[pvivek2]

Newbie here - so I can't vote yet, but my choice would be a sedan. A month back I would've said crossover for the simple reasons of
- A butch look
- Better road visibility from a heightened seating position
- Better ground clearance

However, I'm in the process of checking out both crossovers and sedans as an upgrade from my current hatchback and after multiple test drives within city and on highways, will be choosing a sedan for the following reasons:
- Better ride comfort, very minimal bumpiness experienced on the rides
- Better handling/stability
- Better interior space
- Pricing. A sub 4-m sedan costs lesser than a sub 4-m crossover for equivalent features and interior space. Or put in a different way, you can get a mid-sized sedan at the same price of getting a sub 4m crossover (though with the launch of Magnite, this is prone to disruption). Hence at current market prices, a sedan seems to offer more than a crossover from one segment below.
And regarding the earlier mentioned disadvantages, the ground clearance of the latest sedans on offering doesn't seem to be a deal-breaker in potholed roads as well - tried out both the City & Rapid and they didn't bottom out (albeit at crawling speeds). The SA was mentioning how the ground clearance has been improved over years for sedans to accommodate this. Road visibility though is something that crossover wins but again, not worth the compromise in other aspecs is what I felt during test drives. So finally going with a sedan!

[King_pin09]

To me, it has to be the sedan.

The full size sedan appear more mature, balanced and complete when compared to the crop bodied cross-over which appear funky and youthful.

A sedan usually has adequate to better boot space as compared to the minimalist offered by a cross over (with all seats raised).

From occupants perspective, a sedan is more comfortable than a cross over, when manuvering the same speed breaker or a pothole.

[Sen]

Major reasons for voting sedan:

* Handling aspect, the car feels more planted and fun to drive with adequate ground clearance
* Knee room is good and never going to be an issue in most C-Segment sedans
* The typical family car image is basically the sedan
* Usual 500~ litre boot capacity for swallowing luggage for the weekend trips entirely

[imzahid]

As far as Indian driving conditions are concerned, crossovers make much more sense. Ask someone who has driven a low slung sedan in India and they will tell you how much of a struggle it is. Driving something like a Honda Civic on Indian roads is a challenge in itself. Every speed breaker is a war which you have to win or else watch your heart cry when the underbody of your car scrapes those breakers. Even in traffic jams a high seating position helps you a lot in manoeuvring the car properly. Two wheelers and autorickshaws can pop out of thin air and a sedan's cocooned driving position may not allow you to detect them every time. I may sound illogical but I prefer driving something like a Scorpio in such situations rather than sedans. Now coming to the driving feel of sedans, their is little to differentiate between sedans and crossovers these days. The crossovers themselves are essentially just their sedan counterparts on steroids. Even the driving experience is somewhat similarly with the ride height being the only major difference. So all in all, CROSSOVER it is!

[rageshgr]

Sedans!
What is a cross over anyway ? An equivalent sedan is better looking, more aerodynamic, dynamically more superior, lighter, better acceleration, lesser body roll, more agile, and cheaper
Crossovers give up all this for what? They are all FWD. Not much GC. Just look tall and Bob up and down the highway.

And regarding style, there are about Zero cross overs in the world which look better than its sedan sibling.

[aniyo]

Crossover:
See we might not scrape the sedan as much, may be 2-3 time a year, it is the stress of managing the speed breakers and the bad roads that take a toll. After driving Nexon for over 21K KM I ignore most of the bad roads and not bothered when going over speed breakers or deep pothole, just reduce speed and continue to drive without the worry of scraping.
Sedans do not have a far better driving dynamics over the cross-over these days. Also for similar footprint, cross over are more spacious. (Creta vs Verna, Elentra vs Tuscon etc)

[KPR]

So just now I'd visited with my friend to look at one of the best selling cross over and least selling sedan. Sonet and Yaris I'm talking about. Anyday sedan for me. First time I'm seeing both in person. Yaris felt like a proper elegant car and sonet felt like a hatchback. Period. End of the day I cannot pay 12L for a hatchback looking pseudo SUVs. A full sized sedan allow designers to work in longer dimensions for getting an elegant and aerodynamic design.

[raunaqv471]

I'd pick a Sedan anyday. There's nothing more attractive in the world than a low slung well proportioned fast looking sedan. While SUV's and Crossovers help over our terrible roads, there is no beating the driving pleasure of a sedan. I have driven one or two crossovers and they felt like boats, bobbing up and down, quite a handful. Compare the straightline acceleration figures of a Verna/City against a Harrier/Creta , and nothing further need be said. Be it cornering, braking, rear seat legroom comfort, high speed stability, top speed, high speed manouverability, no prizes for guessing which one wins. Also a lot of folks are mistaken about SUV's being larger than Sedans just because of their height and width. Length wise, most sedans are longer than their SUV counterparts, Compare the Verna with the Creta, or Even a Civic to CRV or an Innova. The definition of a Big car for me is, has and always will be Sedan. As a second or a third car, a Crossover would do for bad roads or Mild offroading.Otherwise, always a Sedan. The Current trend of tilting towards SUV's/ Crossovers is a bit disconcerting and I fear for the future availability of Sporty Sedans in this country.

[Kosfactor]

Originally Posted by nandadevieast

Crossovers have higher GC: We have 160-170mm’s running for last 50 years and if it was such a deal breaker, manufacturers would have stopped making sedans or hatchbacks. Look around you. So many hatches and sedans running without a problem. If there is a road, you can drive a sedan on it. We have people here who have taken their sedans to Ladakh and xyz-La’ without a problem. People have driven a sedan from Banglore to Madrid. Alto on hills?

That tells me, sedans are not low on GC. They have proven and correct GC. Rest is psychological safety.

.

You could drive any sedan on any road that a crossover like duster would go, just carry an extra oil pan, a bumper or two, running board , sometimes an intercooler and radiator etc.

Please do not equate An ambassador`s 160MM ground clearance to that of a Honda City, they mean different things altogether.

[avira_tk]

Originally Posted by raunaqv471

I'd pick a Sedan anyday. There's nothing more attractive in the world than a low slung well proportioned fast looking sedan. While SUV's and Crossovers help over our terrible roads,...


Sedan. As a second or a third car, a Crossover would do for bad roads or Mild offroading.Otherwise, always a Sedan. The Current trend of tilting towards SUV's/ Crossovers is a bit disconcerting and I fear for the future availability of Sporty Sedans in this country.

What is the point of a high performance sedan if you need crossovers and SUVs to handle our terrible roads? The Verna is absolutely terrible in practically every yardstick you mentioned, I've haven't heard many owners raving about the City, except for reliability and fuel efficiency. What about rear seat space in a sedan, and which sedan has great rear headroom, any hatch does better in the headroom stakes. The footprint is irrelevant to the buyer, an innova will be much better than the civic for passengers and luggage, going by sales, the market agrees.

The Macan and Cayenne sales gave us the terrific sports cars Porsche makes today, that's the best case for SUVs if you aren't convinced they're the better option.

[raunaqv471]

Originally Posted by avira_tk

What is the point of a high performance sedan if you need crossovers and SUVs to handle our terrible roads? The Verna is absolutely terrible in practically every yardstick you mentioned, I've haven't heard many owners raving about the City, except for reliability and fuel efficiency. What about rear seat space in a sedan, and which sedan has great rear headroom, any hatch does better in the headroom stakes. The footprint is irrelevant to the buyer, an innova will be much better than the civic for passengers and luggage, going by sales, the market agrees.

The Macan and Cayenne sales gave us the terrific sports cars Porsche makes today, that's the best case for SUVs if you aren't convinced they're the better option.

Thanks for the response It all boils down to personal choice i'd say. I do agree that a Creta would handle potholes and craters at low speed way better than a City or a Verna (Solely due to its GC). However I have driven all 3 and found the Verna and the City a lot quicker than the Creta.The rear seat space in a City is also way more than that of say a Creta. Even the Jeep Compass which is sold for 25 odd big ones is pretty compact in terms of dimensions and the rear space isn't great. As for headroom, passengers upto 6 feet rarely face issues since most rear seat roofs happen to be scooped out upwards. Compare the zero to 100 dash of the 1.5 Creta with the 1.5 City DOHC IVtec manual and the former will be biting the latter's dust.

Coming to the Innova, It's at the end of the day a Practical Van and has no sporty appeal whatsover. Folks in need of a people mover would prefer it no doubt but I doubt anyone buys an Innova for its looks or driving pleasure. As for Luggage, sedans have larger boots and the space can be further improved with a 60:40 split of the seats. I happen to drive a Civic myself and while it does scrape when loaded with 4 to 5 passengers if one isn't careful, you're good to go with one or two passengers and I haven't faced issues while driving in the city atleast.(I usually drive alone).

As for the The Macan and Cayenne, although they might be terrific cars, I would still prefer a Boxster or 911 or even Panamera . Guess it's just my Bias towards the low slung body style.

[Rahul Bhalgat]

Sedan is my choice.

Crossovers don't offer me anything over and above the sedan.

Neither they carry more luggage nor more people compared to my sedan. Neither they offer me more features (just because of being a crossover) nor they offer me more FE. Neither they offer more ground clearance, nor better ride and handling just because of being a crossover. Neither they offer more safety nor better braking just because of being a crossover. Neither do they offer better low end torque per ton.


When I upgrade to a better car, I would go by low end torque, reliability, space, comfort, ground clearance, ride and handling, refinement, fit and finish, non-weird looks, peace of mind during the ownership. Not in this particular order. I don't mind a full fledged SUV too, if it fits my criteria or else I am content with sedan.

I won't object to having a crossover but it is likely to loose out to sedans or SUV on my requirements.

[TrackDay]

Voted : Sedans

Why? Comparing sedans and Crossovers (also compacts SUV's) within the same price bracket, you actually get a better vehicle if you go the sedan route.

The only issue I see is with seniors for ingress/egress, but then that is only a minute fraction of time compared to the whole journey. The actual journey/movement is way too comfortable comparatively in a sedan. No boat like movement or being thrown about within the car.

As for the whole ground clearance issue, Even when I drive a compact SUV, I slow down for the craters. If I drive over them like a hummer or a land cruiser I am sure the suspension will require frequent replacement in these so called compact SUV's.

Ethan Hunt usually goes for sedans. I am just saying. He rarely goes for an SUV. Folks should also try out sedans before going for SUV's within their budgets. A sedan will always put a smile on you face, for the whole driving experience!

[avira_tk]

Originally Posted by raunaqv471

As for the The Macan and Cayenne, although they might be terrific cars, I would still prefer a Boxster or 911 or even Panamera . Guess it's just my Bias towards the low slung body style.

I meant that the profits from the SUVs gave us the better Porsche cars we have today. There is no way that sports cars alone could've saved the brand.

Originally Posted by TrackDay

The only issue I see is with seniors for ingress/egress, but then that is only a minute fraction of time compared to the whole journey. The actual journey/movement is way too comfortable comparatively in a sedan. No boat like movement or being thrown about within the car.

That small fraction of time adds up, to give you a damaged hip and increases the risk of a fracture. My parents were asked by an ortho to out first turn in the seat and step out after placing both feet on the ground, it reduces stress on the hip bone on exit.

The traveling comfort in sedans is good but crossovers are getting better every year.

[dragonfire]

The country is moving to SUVs and crossovers, so sedans are a dying breed. Also when you are in a low lying sedan/hatch you are easily intimidated by a butch SUV coming towards you, not to mention the buses and trucks.

Handling was the only drawback of SUVs and crossovers, and modern ones are much improved at that.

So, crossovers or SUVs for me.