Dear Akash,
I do appreciate your very comprehensive review of TUV. Almost close to the depth of a BHPian.
Sir with due respect I accept your praise but I do not wish my review to be compared with BHP or whatever. Neither me nor other reviewers have to be seen as benchmark in writing about cars. Each one has its own point of view. No point in comparison.
Like you, I test drove the vehicle twice. Once in hills, once in Chandigarh. I have been looking to replace my aging car, therefore I have been in the business of test driving all the vehicles nomenclatured SUVs in this range.
Most certainly, I don't doubt your point of view and experience.
So far I have been impressed with Duster's ride and handling.
I am no untoward fanboy and neither has Mahindra been patronizing me in any which way.
You are most welcome to have your perception and I am open to accepting that sir. And rightly, no one should be biased for a brand or product. Else, purpose of being a part of a unbiased forum fails.
I strongly feel that you have erred in your harsh judgement on the engine performance of the TUV. But in city it drives with elan.
This is what I had mentioned on 1st page of this review and a short drive that I had earlier than this one.
The engine if put in simple words is lethargic for those who wish to feel the craze of a powerful diesel engine but yes for City driving this 1.5L unit is kaam chalau.
About pick-up if I talk then M-Hawk engine is there and response is neither too good nor very bad. It is Ok for driving in city.
I may be an amateur but many professional experts have granted that to TUV on performance front. Therefore, it cannot be faulted too harshly on engine performance.
Sir I am repeating again here, Individually this car is at most capable to be driven in city but still lacks by leaps and bounds if you even compare the city driving manners of Creta or Ecosport. If Mahindra is competing in segment with flourishing/flourished products like them then it must make a product which stands equal to competitors. TUV-3OO is not comparable to Creta and neither to Eco-Sport in driving. If any lay-man buys a car, he expects it to give a decent performance on City and Highway. TUV-3OO needs to be re-worked on this front.
One has to evaluate a vehicle within the context of a certain price range. One cannot compare it to Creta or Ertiga (MUV) or XUV 500 like in your review.
Sir, behind my comparison of TUV-3OO to Creta lies the first hand experience of Official Launch of TUV-3OO. Over there the officials themselves compared it to Creta. If its not Creta then what else should be compared to TUV-3OO, A Scorpio? A Rexton? A Verito Vibe? Mahindra's officials went to the extent of comparing to Duster as well. Creta comes in 1.6 Diesel and TUV-3OO has 1.5 Diesel engine? Why can't it be compared on performance front?
Secondly,
My reason to compare it with Ertiga was only because of the 7 seater provision given in TUV-3OO. I have sat in Ertiga and then I sat also in TUV-3OO, both are different in miles. You can see the pics of 3rd row seating and judge for yourself. If one is selling a particular feature then that should be useful for the buyer and not just turn out to be a ornamental feature.
XUV-500, I compared it to XUV-500 not for any other purpose but simply for fun to drive purpose. It is not a sin to ask or expect a fun to drive experience for any car. XUV-5OO belongs to M&M and TUV-3OO too but TUV-3OO lacks in fun part of driving. Would you love to have stressful drive in it when driving in traffic either in City or on Highway?
Yes, one could compare it to Ecosport (which you have rightly done).
Ecosport and Creta are both competing in the same segment.
And personally I didn't like Ecosport 1.5 diesel for space or darkish interiors or sedate engine performance and very expensive after sale service (these are my personal views).
Like your views on Eco-sport, on TUV-3OO are my own views too.
TUV has a long wheelbase therefore roomy interiors. Also a lively upholstery, a very sofa-like commanding drive position. Many other pluses over Ecosport, for instance.
I never denounced or rejected that. You may cross check my review.
I didn't find anything wrong with TUV's clutch pedal. But had you pointed out a glitch with reverse gear I would have agreed with you.
Gear slotting in TUV-3OO is bit notchy and it has pointed out many times since launch.
You fault TUV's suspension yet you recommend it for rural areas?
This is what I said for the TUV-300 in this review
Due to a average suspension, the ride quality of the car was in one word “OK” nothing extra-ordinary or should I say, not much confidence building.
Now, as for the use in rural areas, firstly, I am not counting the semi-urban places. I am considering village and
Dehaat where prime consideration is to have maximum number of seats in a car/jeep. In rural areas, the 1st consideration of buying a Mahindra MUV is that it offers space and then comes the suspension. Mahindra's TUV-3OO can be driven there because people over there are not at all concerned about the suspension feedback. All they want is that it should drive over mud, improper roads and potholes. For them Jerks on potholes mean nothing. I have number of times seen Mahindra Armada and Bolero in worst of conditions yet driven there. For them Mahindra is not about suspension, it is all about driving capability, diesel engine and number of seats.
Also, so far, except for Mahindra Scorpio, Thar and XUV-500 which is that one car that has flown off the shelves for them for personal use? XYLO, Verito, Vibe, Bolero are maximum sold in commercial spaces. For TUV-3OO I clearly have stated that looks and interior comfort will gain buyers for it but performance will give second thoughts. I am quoting last few lines from my review.
Had the TUV-3OO performance been as good as its interiors or the price and even looks then it surely would have been a tough competitor to other two.
Regards
Akash