Why Aria Failed To Take Off But XUV Did??

[TSIVipul]

Warning:If you hate long reports,then this can be your worst nightmare

Some time back Tata launched a new premium UV calling it ‘a new breed’ or what we call ‘Crossover’,they said “This car is for those who want the utility of an SUV with the comfort and finesse of a sedan.Yes,you people are absolutely right,this UV is known as ‘Tata ARIA’.It was really a big leap forward for Tata but due to an issue or two this vehicle was never able to attain the sales targets this vehicle was focused at.The reasons will be discussed later in this thread.

Then came the new kid on the block in late 2011 called ’Mahindra XUV-500’(five-double-ohh),while the Aria which being in the same segment kept struggling for the sales,this new entrant simply put the sales charts on fire and booking have already touched the numbers that even the manufacturer M&M was also left astonished.While both the cars may look like they are quite same,both of them have a lot of difference and being true it seems like both are focused at totally different types of customers.In other words,the people who like Aria for a reason or two simply hate the XUV and vice versa,so now let’s once try to find out what may be the true cause for the same,so now one by one we cover both the cars in different aspects:-
Some general highlights of both the vehicles:-

(Note:Prices etc mentioned are on-road Delhi excluding any discounts etc,for the compare only top end or nearly same priced versions(after counting discount on Aria)are considered.)

Tata Aria:A ladder frame layout vehicle.

1):Price 13.2 lacs to 18 lacs for Pure 4X2 and Pride 4X4 variant respectively.

2):Engine,in-line-four,2179 cc turbo diesel unit called ‘VTT DICOR’ which produces 138 bhp @ 4000 rpm and 32.6 kgm of torque@ 1700 rpm.

3):Transmission:5 speed manual.

4):GC=200mm,Kerb weight=1992 kg(4X2 pure)and 2218 kg(4X4 pride),fuel tank capacity=60 lts.

5):Warranty=3* years/1,00,000* kms,whichever comes first.

Mahindra XUV 500:Mahindra’s first monocoque design..

1):Price 13.1 lacs to 15.6 lacs for W6 4X2 and W8 4X4 variant respectively.

2):Engine,in-line-four,same as Aria 2179 cc turbo diesel unit called ‘M-Hawk’ which produces 140 bhp @ 3750 rpm and 32.63 kgm of torque at 1600 to 2800 rpm(That’s a wide spread torque!!)
3):Transmission:6 speed manual.

4):GC=200 mm,Kerb weight=1790 kg(W6 4X2),fuel tank capacity=70 lts.

5):Warranty 2* years/50,000* kms,whichever comes first.
Now let the spec sheet speak itself…



TO BE CONTINUED..

 

[TSIVipul]

Re: Why ARIA failed to take-off but XUV did??

First:The heart of the matter-The Engine thingand other mechanicals:-



Tata Aria:-

1):The 2179 cc common rail turbo unit from Tata is quite a good engine which is having acceptable levels of refinement and quite good drivability.

2):Turbo lag is enough but once turbo comes to life and this pulls like a locomotive.

3):Not very wide spread of torque and hence there is quite small rev range to play with(ie:The fun starts at about 2k rpm and ends at 3.5k rpm)but in the powerband,the XUV is nowhere near this UV.

4):The massive kerb weight and a quite unsuitable combo of engine and transmission really puts the UV down.Also the FE is quite good but could have been better.

5):This engine is not for city dwellers,this is a mile munching engine and is best on highways only.Yes,this engine is even greater for hills.Why?Because in the powerband this engine pulls away without any single signs of stress,weather there is any incline with full passengers on board.

Mahindra XUV-500:-

1):The highlighting point is only ‘M-Hawk’,this engine was already good in Scorpio with a FGT and now with an added advantage of VGT good has already gone better.The engine is refined and offers grea drivability.

2):The widespread torque in the rev range makes this engine really responsive especially between 2000-4000 rpm,if you are in this rev range then just tap the throttle and the vehicle starts pulling.

3):Although this engine also pulls quite good but the 2.2 DICOR unit’s pulling is still unmatched by this engine.

4):Low kerb weight+good power+ quite good gearbox=great overall performance and FE.

5):This is not a cross country running engine,why?Because the power and torque figures look good on paper but does not translate the same way on the road,this engine feels strained when it comes to high speed cruising as well as climbing hills or inclines.

Now coming to the clothes of the models,the EXTERIORS they are:-

FRONT view:-





Tata Aria:-

1):The front is quite plain with a good big grill which dominates the front,only problem is that somewhere this front design resembles a grown up Indica Vista,but still for the people who love the plain designs,this is the one to go.

2):The double barrel type headlights have projector too which adds to both style and safety.

3):The aggression is missing while there is sophistication in this look.
4):Yeah,the look is plain and quite simplistic but no doubt it looks expensive,in other words no person can even doubt this vehicle as a low cost vehicle.

5):The big wide grille and small wrap-around type(or pulled up type)headlamps combo gives Aria quite a distinguished image too and its really quite easy to recognize it coming,it may look like a grown up Vista or Manza but still looks totally masculine.

Mahindra XUV-500:-

1):First word that came to my mind was ‘DISAPPOINTMENT’ after I was the XUV for the first time.Why?I always praised M&M for making aggressive designs with the extremely aggressive grille dominating the front,but in XUV they have tried to make something and it came out as something else.

2):No matter how it looks,but the front bumper could have been quite smaller and grille could have been bigger.Still it looks like M&M have kept aside their classic design language and have gone a bit too much overboard while designing XUV.

3):Its delight for those who love those fancy designs but is a turn off for simplistic people.

4):Headlights,oh,they are the lights I simply love.They look great and in fact they are the only part in front which gives the XUV that quite aggressive look when combined with that high bonnet and that aggressive scoop like crease running on the bonnet.And do not forget that LED treatment too..

5):Cheetah resembling lines look more like they resemble a tiger and being true if you take a close look then Scorpio or Safari or Aria all looks like they are built more tougher than the XUV.In other words,those people who love fancy highlights,the XUV is definitely for them.But remember,these fancy things does not delight people for long time.

 

[TSIVipul]

Re: Why ARIA failed to take-off but XUV did??

SIDE PROFILE:-



Tata Aria:-
1):Looks more like a van than an SUV.
2):Looks like a warship with its big dimensions,just look at her and you will understand that its cumbersome.
3):No signs of aggression present,only sophistication and simplicity is there.
4):The roofline resembles more to hatchbacks then the SUV/MUV.
5):Compare to XUV,then you get disappointed s XUV looks more compact,tough built and modern.While Aria looks quite dated here.

Mahindra XUV-500:-
1):High,tough and aggressive lines running all around gives the XUV really butch looks.
2):The crease on the lower side doors simply adds to the presence.
3):How to ignore those unique door handles and the scoop above the rear wheel arch.
4):Look at here at any point and what you get is a piece of muscle,it’s a simply SUVish look.
5):To minor attention to detail adds that tail light,those tough looking alloys and many cuts and curves it has.No doubt,the XUV simply clean bowled the Aria when it comes to side view.


BACK FACE:





Tata Aria:-

1):This is where Aria makes a good comeback and really pleases more than the XUV.

2):Looks modern and compact too if you look from back.

3):The chrome finished strip above number plate with ‘Tata’ engraved on it and the chrome finished exhaust tips really give Aria a pleasing back view.

4):The tail light design is quite disappointing,although it resembles Tata people mover family but they would have looked better with transparent or crystal clear covering plastic.

5):Still the rear seems to be perfectly designed with everything at its correct place.

Mahindra XUV-500:-

1):Tail lights are looking great in that configuration,I think M&M call it cheetah claw type!!

2):Something looks missing,oh yes,that shape just above the number plate is the culprit.

3):SUVish design language with the added spice of style.

4):Everything looks at its place only one part is the culprit,rest the design language is great.

5):The black part of rear bumper adds to butch looks but exhausts could have looked better.

 

[TSIVipul]

Re: Why ARIA failed to take-off but XUV did??

THIS WAS THE EXTERIOR,NOW COMING TO INTERIORS..





Tata Aria:-

1):Shut the doors and you get a good satisfying thud,yes,every thing looks really tough and tightly put together.It feels more robust and better put together than the XUV.

2):Just like exterior,no fancy touches inside too.You get a plain but very functional dashboard.

3):Fit and finish is really good and quite satisfying,in fact once you can be doubtful if its really a Tata product.

4):The steering position could have been better and same is with the pedals,rest everything is simply great.

5):Great seating space is there and with the added advantage of movable middle row,you can really carry 7 adults in a comfort and most important ‘it gets a really good boot space’ while the XUV misses this.

Mahindra XUV-500:-

1):You enter inside and you are ‘WOWED’ but this happiness is not that long,touch the interiors and plastic quality lets you down.

2):Very functional and thought out cabin with some smart storage too,although it can’t beat the TALIBANI grenade compartments provided on Aria’s roof but still its smart.

3):Seats are comfy and driving position is also great.

4):Middle row legroom is better than Aria,but then seats feel quite less supporting/comfy then the Aria.

5):Everything is okay,only problem is that the ‘boot’ is not there,only seats are available.


RIDE,HANDLING ETC ETC

Tata Aria:-

1):It’s a mile muncher,so both ride and handling betters up as the speed builds up.

2):low speed ride is nowhere as good as XUV,nor the handling is.While at high speeds,its far far more confident than the XUV.

Mahindra XUV-500:-

1):If you travel in the city most of the time,then look at it and for cross country movers,a mile muncher is always better.

2):Low speed ride is far better than Aria but as the speed builds up,this machine starts loosing her confidence.

THANKS FOR READING…

(Note:The above mentioned points are my personal observations and may vary for person to person,no offence to anyone)

Waiting to hear from you guys!!!

 

[TSIVipul]

Re: Why ARIA failed to take-off but XUV did??

I am yet to come across any person facing any serious issues with Aria or XUV and hence I have not considered them in the comparo.

Result of comparo:In my views,this comparo can't give any specific results,why?as both cars are a bit too much different if we consider them as a whole.And if comparo is to give the resulds,then XUV is really an overall better package.Why?Because it is not better but because Aria is priced very high.

 

[mukeshus]

Re: Why ARIA failed to take-off but XUV did??

Vipul thanks for the effort you have put in this comparo, many visiting forum can have a better view.

But i disagree on pulling part with Aria(I have not driven Aria).

But i have heard from Dhaya that pulling with 7 on board was bit OK.

So with XUV though only 4 were sitting on my TD found the pickup best in the range on a steep incline in 2nd gear.

So before jumping on me folks , would like to hear more from Dhaya, i may be wrong.

 

[TSIVipul]

Re: Why ARIA failed to take-off but XUV did??

Vipul thanks for the effort you have put in this comparo, many visiting forum can have a better view.

But i disagree on pulling part with Aria(I have not driven Aria).

But i have heard from Dhaya that pulling with 7 on board was bit OK.

So with XUV though only 4 were sitting on my TD found the pickup best in the range on a steep incline in 2nd gear.

So before jumping on me folks , would like to hear more from Dhaya, i may be wrong.

Yes dear,you have the right to disagree.Actually from the pulling I meant to say that XUV pulls good but Aria does it better.
Actually you may be considering the response of the engine,as your words suggest and yes its the widely spread torque of XUV which helps it give such response but what I am talking about is the way the engine pulls away at comparatively lower revvs with full load or the way the rev needle climb up the revv range as soon as the turbo comes to life.

No doubt,my experience can also come to be wrong as I have experienced Aria for not more than a hundred kms or two.
It will be better if any person who may have experienced both like Dhaya or maybe Raj(I think he has experienced both)come up and clarify it.

 

[raj_5004]

Re: Why ARIA failed to take-off but XUV did??

Q: Why Aria failed to take-off but XUV did?
Ans: Because Aria was priced much higher than what it deserved & XUV5OO was priced spot on.

 

[TSIVipul]

Re: Why ARIA failed to take-off but XUV did??

Q: Why Aria failed to take-off but XUV did?
Ans: Because Aria was priced much higher than what it deserved & XUV5OO was priced spot on.

No doubt,this is the main reason...the question was asked for only one reason:-
To get the transparent picture of the whole thing and be able to justify this fact.And after looking at each and every point,I acn say +1000 to you.

But,as always I am not ready to accept Aria as a low-quality product or anything like that,considering what I like,its aria which is still better if priced right!!

 

[autosafari]

Re: Why ARIA failed to take-off but XUV did??

Wow!!!

That was a nice review.

Really usefull for somebody visiting automotive related sites for information.


{Hope you have not gone Munnabai way - kidnapping a top class automobile journalist to write a review in your name }

 

[Swapnil]

Re: Why ARIA failed to take-off but XUV did??

The thread is certainly going to take off, as it is compiled brilliantly, +1000 to it.

I personally feel that Aria did not fail, rather it did not take off as the XUV did, and again, Tata cars are known for late turbo kick-in. My opinion;

1. Over priced by at least 2 lakhs.
2. In-city / bumper to bumper drive-ability may not be inspiring.

 

[lxi.]

Re: Why ARIA failed to take-off but XUV did??

Wow, Brilliant review buddy! Actually, was really a nightmare, was a very long post

Yes, i also feel the Aria is overpriced.

 

[AppU]

Re: Why ARIA failed to take-off but XUV did??

@TSIvipul:

Fantastic Review Man,

Enough comparision between Aria & XUV..

Personally I like Aria over XUV

 

[JazzSelect]

Re: Why ARIA failed to take-off but XUV did??

Nice comparison.

I would prefer Innova/Duster rather than XUV5OO or ARIA (no offense to anyone).

 

[maximas007]

Re: Why ARIA failed to take-off but XUV did??

Q: Why Aria failed to take-off but XUV did?
Ans: Because Aria was priced much higher than what it deserved & XUV5OO was priced spot on.

That is the only reason Aria didn't take off(price).Nothing else .
Also its van like look made it compare it with Innova which is not at all fair.
If they could have done it like the looks of LR. Then for the price it would have done a justice.