[Guna]

@rehaan, shankar and others who have done the TD
There was much debate about the 'electronic differential lock' which is supposed to be present on Yeti. The question was, whether this differential lock can be controlled by the driver using a button or is this completely decided by the system depending on the road condition or is this one of the many things that gets triggered when you put the car to off-road mode.
Were you able to check this out?

[n.devdath]

Originally Posted by Guna

The question was, whether this differential lock can be controlled by the driver using a button or is this completely decided by the system depending on the road condition or is this one of the many things that gets triggered when you put the car to off-road mode.
Were you able to check this out?

It is system triggered like the other off road features IMHO.

[GTO]

Originally Posted by suhaas307

GTO and Rehaan, something doesn't quite add up here! If driving in a high gear at low RPM angers the Yeti, how does it manage to chug along at 1.8k RPM while doing 100 km/h?

You can't "lug" the Yeti engine, as you can with so many other diesels. Example : Say your speeds drop to 3 - 5 kph after a speed breaker, and you try to pull along in 2nd gear itself, the Yeti will stall. 6th gear at a 100 kph + 1,800 rpms is a completely different scenario. For one, the car has already gained sufficient momentum. Second, at 1,800, the turbo is spooling enough to provide boost.

Originally Posted by shankar.balan

My personal TD Impressions - as a regular joe consumer:

Excellent review, Shankar. Thanks for sharing.

[shankar.balan]

there is the OFF ROAD button which electronically controls anything and everything to do with the specialized needs. the vehicle intelligently senses which wheels need more power and feeds it accordingly.

under normal circumstances the power distribution is equal (25% each) to all the 4 wheels but it is capable of transferring upto 90% power to the rear wheels as per requirement in extreme slush, snow, water-logged scenarios etc.

frankly in the short in-city drive yesterday this is not at all evident. Nor does it feel overtly like there is power delivery happening simultaneously to all 4 wheels. We know it is there and we feel the better for it. This is a simple layman's point of view given my experience of yesterday.

While this is NOT a proper off-roader, it is more than capable of getting one out of trouble in snow, ice covered roads and/ or mud and slush covered areas like in our monsoons.

Originally Posted by Guna

@rehaan, shankar and others who have done the TD
There was much debate about the 'electronic differential lock' which is supposed to be present on Yeti. The question was, whether this differential lock can be controlled by the driver using a button or is this completely decided by the system depending on the road condition or is this one of the many things that gets triggered when you put the car to off-road mode.
Were you able to check this out?

[shankar.balan]

thanks GTO
yes I agree you cannot lug the engine. you HAVE to change to a lower gear and go on, else you will stall.

the turbo kicks in around 1800 rpm. While accelerating in second gear and when you let the revs go up just a bit before changing to third, you can actually feel the turbo kick in and push you back a bit in your seat. Nice reassuringly powerful feeling.

it is a nice torquey engine and while driving on highways while one is overtaking say a bus or truck, I think it will have more than enough juice from its 140 BHP to pull one out safely in front, well in time.

Originally Posted by GTO

You can't "lug" the Yeti engine, as you can with so many other diesels. Example : Say your speeds drop to 3 - 5 kph after a speed breaker, and you try to pull along in 2nd gear itself, the Yeti will stall. 6th gear at a 100 kph + 1,800 rpms is a completely different scenario. For one, the car has already gained sufficient momentum. Second, at 1,800, the turbo is spooling enough to provide boost.



Excellent review, Shankar. Thanks for sharing.

[ampere]

The car and bike show in NDTV says early 2011 we should see the Petrol version as well. So not sure if they would put in the same 1.8 TSI as we have in Laura.

[ajmat]

The Yeti comes in

12.TSI m/a 2wd
1.8 TSI m 2/4wd
2.0 CRD 110 m 2/4wd
2.0 crd 140 m/a 4wd
2.0 crd 170 m 4wd

[ampere]

Originally Posted by ajmat

The Yeti comes in

12.TSI m/a 2wd
1.8 TSI m 2/4wd
2.0 CRD 110 m 2/4wd
2.0 crd 140 m/a 4wd
2.0 crd 170 m 4wd

Great to hear that! Given the size, what do you thing of the 1.2 TSI?
The EUR spec says 105BHP for the 1.2TSI.

How is the engine performance for the 1.2?

[Sutripta]

Originally Posted by GTO

Not undermining the importance of ground clearance, yet will add that my Classic with its 175 mm of GC can go places that other UVs with 200+ mm of GC cannot. GC isn't the be all and end all of tackling rough roads.

Tried some soft-roading and the Yeti didn't scrape once (drove with an awful lot of caution though). On the other hand, we left with a smelly clutch.

Agreed there's more to jeepability than just GC. Like 80' WB and solid axles! Also I think in your case, the GC is determined by the diff pumpkin. GC is important in any vehicle with off road pretensions.

Nope, but the 6th gear still makes a lot of sense. I love the 6th ratio on my 220; makes for extremely relaxed expressway cruising & extends the tank range too. IIRC, the Yeti was ticking over at a lazy 1,800 rpm at 100 kph in 6th gear.

Does anyone know the max speeds/ corresponding rpms for each of the gears. Somehow I think that # of gears is becoming like the cheap digicam megapixels. Driven by marketing rather than function.

Regards
Sutripta

[suhaas307]

Originally Posted by GTO

You can't "lug" the Yeti engine, as you can with so many other diesels. Example : Say your speeds drop to 3 - 5 kph after a speed breaker, and you try to pull along in 2nd gear itself, the Yeti will stall. 6th gear at a 100 kph + 1,800 rpms is a completely different scenario. For one, the car has already gained sufficient momentum. Second, at 1,800, the turbo is spooling enough to provide boost.

It makes more sense now. Yes, that's due to the lack of bottom-end torque and probably altered gear-ratios. And given that it comes with a 6th cog, it should have the ability to cruise at modest speeds in the highest gear and sip fuel while at it.

Originally Posted by ampere

Great to hear that! Given the size, what do you thing of the 1.2 TSI?
The EUR spec says 105BHP for the 1.2TSI.

How is the engine performance for the 1.2?

The 1.2 TSI will be a good addition. And I'm guessing that it will be priced relatively lesser than it's diesel counterpart. However, Skoda will have to rethink their pricing-strategy if they are interested in selling an expensive car powered by a 1.2 liter motor. They will need to slash prices heavily and probably offer it only in one variant.

However, I seriously doubt Skoda will introduce the 1.2 TSI in the Yeti. They are looking to position the Yeti significantly higher and the 1.2 litre engine will not do justice to the car in that segment. Expect the 1.8 TSI from the Laura to make an appearance, probably in the first quarter of 2011.

[ampere]

Originally Posted by suhaas307

The 1.2 TSI will be a good addition. And I'm guessing that it will be priced relatively lesser than it's diesel counterpart. However, Skoda will have to rethink their pricing-strategy if they are interested in selling an expensive car powered by a 1.2 liter motor. They will need to slash prices heavily and probably offer it only in one variant.

However, I seriously doubt Skoda will introduce the 1.2 TSI in the Yeti. They are looking to position the Yeti significantly higher and the 1.2 litre engine will not do justice to the car in that segment. Expect the 1.8 TSI from the Laura to make an appearance, probably in the first quarter of 2011.

That is exactly my thought process. I have been maintaining my theory for a long time.

1. 1.2 TSI development for Yeti alone does not make sense. Skoda will do that only when they introduce sedan/hatch with that engine. (E.g Golf). Now that seems unlikely as they would rather consolidate there current position on Polo/Vento.

2. They have also maintained that TSI technology makes sense only for a vehicle which cost north of 10L. Golf comes in that territory (May be just round 10; A very very costly and powerful hatch)


3. Hence the 1.8 TSI seems the natural version for Yeti for the current situation. I was initially thinking if VW would have the Golf lined up for next year and would offer it in 1.2 TSI, maybe the 1.2 TSI Yeti would also be rolled out. But given the current VW scenario this does not seem possible.

[v.anand]

My thoughts about 1.2TSI engine in cars like Yeti or Golf is it just doesn't make sense due to high cost, low performance and low economies of scales.

The positioning of 1.2L engine in these large cars is as an entry level option in other markets, here that segment is generally non-existent for entry-premium cars.

After paying north of 15L for both these variants, one comes to expect performance rivaling a Civic rather than 1.6 Jetta, which as it should have been was a failure (Jetta diesel sells, not petrol). 1.2TSI suits Fabia and Polo to a T and not much else.

@ampere, I too would like to buy a Golf at 10 lacs but its not going to happen buddy. If anything, the price of Golf would be on par with Laura, Civic, Altis. It has never been in any country its sold in, and priced higher than Jetta in some. Also, looking at Polo prices currently, that could possibly cost 10 lacs on road if launched with TSI.

[NeedaUsername]

Originally Posted by shankar.balan

under normal circumstances the power distribution is equal (25% each) to all the 4 wheels but it is capable of transferring upto 90% power to the rear wheels as per requirement in extreme slush, snow, water-logged scenarios etc.
.

Under normal circumstances, the power distribution is 96% to the front wheels and 4% at the rear.

[Guna]

Originally Posted by shankar.balan

under normal circumstances the power distribution is equal (25% each) to all the 4 wheels but it is capable of transferring upto 90% power to the rear wheels as per requirement in extreme slush, snow, water-logged scenarios etc.

Originally Posted by NeedaUsername

Under normal circumstances, the power distribution is 96% to the front wheels and 4% at the rear.

Yes, under normal conditions it is mostly functioning like a front wheel drive with only 4% going to rear.
It is only when all four wheels are facing lack of traction, each one of them will receive 25% of the torque.
If the front two wheels loose traction, up to 90% of the torque can go to the rear wheels.
If 3 wheels start spinning, a single wheel (which has some traction) can receive up to 85% of the torque.

So, it is a reactive system which decides the splitting of the torque depending on the situation. I don't see 'differential lock' playing a role here.

[Sawyer]

Originally Posted by Guna

Yes, under normal conditions it is mostly functioning like a front wheel drive with only 4% going to rear.
It is only when all four wheels are facing lack of traction, each one of them will receive 25% of the torque.
If the front two wheels loose traction, up to 90% of the torque can go to the rear wheels.
If 3 wheels start spinning, a single wheel (which has some traction) can receive up to 85% of the torque.

So, it is a reactive system which decides the splitting of the torque depending on the situation. I don't see 'differential lock' playing a role here.

It is these kind of tricks that leads me to think that these are not genuine 4x4s. One of the good practices for the use of 4x4 is to be in it before you actually need it, before you get stuck. From what I have seen of these faux 4x4 systems till now, they kick in after the front wheels lose drive, start spinning, and then the power transfers to the rear axle, which means after the time that the 4x4 is needed. If the system was to anticipate a loss of traction and then shift the power around before that happens, now, that would be clever and effective, but I don't think that there is any such system yet. By distributing the power to all 4 wheels before any of them lose traction, the chances of this happening is also reduced, by reducing the torque to each wheel, that by itself reduces the chances of breaking traction. That is why the "simpler" systems on cars like the Pajero, where one can preselect the 4x4 mode manually, actually work better. Or, perhaps the kind of system that the X trail has, where there is a lock button that keeps the power going to both axles regardless of what is happening on the contact patches.
I had once seen a CRV making its way across a slushy, muddy patch and it was comic to see. The front wheels started to spin, that is when the power went to the rear wheels, which took the load, got the car moving forward, the front wheels stopped spinning, and as soon as that happened, all the power went to the front wheels again, which promptly started spinning again, for the entire cycle to repeat. The car made progress in fits and starts driven by these cycles, whereas the Pajero just cruised across smoothly in 4x4 locked mode. Not a GC issue, just poor road traction conditions. I am sure driving or being in that CRV must have been somewhat unnerving. Even more so if one was navigating a hill with steep drop offs.
So, here is the question - does the Yeti do the power transfer when it anticipates loss of traction, or after the event? And if the former, how does it do that?