[-xplora-]

Originally Posted by CrAzY dRiVeR

True. But there are some design elements that play a role as well. For example, the high belt line of the Creta compared to the BRV. Specially at the rear, the small glass area starting higher up gives the impression that Creta is taller / bulkier which it isn't.

That is standard with all C-SUVs, and even some hatchbacks. Decreasing the window areas and increasing the door line makes it instantly tall, butch and SUV like. Creta is exactly that. I like the airy cabin of the BR-V over Creta kind of faux taller look anyday.

One thing I would like to add to your review is that the paint job on Creta is better than BR-V. Not by miles but BR-Vs paint work is inferior especially comparing it to the likes of Linea.

[Karthik Chandra]

Excellent report CrAzY dRiVeR

Details that would help prospective buyers decide their choice.

Originally Posted by CrAzY dRiVeR

Although it appears as though the Creta is taller than the BR-V when viewed independently from the front, there is only a negligible difference between these two in terms of height! On paper, BR-V infact is taller with a height of 4453mm as compared to the 4270mm height of the Creta, but it should mostly be due to the taller roof rails.

You have mentioned the length by mistake, Height is 1630mm for Creta and 1666mm for BR-V

[CrAzY dRiVeR]

Originally Posted by niranjanprabhu

Sorry but this is not the height but the lengths of the respective vehicles

Originally Posted by Karthik Chandra

You have mentioned the length by mistake, Height is 1630mm for Creta and 1666mm for BR-V

Oops! Now it entered my brain. Effect of typing reports in the morning after working at night. Thanks for pointing it out.

Will request mods to make the necessary correction.

[Hvt77]

Awesome shoot-out guys! Thanks for taking all the efforts, in doing this, and then jotting things down so well!

One suggestion: when comparing the boot, a comparison of the loading height can also be added, i guess its lower for BR-V, so bit better than the Creta! (It can also be mentioned in the rear pic comparison, where the (difference in) loading lip-line is kind of visible.)

As -xplora- said to me: Try lifting a 30kg bag just 15 cm more than BR-V loading lip!!

[Waspune]

Great comparo guys

The Creta looks a lot more desirable, thanks to its European styling and interior quality, but I guess is let down by its on road dynamics and steering.

The BRV on the other hand looks more practical that provides more value, thanks to its 3rd row seating, a competent trust worthy petrol engine and the car like driving nature.

[SmartCat]

Originally Posted by Waspune

The Creta looks a lot more desirable, thanks to its European styling and interior quality, but I guess is let down by its on road dynamicsand steering.

I wouldn't say Creta has poor on road dynamics. I drove the Creta for around 20 kms on smooth winding roads like this at speeds of 40 to 80 kmph -



Creta holds on to the line without fuss or feeling nervous in the twisties. Obviously, I did not push it to the absolute understeer limit like auto journalists do .

But yeah, the steering will probably disappoint most Honda, Fiat, Renault Duster and Maruti owners. Creta has a high steering ratio - that is, you need to turn the steering more than you would in most cars - and that robs some driving pleasure. And yes, it is not very feelsome either.

However, do keep in mind that I used to drive Honda Civic and CrazyDriver drives the Fiat Punto. We might be influenced by this, and its possible that not everybody might feel this way.

The only other significant bit I don't like about the creta is the aggressive looks. However, the 1.4 diesel variant without the angry looking projector lamps look much better. And hey, no chrome either!






Otherwise, Creta diesel is a A+ package! The 1.6 diesel engine is a bit like a Rottweiler - needs to be kept on a leash.

[Waspune]

Originally Posted by smartcat

I wouldn't say Creta has poor on road dynamics. I drove the Creta for around 20 kms on smooth winding roads like this at speeds of 40 to 80 kmph -

Attachment 1533921

Creta holds on to the line without fuss or feeling nervous in the twisties. Obviously, I did not push it to the absolute understeer limit like auto journalists do .


Otherwise, Creta diesel is a A+ package! The 1.6 diesel engine is a bit like a Rottweiler - needs to be kept on a leash.

That's good to know . How would you compare the 1.6 in the Creta vs the one in S Cross (Fiat sourced) ?

[SmartCat]

I haven't driven the S-Cross, but I have extensively driven the Renault Duster AWD (pre-facelift). I have driven it for something like 600 kms when I borrowed it from my friend on a drive to Coorg.



My friend paid around Rs. 15.3 Lacs for the RxL AWD variant. Here are my thoughts about Renault Duster AWD, especially in comparison with the Honda BR-V CVT petrol and Hyundai Creta 1.6 Diesel MT -


LOOKS: To me, Duster is the best looking for all (compact or otherwise) SUVs in the Rs. 15 Lacs range. Unlike its competitors, it has no bad angles. It will look as good as it is now, even 5 or 10 years from now. Has the Fiat-like timeless design elements to it. One of the rare cases where chrome application is not garish.

BUILD QUALITY: Again, one of the few cars still around to have a solid build. I needed to use both my hands to lift up the rear hatch - it is that heavy. When you move around the doors and panels, you get the "money well spent" feeling - that is not there in the BR-V or to some extent, even the Creta. However, its not all roses here - panel gaps are huge, especially in the bonnet area.

INTERIORS: Duster AWD has the least impressive looking dashboard when compared to BR-V and Creta. Dashboard plastics feel low rent to touch too. However, the RxL variant had black reflective plastics in the gear console - which looked nice. One minor irritant was the speedometer! Since the markings are unconventional (10 30 50 70 90 110 etc), you will never know what speed you are doing with one glance!



FEATURES: The pre-facelift Duster AWD RxL variant was a spartan cave. No touchscreen HU - no reversing camera- no parking sensors - no front armrest (sounds familiar huh?), no automatic climate control, no keyless entry & go, but more importantly, no passenger airbag. But what you got for your money was the right to call yourself an owner of a SUV - it had 4WD system with AWD lock.

ENGINE/GEARBOX: Duster AWD's 110 BHP engine is extremely linear with very little turbo-lag. The SUV's quick too, but doesn't feel as quick as the Creta - possibly because you don't get that shove in the back like in Creta post 2000 RPM. If you change gears at the right time, you can make good progress though.

Duster AWD has excellent driveability in low speeds/city traffic. Definitely better than the Creta diesel, but obviously not as good as BRV CVT (being an automatic and all that). You really don't have to change gears much at city speeds in the Duster AWD. However, on the highways, I found the 5th gear to be a bit short and 6th gear not good enough to lug the car at any speeds below 60 kmph.

Basically, you have to constantly shift between 4th/5th/6th gear in medium to heavy traffic highways. I think Duster AWD has one gear too many.

RIDE + HANDLING + STEERING COMBO: Among the three (BRV, Duster, Creta), the Duster offers the best compromise between ride, handling and steering. Duster comes closest to the Honda Civic in the driving pleasure department thanks to the way it behaves on the road.BR-V has slightly stiff ride quality at low speeds, ultra-light steering at low speeds, although it has excellent handling, quick steering and weighty steering feel at higher speeds. But Duster AWD does everything well.

OTHER OBSERVATIONS ABOUT DUSTER AWD

1) Seat compound is soft. My bum was aching after a couple of hours! No lower back ache though.

2) Bonnet is prominently visible from driver's seat.

3) On the outside, the engine sounds like a portable power generator! On the inside, it was quite refined and quiet (but not as hushed as the Creta)

4) Sound quality from stock speakers is the worst among the three. BR-V's is the best.

5) My friend keeps complaining about the road/tyre noise inside the cabin. I did not find anything unusual about it though.

6) MID controls are confusing and unintuitive. My friend claims he still doesn't know how to use it.

[dinesh6481]

Very well and crisp comparison. covered almost all the relevant aspects in detail with all the earnest. one thing which always leaves me bewildered are the glaring omission of essentials in Japanese cars. Be it backlit CVT marking or auto down button. Also in terms of design department car like BRV leaves much to be desired with quirky dash and Non aligned HU. the manual air ciculation switch is such a big blunder on 15L car that can't be overlooked, no matter how much you give it to Japanese reliability. I find the Toyota Etios brothers equally culprit in interior quality or lack of it. the cars driven on Indian roads have their share of beating in few years no matter how carfully you drive. especially in hatchback and C segment where the owners like to change after 5-6 years. so engine quality is of limited use to average indian customer. what matters to him are the bells and whistles in the car and this is where Honda and Toyota loses the battle of perception.

[landcruiser123]

Many thanks for this wonderful thread. It's surely going to help many out there.
BR-V shows that Honda have somewhat acknowledged their mistake of excessive cost-cutting in the Brio/Amaze/Mobilio, but couldn't discard the platform as it's relatively new. Hopefully, the second gen platform makes the cars feel premium. Whatever be the case, the BR-V is the more practical choice of the two.

Hyundai on the other hand has toned down their fluidic designs and aren't making cars with flashy designs anymore, but with attention to detail to fit and finish.

If you're looking at a 5 seater, the Creta is a clear winner. The BR-V is worth it only if you want 7 seats.

Originally Posted by CrAzY dRiVeR

• Honda's 5 seater crossover for this segment will debut in 2017 and is to be based on the Jazz while BR-V is based on the Brio / Amaze / Mobilio platform.

I think this car is more of a "cross" Jazz. I think the Vezel is the proper crossover based on the Jazz platform.

[VeyronSuperSprt]

Once upon a time Honda engines were among the best on the planet. Folks say Honda were so passionate about engines that they would just make an engine and then say "Heck, now we've got to make a car to put this into". Those who have known the old city VTEC will still look at that car with fond memories of what it could do. The CRV was a great drivers car - handled better than most sedans and won an award for the best drivers car even though it was a SUV!

That was back in the day.

Now, competition has caught up and Honda has lost the plot. Their engines are no comparison to the turbo petrols available. And it looks like Honda are yet to decide whether to make a good engine, a good car or a good SUV. As a result when compared to the past when all their products were desirable most of their products are now in limbo.

Their diesel engines are bad at almost everything - power / performance / NVH and the only factor that slightly redeems them is marginally better reliability. Cars like the Amaze have taken cost cutting to a new threshold. Any thing further and you could be jealous of the comfort levels in an auto when he overtakes you.

Habits die hard and so it isn't surprising the BR-V is another half hearted attempt by Honda at making a car. And as it appears, mainly to redeem the Mobilio flop.

On the other hand, the Creta's Diesel engine is good. In fact very good for a Hyundai. The "nervous handing quotient"of the Creta is about 20 kmph higher than the Verna. So while you would get the nervous handling feel at around 120kmph in the new Verna, the Creta increases that threshold by 20 kmph. The interiors are good too. It is difficult to find fault with the Creta unless you like splitting hairs. Looks and chrome garnishes not withstanding.

Honda doesn't look like it can get anywhere with the BR-V and comparing it with the Creta is a pointless exercise. In other words, it's like chalk and cheese.

[GTO]

Originally Posted by Waspune

The Creta looks a lot more desirable, thanks to its European styling and interior quality, but I guess is let down by its on road dynamics and steering.

I think we're beyond the point where all Hyundais had horrible handling. All that is history since the last-gen Verna & i20 retired.

The Creta has sorted road manners. From our official review:

At highway speeds, the steering weighs up adequately. It's not too light or nervous, and is a decent EPS. In the same breadth, I might add that the Creta's steering & dynamics aren't tuned to an enthusiast's taste. They are very comfort oriented. As fast as the engines are, the suspension is designed for the mass market. Body roll is well controlled. The grip levels are good, and the Creta's behaviour is safe & predictable. Being a monocoque SUV, the Creta will run circles around conventional body on frame SUVs. We took a corner or two really fast and the Creta stayed on the intended line. High speed stability is fine and it didn't give us any reason to be nervous on the expressway (only downside being the long wave bounce over road undulations). Even when driving through heavy rains at 120 kph, the Creta felt composed. That said, it's not rock solid like European cars. Further, strong cross winds do upset its composure. There is a particular stretch on the Mumbai-Pune expressway that is susceptible to cross winds; the Creta did feel nervous there. Drive on the same stretch in a European car and you won't get a whiff of the winds. In summary, while the Creta's on-road behaviour is satisfactory, the EcoSport & Duster are better dynamically. Hyundai hits back with ESP which can be a life saver in tricky situations (Diesel MT only). The EcoSport & Duster have ESP on the less popular AT & AWD variants (respectively).

[CrAzY dRiVeR]

Originally Posted by -xplora-

One thing I would like to add to your review is that the paint job on Creta is better than BR-V.

I did not notice any major flaws in the paint job on the BRV, and the reason could be the white colour as well. For example, orange peel effect was clearly evident on the maroon shade of the City when i saw it in the showroom. Also the official review for BR-V mentions this - "Paint quality is top-notch and there are no rough areas to be seen anywhere on the car. "

Originally Posted by Hvt77

Loading height can also be added, i guess its lower for BR-V, so bit better than the Creta!

Thanks for pointing it out. The difference is obvious in pictures, but did not notice it earlier because all I dumped in there was my camera bag.

Originally Posted by Waspune

let down by its on road dynamics and steering.

Majority of the regular buyers wont have any complaints with either of these factors though. The steering also is much better than what I have in the Xcent. Its heavy enough for the masses, but the disconnected joystick feel remains a downer for enthusiasts.

Originally Posted by dinesh6481

What matters to him are the bells and whistles in the car and this is where Honda and Toyota loses the battle of perception.

The most glaring omissions in the BRV would be the parking sensors and reversing camera. Even hatchbacks provide them these days and the BRV is a long car!

The second most glaring omission would be the touchscreen HU because 1. It is expected for the price. 2. Their own stable has it for cheaper cars like the Jazz and 3. The stock 2 DIN HU makes the dashboard look horribly basic as compared to the one on smartcat's car.

These features have become essential these days in the price band BR-V operates.

Originally Posted by landcruiser123

I think this car is more of a "cross" Jazz. I think the Vezel is the proper crossover based on the Jazz platform.

As per various reports, it looks like Vezel is "too premium" for the Indian market. Ideally it should compete against the Creta as per the specs, but guess it will be priced a lot higher.

That would leave us with the "cross Jazz" to fight it out against the Creta.

Originally Posted by VeyronSuperSprt

Habits die hard and so it isn't surprising the BR-V is another half hearted attempt by Honda at making a car. And as it appears, mainly to redeem the Mobilio flop.

Pretty sure atleast a few guys at Honda would be thanking their stars that the Innova moved out of a similar price band around the same time as the BRV launch. That leaves them a wide playing field between the smaller Ertiga and the now ultra premium Innova.

As things stand now, for people looking at 3 row seating (and dont want the not so popular MUVs like Lodgy, Xylo etc) will be forced to look at the BRV and they dont have many other alternatives. The petrol automatic option of a good iVTec engine + CVT also stands out among other 3 row seating cars.

That said, I personally think upgrading to the XUV W6 diesel automatic is worth the extra money paid. I had mentioned it earlier here (Honda BR-V : Official Review)

The on road price is around 17.5L for XUV 5OO W6 AT. Thats a price difference of 2.4L in Bangalore when compared to the BRV V Petrol CVT. Manual diesel VX variant of BRV which is 16.28L in Bangalore while XUV 5OO W6 is only 16.92L!

Advantage XUV -
- Diesel engine (BRV petrol CVT v/s XUV diesel AT).
- Lot more power and torque on tap, plus Aisin 6 speed AT. (2.2L diesel engine v/s 1.5L diesel)
- Much more spacious first and second rows.
- 2+3+2 seating compared to 2+2+2 of the BRV. However, boot space with all 3 rows folded is less.
- 7" touch screen infotainment system
- All wheel disc brakes
- Parking sensors
- Cruise control (Deal breaker for me in both Creta and BR-V)
- Electronic Stability Control, Hill Start Assist (Automatic)
- Automatic stuff like headlamps and wipers.

Advantage BRV -
- Keyless entry
- Alloy wheels
- Leather seats.

Originally Posted by landcruiser123

It is difficult to find fault with the Creta unless you like splitting hairs. Looks and chrome garnishes not withstanding.

Honda doesn't look like it can get anywhere with the BR-V and comparing it with the Creta is a pointless exercise. In other words, it's like chalk and cheese.

In a way, yes. I do agree with you. But there will still be cross shopping between the two considering the bigger brand (Honda) factor, possibility of using 3 row seating in future, mileage aspects etc. Also, its too early to predict on the success of the BRV, though i feel bookings have slowed down.

[Waspune]

Originally Posted by GTO

I think we're beyond the point where all Hyundais had horrible handling. All that is history since the last-gen Verna & i20 retired.

The Creta has sorted road manners. From our official review:

I haven't driven the Creta yet, but from the reviews I can infer that the Creta is the best from Hyundai as far as road dynamics are concerned.

But does this also mean that it betters any other C-Suv/Cross like S-Cross, Avventura, Duster, Ecosport, BRV, XUV in this department? I don't think so. Please correct me if I am wrong.

[PearlJam]

Originally Posted by Waspune

How would you compare the 1.6 in the Creta vs the one in S Cross (Fiat sourced) ?

I think both the engines are excellent in their own way.

Driving the Verna 1.6 CRDI for a year now, I can tell you that this engine is unbelievably refined, and NVH levels are top notch. On the outside, you hear a muted thrum, and on the inside, you can hardly hear the engine. High RPMs are pleasant to the ear. Turbo lag exists, but can be gotten used to. The power band is also quite wide.

On the other hand, from my observations (not driven), the 1.6 MJD is noisier and carries with it the familiar clatter of the more popular 1.3. From many reviews, including the official review, there's a huge lag, but it also gives you that amazing "push back to the seat feeling" after 2000RPM.

From a couple of other sites, 0-100 timings are also comparable, with the Hyundai beating the Suzuki by about 0.5 secs