Sunday, 7 April 2013

honda city 2oo1 model


A 'CIty ENGINE'

The engine powering the City 1.5 is still from the Civic line. Compared to the 1.3, the stroke is longer at 84.5 mm (76 mm) while the bore is a constant 75 mm. This has resulted in an undersquare configuration which means better pulling power. The compression ratio is higher at 9.4 (9.0) and there is now 77 kW (105 bhp) at 6500 rpm (69.8 kW/95 bhp at 6400 rpm). Torque is 134 Nm at 4600 rpm (115 Nm/4700 rpm). The City 1.5 is only heavier by 8 kgs and thus enjoys a better weight-to-power ratio of 12.8 kgs/kW (13.9 kgs/kW).

There are also some changes in the 4-speed automatic transmission to accommodate the higher power outputs. Second, third and fourth gears are higher in ratios since there is more torque now. In fact, third gear is an overdrive at 0.972.

DRIVING THE CITY 1.5

As one of our staff has a City 1.3, we had the rare chance to gauge the City 1.5 back-to-back. The better torque has definitely provided for a more relaxed driving ambience. There was no need to prompt the accelerator often to get it down to second gear for that spurt of speed or pull to get going quickly.

The City 1.5 has ample torque to sufficiently quick
 pick-up for overtaking on the highway and when going up mild inclines. This feature also helped to give the City higher corner speed through winding stretches, encouraged as well by the proven all-independent suspension with a MacPherson strut at each wheel and the 175/75 SR13 Dunlop LeMans J-Cinq tyres.

With less of a need to kick down and get second gear, there was less of a jerky affair while driving. Although some improvements were made with the automatic transmission, it still didn't perform as good as that in the Civic. It is getting there though.

Our acceleration runs confirmed the City 1.5 as a quicker car. It was clocked at 11.5 seconds for the 100 km/h sprints which the City 1.3 did in 13.2 seconds. On kickdowns, the City 1.5 covered the 50-80 km/h runs in 5.6 seconds, a second faster.

Despite the slight differences in transmission ratios, road speed through the gears were similar–58 km/h (60 in the 1.3) in first, 104 km/h in second and 160 km/h in third. The auto changes occurred between 6100 and 6500 rpm. This was also similar at cruising speeds, with the engine running between 2800 and 3100 rpm (2600 and 3000 rpm) at 100-110 km/h.

As is typical of Honda engines, some mileage is required before optimum performance can enjoyed. That in the test City 1.5 was no different, having covered slightly above 1,000 kms when we borrowed it. Thus the top speed we attained may not be indicative of the true potential of the car in this respect. If it is like the City 1.3, it should do above 170 km/h, if not 180 km/h, with more mileage.

The difference in interior appointments aren't much. The extras come in a central console bin and a door armrest for the front doors. All the windows are electrically-powered (only the front ones for the City 1.3).


"Would you buy the City 1.5?" we asked the staffer who owns a City 1.3. The response (which we also tend to agree with) was this: "Now that I've driven it, I do regret not waiting for the 1.5 to come along. The better pull certainly makes for more comfortable and relaxed driving. But with the gloomy economic scenario, I think I will keep my City 1.3

No comments:

Post a Comment