[JediKnight]

Originally Posted by GrammarNazi

At about ₹4.6L extra, just fuel type or slightly thicker steel wouldn't justify a near 50% premium for the Marazzo over Ertiga.

That is gross trivialization of a vehicle and its capabilities. But i do agree finer aspects of automotive engineering are lost on the general car buying public. A cheap car with a lot of bling/gizmos is what the market wants.

[sreejithkk]

Originally Posted by JediKnight

That is gross trivialization of a vehicle and its capabilities. But i do agree finer aspects of automotive engineering are lost on the general car buying public. A cheap car with a lot of bling/gizmos is what the market wants.

Not exactly true. May be true with the case with Ertiga, but Innova crysta is much more expensive than marazzo and still people wants it. I guess Marazzo is neither here nor there with respect to the consumers. I agree that Marazzo has much more solid build and engineering and the with ladder frame constructions, it is expensive to manufacture than Ertiga. But people who want the bigger MPV usually go with Innova and people want a smaller MPV will go with Ertiga,XL6 and may be some will choose Triber as well. Ertiga is shorter in length than a Ciaz or City. And Triber, if come with slightly more powerful engine, can be another good alternative as occasional 7seater /Flexible 5 seater MPV customers. And I always feel Mahindra has not advertised Marazzo as much as they should. There are still many non-enthusiast people around, who still haven't realized that a car named Marazzo exists.

[rajeshsundaram]

Xylo owner here.

IMO, Marazzo being a new platform had cost more to Mahindra. The R&D, designs, tests, man power etc are huge.

I believe Marazzo is a monocoque body. Correct me if I am wrong. Even if it is not, Marazzo was developed from ground up. It also had some engineering achievements. The placement of engines, the build, ride quality etc are an outstanding effort for a company which got everything right on first launch. Everything costs money. Add to the fact that it is designed in USA adds significant cost too.

So naturally Marazzo was expected to be priced higher, but not this higher.

When I test drove the Marazzo in Erode, it felt very different. No typical Mahindra quirkiness was observed anywhere inside the vehicle. Pliant ride quality is something I was shocked to experience. My Xylo rolls like significantly on uneven roads, where as the test-driven Marazzo simply sailed through. The seats were great for a Mahindra, the access to middle row and last row were lot better, infact more user-friendly than Xylo.

What let me down were two things -
1. The engine & the long throw clutch.
2. The price.

Marazzo's engine was at-best, I would describe as "adequate". It also felt like the engine is performing to its maximum potential there. It did not feel "relaxed" like my Xylo engine. Marazzo's engine also drove like a car engine, something like it is working more and more to pull the car. Where as my Xylo engine sounds like so relaxed no matter how many people sit in. Anyone who has driven >1.5L diesels can relate to that. No matter how much they boast about output numbers, the engine simply is not impressive. The TD car was one of the freshest of the lot though.

The clutch is a different story. I thought Xylo had the longest throw in Mahindra vehicles. But Marazzo changed that on that particular day. I find long throw clutches to be uncomfortable. Did not inspire a positive feeling.

Finally looking away from these impression spoiling stuff, came the big shock - the price. Expensive. With no automatic on offer, the price was completely unjustified. For such a eye-watering price, they should have plonked in a bigger engine to justify it IMO. May be scorpio' 2.0L diesel?

Concluding, I must say Marazzo is not worth the price is asks.

There is still time M&M could do some better things.
1. Redo the engine bay and fit in a bigger engine + TC box as M8 / M10 variants to justify the premium.
2. Add atleast an AMT to the current diesel engine. But do not price it more than required.
3. Fix that clutch.

[Karthik Chandra]

Originally Posted by DriveOnceMore

Subtracting the difference of Rs 2 lakh for Marazzo being diesel.
Still what on earth could justify the premium of Rs 2 lakh which Mahindra is asking for.

Originally Posted by GrammarNazi

So, for ~4.5L higher price tag, i.e. a ~35% premium over Ertiga 1.5L ZDi, Marazzo failed to offer any significant value over the former. This was why Marazzo lost market share to Ertiga.

If we dig deeper we can understand why M&M isn't able to price competitively and how MS has been able to price the Ertiga/XL6 well.

MS has huge cost advantage.

Platform:

Marrazo is based on a new platform - U321 which isn't shared yet whereas Ertiga/XL6 is based on Heartect platform which is the base for 4 other cars - Swift, Dzire, Baleno & Ignis

Engine:

Marazzo gets a new D15 engine which is shared with only 1 car - XUV500 whereas Ertiga/XL6 is powered by the K15 which is shared with 3 other cars - Brezza, Ciaz & S Cross

Interior parts:

Parts like steering wheel, power window switches are unique to the Marazzo and isn't shared with any other car whereas Ertiga/XL6 share parts with other cars.

With MS selling bucket loads of cars with shared platform, engine & parts - they are able to price it well.

Marazzo M6 is ~16 lacs on road vs XL6 which is ~12 lacs

One gets the following

Diesel engine with 6 speed transmission vs petrol with 5 speed transmission.

4 star rated car with stable body structure vs 3 star rated car with unstable body structure (Ertiga gets 3 star on child protection vs 2 for Marazzo though).

Better build with thicker body panels.

Thicker glass for windows and windshield.

Seats with better comfort

M&M could have priced it better but still Marazzo is a better product overall than Ertiga/XL6 & is one segment above the Ertiga on product positioning. Mahindra could given more features though.

7 seater segment has a wide product/price range
starting from 5 lacs all the way upto 40 lacs

Go+
Triber
Ertiga/XL6
Marazzo
Hector +/Gravitas
Innova Crysta
Carnival

[Time_Machine]

Originally Posted by Karthik Chandra

If we dig deeper we can understand why M&M isn't able to price competitively and how MS has been able to price the Ertiga/XL6 well.

Well explained.. I wish M&M come out with a premium version of Marazzo much like XL6 is to Ertiga-

1. give it the sweet 2.2L mHawk
2. make the bonnet a little more horizontal and SUV'ish
3. update the rear design and the rear light cluster to a horizontal setup.

Since the Marazzo is already >4m in length, M&M can safely increase its length by a few cms and also give it a bigger engine!

[caffeineAM]

Originally Posted by GTO

The top 4 main problems with the Marazzo remain:

• Mahindra's lack of marketing push

To underline that, I totally forgot this vehicle existed till I browsed the forum.

[locusjag]

Originally Posted by rajeshsundaram

I believe Marazzo is a monocoque body. Correct me if I am wrong.

It is body on frame but Mahindra have gone with a novel method of fusing the body to the frame, rather than using mounts to fix the body to the frame. Our member "4x4 addict" had shared this bit of detail once on the forum:
https://www.team-bhp.com/forum/road-...ml#post4624829

Marazzo's engine was at-best, I would describe as "adequate". It also felt like the engine is performing to its maximum potential there. It did not feel "relaxed" like my Xylo engine. Marazzo's engine also drove like a car engine, something like it is working more and more to pull the car. Where as my Xylo engine sounds like so relaxed no matter how many people sit in. Anyone who has driven >1.5L diesels can relate to that. No matter how much they boast about output numbers, the engine simply is not impressive. The TD car was one of the freshest of the lot though.

This tidbit of information is priceless! Thank you. None of the available reviews (official/user generated) have shared this aspect. So under a full load, the engine does get strained...that is another negative point against the Marazzo in my books. The other point against it is its ground clearance issue with a full load. Lots of owners have complained about it.

[Slushmaster]

Originally Posted by rajeshsundaram

Marazzo's engine was at-best, I would describe as "adequate". It also felt like the engine is performing to its maximum potential there. It did not feel "relaxed" like my Xylo engine. Marazzo's engine also drove like a car engine, something like it is working more and more to pull the car. Where as my Xylo engine sounds like so relaxed no matter how many people sit in. Anyone who has driven >1.5L diesels can relate to that. No matter how much they boast about output numbers, the engine simply is not impressive.

I totally agree with you. The 1.5L engine is just adequate on highways, that too when on level roads. Take this car to hills with 5 people on board and the engine starts to show its shortcomings. Ask any cabbie around and if they have driven Marazzo on hills, it is not going to be their first or second choice for any destination in mountains. Also, it is nowhere comparable to Xylo if I talk about the pure lugging power, you will always find Xylo to be relaxed and ready to do duty.

Also, the Marazzo M6 Plus is 4 thousand rupees more than XUV500 W5 variant(on road) in Chandigarh. And when I see this equation, Marazzo seems like an overpriced car with an underpowered engine.

[locusjag]

Originally Posted by Slushmaster

I totally agree with you. The 1.5L engine is just adequate on highways, that too when on level roads. Take this car to hills with 5 people on board and the engine starts to show its shortcomings.

I'm not quite sure of that. One if our mods had rented a Marazzo and had driven it with 6 + luggage in Coorg hills. He said that all it took was the right gear to keep moving at a quick clip. Nothing catastrophic happens in hairpin bends either.

[Slushmaster]

Originally Posted by locusjag

I'm not quite sure of that. One if our mods had rented a Marazzo and had driven it with 6 + luggage in Coorg hills. He said that all it took was the right gear to keep moving at a quick clip. Nothing catastrophic happens in hairpin bends either.

What I have mentioned is purely based on my own experience. 1 trip to manali and other one to Shimla and I feel it is underpowered for any hill drive with all seats occupied. I have also driven a xylo to leh and back and can tell you it is much more drivable with 5 plus a lot of luggage. In fact I like xylos engine better than my Storme on hills.

If you are considering a Marazzo, take a test drive with all on board and try it. If you feel its ok, go ahead and buy it. But, I still think XUV500 W5 will make much more sense.

[JediKnight]

Originally Posted by sreejithkk

Innova crysta is much more expensive than marazzo and still people wants it. I guess Marazzo is neither here nor there with respect to the consumers. I agree that Marazzo has much more solid build and engineering and the with ladder frame constructions, it is expensive to manufacture than Ertiga. But people who want the bigger MPV usually go with Innova and people want a smaller MPV will go with Ertiga,XL6.

Toyota is able to charge a premium for their products due the brand equity and reputation for quality and reliability. The previous generation Innova was the perfect size for an MPV. Bigger than say an ertiga but still manageable for everyday use. The Crysta in my opinion has become too long without proportionate increase in space. I personally feel Marazzo fills the space left by the older Innova. More substantial than they say an ertiga. But still manageble in city with 4.5 M length and 5.2 m turning circle. Internally Marazzo is dimensionally more closer to an Crysta ( except boot space ) than to the Ertiga. It is marketing failure by Mahindra that people are comparing it to the Ertiga rather than Crysta.

Originally Posted by rajeshsundaram

Concluding, I must say Marazzo is not worth the price is asks.

The base ( M2 ) BS-4 version of Marazzo had a similar pricing than the D2 version of Xylo. And i would rate Marazzo M2 much better value for money than D2 Xylo. Though i agree the M8 and M6 variants feel overpriced when compared to the feature delta to M2 and M4.

Originally Posted by Karthik Chandra

Marazzo M6 is ~16 lacs on road vs XL6 which is ~12 lacs

One gets the following

Diesel engine with 6 speed transmission vs petrol with 5 speed transmission.

4 star rated car with stable body structure vs 3 star rated car with unstable body structure (Ertiga gets 3 star on child protection vs 2 for Marazzo though).

Better build with thicker body panels.

Thicker glass for windows and windshield.

Seats with better comfort

Add:

More silent and refined than both ertiga and crysta.
High seating. Driver sits higher than a Crysta.
More width. Three abreast seating is much better.
400 kgs of more steel.
Rear suspension with highest travel.
Brilliant diffuse mode AC in the rear.
Full wheel cladding.
Double door seals.
...

Originally Posted by caffeineAM

To underline that, I totally forgot this vehicle existed till I browsed the forum.

Mahindra has retards working in their marketing department. Contrast that with the brilliant engineers that design their diesel engines. In my opinion Mahindra makes world class diesel engines.

Originally Posted by Slushmaster

I totally agree with you. The 1.5L engine is just adequate on highways, that too when on level roads. Take this car to hills with 5 people on board and the engine starts to show its shortcomings. Ask any cabbie around and if they have driven Marazzo on hills, it is not going to be their first or second choice for any destination in mountains. Also, it is nowhere comparable to Xylo if I talk about the pure lugging power, you will always find Xylo to be relaxed and ready to do duty.

Also, the Marazzo M6 Plus is 4 thousand rupees more than XUV500 W5 variant(on road) in Chandigarh. And when I see this equation, Marazzo seems like an overpriced car with an underpowered engine.

Marazzo has a bit of a turbo lag. And lacks the low end lugging ability of a big diesel. There is a bit of a learning curve to the Marazzo if you are used to driving big diesels. But all said and done it is not that bad. Practically the only difference is that you have to be in gear lower and may be give it a bit of throttle. I have not driven to the hills yet. But i have no problem tackling some steep ramps in my building parking.

In normal day to day driving i dont find the Marazzo lacking in any way and actually enjoy driving it. Has a good mid-range and as per Auto car marrazo actually accelerates faster between 40-100 in 4th gear than the Crysta 2.4MT.

The latest XUV 500 has a ballistic top end which the Marazzo lags. But Marazzo rides much better than the XUV, has better third row and is much more fuel efficient. That is the reason i bought the Marazzo over the XUV.

[RavenAvi]

A close, detailed look at all the BS6 Marazzo variants, courtesy Auto Trend.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XwSlHo9bbxo

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tlty8Mx8ifc

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Yib4HS03QLs

[josha10]

I evaluated the Marazzo & XUV500 specifically from the Mahindra stable as I am looking to upgrade from my current vehicle.

The Marazzo was very impressive in terms of cabin space, comfort including 3rd row (am 5-10), and felt very easy to drive in the city. Its build quality too felt much better than the XUV 500 which to me felt long past its product life cycle. (Awaiting the new version)

I did extensive test drives albeit no hills and found it to be pretty driveable. Surprisingly I didn't stall it even once. The M6 has all the stuff am looking for in my next vehicle in terms of creature comforts too.

The XUV500 blows it away once you get going , but the Marazzo did a nice job of humming along at 80-100 with the RPM at 2000 in the 6th gear during my 10-15km test drives with 4 adults onboard . I have driven the Innova and it definitely is more torquey and one can climb inclines with a full load easily in a higher gear. But the Marazzo's shifter was a joy to use and the seating position and amount of comfort i.e. suspension setup really surprised me positively. And the AC performance was a chiller. I feel we are isolating a certain trait of the vehicle when its pretty okay to downshift to maintain a 1700+ RPM to get the 300 Nm torque and pull uphill.

If you are looking for a vehicle that can run all day at 80-100 , has a 6th gear , great AC and wonderfully comfortable suspension to carry 5 in supreme comfort with luggage , this should be under consideration - this is a nice effort by Mahindra.

Only gripe - the doors , they don't close in one move. You have to really slam em. They are heavy but don't have the 3 stage movement in most cars in this range.

I found the Xl6 / Ertiga built to a price. The Marazzo is a better product at a disproportionately higher price difference (13 XL6 vs 16.xx M6) - even my relatives are suggesting to pick the XUV 500 or Creta / Seltos or XL6 over it. But the ride and the commanding view makes me rethink. It has its strengths.

Looking forward to more reviews of owners / test drives to get a better perspective. Especially on its reliability - that would be a big clincher.

[ManneAtWheelz]

Things I liked:

• Auto engine start/stop
• Sorround cool technology with diffuse feature, only car to have this rear A/c vent system
• 4 Disc brakes on all variants
• Pretty smooth and effortless to drive in city & a great cruiser on highways as well
• Great comfortable mid sized family MPV
• Solidly engineered with a 4* rating global NCAP crash tests

Things I disliked (mostly on M6+):

• No leather wrapping, steering feels too thin
• No leather seats
• No push button start/stop
• No Auto headlamps/wipers
• No Telescopic adjustment
• No Traction Control/ESP
• No 6 Airbags
• No Cooled glove box
• No Auto fold ORVMs
• No Rear sunblinds for windows which are massively huge
• Access to 1L bottles while doors closed is tricky

Originally Posted by TorqueIndia

Tried Marazzo BS4 test drive in May 2019 at Kottayam,Kerala dealership. But Mahindra never called me back and they treated, talked like they were targeting only cab customers.

On the contrary their marketing teams somehow contacted me for a test ride arrangement though I even don't know such a car exists. This is during it's initial launch stage in Nov'18.
I even opted for a 2nd test drive for which they obliged softly and made arrangements as per my wish.

Originally Posted by rajeshsundaram

What let me down were two things -
1. The engine & the long throw clutch.

Personally I felt the engine is Pretty smooth and effortless to drive in city & a great cruiser on highways as well

Originally Posted by rajeshsundaram

It did not feel "relaxed" like my Xylo engine.

People like me who come from a hatch experience don't feel this way.

Originally Posted by rajeshsundaram

Marazzo's engine also drove like a car engine, something like it is working more and more to pull the car. Where as my Xylo engine sounds like so relaxed no matter how many people sit in. Anyone who has driven >1.5L diesels can relate to that. No matter how much they boast about output numbers, the engine simply is not impressive.

Yes, Marazzo is a car like to drive.

Originally Posted by rajeshsundaram

The TD car was one of the freshest of the lot though.

++1, May be this is one of the reasons I liked this car

Originally Posted by rajeshsundaram

The clutch is a different story. I thought Xylo had the longest throw in Mahindra vehicles. But Marazzo changed that on that particular day. I find long throw clutches to be uncomfortable. Did not inspire a positive feeling.

Some how I never felt this uncomfortable though coming from a hatch background.

Originally Posted by Slushmaster

I totally agree with you. The 1.5L engine is just adequate on highways, that too when on level roads. Take this car to hills with 5 people on board and the engine starts to show its shortcomings. Ask any cabbie around and if they have driven Marazzo on hills, it is not going to be their first or second choice for any destination in mountains. Also, it is nowhere comparable to Xylo if I talk about the pure lugging power, you will always find Xylo to be relaxed and ready to do duty.

In a real world scenario how many people for how many days they travel on hills? Not even 5% I believe, so I feel it's still a good car to drive for that 95% of usage.

Originally Posted by Slushmaster

What I have mentioned is purely based on my own experience. 1 trip to manali and other one to Shimla and I feel it is underpowered for any hill drive with all seats occupied. I have also driven a xylo to leh and back and can tell you it is much more drivable with 5 plus a lot of luggage. In fact I like xylos engine better than my Storme on hills.

If you are considering a Marazzo, take a test drive with all on board and try it. If you feel its ok, go ahead and buy it. But, I still think XUV500 W5 will make much more sense.

The engine specs of Xylo and Marazzo doesn't match to what you say about your experience. Also I never felt inadequate power on Marazzo with 7 on-boarded, though don't have a driving experience on Xylo.

Xylo:
https://www.team-bhp.com/forum/techn...ml#post2383751 (Mahindra Xylo - Technical Specifications & Feature List)

Marazzo:
https://www.team-bhp.com/forum/offic...ml#post4491044 (Mahindra Marazzo : Official Review)

Xylo has a power to weight and bhp to weight as 61 & 142 where as
Marazzo has 76 & 188 respectively.

[rajeshsundaram]

Originally Posted by ManneAtWheelz

People like me who come from a hatch experience don't feel this way.

For someone who is upgrading to a Marazzo, the experience would definitely be a good one. But for me and few other Xylo owners,I am sure it may not be a good one. Personally for me, it felt like a downgrade.

Once you get used to Xylo's space and relatively stress free engine drive it is very difficult to switch. (Unless it is an Innova )