[Col Mehta]

NA petrol engines anyday!

Forget about the smaller 1.0 turbo, the 1.4 turbo petrol on Creta has terrible lag in the lower RPMs. It struggles in city traffic and the DCT turbo combo doesn't help either. The 4th gen City had an amazing 1.5 NA petrol CVT combo, not so sure about the 5th gen though. For another reference, the 1.5 NA petrol IVT on Creta feels so much drivable in b2b traffic than the 1.4 DCT. Other than being linear, it has enough grunt to close those small gaps in city traffic and never feels inadequate.

On highways though, it's completely opposite where the turbo motors shine. No contest there!

[SolitaryRabbit]

For me reliability and peace of ownership is higher priority than a couple of seconds faster car, hence always a Honda CVT over any DCT in India. Also 1L Turbos (irrespective of brand) when driven enthusiastically are known to be thirsty and with the current fuel prices that's another consideration I would always keep in mind.

[SmartCat]

Originally Posted by SolitaryRabbit

For me reliability and peace of ownership is higher priority than a couple of seconds faster car, hence always a Honda CVT over any DCT in India.

Honda CVT is actually faster. It's just that power delivery of Hyundai DCT is different (more exciting because of non-linearity)

Also 1L Turbos (irrespective of brand) when driven enthusiastically are known to be thirsty and with the current fuel prices that's another consideration I would always keep in mind.

Under pretty much all conditions, Hyundai DCT offers approx 10% better fuel economy than Honda CVT. Remember that when driven enthusiastically, Honda CVT engine stays at 4000 rpm to 6000 rpm range all the time. That kills fuel economy.

[GreasyCarb55]

Well we own a 2017 Honda City ZX CVT so you can already tell which one I voted for and to be honest this comparison is more than just 1.5 NA vs 1.0 Turbo.

If the City 1.5 CVT was up against something like a Polo GT 1.0 Turbo then I could see the Polo winning 5 votes to 1 over the Honda City (make it 6 votes to 1 if it's a Manual Polo GT), heck if it was indeed the 1.0 Turbo Polo GT I'd betray our own car and vote for the the VW. But as it stands, my vote goes to the 1.5 NA CVT.

[chandrda]

Voted for DCT, but I love CVT as well

I have driven CVT for a over 100K KMs in US and Canada. I am familiar with CVT and what to expect. In the city driving conditions, especially in Bangalore I would prefer a NA Engine with CVT combination.

But on the highways, DCT + Turbo combination is fun to drive. Though I don't own any DCT, have driven few on the highways and like it. Prefer is over CVT on highways

If 80% or more of your driving is in City, then CVT is better considering their reliability and drivability. CVT as well is very sensitive to scheduled maintenance.

Regards

[vandemanw]

Our family owns both the 2014 Honda City VX CVT and the 2020 Hyundai Venue DCT 1.0.

Some observations:
1. The venue DCT is more effortless in the city and on 2 lane highways. Power delivery is instantaneous beyond 1500 rpm. No sweat during overtakes.

2. Dislike the rubber band effect on the CVT, but on 4 lane/6 lane highways this doesn't matter much.

3. Driving style is a big factor when trying to extract fuel efficiency on the DCT (with a heavy foot expect to see big drops in mileage), the Honda CVT is much more kinder to those of us with a heavy foot.

Due to space issues, i almost always pick the Honda for Long distance drives and the Venue for short commutes.

[Rocketscience]

Although even the Hyundai engine is not my engine of choice thanks in no small way to the DCT gearbox which might have issues and a somewhat okayish low end (Some have already started facing issues with them)
But out of both these, this is the clear winner in my books.
No one has the space or the inclination to revv the nuts of their cars in regular day to day driving so the City with its flat midrange performs far worse than a turbo engine in your everyday City, crowded highway situations with its power being much more focussed in the top end as compared to ample surge in the midrange to be enjoyable and useable everyday, everything else becomes secondary to me atleast and this everyday and easily accessible power make the NA engines (if there is a direct rival in the same price range like in this case) a relic of the past.

Not that this should be mistaken as me being opposed to those engines, there is a price and place for everything and infact the cars I'am considering for my wife all have NA engines and her being a slow driver who would just drive in the city at a leisurely pace and can't care less for the engine's power they would suit just fine, I'am only considering refinement, ease of use/good low end and mileage in her case.
Something like a K12 dualjet and even Kappa or Honda's small iVTEC will be fine in that use case because unlike ten years ago all 3 have fixed their drivability issues and have decent low end, Suzuki's engine is the winner of those 3 in my opinion but it is a somewhat close race.

[Parasm]

Originally Posted by Storm2.0

Well, one thing to see is reliability of the DCT and turbo 1.0 combo on Venue. Your BR-V, touchwood has been going strong for the last 5 years, whereas for the Venue it's still a question mark and only time will tell.

It’ll keep on going strong , such is the reliability of Honda engine . Basic maintenance is all that it requires.

[aniketi]

Originally Posted by GTO

Nothing beats Honda's superb 1.5L engine & smooth CVT for an urban commuter. That engine is the best naturally-aspirated motor on sale in India, while the CVT has been impressively improved upon with time. In the latest 5th-gen City, I found the rubber-band effect to be well-controlled.

For city use, yes, at lower rpms, Hyundai-Kia's 1.0L DCT does feel lethargic. Turbo lag & dual-clutch AT cons. But once the revs rise, it is something else.

Hard to make a choice on the poll. I love them both .

I am not sure it beats or not but Maruti's 1.5L engine in Ertiga is also one of the best available in market. It's super smooth, very good drivability in city (you can drive at 30-40 KMPH in 4th gear), very good AC and very good fuel efficiency on both highways and city runs. I have taken it for some long highway runs with 6 people and lots of luggage & it performed quite well, has adequate power as well to work with. I am very happy with it.

[saisree]

@Smartcat, thanks for this neat comparative thread. This thread kind of proves that the NA and Turbo engines are nearly equal when it comes to the mileage and its just the drive-ability that differs given the same conditions.

I, voted for the 1.5NA+CVT considering my 80% of the drives are in Cities and its where I need more peace of mind and composure to keep up with the traffic and I hate sudden surges. IMO, we will never get to feel the Turbo in cities unless we are driving post mid nights. When it comes to the highways, the 1.5 CVT combo is capable of maintaining speeds along with the Turbo's probably with few seconds delay and its those two lane highways, where it struggles for those quick overtakes.

[AutoConsultant]

Voted for Honda 1.5 iV-TEC + CVT

Let me first talk about the 1.5 NA vs 1.0 TC and how the former suites my driving style :

1. When I am driving in peak city traffic (which is almost 90% of the time since I stay in West Delhi), I am at my most aggressive and want to push my car into the narrowest of gaps as fast as possible. That is where I feel a bigger capacity engine performs better. I’ll have to rev the smaller turbo engine a lot higher which would just irritate me more

2. When I am on wide roads/highways with medium to low traffic, I like to drive in a relaxed manner without pushing too much for overtakes most of the time. The 1.5 NA suits my needs here as well

3. The AC performance of 1.5 NA is distinctly better than a 1.0 TC especially at lower RPMs when driving around in traffic. City’s AC performance is quite good even in 45+ degree temps

Haven’t driven much of either CVTs or DCTs to comment extensively but based on what I have read, CVT with paddle shifters would suit me more as I would prefer the reliability factor and am willing to compromise a little bit of performance for that.

[VS1811]

Voted for 1.0 DCT.

Recently bought Honda City 1.5 ZX CVT and have driven Sonet DCT extensively. Also, my primary driver is Seltos 1.4 DCT. My experience comparing the 1.0 DCT and 1.5 CVT

- 1.5 CVT is more responsive off the line. It crawls better and feels lively with a little dab on accelerator. In comparison, 1.0 DCT feels a little sluggish off the line but no issue once it gets moving.

- The refinement cannot be compared. 1.0 DCT is much quiter and sophisticated in terms of gearshifts. Anything more than a dab on the accelerator on city results in more noise and very linear but boring speed gain.

- In my driving style, i think the car spends 95% time in between 1500 to 3000 rpm. Its here where the turbo punch and mid end power of the 1.0 DCT shines through. 1.5 in comparison feels boring and very very linear. All the joy of that 1.5 NA lies above 5K rpm but how often do we go there? I, hardly ever.

For me, once you get used to turbo petrols, NAs just feel so gutless unless you are wringing them by their neck which is a style of driving i dont enjoy.

[lionheart_mm]

NA engine + CVT makes sense for the typical Indian driving conditions. Small turbo engine+ DCT will bring trouble in the future.

[Durango Dude]

I've the Honda City CVT and have very briefly driven the Venue Turbo DCT combo. I prefer the Honda any day and I've never touched high speeds ever in my City running stock tyres. My speed is around 100-110 kmph with a clear highway. Factor reliability and you'll definitely vouch for the Honda CVT than a DCT.

[LEOMAN]

Guys, a little off topic . I like turbos only in case of diesels due to better torque . Petrol turbos are less efficient . I like my 2020 ecosport dragon petrol automatic which does 0-100 in 11.23 seconds and its a NA 3 pot 1.5 dragon engine mated to a sweet torque convertor. Rest all my armoury is diesel biased . I used to have a linea in Tjet guise but it was manual.It was build like a tank and needed no description.
Not in favour of DSGs as my skoda rapid 1.5 tdi automatic gave only after 24000 kms on the odometer. If its DQ200 it has to fail , no matter what skoda says. In my case it was the mechatronic which went bad.