan

I wonder if Toyota managed to save a few kilograms by putting a thinner windshield ( am keen to know if there is a way to get info on the specs of glass, steel etc used by various car makers )

With the kind of commitment Toyota has towards safety I really doubt that.
The windshield crack was probably a freak accident.
I think the engineering prowess of Toyota should be the main reason for the weight of their cars.
If Tata is able to provide a better FE in a heavier car, imagine what they can deliver with a lighter one!

But as someone else mentioned the biggest disadvantage of heavier car is the the toll it takes on the mechanicals of the car!

[aamateen46]

A deserving applause to Tata Motors for this attempt at making a premium crossover SUV! 👏🏼

In my opinion, overall, Hexa has already overtaken XUV500 which is a great start and seems to b gunning for the lower variants of the Crysta.

On Hexa being overweight, if I am a potential 7-seater SUV / MUV customer with 17 odd lacs to spare, I would rather have a butch, sturdy, overweight yet fuel efficient car.
Vehicle weight will never be in my list of priorities.

[AtheK]

As I scroll through this thread, I feel proud and have a sense of achievement for an Indian SUV. It's a remarkable job done by tata to turn aria head over heels, and come up with such a beautiful looking car.

It might or might not do the numbers but everyone in tata should be proud of themselves, zest, bolt, Tiago and now hexa. Public perception is changing and it will continue to be positive, if they keep putting this same hard work in a the products they develop.

Now just fix the service centres and you will see footfall only increase.

XUV somewhere is feeling the heat. Proud of that car too as both are made and designed in india. Way to go tata and mahindra.

[Behemoth]

Originally Posted by aamateen46

A deserving applause to Tata Motors for this attempt at making a premium crossover SUV! 👏🏼

In my opinion, overall, Hexa has already overtaken XUV500 which is a great start and seems to b gunning for the lower variants of the Crysta.

On Hexa being overweight, if I am a potential 7-seater SUV / MUV customer with 17 odd lacs to spare, I would rather have a butch, sturdy, overweight yet fuel efficient car.
Vehicle weight will never be in my list of priorities.

Agreed, SUVs of the old time were all 2 ton plus monsters with heavy sheet steel and a frame on ladder construction. Then somewhere due to fuel efficiency and reduced weight targets to bring down costs led the revolution of monocoque hydroformed crossvers (the XUV is an example). The sheet thickness of the XUV panels is extremely thin and some panels are also made of plastic. They may have added structural steel bars to make the car safer but end of the day even a small touch on the car makes a big dent in the panels! Same is the case with most Japanese and Korean cars these days.
The Hexa may be heavy due to thicker sheet steel used for the body and also the heavy ladder construction. But we will come to know only after we read the detailed reviews.
I would anyday prefer a car with good structural strength and thicker sheet panels, but the drivetrain also has to be designed accordingly and has to be reliable!

[CrAzY dRiVeR]

Originally Posted by narayan

@Crazy Driver - your comment on the high kerb weight is correct and often made for many of Tata vehicles across segments. For e.g. - The Bolt is heavier than the Swift or Liva and likewise with Zest and Storme ( I recall heavier than even the Fortuner ).

Having said that, the Storme was returning better FE figures than a significantly lighter Innova. I wonder how Tata Motors manage that.

Pt is - if the vehicle is heavy and it adds to the overall sturdiness without compromising FE, that shouldn't be a bad thing. On that note, in the Crysta thread - noted that bhpian- Sankar's Crysta windshield cracked with a minor stone hit ( likewise with a few other owners ) and I wonder if Toyota managed to save a few kilograms by putting a thinner windshield ( am keen to know if there is a way to get info on the specs of glass, steel etc used by various car makers )

Agreed. One other commonly discussed examples outside of TATA is that of Polo v/s Etios, both being rated 4 stars for safety. I would pick the Polo ten or of ten times since the build just makes me feel better compared to the light build of the Etios, even though both are safe cars.

That said, coming to Hexa - 2280kgs is just a lot. 2 tons would have been more reasonable. You do have a point about the FE though, and I believe the reason would be gearing. Earlier Innova used to scream at highway speeds unnecessarily.

Driveability would be another concern with such weight, as the turbo lag could be more. That torque converter 6 speed AT came at the right time. We'll need to wait till 21st to see how TATA has tackled this big problem of weight in the Hexa.

Noticed that incident with Crysta windshield. Have seen similar cases with other Japanese brands as well, but as you said its hard to conclude without real evidence.

Originally Posted by srishiva

Just thinking out loud. Wouldn't momentum make the heavier vehicle plough into a barrier more ? Also the same crumple zones might not be able to handle the momentum better for the same car of heavy version (unless they change the safety mechanisms also for the heavier version of the car).

Right. But you miss the point that crash safety tests are done at the same speeds for every vehicle.

Suppose Hexa were to be crash tested as safe (Like the Aria 4*4 was), then it means it survived a crash of a 2.3 ton car at 64 kmph. A car like Polo on the other hand survived a crash of a 1 ton car at 64 kmph. Now if these two were to go head to head, the resultant momentum on the Polo would be much more than its rated strength, while it would be much lesser on the Hexa.

Some more top pics sourced from Twitter.

[tifosikrishna]

Encouraging:

Have @TataMotors hit nail on the head with #Hexa? Sorry but have to wait for embargo to lift on Friday for verdict (hint: I'm smiling there)

source:

https://twitter.com/SirishChandran/s...06019667542016

[sachinayak]

Originally Posted by CrAzY dRiVeR

Sorry, I think that's wrong. Safety depends on the structural design of the vehicle. We have seen multiple cases where heavier vehicles performed poorly in crash tests.

Completely agree with you on this when it comes to passenger safety.

However, given Indian driving conditions, where you hardly leave a few inches gap from the nearby vehicles, and getting bumps/scratches/dings is a oh-so-common thingy, sheet metal thickness is important.

With my Innova, a minor brush by someone results in bump or a deep scratch. With my Manza earlier, a much forceful impact from a Tata 407, resulted in hardly much damage. This does not have an impact on passenger safety, but on overall ownership cost.

http://www.motoroids.com/news/maruti...-zone-impacts/

The above link perhaps is an indicative example for the same.

Coming back to the media drive experience, the vibes are definitely positive. Hope, the moderators can at least share their experience with an emoticon, and let all of us guessing.

[lazy]

Folks

Anyone know of launch date and tentative deliveries?
Willing to buy asap.

cheers
lazy

[SAE40 in veins]

Originally Posted by lazy

Folks

Anyone know of launch date and tentative deliveries?
Willing to buy asap.

cheers
lazy

Read news stories today which said that bookings will start on 1st Nov and Deliveries by Jan 2017. I guess clearer info will emerge in the next couple of days from Tata.

[RaghuVis]

Read Hexa page yesterday night and was busy today till now and what happens then?
4 pages of comments within a span of 10-12 hours!

Boy Aren't we excited? Have not seen the flurry of enthusiasm like this for any cars in recent times (S-Cross was a bit similar though not this much)

Good Start TML. Please maintain this mileage.