arvipat

city vs sx4: which one

Recommended Posts

I want to upgrade from my santro to a sub-10 lac sedan. narrowed down to Honda City zxi-mt and Sx4 v-mt. drive mostly in-city (occasional long inter-city) as evidenced by just above 35000+ km yet in my 1999 santro. I feel city is a better deal though 1 lac costlier than the sx4.
what's the forum's advice?

 

 

 

 

 

Thread moved-Mod.
BornFree2010-12-11 09:13:34

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Think you could not go wrong with both the cars mentioned. Both of them have their own plus and minuses, but still holds on to be the best choices in the sub 10 lakh category.

Both the cars are pretty reliable and will hold on their value over the years to come. You could expect good resale value when you are thinking of selling your car.

Consider City, if the roads in your area are in good condition without big humps. The ground clearance for City is a bit low, hence you have to be a bit careful about big humps, if any.

SX4 on the other hand is more SUV like, with high set-seats and good ground clearance. Also, it has many extra features which City lacks. The Climate Control, Option to play CDs etc are some of the plus points of SX4. Also, the SX4 engine felt to be more free revving and a little more refined than the City's. High speeds over bad roads too is phenomenal.

The fuel efficiency is almost well matched and the periodic service charges also should be close. However, the average cost of spares are considerably lesser for SX4, if you go by the spare parts comparison by Autocar India magazine.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

City is far better than SX4 in every comparison barring GC. So my advice' date=' City.

[/quote']

I wish you explain how and why City is better than SX4, just by saying will not solve the purpose for prospecting buyers.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

@Carwar -- From your number of posts, it seems you're new to ACI bro. City is a segment leader and has been compared endless times with other cars and it has emerged as the winner ALWAYS. I'd advice you to checkout some existing threads and topics. (LoL, I cant locate the link) !

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The question here is are you stretching an extra muscle to buy it? If you are, then its not worth that, and this I am saying being a City owner myself. Is it the best car in that price range, yes, but given the huge price difference along with features factored in, SX4 is very close to it. Buy City if its easily in your budget, otherwise just buy SX4 you wont regret it.

Also you have interchanged te variants of SX4 and City. SX4 comes in ZXI and City comes in V-MT.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

@Carwar -- From your number of posts' date=' it seems you're new to ACI bro. City is a segment leader and has been compared endless times with other cars and it has emerged as the winner ALWAYS. I'd advice you to checkout some existing threads and topics. (LoL, I cant locate the link) ! [/quote']

May be new here but driving cars since last 30 years and simply you can't judge the car from its engine alone, there are many other things in the car and what price you are paying for what you are getting.

By the way I own both of them.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

City is far better than SX4 in every comparison barring GC. So my advice' date=' City.

[/quote']

I second Bala. The finesse you get in City is unmatchable. Its' butter smooth, and power is available at all levels. Rear sitting is more comfortable in City than SX4. The big hump, in SX4, in the middle makes middle occupant bit uncomfortable.

Recently I drove My friend's City for nearly 700 kms on highway and hilly area and can say that, I m still thrilled by my experience.  For your information, we were 4 adult and 2 children and we got the F.e. of 14 kms with mostly AC on. The highway was not like Express highway, and there were lots of Diversion, to kill the speed. So for me City is worth a Lakh more.

I also second the thought of Etios by DD, if you can wait for 4-5 months...

All the best.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

whats GC bala. and yes rahul, i did get the city/sx4 variants mixed up.

dekkoed the etios vs Dzire utube vid; etios looks like the logan rearside and the internal fittings aint upto the mark it seems.

toyota will definitely improve in future, but surely cant wait.

sx4 seems too 'bulky' for me what with its huge tires, high/massive rearend. city seems to have got everything going for it in its segment - engine, looks, performance, power (power-to-weight ratio vis-a-vis its engine capacity). the sx4 with its few extra bells n whistles dont match up.

havent considered the vw vento, manjoshi, as its new and no idea of vw's india future. city's of course a proven machine.

thanks all you guys for end-user inputs - have decided to go in for the city v-mt

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

@Carwar - Engine is the heart of the machine. If the heart isn't fine, nothing else can be. On the other hand, one can compro with secondary features and stuff like ACC, Alloys, etc, which hardly make a difference as long as your machine has a healthy and refined heart (engine, ofcourse!). As it is said, Health is wealth!! LoL.

Atleast thats what I think. I'd be glad to know other opinions around!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You do not decide on a car just by looking at the spec sheets.

While the newbies like the Etios and Venot may turn out to be good cars, I will like to see them on the road for six months, for the bugs to be ironed out. Also, while I do not expect issues with the Toyota Service I will watch the VW (after all it is the same Skoda stable!).

Honda is a world of its own, with excellent hardware and service. I am a relatively new Honda owner (since June) but regret having bought my Accent (an excellent car) in place of a City Mk.I. They are in a different plane. Price difference notwithstanding . Incidentally, you are not looking at ZXi on the City (that was Mk.II). Honda cars tend to be the most economical to run, both fuel efficient as well as not too expensive to maintain (some spares are expensive, but last far longer). Also, the cars tend to be hassle free, with very few niggles.

You may just be able to squeeze in the AT - if so consider it by all means. The AT City will be more economical that the MT SX4!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

@Bala: arre talking about the City or Civic. Also, let me add that the ground clearance figure in the specs is pretty irrelevant. This is the height of the lowest part of the car. This point invariably is the steering linkage, which sits between the wheels. It will ride over any bumps and will not hit the ground. The point which will hit will lie elsewhere, and this is dependent on both the loading, and speed of the vehicle.

It is also true that one of the selling points of the SX4 is the high ride.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

thanks sanjay (sgiitk). am totally unfamiliar with AT - like is it ok for city driving, that too kanpur where am located. the honda dealer (pushp honda) said it doesnt sell and its resale value is low. am told its mileage too's poorer compared to MT version

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

@arvipat;

Honda City is better meant for City usage, as its having Good Visibilty, Size, Easy Controls & Contours needed for Smooth City usage, wheras SX4 is much bulbulous for Trafficky conditions & offers not as Good visibility as City.

 

Also, Honda City will Recover that extra lakh spent Initially within 1-2years with its Highly fuel efficient engine(Our forum member driftpunk can throw better light on this) & Trouble free Ownership.

Its Refinement is also of the very Order, unmatched yet by Maruti Suzuki or Toyota.

So, My Vote is for Honda City V-MT.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Basically with AT you can rest your left foot for good and after using an AT, over a period of time, it becomes that much more difficult to get back to driving a manual in our congested traffic. The FE is a little less and the brake pads wear out faster with the AT. But comfort is a given. Though haven't driven an AT these are my comments.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

got a load of info on wikipedia & wikiHow. MT machines seem more suitable for indian conditions and, as durango says, it spoils driving habits. plus its 60G dearer over the v-mt version. its FE is marginally lesser because of the xtra laden weight (~ 55 kg) and the energy needs of the AT hydraulics

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I have had an AT since 1999 (Zen). In 2005 the Zen was replaced by a Sanrto AT. I love ATs and now have my larger car also as an AT. The Honda AT is simply brilliant - same for City & Civic. There are no issues about driving an AT in Kanpur. Also, I have never had a problem in using both MT and AT and now with ATs and occasionally driving an MT. It is second nature.

Plus and minus - one minus is the higher fuel consumption - about 10-15%. The other negative is the higher wear on the brakes as there is no engine braking in normal driving.

With more sophisticated ATs as in Honda you have a torque converter lockup at higher speeds, so the fuel consumption loss in negligible.  In fact as the Civic AT has a very tall gearing the US EPA figure for the AT is 1mpg higher than for the MT.

The plus is that there is no clutch to wear out!

Most certainly recommended.

sgiitk2010-12-17 02:50:38

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now