[KPR]

Voted No. One important point for a daily user is that Turbo diesels gave good mileage. Turbo Petrols lack that.

[anb]

I voted yes. I drive 3 hatchbacks, Polo GT TSI, TDI & Figo Petrol. For a quick overtaking, a downshift or two requires in Figo due to lack of low and mid range torque which is not required in turbo engines. Once used to turbo lag, a turbo engine is easier to drive.

[KarthikK]

Voted for Yes.

From a trend point of view, I don't think we get to choose between opting for a lower priced NA version anymore. Most manufacturers are jumping to the small displacement turbo petrol bandwagon and we can't really say No I won't pay, because turbo petrol may soon be the only petrol in the portfolio for most vehicles going ahead

Having experienced both camps within the same brand, I'd say both have the ability to be tuned to varied (torque / power / driveability) requirements, and perhaps the maintenance costs will also be similar. The only tradeoff I can see is that a turbo petrol might be more refined and high revving than a diesel, while a turbo diesel may be more economical + have a better tank range if touring a lot. In short, the main tradeoff is between refinement levels + marginally more fun to drive, and running costs + fuel-up frequency during usage . Turbo petrols may be a little more susceptible to fuel quality issues compared to turbo diesels here.

For me I would say, it depends on the vehicle and I would make that decision on a case-to-case basis. If it is a vehicle that is meant for fun such as a hatch or fast sedan, I would gladly pay the premium for a petrol since it might be used less (leisure) and the additional FE costs of a turbo petrol may not pinch directly. If it is a high usage vehicle such as say, a family Innova or some other such SUV/MUV where running costs with low FE is skewed towards burning a hole in the wallet, I might just choose a diesel and be done with it. For a SUV, regardless of running costs I would still go for a diesel just for personal preference.

[jeganatu]

Voted No.

If a small car then I would go for Turbo Petrol for the punchy fun to drive feel. But for large car, compromising mileage and torque, it does not make any sense to go for Turbo Petrol as mileage will take a huge hit.

Why no one here take the mileage figure in to consideration when giving your choice?

Instead, I can pay similar or less premium ( Na petrol to turbo Petrol) if the companies upgraded their diesel bs4 to bs6 engine so that mileage does not get hit.

I notice the aggregate mileage of several short trip or mix of HW and City trips for a single tank-full dips way below 20-40% than the arai specified figures of a petrol car than a diesel car.

[PrideRed]

I am not prepared, hence voted no. But I am sure, manufacturers will push me there. On a brighter side, once Turbo petrols become mainstream, I see high probability that manufacturers will start offering turbo diesels too! On another note, 1.0L 3 cylinder turbo, defeats the purpose as petrol motor is bought for their refinement, would prefer a 1.5L NA anyday.

[Turbohead]

It's way more complicated than I initially thought. Turbo petrols are really good barring fuel consumption. But long term reliability of small capacity turbo charged engines is still unknown. Turbo petrol cars were usually bought by enthusiasts who tend to care for their cars a lot- Eg: Polo GT TSI, Abarth Punto, Linea TJET and the Baleno RS. It was only last year that the non enthusiast has warmed up to TC petrol engines and in a big way with the Venue, Seltos, Creta etc.

I believe this might be a honeymoon period with TC petrol cars until opinions passed by word of mouth push people to consider diesel or possible hybrid/electric models considering the low fuel economy which is guaranteed on mashing the pedal.

Personally, I wouldn't want 6.xx kmpl after having some fun. Kills the fun completely. Diesels can still give 18kmpl after having some serious fun behind the wheel. Voting diesel and I wouldn't mind using the car for 10 years and then scrapping it if such rules ever come.

[AMG Power]

Originally Posted by turbo

The turbo petrols have no torque below 2000 rpm, and give you the feeling that you are literally wringing the life out of the engine to get any semblance of performance.

Not all turbo petrols have this issue.

The Kia Seltos makes its peak torque of 242 Nm at a very low 1500 rpm. The 330i G20 also makes its peak torque of 400 Nm at 1550 rpm.

1500 rpm is barely above idle rpm. Drive these cars and you'll feel the difference in the torque delivery.

The Renault 1.3 turbo petrol, Rapid 1.0 TSI would have the issue you mentioned to some extent.

[ajaiD]

Still have a turbo petrol "Linea T-Jet" and also bought a turbo diesel "Compass". I would any day prefer the Compass not because its newer and more powerful "Those 125PS under Linea is almost as fast as Compass" but because of the mileage and my heavy foot.

At one point my months bill was coming around 14000 just for the petrol. That was at that time almost 1/4th my salary now with Compass I have driven it 12k in last 2 months and about 1k in 9 months before that "Covid" but its never given me a mini heart attack because of my heavy foot.

Originally Posted by AMG Power

Not all turbo petrols have this issue.

The Kia Seltos makes its peak torque of 242 Nm at a very low 1500 rpm. The 330i G20 also makes its peak torque of 400 Nm at 1550 rpm.

.

Are you sure about this?

I was told around 1500-3000rpm is where the max torque is made on the 1.4. This was when Seltos was in my list so 2019 and I had driven 1.4 and the 1.5D.

Edit:

Found another source on the same https://www.overdrive.in/reviews/201...-drive-review/ "Max torque from this engine is 242Nm available at as low as 1,500rpm all the way up to 3,200Nm. "

[humyum]

Voted No.

If I have some fun in a turbo petrol car say on a trip to Nasik from Mumbai, the car will go bottoms up on fuel because that would mean I shift near to the redline, the same if I do with a diesel, it won't lower the mileage by much.

For me it's diesel for the torque along with fun and the comfort of economy.

[Hayek]

Have been an early convert to Turbo Petrols - 10+ years ago when I bought my Superb. Was amazed at how much nicer it was to drive with a 1.8 l engine than the Accord, which had 600 cc and 20 HP more on paper. Of course, the DSG probably played a role in that. Of course, it was not maintenance free - I had to carry a can of oil at all times and top up several times between the theoretical 1 year service appointments.

Now drive a Turbo Diesel, but I must admit that had the petrol version (which was launched just as I was closing my deal) been available at the same price, I would have picked the X3 28i over the 20d. As it happened, the new launch 28i was over ₹10 lakhs costlier than the discounted price on the 20d - and that was the clincher for me.

That was in the BS4 world - in the BS6 world, my driving cycle (90% plus urban, short drives of 12.5 km each way to and from office, with an average speed of 20 kmph), would be a recipe for a clogged DPF, especially in cars with a LNT instead of Ad Blue SCR. Am sure that even a temperamental turbo petrol with a DCT would be more reliable for me than a BS6 turbo diesel. No brainer really - diesels are not meant for cities.

[kozhissery]

My bet is on Turbo petrol.
But in some cases I would go for bigger turbo diesel instead of puny turbo petrol.
For example in case of Venue I would pick 1.5 diesel, whereas in case of Seltos I would pick 1.4 TGDi

[Blow Horn Ok]

I believe it's better to stick to simpler engines (in case of petrol) for the sake of long term reliability and low maintenance. Agree that turbo petrols produce more power for the given amount of cubic capacity, but it's being achieved due to complex injection technology and turbo plumbing. This may result in unwanted breakdowns and costly repairs once the warranty expires. There would be some amount of turbo lag and also, I see no benefit in terms of efficiency.

My vote: No

[Vik0728]

Originally Posted by GTO

Voted for Yes .

That said, my selection of petrol vs diesel will vary based on the car rather than the price.

Voted NO, although I completely agree with GTO on this.

With the TC Petrol engine cars costing nearly (probably more) as much as their Diesel counterparts, it sure has tilted many a buyer towards the former. Basically, you get the exact same package albeit with much better NVH and heck of a lot more RPMs to rev. But I would hate to run to fuel station often!

I have a GT TDI and a close friend has a 1.2 GT TSI. Two long drives at the same pace & almost identical driving styles, and yet the GT TSI fell short of at least 100-120Km range. No petrol can ever match the deadly combination of FE and FUN that a well tuned Diesel engine gives.

That said, if its just those high revving errands and some aural pleasure that one seeks, no diesel can touch a high revving TC Petrol engine.

[ashvek3141]

Voted NO.

I don't think a Turbo Petrol can substitute a good Diesel motor. The sheer amount of torque of the diesel engines is an enough draw for me. That turbo-whoosh is simply addictive. Added advantage is the mileage, lower pricing of diesel fuel and ease of cruising at highway speeds.

Turbo petrol's are also prone to poor mileage, especially when driven hard & at city speeds. No such issue in the Diesels. Throttle the Venue / Sonet hard and you are looking at figures like 8 - 9 kmpl on the MID which is scary for a sub 4m car!

Having said that, the higher capacity turbo units are indeed more fun than their diesel counter parts. Case in point, the 1.4 L units from Hyundai / Kia. But again, that fun comes at a compromise in fuel efficiency.

In a nutshell, it varies from car-to-car or rather engine basis and there is not definite answer as such. But yeah, a good diesel motor over a good turbo-petrol motor, always.

[motorworks]

First, the current premium for the Turbo petrol is insane! It just does not make any financial sense. And I have mentioned this before, manufacturers are trying to push the turbo petrol as part of the top end variants more than anything else, like by shortchanging the regular petrol variants.

Second, diesels commanding a premium of around a lakh made sense only when there was a decent price difference of at least Rs.15-20 between both the fuel types. At current prices, diesels dont make sense in small cars or sedans, probably it does in bigger cars due to the really bad fuel efficiency of petrol in bigger cars.

Now, I strongly believe that manufacturers will start offering turbo petrols at a lower price in the near future, one way or the other. For example, Skoda and VW arw rumoured to have only turbo petrols for all their future offerings, so surely they are not going to offer these at a premium over their rivals? And all such manufacturers who do not have BS6 diesels will take this route, so I see turbo petrol as standard on a lot of VW, Skoda and maybe even a Renault or Nissan in the future. So my guess is the next Skoda and VW compact SUV with a turbo petrol may be slightly more expensive than the regular petrol of Creta and Seltos but not as expensive as the turbo petrol of these cars. Just an assumption else Skoda and VW lose out on the starting price straight away, so they have to do this.

Hence the premium of turbo petrol would and should gradually come down as this engine technology is adopted for more cars. However, I still feel bigger cross overs and SUVs still need good torquey BS6 diesels that delivery on power, torque and also decent fuel efficiency. I cannot think of turbo petrols doing duty on something like a Harrier or XUV500 and delivering diesel kind of efficiency. This means diesel would get relegated to 15 lakh plus SUVs and cross overs, while Petrols become main stay below 15 lakhs. And turbo petrols will straddle all segments, but gain acceptance when price starts to come down.