[ecenandu]

Originally Posted by GTO

See the rev limiter problem I mentioned:

As you pointed out, it is a calibration issue with the rev limiter.

Looks like the cut off for the rev limiter is at ~ 6900 -7000 rpm and re-entry is at 6500 rpm. So, if the engine is cut out at 6900 - 7000 rpm, then the engine rpm has to drop below 6500rpm for the engine to power again.

So there is a 400-500 rpm dead band, the problem will be more severe at higher gear say 3rd.

Anyway, this issue can be easily solved by changing the re-entry rpm value. But how many people do red line the engine and keep revving, for the majority of the users, this is not an issue at all.

[CrAzY dRiVeR]

Originally Posted by volkman10

Why we'd rather have the 1.5L NA engine over the 1.0L Turbo - Says this drive report.

Theoretical report (although they totally ignore the graph, which makes the difference all the way upto 6000rpm as clear as day and night) - They haven't driven the car.

What they have actually driven is -

Originally Posted by volkman10

Again, sounds good in theory. However, when we sampled the engine in a prototype Honda Civic hatchback back in 2015, he concluded that there was nothing to shout about.

And the Civic hatchback weighs 1362 kgs for the top-end version in the UK, compared to the new City which is lighter by 209 kgs for the top-end version in India.

An additional 18% weight isn't significant?

That 1.0 still pulls that Civic to a 100 kmph in 10.8 seconds.
The 1.8 NA pulls our Indian Civic to a 0-100 kmph timing of 11.48sec.

There would be an uproar if the 1.5 NA is put in the Civic in India.

Originally Posted by PrasannaDhana

+1

When it comes to all round competence - performance + fuel efficiency + reliability + low levels of NVH, there is no beating the 4 pots of Honda's 1.5 N/A and Suzuki's 1.2 N/A petrol engines in their respective segments.

Suzuki's 1.2 is long being forgotten - the last time a big enthusiastic discussion happened around it was when it provided good value over their own 1.0 Turbojet. But the performance of the 1.0 TSi, 1.0 TGDi motors have burried the significance of the 1.2 K series, except for refinement. No one would have chosen a 1.2 NA Brezza for example, as against 1.0 Turbo Venue.

The relevance of the 1.5 NA is because it is fighting against 1.0 Turbo motors in the sedans - not the 1.4 or 1.3 turbo-petrols which does duty in similarly priced crossovers.

If the HR-V gets launched with the 1.5 NA motor as it does service in base variants in the UK - it will absolutely get smashed in comparisons against the 138hp 1.4 TGDi and the 156hp 1.3 Turbo motors in the bracket. Hyundai actually had the opportunity to end the debate once and for all with the 1.4 TGDi in the Verna, but the C segment plays second fiddle to the crossovers in terms of goodies now.

[Iyencar]

Originally Posted by iamitp

Now seriously considering swapping the 185s for 195s again. What's the best way to go about this? Get the 195s from the same dealership or a separate tyre store? Any specific tyre brand that's recommended? And what's the expected discount someone might get for exchanging the brand new stock tyres?

Always from outside. If the car is yet to be picked up, call the tyre store in advance and let them know you'll be driving there straight from the showroom. If you're looking at good roads then Michelin. For poor/average roads MRFs. That's just my opinion.

[mohansrides]

Roughly 20 lacs (USD 28k) on road for a puny 1.5 liter engine producing 120 horses and 145 NM of torque

https://automobiles.honda.com/civic-...specifications

[Mynameis]

Originally Posted by Candy$Cars

Guys, I see a lot of you crying over the high speed stability of the City. I have the 4th Gen City (ODO 76000km) and I can assure of you that it is not as bad as many of you feel. Even with the 175mm section tires, it is stable at 100kmph and quite stable at 120kmph.

Completely agree on stability part. Have driven my relative's 2014 City petrol MT a lot of times, including a Mumbai-Bangalore drive, to and fro. It felt completely stable even at 120kmph. Infact for short moments i went higher and found it stable enough. Car was on stock 175mm section tyres. Enough space, strong mid range and good stability makes it a good cruiser. Still its not free of faults.

I found that road noise filtering in was more than what it should be, considering City is positioned as a premium car. Due to this reason and low GC, I would not prefer a road trip in a Honda City. Also, contrary to many, i do not like rear suspension of the City. It just crashes in potholes, unless you are going super slow over them which is not practical all the time. Due to that crashing, almost a jolt type is felt in the hips. I literally wanted to sit in front whenever not driving. I am talking about mumbai roads which are mostly kind of undulating and uneven.

Another thing i did not like was the weak bottom end. With four people and luggage, the engine kind of bogs down when starting off just after a speed breaker.

Also, somehow I do not get that secure feeling while driving on the highway due to that light build. This is where Rapid and Vento fare a lot better.

Still, everything said, that smooth petrol punch in the midrange of City is very nice. That is enjoyable.

[GBX]

Originally Posted by volkman10

Why we'd rather have the 1.5L NA engine over the 1.0L Turbo - Says this drive report.

Crazy Driver pretty much said everything that needs to be said, but the very fact that Honda themselves benchmark the 1L turbo against the 1.8L NA tells me everything I need to know about its potential.

My money's firmly on the turbo. Really hope someone in Honda management has some passion to bring the turbo here. We'd have a very lovely German vs Japan turbo scene with tons of mod potential.

[mxh]

Originally Posted by achyutaghosh

Guess some sense has previaled at Honda India?

Higher variants of 4th Gen Honda City axed. Only 2 variants remain, and both of them priced below the 5th gen.

https://www.autocarindia.com/car-new...ariants-418137

According to this article difference in price between V MT 4th and 5th generation is Rs 24000. Unable to understand the logic for keeping the 4th gen model, can someone please explain.

[Shreyans_Jain]

Originally Posted by GBX

Crazy Driver pretty much said everything that needs to be said, but the very fact that Honda themselves benchmark the 1L turbo against the 1.8L NA tells me everything I need to know about its potential.

My money's firmly on the turbo. Really hope someone in Honda management has some passion to bring the turbo here. We'd have a very lovely German vs Japan turbo scene with tons of mod potential.

If Honda management benchmarks the 1.0 turbo against the 1.8NA, it is a perfect example of how they are living in their own world, completely disconnected from reality. They use this motor in the Civic. What does the competition offer? A 1.8 TSi, soon to be replaced by a 2.0TSi. It is a complete no contest.

Coming to the 1.5 iVTEC, it is totally outmatched by the new 1.3, 1.4 or 1.5 turbo petrols from Renault, Hyundai and VW respectively. If they launch the HRV with the 1.5 NA, it will be dead meat against these turbo petrols. Conversely, the day Hyundai decides to offer the 1.4 turbo petrol in the Verna, City will be COMPLETELY outgunned.

Honda has been reduced to a one trick pony - the 1.5 iVTEC and its variants. Just like how Maruti has been reduced to the 1.2K series petrol and it’s smaller 3 cylinder version. Or how Hero MotoCorp is with the antiquated 100cc Honda based engine.

[avdhesh15]

Crisp and pointed review

What's your view for this vehicle as an upgrade from the 4th gen City? I want to be upgrading sometime very soon (budget 17 lacs), and am quite confused.

Originally Posted by GTO

Attachment 2035429]

Is the bottom left part a cryptic summary of the vehicle

[landcruiser123]

Pretty interesting observations there, GTO. To keep sedans alive and relevant, manufacturers should start making proper hybrids with reasonable EV only range.

Originally Posted by mxh

According to this article difference in price between V MT 4th and 5th generation is Rs 24000.

Dealers may offer additional discounts on the previous gen model.

Originally Posted by avdhesh15

What's your view for this vehicle as an upgrade from the 4th gen City?

Why are your requirements and reasons to upgrade? Just curious as keeping an old car can save you a lot of money.

Personally, I'd never buy a car until 12-15 months after launch as most minor production issues are ironed out after launch. With Honda, Hyundai, and Toyota having niggles with new models, I think manufacturing quality in the Indian auto industry is going down.

[autohead]

Originally Posted by GTO

See the rev limiter problem I mentioned:

Thankfully in day to day driving we don't even rev the engine till 6000+ RPM to be encountering this problem. Probably Honda engineers were being too lazy in their testing.

[Punatic]

Originally Posted by Punatic

I had gone to TD the CVT but it was already doing that duty for someone else, so they're going to bring that to my home in a couple of days time and I suspect my enthusiasm will be tempered a little, assuming the CVT will not be as much of a hoot. Will also pay attention to the features then, but the VX looks good enough. If the CVT turns out to be even reasonably peppy, this is going to be hard to resist.

Follow-up to my previous Test Drive: Drove the ZX CVT today, and as expected, didn't enjoy it as much as the MT two days ago. More significantly, I made the "mistake" of sitting in the back seat for the mid-speed drive for the few kilometres from Hinjewadi Ph-3 to Ph-1 and I really liked it. It brought home the point of this car - it is ideal for the executive being driven around. I genuinely felt at peace, and could have concentrated on my laptop if I had carried it along.

I'm not saying it was a letdown to drive, far from it. I tried the Yaris earlier this morning and that was, forgive me, a yawnfest. I'm at least twenty years too young to drive the Yaris. I won't say that about the All New Honda City, it's definitely got a few things going for it, such as the improved rev-happy iVTEC (and the gimmicky yet addictive G-Meter that one can activate on the MID). But I think one gets the best out of this car by being driven around in it.

[sgm]

Originally Posted by mohansrides

Roughly 20 lacs (USD 28k) on road for a puny 1.5 liter engine producing 120 horses and 145 NM of torque

https://automobiles.honda.com/civic-...specifications

I think you got confused between 1.5L NA and 1.5L Turbo
For 28K USD, you are getting a Civic 1.5L Turbo and it is a pretty quick one by our Indian standards, 0-100 in 7-8 seconds. Sad, we don't get the same here in India.

[mohansrides]

Originally Posted by sgm

I think you got confused between 1.5L NA and 1.5L Turbo
For 28K USD, you are getting a Civic 1.5L Turbo and it is a pretty quick one by our Indian standards, 0-100 in 7-8 seconds. Sad, we don't get the same here in India.

I wasn’t confused at all. I was saying that for USD 28k, someone would be able to buy a Civic which is a class above the City; along with bigger engines (2 L NA or a 1.5 L Turbo). My point was two fold -

a.) We are getting fleeced here in India with regards to cars.

b.) We are so starved for good cars here, that we end up putting anything we get on a pedestal. In most developed car markets, the City, with it’s puny 1.5 L NA engine, would be nothing more than an entry level budget vehicle that would not warrant a second look. But here, it is a status symbol that eats up a lot of ink.

Cheers

[fhdowntheline]

Originally Posted by Shreyans_Jain

Coming to the 1.5 iVTEC, it is totally outmatched by the new 1.3, 1.4 or 1.5 turbo petrols from Renault, Hyundai and VW respectively. If they launch the HRV with the 1.5 NA, it will be dead meat against these turbo petrols.

As mundane as the 1.5 iVTEC may sound, it's performance and general powertrain reliability is virtually unmatched in the price segment it operates.