[MaheshY1]

Voted Ladder Frame.

I'd not pay top dollars for an overpriced, blown-up hatchback. Moreover, I love the traditional 3-box design of a sedan. If I'm buying an SUV, I'd need/want to drive it off-road. So, it better be an SUV and not a hatchback on steroids.

For the smooth roads, I will just use the other car (sedan/small hatchback).

If ground clearance is my only concern, I can buy a car with decent GC, then I'll install larger profile tyres, pump them up 3-4PSI higher than recommended and I have a high GC car. My Beat diesel's GC is currently more than 180mm with just the tyre change (165/70 instead of 165/65 stock) and my Nano's GC is 180mm from the factory.

[AirbusCapt]

Lets clear out a few concepts first. A twist beam axle, high GC, front wheel hatch shaped car cannot be called a SUV. The Creta, the Seltos and the Harrier are large high GC hatchbacks, that's all. Show these vehicles a slightly slippery track with a few rocks and they will get grounded. Forget that, try following a slushy trail which is used by tractors or dumpers in these "suv" and you will need to be towed out.
Unless you actually get atleast an AWD, don't try to off-road these vehicles, certainly not in the wet.
Now coming to the BOF vehicles. A two wheel drive Innova is a Van. Period! Can't call it an SUV no matter what spin you put on to it. Secondly the BOF vehicles only makes sense if you use it as a rural farm vehicle (throwing in 100 kg sacks of fertilizer etc). Besides if your BOF vehicle has coil springs instead of leaf springs, you can't overload it, without suspension damage.
A rear wheel drive monocoque will always be superior to a rear wheel drive BOF.

BOF vehicles are suitable for commercial applications mainly. For tough offroading what is needed is wheel articulation and a good engine and gearbox/low range option. For slippery dust/dirt offroading a lighter monocoque will outperform a heavy BOF, even when the running gear and power are equal.

[saikishor]

It is because of such poor marketing that crossovers are being called as SUV's. IMO, a true blue SUV is always a vehicle which is built with the body on frame construction. 4m+ are crossovers and sub 4m are raised hatchbacks. Clearly not SUV's.

[KPR]

Voted BOF for the feel of I own a proper SUV (aka truck) and not a monocoque one. Today if I've to purchase a SUV type car at 12L on road budget I will happily put my money on Bolero Neo over pseudo sub 4m crossovers. Otherwise I'm happy with raised GC cars like Punto/Linea. The real problem is how to convince family this thought on BOF vs Monocoque because car purchase is something for which consent from family is required.

[Kosfactor]

Originally Posted by vredesbyrd

Then again there are vehicles like Kodiaq, X3, X5 and Q5, which are best of both worlds. I mean, who wouldn't like to do himalyan forest trails or difficult climbs with a 3L 6-pot?

The problem with European idea of an off-road vehicle is that you are very likely to have a blowout on your way to a hill station than having to worry about AWD and grip etc. At that point you have to call a flatbed because some of these damned vehicles don't even carry a spare tire.

I have observed how close the bumpers and running boards of these expensive crossovers get negotiating the usual under construction bits on the national highway, why is that a problem? Just remove the front bumper of some of these vehicles and see where they have hung critical bits for the engine(mostly plastic).

In general if a crossover has a low roofline, chances are they have scooped the floor pan down to the running board, so whatever is supposed to be there is now crammed into places that are too low for your peace of mind.

[BrakingBad]

Originally Posted by saikishor

It is because of such poor marketing that crossovers are being called as SUV's. IMO, a true blue SUV is always a vehicle which is built with the body on frame construction. 4m+ are crossovers and sub 4m are raised hatchbacks. Clearly not SUV's.

Completely agree with you. We should add newly launched Kushaq and it's cousin Taigun to the list of "Raised Hatchback". One of my friend who saw it in person quoted this "I felt the car is too small. Looked like i20". I completely agree with his assessment. Another friend who was looking for an upgrade from his Fiat Linea was considering Alcazar knocked it off the moment he looked at the capacity of the boot. He fills his Linea's boot (500 litres) easily for a 3 day Blr-maa trips. Now he is scratching his head on SUVs with good boot space and seating capacity for 5 +a Pet.

IMHO Calling venue, sonet, kushaq, Taigun etc as SUV is a gross misnomer.

[AirbusCapt]

Originally Posted by Kosfactor

The problem with European idea of an off-road vehicle is that you are very likely to have a blowout on your way to a hill station than having to worry about AWD and grip etc. At that point you have to call a flatbed because some of these damned vehicles don't even carry a spare tire.

I have observed how close the bumpers and running boards of these expensive crossovers get negotiating the usual under construction bits on the national highway, why is that a problem? Just remove the front bumper of some of these vehicles and see where they have hung critical bits for the engine(mostly plastic).

In general if a crossover has a low roofline, chances are they have scooped the floor pan down to the running board, so whatever is supposed to be there is now crammed into places that are too low for your peace of mind.

Not really. Having driven the Discovery Sport and the Evoque extensively, I can vouch for their off-road/rather no road credentials. Enough ground clearance, no low hanging bits and a great terrain response system. You can take these cars wherever you want without the fear of breaking anything expensive. The low roofline helps on terrain with lot of trees and low lying branches. The compact dimensions (sort of) help on narrow winding trails. These SUVs can do almost everything which doesn't need a dedicated 4*4 low range.

[Lowflyer23]

Can't help but smile at the posts calling only proper BOF 4X4s as SUVs, while it is true, most of the BOF vehicles these days don't offer 4X4 (Scorpio, Bolero) so I don't understand how these are more capable off road. Some might bring in the RWD argument, but every off-road drive doesn't involve loading the rear of the vehicle while going uphill.

Also, most of the guys crying foul never put their money on BOF 4X4 when they were very much available, now everyone calls crossovers as hatchbacks even if it is the market itself (us) that popularised them.

[sramanat]

Voted Monocoque. A lot of us are city dwellers and a lot of us have an eye on owning a farm land or retiring to villages. Just the other day there was a post by a member from Bangalore who has setup a pomegranate farm and he drove a Mercedes GLA there. In other words as more of India is connected by well laid roads, Monocoque SUVs would suffice for most of us. I guess it all boils down to utilization and driving mix. At current rate, for most of us it will be 90% paved vs. 10% unpaved. Will you be willing to compromise on comfort and maneuverability during the 90% time so that you can drive with a "devil may care" attitude in the other 10%?

I wouldn't bet on the return of the sedans though. While we have well laid roads, the lack of standards or finesse in laying such roads require high cars with GC. The other day I saw a youtube video by Overdrive(?) where they checked the approach and departure angles of the new City right outside a modern office building (getting in and out of basement...) and the overhang posed some problems.

[PrideRed]

Originally Posted by AirbusCapt

Not really. Having driven the Discovery Sport and the Evoque extensively, I can vouch for their off-road/rather no road credentials. Enough ground clearance, no low hanging bits and a great terrain response system. You can take these cars wherever you want without the fear of breaking anything expensive. The low roofline helps on terrain with lot of trees and low lying branches. The compact dimensions (sort of) help on narrow winding trails. These SUVs can do almost everything which doesn't need a dedicated 4*4 low range.

This is where price factor kicks in as someone mentioned earlier. BOF 4x4 SUV like Fortuner/Endeavour costs 45-50L despite being a size or two bigger where as the Discovery Sport is 83L and Evoque is 81L before discounts. JLRs poor reliability and the price, how many are willing to take offroad?. For day to day use Land Rovers may be better but again are in a different price point altogether and we don't have a BOF representation at this price point.

[Singh101]

Originally Posted by Aditya

Several monocoque SUVs can be fun to drive (Kushaq, Seltos, XUV300, CR-V), but you will be hard-pressed to find BOF SUVs that are fun on the winding road.

Originally Posted by Altocumulus

Firstly according to me, to qualify as a 'SUV', it has to have a 4WD Lock option. Everything else is either a cross over, bloated/ glorified hatchback or a people carrier.

@Altocumulus YES, THANK YOU!

When I was reading the initial post especially the quoted part, I chuckled inwardly and said "Well, I'm still waiting for you to name a SUV here."

As for the question itself, if "one of each" isn't an option, I'd take a monocoque all day everyday. Land Rover has proved with the Defender that it's possible to make a plenty capable true off-roader with a monocoque shell. It's just a matter of time before that trickles down to us plebs in the price segment of our choosing.

[Kosfactor]

Originally Posted by Lowflyer23

Can't help but smile at the posts calling only proper BOF 4X4s as SUVs, while it is true, most of the BOF vehicles these days don't offer 4X4 (Scorpio, Bolero) so I don't understand how these are more capable off road. Some might bring in the RWD argument, but every off-road drive doesn't involve loading the rear of the vehicle while going uphill.

Agree with you that crossovers are SUVs.

I consider anything that looks like an SUV to be an SUV and that includes the Espresso, lets be honest that there is no Sport in a Scorpio \ Bolero - they are utility vehicles at the end of the day.

As they say , horses for courses! But the average crossover will not reach as far as a 2wd Scorpio or Bolero, nor would it survive that abuse for long. There is a lot of things that are different - but at the basic level, the gearing is all wrong, you will burn the clutch on the way up and burn the brakes on the way down. Been there, done that, I even tried some of the fabled newer crossovers with terrain modes, hill descent control etc, just completely useless.

[swami]

Monocoque - just for the ride comfort and handling. My family just does not like being thrown around at the back. Affordability and creature comforts are other areas where Monocoque offers better value.

[haldar_siliguri]

If I need an SUV, I need it for what it is supposed to offer me, which is Go anywhere ability, ruggedness, and an extremely low maintenance ownership.

Monocoque doesn't YET give all of those to me in a single package in India. For that reason I will choose a BoF for an SUV anyday. This coming from someone who has never owned a BoF until now.

If I need a monocoque' credentials I'll buy a sedan or a hatchback looking at what we have on offer in India under 50L. Purely because those sub-Rs 50L monocoque vehicles that claim to be SUVs, are more of a joke than they are SUVs, with the exception of a select few like the Tiguan, Compass or Kodiaq.

[VKumar]

Originally Posted by Lowflyer23

so I don't understand how these are more capable off road

Because Capability has less to do with the car, and more to do with the confidence of the man behind the wheel - even where it's two cars os same make, same specs and same vintage. And that's where the BOF brings the difference. While driving from Kaza to Gramphu, when you encounter a water crossing, first of all you wait and watch other vehicles cross it. If you are driving a BOF, all you will do it sit, smile, engage first gear and mash the throttle. Will you take the same risk with a Creta or Harrier?

There is something called 'momentum'. Being a desi villager, let me try to explain in our local style.

I belong to a family which consists of farmers too (Including myself), but the ones who drive SUVs and tractors to the farms. What a BOF allows you is to simply carry momentum to get past something that will get you stuck while you crawl - like we use the term 'bulldoze'. Something you won't even think of doing with a monocoque.

Coming to Innova, well, when the going gets tough - the Innova starts doing wheelspins!