[CentreOfGravity]

Over the past few years, Tata have experienced exponential growth, and rightly so. The combination of design, safety and features in their cars is a proposition that Indian consumers find too hard to ignore. Until recently, they have been operating in almost all mainstream SUV and hatchback segments – except the lucrative, intensely crowded and competitive mid-size SUV segment. However, Tata have addressed that void with the all-new Curvv (or let's just say, the new Curvv - I'll come to it in a bit). At first glance, it looks really impressive with the coupé body and all. It seems Tata have hit the bullseye with the Curvv - just what could go wrong with it, right? But I've been thinking about this car for quite some time now, and I've come to the conclusion that there are many caveats in this story – I think that Tata is trying hard to set the Curvv apart from the Nexon, but in vain.

Before diving into my observations and analysis, let me tell you that I’ve personally visited a showroom to check out the car and speak to the dealers so that this doesn’t turn out to be a baseless and hollow post. However, I didn’t drive the Curvv because I had got my driving licence just a few days before and didn’t want to risk driving a spanking new car. All my thoughts related to the engine and driving experience are backed up by the numerous test drive reports from Team-BHP and other auto journos. With that out of the way, let’s dive straight into it.



------------------------------

- Let’s begin with the underpinnings of the Tata Curvv. Tata claim that an all-new architecture, ATLAS, has been used for the Curvv - note that they mentioned architecture, and not platform. What Tata mean by architecture is a combination of the hardware and software. Now, I did a lot of digging, but couldn’t find concrete evidence that suggests that its physical platform is a derivative of the Nexon’s. However, considering that the Curvv looks almost exactly like the Nexon from more than one angle, it is safe to assume that it is indeed based on a modified version of the Nexon’s X1 platform, whose origins can in turn be traced back to the Indica platform (according to various sources).

- Don’t get me wrong – there is no harm in using the same platform across vehicles; every manufacturer does this. In this case, it is in a way a boon as this platform is proven in terms of safety, with the Nexon and Curvv boasting of a 5-star safety rating. Also, in theory, you save on development costs when you use the same platform. However, when you have more modern and new-age platforms in the form of the ALFA arc and OMEGA arc in your arsenal, why not use them? Sure, the end user of a Curvv needn’t be bothered as this is an otherwise sorted platform and apart from minor ergonomic issues, there is nothing seriously wrong with it. But the enthusiast in me is slightly disappointed; remember, this is supposed to be a fresh product with a niche body style. So, it wouldn’t be unfair to expect modern underpinnings in such a car, the ideal candidate being the ALFA ARC platform. Since the OMEGA arc is a JLR-derived platform, it would’ve driven up costs further, so it’s understandable that it hasn’t been used. But the ALFA arc is a versatile platform that can support multiple body styles (including a 3-row 7-seater, mind you) and powertrains including hybrid and electric, so what stopped Tata from using it? To save vehicle development costs? Maybe, but I’ll get to the ‘costs’ part in a bit. But to reiterate, a potential buyer needn’t be concerned about this at all and one shouldn’t reject this car because the platform has its roots in the Indica’s platform.

- The fact that the Curvv and Nexon use the same platform is passable and honestly, it’s a non-issue. But why retain the design of the Nexon in what is supposed to be an all-new car? One look at the Curvv should tell you that it is nothing but a stretched Nexon! No doubt, the Nexon is a sharp looking car (subjective), but why establish a clear link between two cars competing in different segments? At least different DRLs, bumpers and other easy-to-change body panels would’ve played the trick. This isn’t to say that Tata haven’t tried though – the Curvv is trying to look like a Harrier/Safari junior as it has the same colour options, grill detailing, full-width LED DRL treatment for the ICE version (DRL unit itself is from the Nexon.ev), headlight housing, steering wheel and touchscreen as the latter. But in spite of all this, it still looks like a Nexon Pro Max coupé as opposed to a mini-Harrier to my eyes.

- I’m sure that many will come in defence of the Curvv stating that the Curvv’s design was envisioned back in 2022, much before the Nexon’s test mules were even spotted – sure, you won’t be wrong in saying so. The only reason I’m drawing parallels between the Curvv and the Nexon, and not vice-versa, is because the Nexon was launched first, hence creating the impression that the Nexon’s design inspired the Curvv – which may actually not be the case. But even then, the question remains – why do they have to look so similar? Either which way, my point is that, creating a different visual identity to the Curvv would have been a far easier thing to do than to use a new platform, yet Tata royally missed that opportunity. Look at the midsize crossover segment today and you’ll realise that not even ONE car looks related to their sub-4m crossover stablemate. It’s really heartbreaking to see that the Curvv looks so similar to the Nexon. Design sharing works in lower segments (the Tiago stretched to give birth to the Tigor = ), but not in the aspirational 20-lakh segment where the customer, more often than not, wants a unique experience (don’t confuse ‘unique experience’ with unique body style please).

- For God’s sake, please don’t bring up the luxury coupé segment analogy into this picture – they operate in a different price point altogether and owning a Merc / BMW is a prestigious affair anyway, so I think it’s fair to assume that a coupé’s similar design to its regular counterpart wouldn’t be a dealbreaker. Moreover, those cars look huge on the road – an attribute that cannot be given to the Curvv, although it does have road presence.

- The interiors are a copy-paste of the Nexon’s (save for the touchscreen and steering wheel, both of which are Harrier/Safari sourced). Again – why?! The Nexon’s interiors look fantastic and it has one of the better-looking cabins in the segment IMO, but when the exact same layout is carried over to a car that claims to be a Creta-fighter, that very interior can look par for the course. Let me make myself clear – on its own, the Curvv’s interiors are good enough, but ‘good enough’ cannot make the cut in a cutthroat segment like the mid-size crossover, especially when you are competing with the formidable Creta.



I beseech thee, what is the difference?!

- Overall cabin space is exactly the same as the Nexon, minus the good headroom. The headroom is comparable to our 2022 Honda City which is a low benchmark already, and as a ~5’8’’ 18-year-old, I have about 4 inches of room to spare in both cars. From a cabin experience standpoint, they both are EXACTLY the same, with its only redeeming factor being the additional features it offers over the Nexon. This means that even the flaws of the Nexon get carried over to the Curvv, i.e. no cupholders, weird position of the handbrake in the lower variants, imperfect steering wheel position, small door pockets, etc. You can see how the common theme and recurring issue here is its close relation to the Nexon.

- Okay, we have established that the Curvv has a lot in common with the Nexon, so one would naturally expect it to be competitively priced, right? Well, competitively priced relative to the competition it is, but well-priced? I don’t think so. I think we can all agree that the pricing of the higher variants is steep, especially when compared to the Nexon. There is no reflection of the “cost-saving”, so to speak, on the prices. Between the Curvv and the Nexon, there is a price difference of about 2 lakhs between their comparable variants with the Revotron engine + MT combo. Their respective top spec variants with the Revotron DCT powertrain also have a ~2 lakh delta between them, and their top spec diesel MT variants are priced a whopping 3.6 lakhs apart! (all prices OTR Mumbai). You are basically paying that additional money over the Nexon for the features, boot and… the coupé design? To give you some more perspective, the top-spec 7-seater variants of the Safari and Alcazar are priced around 1 lakh more than the fully loaded Harrier and Creta respectively. The base versions of the Harrier and Safari are separated by a mere Rs. 50,000 (ex-sh)! Go figure.

- Another reason for the higher price tag IMO is the perceived positioning of the Curvv – the fact that Tata pitched this car against the Creta gave them the headroom to price it considerably more than the Nexon. The minimum price difference between the base variants of the Nexon and Curvv is 2 lakhs (ex-sh), for which you get minimal (read = hardly any) extra features, and a physically / visually larger car.

- When you compete in the mid-size crossover segment, you need to have strong USPs. The Creta and Seltos are feature loaded, powerful and practical, the Kushaq and Taigun are fun-to-drive and safe, the Grand Vitara and Hyryder are the only hybrid SUVs in the class, the Elevate serves as the no-nonsense, reliable option. Heck, even the side actor, the Citroen Aircross / Basalt has a USP = it is the cheapest car in the segment which is fun to drive with an extra row of seats! I struggle to identify the Astor’s USP (which is probably why it failed), and that leaves us with the Curvv. The Curvv is neither practical (lack of interior storage spaces), powerful, fun to drive, spacious nor niggle-free (safe to assume) – so, as far as I’ve understood, its USPs are the coupé design, features and safety; but the Koreans match and maybe outdo the Tata in terms of gizmos, and there are other safe cars in the segment too. So that leaves us with the unique coupé body style as the sole USP. Question is, can you have a car with design as its only USP? Maybe, maybe not – the market gets to judge that. But I look at the Curvv as a more expensive Nexon that a potential Nexon buyer should consider if he/she is willing to splurge, and NOT someone who is looking to buy a Creta alternative. Although this isn’t the most accurate analogy, let’s put it this way = a potential Google Pixel 9 buyer may consider the 9 Pro, but an iPhone 16 Pro buyer may not. I think that buying the Curvv is a heart-over-head decision – in the sense that you would buy it ONLY if you absolutely loved the coupé design. However, it is not very likely to tick the checkboxes that Mr. Head expects it to.

- Tata have given the Curvv a diverse choice of powertrains = 1.2L TCMPFI petrol (Revotron), 1.2L TGDI petrol (Hyperion), and a 1.5L turbo-diesel (Kryojet); all engines are offered with MT and 7-speed DCT transmissions. However, take a look at the competition’s powertrains and it should be clear that both the Curvv’s petrol engines are targeted towards the lower end of the segment. Sure, the GDI engine is a first for Tata, but India has seen GDI as a concept for well over a decade now! The Curvv doesn’t have a true top-end petrol engine to compete with the Koreans’ 1.5L 160 bhp turbo-petrol, the Germans’ 1.5L 150 bhp TSI, or the Japanese 1.5L petrol hybrids, and I’m not even considering the 1.4L 3-cyl turbo-petrol of the Astor. Heck, all the engines of even the Mahindra XUV 3XO are more powerful than the Curvv! This is a strong indicator of the Curvv’s positioning and it strengthens my belief that it is a Nexon Pro Max, and not a Creta-fighter.

- Considering the additional performance the GDI offers over the Revotron, the price premium that that it commands over the Revotron is insane! I am talking about insanity to the level of charging 1.3 lakhs more (ex-showroom) for the Hyperion – which is the same displacement as the Revotron by the way. Who in their right minds would do that? For context, 1.3 lakhs is the exact same price difference between the Creta’s top-spec 1.5 NA CVT variant (115 bhp / 144 Nm) and the 1.5L T-GDI DCT (160 bhp / 253 Nm)! Now you tell me – in which case does the engine upgrade make more sense? What’s worse, the GDI petrol DCT is priced on par with the diesel DCT, in spite of the diesel engine + DCT gearbox combo being the theoretically most expensive combination! That should give you an idea of just how hard Tata are trying to recover its development costs from (underlined part read = milking) its GDI customers.

- It’s a different story for the other powertrains though. Talking about the diesel Curvv, there is no need of DPF in Tata’s 1.5L diesel engine and this is a game-changer IMO. Also, this is the only car with a diesel-DCT combo in the segment. It’s safe to say, the Curvv in the diesel avatar sure has a fair USP. High-mileage buyers finally have another good option in the diesel space, and I wouldn’t be surprised if ‘Kryojet’ eats into the sales of ‘CRDI’ (off-topic: too bad the petrol-diesel sales split of the Curvv isn’t revealed!). Similarly, the Curvv.ev is a strong competitor to the aging ZS EV. Its range figures are reassuring and that’s a big draw.

- Now, even if the Curvv is going to be a heart-over-head decision or a lifestyle choice, it still has a major tumbling block – and that block, quite literally, is the Mahindra Thar Roxx . The top spec Thar Roxx RWD diesel AT is just 2.2 lakhs more OTR that the most expensive Curvv on sale. Personally, as a secondary car, would your heart yearn for a Nexon Pro Max (which is not even maxed out properly) or the Thar Pro Max aka the Thar Roxx? I’ll leave you at that!

- Lastly, I want to talk about niggles. Now let me make myself clear – I know that niggles aren’t a ‘Curvv specific problem’, but a ‘Tata problem’. However, I cannot stop myself from saying this because this is an opinion post cum observation report. When I checked out the car, I did see the normal niggles and finish issues like the misaligned horn pad, unfinished stitching in places, etc.


But this one shocked me out of my wits – the Curvv.ev’s sunroof shade was wet. For context, it was raining that day, and the car was parked outside. Just to be sure, I asked the SA about it, and he doubted that it may be a leak. See it for yourself:



------------------------------

I know I’ve been very critical of the Curvv’s confused state, but to their credit, I really commend Tata – and Citroën by the way – for beginning to democratise the supposedly niche category of coupé SUVs with the Curvv – they have balls of steel. It takes a lot of courage and faith to launch such a product in an unpredictable market such as ours. I really wanted to love the car, but in its current state, that unfortunately isn’t the case. I honestly quite like the design; the only issue I have with the design is not the design itself, but the fact that it is shared with a smaller car. Full marks for bringing this coupé onto the table, but the product planning, positioning, and execution have been a bit of a miss (or mess?) IMO. If you think about it, a vowel change will get this to become ‘mass’, and not ‘mess’. But it is on Tata to make it happen. Question is – will they? Only time will tell.

Do chime in with your thoughts on this matter. Cheers!

[saikishor]

Not only Curvv, but to think of it, Tata Motors has no strong USP to differentiate themselves among their rivals. Their EV strides did help them at the beginning(say, during the launch if the Nexon EV) but now EV sales are also nothing to specially talk about. Tata Motors have strong and pleasing designs, but how major of a USP that is to sway a buyer into their showrooms is a very subjective thing.

Tata Motors have nothing to talk about where things matter the most i.e, engines and gearboxes and this is something that even TaMo is aware of. They did bring new engines and gearboxes with the Curvv, but the Curvv is not so different from the Nexon to really make a name for itself IMO. Bring these new engines and gearboxes to the Nexon and that should make a bigger difference.

The Curvv feels like a neither here nor there car. The SUV coupe design was appealing at first but after the initial moolah, it feels like an ugly duckling, especially in thag carrot red or whatever shade of red that is. The QC and reliability game is also not so strong when compared to its korean rivals. All these factors contribute to the lukewarm sales IMO.

[Asoon]

You absolutely right, it is not. It is extended Nexon with more features which probably will come in the next generation Nexon. It is blunder from TATA, it is like Honda's response (BRV) in a Duster / Creta segment - Cold, non aggressive and dull.

4.3 / 4.4 segment is extremely competitive, and a superior product was required to make a dent here. New platform (wide & extended wheel base), a powerful engine, may be an AWD, or 600L boot or a Hybrid with 30KMPL or something which is a segment above or competition would take time to match [e.g. what M&M did with 2.2L diesel engine at the time of XUV launch or what 1.2TSI did for Polo]

[DicKy]

Fully agree and great thread.

The moment I saw that the Curvv had the same interior as the Nexon with only the steering wheel from the Harrier, I knew none of the Activ architecture marketing spiel is going to help it. They could have atleast changed the useless centre console of the Nexon (top variants)

TATA knew it, thats why they plonked all the features into the Curvv including the powered tailgate. TATA has never been strong in the engines department (atleast tuning) and they could have used this chance to launch the four cylinder 1.5l TGDI, but nope. Had to flog the old 3 pot again.

Originally Posted by CentreOfGravity

the ideal candidate being the ALFA ARC platform. Since the OMEGA arc is a JLR-derived platform, it would’ve driven up costs further, so it’s understandable that it hasn’t been used. But the ALFA arc is a versatile platform that can support multiple body styles (including a 3-row 7-seater, mind you)

TATA really found it hard to develop a Creta sized rival on the ALFA platform, while the OMEGA was too expensive. The 3 row might have been an Ertiga rival if launched, so smaller wheels won't matter. They even went to the extend of developing a model using a Chinese car as base.

[motorworks]

To be honest, i think we tend to criticise Tata way too much when compared to the other manufacturers in india.

First up, as long as the car handles and drives well and offers safety, variety of engines, how does it matter what platform its based on? This whole “all new platform” call-outs is marketing material, a way to tell customers that they are buying an updated car! We all spoke so much about VW’s MQB platform and its Indian derivative etc. In my view, the new VW and Skodas feel more Korean and Japanese than the erstwhile Polos and Rapids.

So Tata spoke about some platform gibberish, that’s marketing! They are not advertising that its a 5 star safety car and delivering a 3 star car, are they?

Hyundai showcased the new Creta with an elephant standing over as a representative of its supposed build quality, and yet were not bold enough to send it to the GNCAP or even BNCAP.

Secondly, whats wrong in the Nexon and the Curvv having similar interiors? Isn’t that cost optimisation? Don’t all manufacturers do it, especially when the cars are in adjacent segments? Its not like the nexon and the Curvv are 20 lakhs apart.

Not defending Tata here, they have some way to go in ensuring better fit and finish and also they definitely need to invest in better petrol engines like the way Mahindra did.


But we seem to be too quick to jump the gun when its Tata. Initially there was criticism that Indian manufacturers do not match the koreans in features, now thats more or less taken care of. I dont think Tata and Mahindra are any less now. Secondly we asked for DCT gearboxes. Tata has sort of democratised DCA ( i agree its not as quick as VW’s DCT ).

I have had two Hyundais ( 1st Gen Creta and 2nd gen Elite i20) in the past, switched to Jeep Compass in 2022 and a 2024 Tata Nexon DCA. When i was about to buy the Nexon for my wife earlier this year, we test drove the Venue and the Sonet too. The Sonet felt very similar to our earlier i20 ( 2nd gen ). The car just did not have the build quality, ride and composure. The Nexon felt better in every way. And guess what, it beat the Sonet in features too. Yes, i would any day agree that Tata has to improve their fit and finish, and as customers we all have the right to expect better and also criticise when there is an issue. But im getting a feeling that we are being a bit more lenient with the Hyundais and the Kias of the world while looking at Tata with a microscope.

[Mur7!r3ddy]

Main issue with the Curvv is it’s a Nexon + extra boot kind of vehicle , it should have been a mini harrier with good leg room and a slightly bigger boot than nexon , that’s why it’s getting so much hate compared to Thar 3D and Thar 5D , both companies were after same idea make a Creta competitor using an existing sub 4m vehicle as a starting point . But Thar 5D feels like a proper upgrade over the Thar 3D but curvv can hardly be called an upgrade over the nexon, I own a nexon 2017 model in fact I had pre-booked it before launch and mine was 1st dual tone nexon delivered from the showroom, but now when I want to upgrade Tata motor has let me down with an unexciting product “Curvv” expected more from Tata needed more customer feed back based product not a product that more economical for them to manufacture.

[CentreOfGravity]

Originally Posted by motorworks

To be honest, I think we tend to criticise Tata way too much when compared to the other manufacturers in India.

Hello sir. I hope you had read my entire post before replying. I'll reply to all your points one-by-one.

If you search well enough, you'll find enough complaints about other carmakers too! It is important to understand why companies like Tata, Citroen, Honda, etc. receive flak. In Tata's case, it is the niggles that bothers customers, and hence the criticism. Similarly, the flaws of cars of other manufacturers are also called out by people!

Originally Posted by motorworks

First up, as long as the car handles and drives well and offers safety, variety of engines, how does it matter what platform its based on? This whole “all new platform” call-outs is marketing material, a way to tell customers that they are buying an updated car! We all spoke so much about VW’s MQB platform and its Indian derivative etc. In my view, the new VW and Skodas feel more Korean and Japanese than the erstwhile Polos and Rapids.

So Tata spoke about some platform gibberish, that’s marketing! They are not advertising that its a 5 star safety car and delivering a 3 star car, are they?

Please do read the last sentence of my second point of the first post, which is in bold. I did reiterate that it does not matter to the end customer, and that it is a non-issue. Regarding platforms being marketed as all-new, I don't think it is purely a marketing exercise.

Originally Posted by motorworks

Hyundai showcased the new Creta with an elephant standing over as a representative of its supposed build quality, and yet were not bold enough to send it to the GNCAP or even BNCAP.

Wasn't that the 2020 Creta? But still, I'll agree with you on this point. (By the way, didn't Hyundai receive criticism too for the Creta's GNCAP rating?)

Originally Posted by motorworks

Secondly, whats wrong in the Nexon and the Curvv having similar interiors? Isn’t that cost optimisation? Don’t all manufacturers do it, especially when the cars are in adjacent segments? Its not like the nexon and the Curvv are 20 lakhs apart.

To each their own sir. If you don't have a problem with it, good for you. My point is, if none of the mid-size crossovers have the same interiors (I'm not even talking about interior part-sharing) as their sub-4m crossover counterparts, I see no reason why the Curvv should. If the customer's expectation level stoops low, OEMs can get away with whatever they want!

However, about cost optimisation - it seems you have missed this point:

- Okay, we have established that the Curvv has a lot in common with the Nexon, so one would naturally expect it to be competitively priced, right? Well, competitively priced relative to the competition it is, but well-priced? I don’t think so. I think we can all agree that the pricing of the higher variants is steep, especially when compared to the Nexon. There is no reflection of the “cost-saving”, so to speak, on the prices. Between the Curvv and the Nexon, there is a price difference of about 2 lakhs between their comparable variants with the Revotron engine + MT combo. Their respective top spec variants with the Revotron DCT powertrain also have a ~2 lakh delta between them, and their top spec diesel MT variants are priced a whopping 3.6 lakhs apart! (all prices OTR Mumbai). You are basically paying that additional money over the Nexon for the features, boot and… the coupé design? To give you some more perspective, the top-spec 7-seater variants of the Safari and Alcazar are priced around 1 lakh more than the fully loaded Harrier and Creta respectively. The base versions of the Harrier and Safari are separated by a mere Rs. 50,000 (ex-sh)! Go figure.

Originally Posted by motorworks

But we seem to be too quick to jump the gun when its Tata. Initially there was criticism that Indian manufacturers do not match the koreans in features, now thats more or less taken care of. I dont think Tata and Mahindra are any less now. Secondly we asked for DCT gearboxes. Tata has sort of democratised DCA ( i agree its not as quick as VW’s DCT ).

Agreed on your point about features and DCT gearbox. But: I took efforts to write this thread in as much detail as possible, and I went the extra mile to make sure that along with opinions, I got my facts right. That is precisely why I visited a dealership for a first-hand experience of the Curvv - to verify my opinions. I would like you to understand, sir, that I have taken utmost care to make sure that my post is well-researched. Therefore, I don't think it is fair to say that I've jumped the gun. It took you 1 minute to type that, but it took me 1 month to compile this thread!

Originally Posted by motorworks

I have had two Hyundais ( 1st Gen Creta and 2nd gen Elite i20) in the past, switched to Jeep Compass in 2022 and a 2024 Tata Nexon DCA. When i was about to buy the Nexon for my wife earlier this year, we test drove the Venue and the Sonet too. The Sonet felt very similar to our earlier i20 ( 2nd gen ). The car just did not have the build quality, ride and composure. The Nexon felt better in every way. And guess what, it beat the Sonet in features too. Yes, i would any day agree that Tata has to improve their fit and finish, and as customers we all have the right to expect better and also criticise when there is an issue. But im getting a feeling that we are being a bit more lenient with the Hyundais and the Kias of the world while looking at Tata with a microscope.

Congratulations on the Nexon! It is a great car, no doubt.

Every manufacturer is under the Team-BHP microscope sir. No one will get away if they've done something wrong. Without constructive criticism, no one will try to evolve and do better. In fact, the Dzire would never have scored a 5-star safety rating had Maruti not faced the intense backlash that they did. All the constructive criticism is an effort to see Tata - or any other OEM for that matter - do their best.

I partly understand where your frustration is coming from - keyboard warriors who criticise for the sake of it. However, I don't think I deserved the criticism as I'm not a keyboard warrior .

Please don't take any offence. Peace

[Carma2017]

I think people are not reading the heading of this thread and then using a "reels" or a "Shorts" type approach to reading the entire lead post before commenting. It is a well compiled monologue where the author has expressed his opinions. And yes, I agree. Curvv is not ahead of the curve.

It's a well put together vehicle using design commonization and iterative improvements that Japs would be proud of. But then Japs were never known for a big leap. That is where the Curvv suffers. It's a step up but the layout and packaging and the parts quality do not do justice to the styling leap TATA took. It's a Coupe SUV - a rarified segment where only elite players exist. But, there is nothing elite about this Car. Safety ratings are anyways non sense and irrelevant and most customers do not care much except for certain urban centres.

[Geta]

I feel the main grievance of the threadstarter is Curvv's price delta over Nexon. The other design flaws/ not-so-tasteful design elements are just secondary.

Disclaimer:
1) I am never a fan of a "coupe" design for a sub 4.4 meter 4 door 5-seater with a high ground clearance. It just doesn't make any sense from whichever perspective.
2) I find Tata's steering wheel design very weird. I can't believe people actually like this design. I don't think this design will age well.
3) Nexon was a very ugly "Indica on steroids" when it was launched and over the years, it's design matured and 2024 Nexon is actually a good looking car. So a 2024 Nexon with a boot is not something which will not appeal to buyers. So no need to thrust a "coupe" design, weird steering wheel design etc, into this package.

The elephant in the room: Sub-4 meter rule. All major auto makers (Maruti, Hyundai, Mahindra, Tata, Kia etc) know that the ex showroom cost is going to go through the roof when they launch an extended version of their sub-4-meter car, thanks to the higher GST. Hence they try to differentiate the longer sibling as much as they can (with bigger engines, hybrid technology, panoramic sunroof, ventilated seats, design differenciation etc) to justify the Rs 2 lakh premium (which is the industry standard). Tata too has done the same, except that they have probably chosen to differentiate only on the design front and not on the technology front, and this has apparently not worked well with many buyers.

Adding a panoramic sunroof to Nexon (in a bid to hold its forte against XUV3XO) within 1-2 months of launching the Curvv is also not helping the Curvv's cause, as Nexon now offers more for less in comparison to Curvv.

[Sebring]

The Tata Curvv is a better Nexon, period. Strategically I felt Tata Motors would kill the Nexon brand if Curvv sales had taken off.

BTW, Does the Tata Curvv Diesel Automatic exist? Dealers shy away from the topic. I haven't heard of any test drives being offered, nor of any ownership. Is it a myth?

[tungiunds]

Originally Posted by Sebring

The Tata Curvv is a better Nexon, period. Strategically I felt Tata Motors would kill the Nexon brand if Curvv sales had taken off.

BTW, Does the Tata Curvv Diesel Automatic exist? Dealers shy away from the topic. I haven't heard of any test drives being offered, nor of any ownership. Is it a myth?

Judging by the fact that there is almost no information and a definite answer to this question too, then there is a high probability that there are none.

[Shreyans_Jain]

The only issue with the Curvv is its price, the difference over Nexon. Especially on the higher variants. Otherwise, it’s a mighty fine product. It has garnered attention and brought something different into the crossover segment in a way the Elevate never could. For starters, I like the design. Could the car have been made better? Yeah, better engines never hurt anyone. Especially when you want to position against Hyundai’s class leading 1.5 TGDi. But then again, Curvv’s petrol engines are more than up to the task against the ones that actually sell the most, the 1.5 NAs. The diesel Cruvv is perfectly competitive against Creta and Seltos diesels, and then there is the ace up the sleeve in the form of the brilliant EV. If I were to buy a car in the 18-22L rupee range today, I’ll pick the 55kwh top end Curvv EV.

Originally Posted by Geta

I feel the main grievance of the threadstarter is Curvv's price delta over Nexon. The other design flaws/ not-so-tasteful design elements are just secondary.

👍🏻

[GTO]

I spent a couple of days with the Tata Curvv and LOVED it. On-paper specs are one thing, but to experience & live with the car is entirely another. The Currv feels like a properly premium car with a great all-round experience for the driver. Now has the DCT, good motors (take your pick from electric or petrol or diesel), European-car like suspension, European-car like stability, European-car like solid build (drives like a tank), nice interiors and it is well-equipped.

Yes, it has downsides, but which car doesn't? Even the latest-gen S-Class has a long list. For me, the biggest cons of the Currv are its rear seat space & headroom, and Tata's niggles. But other than that, it is a fabulous machine. Yes, it is premium-priced, but IMHO it is also a premium car. That being said, I fully expect Tata to correct the pricing sooner or later.

The funky & unique styling is a bonus. I have never liked the Coupe-Crossovers from Mercedes & BMW, yet I loved the Currv's design.

[JunkyardHunter]

This is a really nice thread, and it sums up my aggravations with the Curvv very well. Old platform notwithstanding, the Curvv really needed some more differentiation from the Nexon, at least in the interiors. After sitting in the showroom with the ICE and EV Curvv, I agree with GTO. However, when compared with the Nexon (which is from a different segment, mind you), I walked away feeling confused. Problem? It was too similar.

Of course, there will still be people buying it for what it is, not what it's compared to. However, just sharing my 2 cents.

[07CR]

Very well compiled article. IMO Curvv is currently the weakest car in the entire 4.3 metre segment.

Except a potentially good/unique design (considering its subjective), I don't see any point going for Curvv.

Does it have the most premium interiors? No, the Koreans do.
Does it have the most spacious interiors? No, infact the least spacious interior and this is a shocker considering its a TATA.
Is it the most comfortable car? Easily not due to the cramped rear (low headroom and high floor).
Does it have the best performing engine? No, the Koreans and Germans do.
Does it have the best NVH? No, again the Koreans do it. Even MG's Astor has fabulous NVH.
Does it have the most feature loaded cabin? It comes close, but Seltos wins this one.
Does it have the best gearboxes? On paper it has DCT but the European/Korean implementation is far better. Heck their ATs are better than this DCT.

Then there are the infamous Tata Niggles and horrifying after sales.

Also the Nexon itself is a better product than Curvv considering overall comfort offered by the car.

Curvv has a very very niche target customer who would only want to standout with the Coupe design and is only a front seat user. I feel after initial few months this car would flop.