[AnandB]

Originally Posted by AamodB

I don't really get the fascination with diesel motors so please do enlighten me why we Indians are gaga over it.

It is only with turbo-petrols can we say that they are as fun to drive as diesels. The Swift 1st gen with its fiat diesel engine was hoot to drive compared to its petrol variants. This held true till recently for almost all cars especially on upper segment cars as diesels variants came with turbo. Not to mention the diesels also give better fuel economy even with enthusiastic driving which can't be had with a petrol. This still holds true with turbo-petrols.

[drmohitg]

Whats the update on the gearbox? And what kind of mileage can one expect from this petrol motor in city driving? The fact that it is a CBU is quite alluring.

[Timothy]

Originally Posted by Vid6639

I don't think you can compare to Polo or Vento. It's more like the Tiguan and Passat and Jetta. Right now the T-Roc is a CBU but when they start local assembly, it's not going to be high on local content. It will be more like CKD like what the Tiguan, Passat, Octavia and Kodiaq. So there's no real scope for cutting corners for such low volumes. At 20L ex-showroom for a small petrol only crossover, it's not going to make sense to localize heavily.

Only thing is they will recover the CBU tax they absorbed for the first batch. The CBU vs CKD for VW/Skoda type of products is a moot point cause even the CKD cars were on par in quality since they were just imported kits assembled here. The T-ROC is going to go the same way.

The T-Roc will continue with the "premium" tag.

My feeling has been that the T-ROC is not priced sweetly but it offers a proposition that nobody can offer. The Creta/Seltos may not appeal to those looking for european build. The Harrier/Hector are more utilitarian and way bigger in size. The compass is not great performance, FE and reliability in petrol AT guise.

The T-Roc offers a chic exterior design coupled with Euro feel and drive quality for a little more than the mass market Hyundai/Kia options. It's also a perfect upgrade for anyone who has a Polo or Vento and does not have any upgrade options since the Tiguan is now priced in another bracket and no longer compact.

My only grouse with the T-ROC is a few missing features like powered seats with memory, the beats audio with subwoofer and the powered tailgate. Would have then made it properly loaded. I can't ask for soft touch materials as this is the case worldwide where everyone is unhappy with the hard plastics vs the VW golf.

Very well summarised & a pleasure to read your post !
Somewhere people are confusing it with a Polo/vento but it is in much higher league. I recently picked up a Octavia L&K 1.8 Tsi and if I was in the market again for a chic compact, stylish SUV this would be it ! It is something like a Mini Cooper or the now discontinued Beetle which kind of stand out from the crowd and admired & relished by enthusiasts. But I do hope the car will sell in much larger numbers than the other two examples I have quoted

[Vid6639]

Originally Posted by drmohitg

Whats the update on the gearbox? And what kind of mileage can one expect from this petrol motor in city driving? The fact that it is a CBU is quite alluring.

DQ200 7 speed dry clutch same as Octavia TSI.

The confusion is because internationally the car has 4 motion variant which uses the DQ381 wet clutch 7 speed box. In India we get only the Front wheel drive.

Same confusion with the rear suspension. If you have 4 motion then you get independent rear suspension. Front wheel drive only = torsion beam.

Please don't get allured by the CBU tag. The Tiguan, Kodiaq, Octavia are all pretty much CBU as well. The only difference is like buying furniture from IKEA and asking IKEA to assemble and send ready made from the store vs assembling it in your own house.

[hellraizer]

Originally Posted by autohead115

1. Hate those plastic dash/interiors, looks straight out of a 6L polo, manual driver seat adjust is so weird in this segment.

2. 160mm ground clearance, I have been driving hatches and sedans, I want an SUV for a change and the perks of high ground clearance for once, 160mm just doesn't cut it :(, is it really just 160mm, will the car feel like you are sitting in a hatch/sedan more than an SUV?

From the videos at least, the Karoq looks more of a complete package to me, it feels like a proper D1-D2 car as the interiors look like from a segment above, but I'm not sure if both these would feel same like vento/rapid?

Are the plastics and back seat (another con of T roc, lacks under-thigh support, space) and ground clearance better, interiors plusher than t-roc, anyone who had hands-on with these cars in auto expo can please confirm?

The hard/cheap plastics definitely shouldn't have been on this car in the first place. Given that this is the case with all global models, we have to accept it. It's indeed disappointing, but is not a deal-breaker for me.

The back seat shouldn't be that much of a problem to me and should definitely be adequate.

I currently own a 2011 Honda City (V-AT) and a 2019 Ford Freestyle (Diesel) and looking to replace both of these cars with TRoc. The Honda city has served me well and it's an automatic and the wife is pretty happy with it. She has no reasons to even replace it, but I think, it's well past it's time. And not to forget the pathetic suspension setup.

The reason I talk about my Honda city is, it's a nightmare whenever the car is loaded and on Bangalore roads. The ground clearance is 160mm, and to my dismay, the TRoc claims to have the same 160mm ground clearance. This indeed can be a big problem. I definitely don't want to be baby'ing a crossover. I mean, what's the point of buying a crossover itself in the first place .

Heated seats will prove little-to-no-use in our conditions. A powered driver's seat was definitely needed. It even exists in higher trims in the EU spec, but unfortunately, can't make it here.

I guess, I can live with average dash/interiors and lack of powered seats as well, but I certainly can't live with it, if it scraps through the notorious speed breakers. I am sure, the suspension will be much better than my old Honda city, but I expected the GC to be around 180-190 mm for an absolute peace of mind.

The Karoq seems to be a more "rounded" car, but somehow I have an inclination to own a VW branded car and not a Skoda. I also have this feeling that the TRoc will be a more "Fun to drive" car. Somehow, brand VW is more reassuring than a Skoda. I know, it's very subjective, but even my wife does not want to consider a Skoda over a VW

Like many BHPians, I am in splits between the Harrier and TRoc.

The Harrier with a bigger a 2.0L Diesel, bigger/roomier interiors, higher ground clearance and definitely a more authentic SUV-ish appeal, certainly makes it a less-risky proposition. The missing bits are the TPMS and the EPB, and the useless center arm rest.

I am sure, the TRoc will drive better than the Harrier, but it's a rather difficult choice to make.

[AamodB]

Originally Posted by drmohitg

Whats the update on the gearbox? And what kind of mileage can one expect from this petrol motor in city driving? The fact that it is a CBU is quite alluring.

The official figures and reviews say it averages roughly 15km/l for city driving and about 18+km/l for highway mileage. Good average in my opinion which probably has a lot to do with the active cylinder management it boasts.

[Vid6639]

Originally Posted by hellraizer

The reason I talk about my Honda city is, it's a nightmare whenever the car is loaded and on Bangalore roads. The ground clearance is 160mm, and to my dismay, the TRoc claims to have the same 160mm ground clearance. This indeed can be a big problem. I definitely don't want to be baby'ing a crossover. I mean, what's the point of buying a crossover itself in the first place .

I guess, I can live with average dash/interiors and lack of powered seats as well, but I certainly can't live with it, if it scraps through the notorious speed breakers. I am sure, the suspension will be much better than my old Honda city, but I expected the GC to be around 180-190 mm for an absolute peace of mind.

The ground clearance for the T-Roc is a non issue. For one the 2011 City you have, had 160mm unladen ground clearance. From last year all car manufacturers have to report laden ground clearance which is why all of the new launches look like they have terrible ground clearance.

Secondly the T-ROC has shorter overhangs which will ensure the front and back don't scrape.

Thirdly, VW suspensions are always stiffer than the Honda's. Which means even on full load they don't compress anywhere close to what Honda's.

Fourthly there is ample underbody protection in VW's as part of rough road package.

Hence you can be rest assured, the only time you will scrape the T-Roc is when you take it off the road where it's a beaten path or not even that.

[McLaren Rulez]

Originally Posted by hellraizer

The Karoq seems to be a more "rounded" car, but somehow I have an inclination to own a VW branded car and not a Skoda. I also have this feeling that the TRoc will be a more "Fun to drive" car.

I'd reconsider the brand issues if I were you. The Karoq offers 9 airbags (vs 6 on the T-Roc) and the interior quality difference is massive. They share the same mechanicals so there is probably very little difference in the fun-to-drive factor. Styling is the only area where the T-Roc scores better but this is subjective.

The Karoq is going to give the T-Roc a big headache. It will probably even win over several would-be Kodiaq customers if priced right.

[VPJ74]

Originally Posted by hellraizer

The Karoq seems to be a more "rounded" car, but somehow I have an inclination to own a VW branded car and not a Skoda. I also have this feeling that the TRoc will be a more "Fun to drive" car. Somehow, brand VW is more reassuring than a Skoda.

Me and wife had exactly similar views about VW and Skoda. My first car was an amazing v6 Jetta in CA and grew up admiring the brand. Skoda was supposed to be a mehh brand with shady ASS and lower pedigree.

Not any more. VW's Diesel gate fraud is a massive disaster and Skoda has become globally admired for its cars.

Especially at home, I feel that it's Skoda that will get bigger priority (and $$$) in the Group and officially also Skoda is leading the Group's strategy in India. Just look at the following of Zac Hollis vs Steffen Knapp and you will understand. Allspace will become a massive flop amd discontinuing Jetta and Passat are stupid decisions.



Bottom line, my list includes Karoq and Superb.

[84.monsoon]

The T-Roc is 4342 mm long, 1819 mm wide, 1573 mm tall. It develops 150 PS and 250 NM and weighs 1350 KGs. It has a laden ground clearance of 160mm and a wheelbase of 2595 mm.

The T-Cross (Called Taigun in VW India's site) based on MQB A0-IN is 4200mm long, and has a wheelbase of 2651mm - almost 60mm more than the T-Roc. It is also going to be powered by the 1.5 TSI engine in a slightly detuned version with 130 HP of power, and will have 205mm ground clearance! (This reported GC figure from AutoExpo looks to be the unladen GC, laden GC will still be more than the T-Roc, about 175 mm IMO). It will also have the same 7 speed DSG gearbox and the top end auto variant which will have comaprable features to the Taigun is expected to touch 13 lakhs ex-showroom.

So why would anyone get a squatter and more cramped T-Roc, when you can wait for a year and get a Taigun at nearly 60% of the price and with much better rear space and higher ground clearance that can make it a "go anywhere" car? Plus, you don't have to worry as much about DSG issues becuase the Torque is limited to 200 NM. The T-Cross still does 0-100 in 9.9 seconds, so still a very fast car!

[Vid6639]

Originally Posted by 84.monsoon

So why would anyone get a squatter and more cramped T-Roc, when you can wait for a year and get a Taigun at nearly 60% of the price and with much better rear space and higher ground clearance that can make it a "go anywhere" car? Plus, you don't have to worry as much about DSG issues becuase the Torque is limited to 200 NM. The T-Cross still does 0-100 in 9.9 seconds, so still a very fast car!

You make a good point and this was one I had when I saw the Vento paper specs vs the Jetta.

The old Jetta was launched first then the Vento. Once the Vento came out it was clear the paper specs of Vento while impressive the 2 cars were chalk and cheese apart.

This will be the same thing. The Taigun will mostly come only in 1.0L TSI. The 1.5L TSI will be much more than 13L my guess.

Secondly, the Taigun will be heavily localized in terms of parts and will cut lots of corners as it is built to a price point.

Overall, the T-Roc will be far superior, even with it's hard plastics.

[AamodB]

Originally Posted by 84.monsoon

The T-Roc is 4342 mm long, 1819 mm wide, 1573 mm tall. It develops 150 PS and 250 NM and weighs 1350 KGs. It has a laden ground clearance of 160mm and a wheelbase of 2595 mm.

While there has been no official word from VW India regarding the ground clearance, the UK spec T-Roc ground clearance (officially 161mm) will no doubt be tweaked for the India spec and it is highly unlikely that it will be lower than a Polo GT which has a GC of 165-168mm.

From the model showcased at the launch the clearance seems to be roughly 180mm+ (calculated on my own through pixel measurement which could be wrong)

[Guna]

Originally Posted by AamodB

India regarding the ground clearance, the UK spec T-Roc ground clearance (officially 161mm) will no doubt be tweaked for the India spec and it is highly unlikely that it will be lower than a Polo GT which has a GC of 165-168mm.

I don't think they will tweak it on a CBU, just for India. It is possible that the way the GC is measured is different in UK and the same GC may become 190 in India

[AamodB]

Originally Posted by Guna

I don't think they will tweak it on a CBU, just for India. It is possible that the way the GC is measured is different in UK and the same GC may become 190 in India

All CBUs that come into India usually go through a factory check (basically a manufacturer quality check). Our Grand Vitara had a factory check before the dealership received it so it is possible that some minor changes might be done to the ride height setup at VW workshops etc.

But yes, I agree method of calculation could be different so it could be taken straight to the dealerships for the pre-delivery inspection.

[drpudhi]

I see that the T-roc is 4234 mm in length in all the official EU documents. But the VW India site still wrongly mentions the length as 4342 mm and haven't changed it. And whats more worse is that, every major media house that has covered the launch including the video walk arounds quote the wrong length and even say that T-Roc is longer than the Creta and Seltos, while in reality it is shorter. This is totally irresponsible from both VW and the media.