[DCEite]

Had a close look at the 3XO in one of the neighbourhood showrooms.

Some quick observations where I was let down by this otherwise decent car:


1. The front driver and co-driver footwell is cramped. Yes, even when compared to a hatchback like WagonR/Grand i10/Ignis et al, there is no space besides the clutch pedal to rest your foot on and in the AT version, the angle of your foot will not be at a comfortable position during long drives. This is somewhat similar to the Thar's front legroom for the left foot. A Big letdown for someone with tall legs.

2. Lack of paddle shifters is a big minus on this car, specially given the reviews we are getting of the car needing quicker downshifts in case of overtaking on highways as the Aisin AT gearbox is slow to respond to throttle inputs for quick downshifts.

3. The sound quality from the speakers were good, but no way as good as the Nexon's JBL 9 speaker setup as per experts. Again this is a big let down for me personally, as I am an audiophile.

4. Lack of seat ventilation is a big miss. Specially considering the car has panaromic sunroof and gets heated quickly outdoors.


Again, this is a car that I would not blindly book based on the reviews alone. I would suggest anyone looking to buy this to do an extensive test drive, evaluate the ergonomics, performance, driveability in your own day to day traffic conditions, and then only finalize.

[sapien]

Originally Posted by CARDEEP

No pictorial/ dimensions comparison of increased boot space. Mahindra claims 1.5 times increase in the same.

Other than the above, I believe Pratap Bose simply erred in designing the headlights in order to not let the world know that he got inspiration from Creta (penultimate model).

Originally Posted by ghodlur

The XUV 300 was a pocket rocket and failed miserably in the rear bench and the puny boot. If the dimension of the 3XO is same as 300 then how was the boot increased 1.5 times, where did that space come from ? Was the rear seating further compromised? If the dimensions have changed/increased for 3XO, will the previous 5 star safety rating still apply for the new model?

The team-bhp review has this mentioned in the interior section (2024 Mahindra XUV 3XO Review).

There was some discussion on the forum regarding an increase in the boot space. Well, Mahindra has lowered the floor by using a 135/90 R16 space saver spare tyre instead of a full-size spare which might have added some litres to the number. However, it's still a small boot. Boot space according to the brochure is 364 litres, but that's as per the ISO V215 measuring method and the XUV 3XO's boot space is calculated from the boot floor to the roof. For reference, the 2023 Tata Nexon's boot space is 382 litres (as per ISO V215). If calculated from the boot floor to the top part of the backrest, the XUV 3XO's boot space is 295 litres (as per ISO V211). Note that you don't get a parcel tray:

The dimensions haven't changed mechanically, just some cosmetic upgrades, so 5 star rating should hold true - that was tested with older GNCAP standards, but with addition of active safety features like ADAS etc its likely to get a good score if tested again with newer standards.

[Breathe2drive]

XUV 300 Petrol was not particularly known for its fuel efficiency. 2 of my friends own the petrol manual and both have reported single digit FE in city drives. I'm interested in TGDI automatic, but I'm skeptical about FE. Please give me some idea, how thirsty the TGDI AT would be. Earlier, I was considering Kushaq 1.5 manual as I was blown away when I did the TD. As we have already heard so many horror stories about DSG's reliability, I want to stay away from it. However I have decided to get an automatic for the sheer conveniece it offers. So mainly my choices boil down to Kushaq 1.0 AT, 3XO TGDI AT, or GV/Hyrider AT.

Kushaq owners have reported many niggles like AC effectivness, ASS, and I'm also aware of poor resale value. Also, I can wait for the new sub 4m CSUV, which is going to be launched next year, but scared to take the risk of buying a new model, as 1st GEN Kushaq had many problems.

My priorities are safety and performance, and I don't mind the small boot space of 3XO, but I'm very impressed with the rear seat space it offers, which can easily accomodate 3, whereas Kushaq is best for 2 adults and a child.

I own a 4th generation City(the reason why rear seat space matters) and didn't like the NVH levels of Elevate. Though the NVH of Hyrider hybrid is also not great, its Superb FE compensates for that. But as taxes can reduce for hybrids in the future, I'm not ready to take the bet. Also, if taxes are reduced within next 10-12 months, I'm ready to wait for it, but we don't have any idea as to whether, when, or how much reduction would be offered.

I'm avoiding Hyundai & Kia for their poor safety ratings.
I'm not a big fan of Nexon.

GV & Hyrider mild hybrid engine is not exciting, though I've also considered them for the peace of mind ASS, resale value and frugal engine. My running is around 15,000 km per year.

[condor]

Nice review of the top end petrol version, with pics of some of the available shades. However, without any details of the MPFI or the diesel versions, this looks like a selected review - something like Mahindra pushing its top variant. I hope the review team will also soon review the other two version in a similar detailed way. And a little more coverage of the non-Luxury variants. Not everyone will take the Luxury variants, and not everyone will take the AX7.

I was earlier looking at the specs and the 364 litre boot looked good, but as the review pointed out, it's still quite small at 295 actuals. I also didnt find the colors attractive.

The price chart uses ** to show prices of the AT variants - these numbers could have been added directly to the table instead of in the notes below.

[lightfootdriver]

Went to see the 3XO today at Anant Cars on ORR. They had blue MX3 Pro and white AX5 on display. Honestly I didn't find the exteriors too funky. White looks weird though with all the plastics claddings around (or whatever they're called).

Interestingly, the dealership is quoting 3-9 months waiting already. :-/
*Mx1 9 months*
*Mx 2 3 pro 3 months*
*Ax5 L5 6 months*
*Ax7 L 7 months*

Another thing I noticed is the official accessories list doesn't mention dashcam. The SA wasn't well aware of how to install it due to presence of just 1 charging port in lower variants. Given dashcam is a necessity these days, I have requested SA to get back to me on this. Attaching accessories list for your reference here.

The SA also says AX5L and 7L will store 7 days of data by default from front cameras. I guess I'll still have to install dashcam for rear view recording. Is anyone aware how ADAS camera based front recordings work on Mahindra cars?

[07CR]

I was comparing the XUV 1.2 TGDI with Sonet and here is what I found.

In terms of pure acceleration, the 0-100 numbers of Sonet are way better despite the power and torque advantage with XUV. I guess it's due to the faster DCT vs the slower AT.
Would be interesting to see their roll on figures.




In terms of features, the Sonet still has better equipment as shown below. However, it will depend on personal choices as some would prefer a bigger sunroof but would let of some other features just for that one thing. Same is true for ventilated seats. I would like a mix of both, wherein the ventilated seats, EPB with Auto Hold, rear sun shades, remote start stop with Key, and bigger sunroof take the cake over other features.


Coming to the interior space, the Sonet is good only for 4 full size adults. The XUV is much better for 5 full size adults. However, the boot size of Sonet in comparison to XUV is cavernous with a much better shape as well.

The interior fit and finish along with the execution of features, the Kia remains better with crisper screen response with absolute 0 lag. The same isn't true with Mahindra as there exist a slight delay with both MID and touchscreen.

In terms of niggles, there have already been a few niggles reported in few reviews wherein the blindspot monitor of XUV had gone kaput as seen below. With the already bad reputation of Mahindra with respect to niggles, we could definitely expect a bit more niggles than the Sonet. Kia has had relatively seldom niggles being reported. That said, I am quite sure the niggles in Mahindra won't be as severe or frequent as seen in new Nexon's.



For people who care about the NCAP ratings, the previous XUV was a 5 star rated car and the new one would surely aim to better that score, whereas the Sonet hasn't yet been rated.

The ride quality of XUV has been raved and rated highly. The Sonet's ride has been improved greatly with the facelift. If someone from Mods who has driven both, could comment on this, it would be great.

The steering feedback for the Sonet has been much better while the XUV's steering feel and feedback has been criticized severely in multiple reviews. This is despite fiddling with the multiple steering modes.

Few qualms I noticed with XUV- There could have been a separate button for drive modes rather than integrating them in touchscreen. Considering the lag, this could cause a serious safety issue while changing the same on the fly. The spare wheel size is dangerously low for increasing boot space just by few litres. Absence of parcel tray to make the boot appear larger is another con for me, considering I do keep small items on parcel tray.

The XUV AX 7 L AT is priced at 18.39L OTR Pune, while Sonet X Line DCT undercuts it at 17.31L.

Considering all above points, I believe the Sonet to be the better all rounder, while XUV is the new no.2 ahead of the Nexon. Nexon fails terribly due to incessant niggles and issues as well as horribly tuned turbo petrol and DCA.

Hope this mini comparo helps.

[Hattrick]

Mahindra 3X0 looks good mechanically and also on features, however, where does it stand for the overall quality and after-sales when compared with the Hyundais or the KIAs? Is it worth considering 3XO (AX5 variant) over Venue (S Optional Turbo) for the hassle-free ownership experience?

Any thoughts?

[pseudo_coder]

Originally Posted by 07CR

I was comparing the XUV 1.2 TGDI with Sonet and here is what I found.
...
The XUV AX 7 L AT is priced at 18.39L OTR Pune, while Sonet X Line DCT undercuts it at 17.31L.

Considering all above points, I believe the Sonet to be the better all rounder, while XUV is the new no.2 ahead of the Nexon. Nexon fails terribly due to incessant niggles and issues as well as horribly tuned turbo petrol and DCA.

I think AX7 and especially AX7L are not VFM. AX5 at around 13 lakh on road is a fantastic value.

[dipen]

Originally Posted by Breathe2drive

XUV 300 Petrol was not particularly known for its fuel efficiency. 2 of my friends own the petrol manual and both have reported single digit FE in city drives. I'm interested in TGDI automatic, but I'm skeptical about FE. Please give me some idea, how thirsty the TGDI AT would be. Earlier, I was considering Kushaq 1.5 manual as I was blown away when I did the TD. As we have already heard so many horror stories about DSG's reliability, I want to stay away from it. However I have decided to get an automatic for the sheer conveniece it offers. So mainly my choices boil down to Kushaq 1.0 AT, 3XO TGDI AT, or GV/Hyrider AT.

Kushaq owners have reported many niggles like AC effectivness, ASS, and I'm also aware of poor resale value. Also, I can wait for the new sub 4m CSUV, which is going to be launched next year, but scared to take the risk of buying a new model, as 1st GEN Kushaq had many problems.

For comparison, Baleno with ~ 900 kgs delivers 22.xx FE. 3XO with ~ 1300+ kgs will definitely deliver 25 % lesser FE with a turbo. So do the math and accept the fact should you decide to move ahead. Most SUV ATs with turbo petrol return single digit pure city FE with AC.

Where the 3XO scores the most beyond good safety is the ride quality over urban broken roads (re-tar'ed roads, cement blocks, joints on bridges, uneven surfaces) where it glides over much better than everything upto 4.3 meters. Do a test drive.

The 3XO rear legroom is decent by 4 meter suv standards, but the view for the rear passenger is severely restricted. For 6 feet tall driver, the distance between the eyes of rear passenger and front seat headrest is just 1.5 feet at best. Try it during test drive to understand this better. Plus the high window line also restricts the vision to outside. Kushaq provides the best legroom and best comfort for 4 under 4.3 meter (Creta too is cramped behind). Kushaq gets a really nice view due to a long rear window glass. The rear bucket seats have an altogether different experience. The Creta rear seat is way too flat. 3XO seat curves are ok but seat foam seems way too soft. Not sure how well they would last and feel during long drives.

One might be surprised but the 1.0 is (or feels) actually quicker off the line/drag in MT (maybe upto 20 - 25 kmph), its actually during in-gear where the 1.5 takes over like a beast. The 1.5 TSI is honestly feels a little bit overhyped. Its not the most super-fun motor. Its not bad but the 1.0 is a more killer motor. 1.5 has a hard clutch and is not just as free revving like the 1.0. Its just that its fast. The 1.0 TSI is slightly more flickable comparatively as well (lesser weight at the front). The Korean twins are no way inferior to the 1.5 TSI and maybe even slightly better. The AT gear boxes are more fun in VAG though.

[vaibhav_one]

Visited a Mahindra showroom to have a look at the 3XO as a potential first car ever for someone who is learning how to drive. Have elderly parents, thus looking at a raised car v/s a sedan/hatchback.

Wanted to check out the MX2 Pro AT variant. But the MX3 Pro manual was available for display.

The build quality of the car felt very solid. Doors had a nice thud. The car felt very roomy and I found the rear legroom to be good. Don't know if it is just me, but I found the under thigh support in the rear seat to be a bit less compared to the Brezza which I saw in a nearby showroom, and the distance between the top of the seat and the floor also seemed to be a bit less than the Brezza. Thus, I (height of 5 feet 9 inches) had to stretch my legs a bit to get a comfortable seating position on the rear seat.

Am now confused whether to go for XUV 3xo MX2 Pro AT or Brezza VXI AT (relative cost between the two not being a factor). For a new driver with 95% running in Delhi NCR itself, the NA engine of the Brezza with linear power delivery looks like a better option on paper. Plan is to keep the car for more than 10 years.

Request thoughts and advice of esteemed members.

[07CR]

Came across this video by a popular youtuber. ADAS doesn't seem to be tuned that well.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CbG99aS7C0s&t=0s

[OpenRoads]

Originally Posted by Bhokal

It is still one chink in its armour in an otherwise brilliant package.

Mahindra has upped their game with 3XO. A punchy engine with smooth 6 speed automatic TC transmission and Level2 ADAS is pretty much a winning combination. In my opinion they have even outdone the Koreans with this package in the same segment. The only thing Mahindra needs to overcome is poor after sales service which might be the only thing which is holding them back.

In Petrol/Automatic sub 4m segment 3XO now sits above Nexon, Venue, Seltos and Brezza. Great job Mahindra

[Draunzer21]

Originally Posted by vaibhav_one

Am now confused whether to go for XUV 3xo MX2 Pro AT or Brezza VXI AT (relative cost between the two not being a factor). For a new driver with 95% running in Delhi NCR itself. Plan is to keep the car for more than 10 years.

Request thoughts and advice of esteemed members.

3XO looks very good but it still is very new car as compared to Brezza. With someone who is first time buyer and wants to keep the car for 10 years, I would say go for Brezza. Maruti's after sales service and dealer network is good + Brezza is a trusted vehicle. Service is not cheaper at Maruti but that is not something you would be bothered of. My friend has it and it is pretty good car in the sub-4m segment.

[Cresterk]

Originally Posted by AYP

The design of the 3XO makes the 3OO look quite subtle, which I found too a bit too loud for my liking back in the day. Also, is it only me or does the XUV 3OO's interior look more premium and substantial? It seems to have a better sense of occasion than the 3XO's interior.

Attachment 2601679

I know beauty is in the eye of the beholder and all but in what way does it look more premium? As far as I can tell the interior atleast is a massive improvement. Exterior is questionable.

[condor]

Originally Posted by 07CR

The XUV AX 7 L AT is priced at 18.39L OTR Pune, while Sonet X Line DCT undercuts it at 17.31L.

Isnt the Petrol AX7 a TC auto compared the Sonet's DCT - a relatively more reliable AT box ?

Note - We have had a TC for a long time, but not a DCT