Quote:
Originally Posted by vshankarhere I doubt. The TUV300 will probably chug along with the existing 3 pot. I only wonder why do they have to develop two different 1.5 L diesels. Am flummoxed. ![DeadHorse](https://www.team-bhp.com/forum/images/smilies/deadhorse.gif) . |
The 3-cyl 1.5 was a relic from the Quanto (shudders). The engine is not a bad one. It is reasonably refined, the dual scroll turbo has really good low end torque, so it never feels underpowered in the city, and the 100PS model has adequate power even on the highway, IMO. It was the initial 80PS model that really gave it a bad name. By the time Mahindra came out with the 100PS model, the reviews and the verdict was already out, with only a few outlets even giving it a second glance. If you look at the TUV3OO reviews on Youtube, most of them feature the 80PS model and compare it to the lighter 100PS ecosport and the even lighter 90PS Brezza, and it's no wonder that the TUV loses out. Personally, I feel that the TUV is great to drive in the city, and very responsive right off the throttle.
I think that with the Marazzo, M&M wanted to start off with a clean sheet of paper, inside and out. They wanted to get it right the first time. The positioning of the Marazzo meant that refinement and power would have to be spot on, and the TUV mill didn't cut it. It's a good start. They have also understood that the figures matter. 120bhp and 300Nm are peak figures, but they sound impressive enough. But it seems that the trade-off is in the driveability, as reviewers have mentioned the tendency to stall, which is indicative of inadequate low end torque.
Coming back to the TUV, I think that they should add a lot more detailing, and put on bigger wheels and tyres. We have 3 sporty, city slick mini SUVs, but what's missing is a mini THAR, or a mini HUMMER, which the TUV has potential to be. If you look at the Hummer design, it's full of detailing, like the off-road looking bumpers, exposed tow hooks, fuel cap, mirror, bonnet scoop, door handles, mirrors, side cladding etc. There's also the huge tyres (not just the wheels, but huge, high profile tyres) that define the stance and the go anywhere prowess of the vehicle. The armor kit for the TUV adds a lot of this to the stock TUV, but the stance is completely spoiled by the wheels of the car which are tucked too much inside the body.
See how ugly this looks. The wheels which are already too far inside the body, seem to go further in with the cladding, making the track look even narrower. The 215 section tyres do no favours to this car either.
Also see how Mahindra's designers seem to have no idea how to make the lights and the bumpers meet. They seem to be fighting two design briefs, one to keep the bumpers integrated with the body, like in conventional SUVS, and another, to create separate, off-road bumpers that look so good on the OTR built jeeps. They have mashed up both the themes quite badly, as can be seen from the weird lines below the headlights and the tail lights.
To see how it should be done, here's a pic of the H3's bootylicious behind.
I have seen exactly one TUV with the wheels done right. This was in Cochin, and the car had 235 section tyres on negative offset 8J chrome wheels and everything else was stock. It looked awesome, and he was gone before I could take a pic.
So please Mahindra, get the stance right this time around.
They should also do something about the grille. It's too inset, and blends with the body, when it should be standing out. The lights also don'd follow the body line, making for an awkward piece of flat surface between the light and the light catcher on the bumper.
To see how a front end should be done with clean, simple lines, see the new Jimny. Feel free to borrow from it, Suzuki isn't going to sell it here anyway..
And so ends my sermon. Do with it what you will, M&M. You already have the XUV300 to do the sporty thing, so let the TUV become what it should have been from the start.
![Thumbs Up](https://www.team-bhp.com/forum/images/smilies/thumbs up.png)