[Zen2001]

Note from Support - Please do not post one liners that do not add value to the discussion. Thank You

[eyesice]

Suzuki’s new 1.5 litre diesel engine likely to debut in Ertiga - See more at: http://indianexpress.com/article/aut....RvJPJYNM.dpuf

Once this becomes available, I will consider the Ciaz. Nice looking car though

[cpbopanna]

Originally Posted by RSM_TorqueZoner

Saw the car in flesh today morning! All I cribbed about all the way before seeing the car in person was the engine being a 1.3 pot. But now, I don't think I would have bought it even if they had plonked the 1.6. I'm not by any yardstick trying to say that CIAZ is a bad car, it is a good car for the mass majority out there. But for me, it just did not appeal at all. 4 points I cannot live with -

• Just couldn't find "THE" perfect driving position. Badly missed reach adjust.
• Under-thigh support in real short supply at rear. Honda City or Vento/ Rapid any day more comfortable.
• Flimsy build quality, at par with the city but incomparable to Europeans.
• And from the reviews, uninspiring 1.3 with average handling

So, I walked back from the showroom a happy man. The decision was made, its not the car for me.

I have been using an SX4 Diesel for the past 3 years and would like to share my experience as follows:

1) The best rear seats this side of 10 lakhs, fantastic thigh support, movable rear neck-restraints, you literally sink into the seat. If you have a chauffeur, travelling in an SX4 is pure bliss!
2) Heavy-car feel (almost 100 kg more than the Ciaz), good handling, average ride
3) Easy to obtain ideal driving position, very comfortable for long-distance drives - I have covered up to 700 km in a day!
4) Yes, the turbo lag is evident initially, but once you are used to the engine and manage to keep it on the boil (do not attempt to lug around in a higher gear, down-shift instead), the car is a work horse
5) SUV like clearance at 180 mm, yes, equal to that of a Scorpio!
6) The car with the large 205/60 R16 tyres (I run on Bridgestone Potenzas) holds on to the road like a leech, come rain or shine!
7) Last but not the least, a minimum mileage of 15 kmpl, in whatever manner the vehicle is driven. The best I have obtained is 18kmpl.

And yes, I intend to use my SX4 for at least another 3 years, and when I upgrade, it will be an S-Cross, not a Ciaz.
Hopefully, it will have a Fiat 1.5 L engine by then!

Alas, the men have gone back

Cheers!

[RSM_TorqueZoner]

Originally Posted by cpbopanna

I have been using an SX4 Diesel for the past 3 years and would like to share my experience as follows:

1) The best rear seats this side of 10 lakhs, fantastic thigh support, movable rear neck-restraints, you literally sink into the seat. If you have a chauffeur, travelling in an SX4 is pure bliss!
2) Heavy-car feel (almost 100 kg more than the Ciaz), good handling, average ride
3) Easy to obtain ideal driving position, very comfortable for long-distance drives - I have covered up to 700 km in a day!
4) Yes, the turbo lag is evident initially, but once you are used to the engine and manage to keep it on the boil (do not attempt to lug around in a higher gear, down-shift instead), the car is a work horse
5) SUV like clearance at 180 mm, yes, equal to that of a Scorpio!
6) The car with the large 205/60 R16 tyres (I run on Bridgestone Potenzas) holds on to the road like a leech, come rain or shine!
7) Last but not the least, a minimum mileage of 15 kmpl, in whatever manner the vehicle is driven. The best I have obtained is 18kmpl.

And yes, I intend to use my SX4 for at least another 3 years, and when I upgrade, it will be an S-Cross, not a Ciaz.
Hopefully, it will have a Fiat 1.5 L engine by then!

Alas, the men have gone back

Cheers!

I havn't driven the SX4 for long, but from whatever little experience I have had, it was definitely a much more comfortable car from a seating perspective - both rear and front. The legroom is much more in the CIAZ, but its useless when they have screwed up the basics (read under-thigh support and headroom).

[Keralite]

I am driving SX4 ZDI for the past 2 years. Clocked 40K kms. 4 long trips. And let me say folks, I never felt it's engine underpowered!

It's unfortunate, those who do not have driving experiance in this car term it as underpowered just by looking at the cc figure. you can easily touch 180 in this car, and it is still rock solid in that speed. I had several cases of panic breaking at a speed of 140, all the time it stopped where I wanted.

Yes, initial turbo lag is there, but then which car doesn't have some or the other minus points.

I think, considering the drop in kerb weight of Ciaz compare to SX4, it should perform better than SX4.

Guys, whoever aspire Ciaz to be your next car, don't disappoint looking at the opinions spreaded all over the media that the car has an underpowered engine. You buy any car, but this is my opinion who is completely satisfied with SX4.

[bhaskaracs]

Originally Posted by Nilesh5417

Was the "+" variant with touchscreen, leather interiors and some chrome so important for you? Otherwise the ZXI(O) has everything going for it that you would want.
Not that XUV is a bad choice.

The difference between + and O is only the touchscreen. + is an independent variant, while O is an upgrade on offer. Further, my SA told me both O and + will be launched simultaneously few 'months' from now. I am considering booking cancellation for my ZXI AT for a Vento TSI.

[audioholic]

Drove both petrol and diesel cars today. Both petrol and diesel engines were peppy with me and SA in the car. The gear ratios are also well spread in either engines. Overall impressions, coming from an SX4, Dzire and WagonR owner:

• Interiors look 'good' compared to the SX4 and the design is very detailed compared to the dull interiors of SX4.
• Instrument panel, switches etc are similar to Dzire and miles ahead of SX4. Audio is again similar to the Swift Z audio and only the fascia is changed to fit the interiors of the Ciaz.
• Technically, this is a far more advanced maruti and they deserve complete appreciation for coming out of hibernation and adding features like auto dimming IRVM, Keyless entry and go, Bluetooth etc which were nowhere in MSILs product portfolio. Guess they learnt stuff from the Kizashi.
  
• Engines are butter smooth in the Ciaz and it isnt felt at idle at all, whereas in the SX4 we can hear a slight thrum of the motor.
• Of course, the fuel efficiency aspect is amazing in the Ciaz. I thought my Dzires MID was crazy in displaying 19kmpl average in the petrol, but the Ciaz was much crazier Even if we keep a 2kmpl exaggeration by the MID, the Ciaz will offer very good FE.
• Clutch is very light in either engines. Not even a new SX4 had such a light clutch. However I would rate the Dzires gearshift to be better than both the other cars.

Where the Ciaz lags:

• Though space is lots, the seats arent so comfortable. Both front seats and back seats arent that supportive. In my SX4, both front and back seats give a hug.
• Load the car with people, and all the performance figures and numbers die down, which brings out the small engine issue in both petrol and diesel. The torque advantage offered by the diesel makes things better than the petrol.
• One feeling that I get in the Dzire and Ciaz is it doesnt give me that secure feel when I sit inside the SX4. The drive also isnt that confidence inspiring due to the lesser weight.
• I have had multiple low speed bumps in my SX4 where the bumper didnt even take a scratch, but I guess in the Ciaz the body panels will take a beating easily. They reduced the bumper extension and used the space to give bigger interior space.
  

Originally Posted by cpbopanna

1) The best rear seats this side of 10 lakhs, fantastic thigh support, movable rear neck-restraints, you literally sink into the seat. If you have a chauffeur, travelling in an SX4 is pure bliss!
2) Heavy-car feel (almost 100 kg more than the Ciaz), good handling, average ride
3) Easy to obtain ideal driving position, very comfortable for long-distance drives - I have covered up to 700 km in a day!

5) SUV like clearance at 180 mm, yes, equal to that of a Scorpio!
6) The car with the large 205/60 R16 tyres (I run on Bridgestone Potenzas) holds on to the road like a leech, come rain or shine!

Completely agree. Apart from space and features, I didnt find the other boxes ticking for the Ciaz. These holidays we did a 1400km trip in four days and that convinced me not to sell this car for a Ciaz, which I had earlier set my mind upon. On the last day, I did a continuous 250+200km drive and still had no complaints. Even in the worst roads of the western ghats, my beast took it all without throwing tantrums.

Originally Posted by cpbopanna

And yes, I intend to use my SX4 for at least another 3 years, and when I upgrade, it will be an S-Cross, not a Ciaz.
Hopefully, it will have a Fiat 1.5 L engine by then!

Exactly. IMO, the justifiable replacement for the SX4 is the S-Cross and not the Ciaz. The Ciaz is more like a bigger Dzire with a better kit. The S-Cross on the other hand is on a different platform, bigger engine, much more kit.

If not being an enthusiast, will I buy a Ciaz? Yes - Six years with the SX4, I can vouch for reliablity, peace of mind and the meagre maintenance that the cars require. End of the day, that is what many would prefer from the Ciaz than outright performance, handling etc etc. Apart from annual maintenance, my cars have never gone to the ASC for any other job. And I can forget all the negatives for this chunk of advantage.

If people think that people buy whatever Maruti offers, that isnt true. One happy customer > More prospective customers which makes their cars sell. Take the case with Skoda - One unhappy customer > Lesser prospective customers. There are already good number of bookings pouring in, which will inturn draw in more customers.

[arun_josie]

Here is the on-road price list for bangalore which I received from MASS. The price difference is huge when compared with the delhi pricing.. The difference in ex showroom price itself is 40K for the top end diesel model

Note: In the below list, the Road tax/Registration fee values are interchanged by mistake.

[Carpainter]

I got the chance to see the car yesterday at a nearby showroom. Couldn't have a test drive as the showroom was not fully functional as it was a local holiday.

Few things I observed:

1. The quality of material used is superior to that of any other maruti cars below 10lakh price bracket.

2. The car is a bit too long for my liking. Specially without much crease on the doors it looks a bit bland.

3. Has ample rear legroom and will be a good family sedan for elderly people.

4. The most noticeable thing I saw in that car is that the center console panel is tilted towards the front passenger instead of the driver i.e. unlike what is found in cars like Polo/Vento etc. where it is tilted towards the driver for easy access. Now even if we imagine that Maruti aimed this car to be chauffeur driven most of the time, this design flaw simply can not be tolerated. Atleast for us Bhpians who prefer the seat behind the steering wheel more than any other seat in any car.

[blacksport]

I kind of like the looks of the Ciaz, much more than the Honda City. City's chrome mustache is repulsive. Ciaz looks long, low slung and has cleaner lines.

But the engines and prices of the Ciaz are a let down. City has the better petrol engine. Diesels are evenly matched, but then the diesel days are numbered.

Also, I'd trust Honda reliability more than Maruti's perceived reliability.

In safety features, the City wins hands down.

At just 25-50K more, the City is a no-brainer. Sorry Maruti, you are not good enough yet for this segment.

Ciaz is gonna sell some in the first few months, then become a sales dud.

[ssateesh]

Originally Posted by blacksport

In safety features, the City wins hands down.

Can you please elaborate? As I understand both have same number of Airbags, ABS with EBD and similar build quality.

[SchumiFan]

Originally Posted by blacksport

Also, I'd trust Honda reliability more than Maruti's perceived reliability.

In safety features, the City wins hands down.

Ciaz is gonna sell some in the first few months, then become a sales dud.

Perceived reliability? Really? Do you know of any failures in the DDiS or the K12/K14 engines launched by Suzuki?

From my limited knowledge, K12 was one of the best petrol engines before the revised Kappa was launched by Hyundai. Still it is one of the best engines for a hatchback and the K14 based on similar technology cannot suddenly go wrong. It has been tried and tested in Ertiga as well without any issues I believe.

The DDiS has been going strong and has been giving the numbers for Maruti right from the time it was launched.

Without going too much off-topic, I don't see any reliability concerns as opposed to the brilliant but doubtful DSG from VAG.
VW's reluctance to announce a replacement policy for the tranny in case of a failure isn't helping as well.

[audioholic]

Originally Posted by blacksport

Also, I'd trust Honda reliability more than Maruti's perceived reliability.

In safety features, the City wins hands down.

At just 25-50K more, the City is a no-brainer. Sorry Maruti, you are not good enough yet for this segment.

Sorry. That cant be farther than reality. Its easier sitting on an armchair and making claims on which car is reliable and which car isnt. Based on a proven platform, there is less room for things to go wrong in the Ciaz. From an optimists point of view, one can trust a proven engine like the Fiat Multijet which has been here from seven years and still no complaints compared to the fresher, ie Hondas all Aluminium diesel engine. Same case with the K9K by renault. I asked a taxi driver why he brought a Sunny. He told engine saar engine. He didnt give a thought about anything else. It all depends upon the approach, and ones perception of a certain brand. Speaking about reliabilty, for the kind of abuse my SX4 has gone through, a City wouldnt have lasted till now given the kind of areas my car has been to. If you keep the car in conditions which arent challenging, yes they will definitely be more reliable than a maruti that has taken beating in the most rural areas

[Equus]

Originally Posted by blacksport

Also, I'd trust Honda reliability more than Maruti's perceived reliability.

Tell you what - my thoughts are that Honda is actually becoming like Maruti, and Maruti is actually giving us hints that it aspires to become like the erstwhile Honda and taking baby steps!

Discount the badge they wear and do a comparo--
Swift Vs Brio
Dzire Vs Amaze
Ertiga Vs Mobilio
Ciaz Vs City

I am not saying MSIL is all hunky dory. Not at all.
But Honda today is not the same as it was. They are milking their brand and their engines. Janta maaf nahi karegi

[extreme_torque]

Originally Posted by SchumiFan

Perceived reliability? Really? Do you know of any failures in the DDiS or the K12/K14 engines launched by Suzuki?

From my limited knowledge, K12 was one of the best petrol engines before the revised Kappa was launched by Hyundai. Still it is one of the best engines for a hatchback and the K14 based on similar technology cannot suddenly go wrong. It has been tried and tested in Ertiga as well without any issues I believe.

The DDiS has been going strong and has been giving the numbers for Maruti right from the time it was launched.

Without going too much off-topic, I don't see any reliability concerns as opposed to the brilliant but doubtful DSG from VAG.
VW's reluctance to announce a replacement policy for the tranny in case of a failure isn't helping as well.

Honda being more reliable does not make Maruti unreliable. If I had to chose, even I would trust Honda to be more reliable than Suzuki. The durability of the big two Japanese - Toyota and Honda is astonishing.