|
Search Forums |
Advanced Search |
Go to Page... |
Search this Thread | 103,755 views |
22nd January 2012, 21:25 | #151 |
Senior - BHPian | Re: Unnecessary OEM equipment in today's cars When I bought my Indica TCIC which was available only in DLG, I used to wonder why Tata was forcing me to buy a Heater just because i wanted a TCIC motor. For some perspective, I lived in kerala and never used it in the first 3 years of the car's existense. But after coming to orissa, the heater has turned into a lifesaver overnight. I guess necessity can be relative Last edited by greenhorn : 22nd January 2012 at 21:28. |
() Thanks |
|
11th February 2012, 09:29 | #152 |
BHPian Join Date: Jul 2011 Location: Dubai,Hyderabad
Posts: 470
Thanked: 80 Times
| Re: Unnecessary OEM equipment in today's cars The tachometer is necessary for somebody who is just learning to drive a manual transmission. I would look at the tachometer to figure out when I should be changing gears because with the windows shut and the AC turned on, I couldn't really hear the engine (when the car was new, that is). I had cars with a fan-regulator-like knob for making adjustments to the head lamps but I never really used it. There was a time when I thought the side mirror adjustments were just a fad because the mirrors are adjusted just once and they are left that way till the car is sold. Then, I was introduced to our Indian traffic :-D |
() Thanks |
11th February 2012, 09:59 | #153 | |
Senior - BHPian Join Date: May 2009 Location: BLR/CBE
Posts: 1,299
Thanked: 3,666 Times
| Re: Unnecessary OEM equipment in today's cars Quote:
I have also used the heater here to get some warmth on my rear when on a trip to Avalanche, near Ooty and the night temperatures hit sub-zero. The seat just felt like a slab of ice | |
() Thanks |
30th July 2013, 01:23 | #154 |
BHPian Join Date: Apr 2013 Location: Yorkshire Dales
Posts: 300
Thanked: 385 Times
| Pure, simple and quality or many extras, bling and neighbour-appeal? My last post reflecting on engine design and how it has gravitated to the cheapest, nastiest design which has been steadily refined and isolated to the point a non-petrol head may struggle to notice the difference between a good engine and a gorgeous one led me to the question in the title of this thread. It has long been the case that the great majority of the car-buying public is more bothered with seats which look comfortable rather than ones which are, with electric seats, windows and sunroof rather than quality suspension and chrome strips, alloy wheels and an impressive boot badge rather than a lovely engine. Basically, if there is high profit in something, the makers want to fit it rather than do any decent engineering. What the neighbours or those at your place of work think of your car seems to be of ridiculous importance to so many. I was wondering what you all wish for, a car which looked expensive, flashy and fast or one which was nothing special to look at, yet which drove exquisitely? I would choose a car with thorough, pure and sophisticated engineering - but with manually-wound windows, no unnecessary electronics and a quiet air about it. I could be persuaded to accept central locking and LED lighting, and would love someone to come up with an alternative for the windscreen wiper. |
() Thanks |
30th July 2013, 18:07 | #155 |
BHPian Join Date: Oct 2005 Location: GTA | GHMC
Posts: 888
Thanked: 1,030 Times
| Re: Pure, simple and quality or many extras, bling and neighbour-appeal? What I like about my bare bones motorcycle is the fact that it is so simple to service, starts with a kick (if not just push start), practical for the roads of this country, has great torque for traffic infested roads, and has no gadgetry that will fail on you suddenly leaving you stranded (although the CDI is surely one such unit - it has indeed failed once in its 9 year history). It is also lightweight and nimble and runs great with some mostly DIY maintenance. The car I owned on the other hand was an absolute disaster for me. It had one of the worst performing engines both in-city and on highways - putting the pedal to the floor would do nothing to the speed of the car, the ergonomics required you to crane your neck looking for potholes, the dashboard was too high, the AC killed whatever torque was left in the useless engine, the suspension would cry out for mercy on the slightest of road undulations. Practicality was a joke what with <180 liters of boot and provisions for 4" speakers front and back. Overall it was a purchase disaster. But did it look good? Oh Yes it did! I also really don't understand why modern cars are so heavy! A 1000kilos for a small hatchback is way too much for a car without ABS or Airbags or ICE, don't you think? If only the car companies would invest some RnD money to develop lighter yet strong enough parts for cars it would do a lot of good for fuel efficiency and engine torque. For my next car I'll definitely be looking at the most practical no-nonsense car that will take me from points A-B with a smile on my face no matter what the roads throw at us. Power windows is a nice convenience but I hated it when my battery failed and I could do nothing but call "Chevrolet Emergency" service (which took a nice 2 hours to arrive) and have him jump start the vehicle just to roll up my windows. You do "pay" for conveniences down the road. I also dislike digital displays because you have to replace the entire panel for faults but it is great cost cutting for manufacturers who can now get away with a cheap LCD screen instead of investing in analog meters and gears. Call me old school, but I like having manual buttons (those that directly control the device in question and not via more electronics) such as those for starting/stopping engine (use the key stupid), cabin air circulation, ORVM adjustment levers, seat adjustment and more. In my experience gadgets fail sooner or later. A manual button will always have a jugaad. FlatOut, in the current market of Indians cars around the 10L budget is there a car that strikes a chord with you? |
() Thanks |
31st July 2013, 00:04 | #156 | ||
BHPian Join Date: Jul 2013 Location: Dance Bar City!
Posts: 355
Thanked: 692 Times
| Re: Pure, simple and quality or many extras, bling and neighbour-appeal? Quote:
Dear Flatout sir, The question you are asking has long been haunting me. I hope I am able to explain my quandary. Before reading my very confusing explanation, I am putting the main questions I want to ask over here first: 1. How do you know, as a non technical person, whether the engine is well engineered or not? 2. Design of cars are generally tailored to a country's needs. I think, most of the cars which are available in most countries are designed to cater to the needs of the population (eg. I would never consider a mahindra to be well engineered car from a european perspective, but I would say its designed well considering Indian population in mind). So, when and how do you decide that a car is well designed? I would like to give some examples: 1. If I were to give you V8 engine from the AMG Merc, M division of BMW, and RS division of Audi; how would you judge which one is the best? 2. Mini-SUV's. This segment has become one of the most hotly pursued segments in the world. India has the following contenders: Dacia Duster, Nissan X-trail, Honda CR-V, Chevy Captiva, LR Freelander, BMW X1. Lets leave the price aside for a moment. Which would you think would be the best from a design point of perspective? Sir, what I am trying to tell you is that today, its becoming increasingly difficult to judge a car purely from whether the engine is good or not. Even if the engine may be bad, a good gearbox and clever tuning can hide the weaknesses very well. E.g. Almost everyone I would ask will tell me that the BMW inline 6 engine is one of the best in the world. But, I have driven a V6 200bhp merc E230 W211. I really liked the engine's refinement and the power delivery (which was very linear). Would you say then I am wrong in my way of thinking? Please do explain to me since I have no experience with good engines. I have never driven an inline 6, hence I cannot comment. As far as design is concerned, yes, its generally easy to decide; BUT from what I am observing, most new cars which are being produced today are designed after deciding which type of consumer its being targeted. So, if you were to judge bearing this, then most designs are spot on. Please do excuse my ignorance, but I genuinely would like to learn. Thanks, Simple_car Quote:
I completely agree with your line of thinking. The spark per say was not very well designed at all. It has a mediocre engine and very bad interior design as well. That said, since it was the car I learnt to drive in, it holds a special place in my heart. But sir, I bought the car about 5 years ago when the only competition was the alto, and maybe the santro. The engine of the alto is not that great either, it suffers from the same drawbacks as the spark. The santro had excellent low end torque, but it was a very poor handler. Spark's engine had good low and mid range compared to competition (though its still a mediocre engine at best) and it was a neutral handler. So, I would still have bought the car even 5 years back. It was a simple car. Regarding the high dash placement, then I would also point out that India's most highest selling platform aka 'swift' suffers from the same drawback. Yet it is revered by the enthusiasts. Yes, space management could have been better, but we had no better choice. I sometimes think that the kei cars of japan should be sold in the metros. They have excellent space management and are decent performers. Thanks, Simple_car | ||
(2) Thanks |
The following 2 BHPians Thank Simple_car for this useful post: | Farukh, TheHkrish |
31st July 2013, 08:11 | #157 | |||||||
BHPian Join Date: Apr 2013 Location: Yorkshire Dales
Posts: 300
Thanked: 385 Times
| Re: Pure, simple and quality or many extras, bling and neighbour-appeal? Quote:
Quote:
Above all, simplicity, purity, integrity and honesty. Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
I was suggesting that fundamentals rather than fripperies should be more important in one's choice of machine. Quote:
I think it is fair to say there are few European cars today which are poor - whereas there used to be many. Equally the best cars have lost some of their purity, quality and desirability from an engineering perspective but have grown more user-friendly, more profitable and less distinctive. Cars have all gravitated towards a middle ground. To give you an idea of what I appreciate, here is a little list to peruse and google if necessary. In no particular order and with plenty of omissions: The original Range Rover (1969-94). Citroën 2cv. Jaguar XK120. Mercedes W124 diesel estates. BMC Mini. Citroën SM. Alfa Romeo SZ. Tata Nano. BMW 328 (1936-40). Triumph TR4. MG TF. Citroën DS. Rover 90. NSU Ro80. Rover SD1. Saab 99/900 (1968-93), Saab 92/93 (1950s-60s). Almost all Alfa-Romeos from the 1950 and 1960s. Citroën CX. Alfa SudSprint. Jaguar XJ6 (1968-). Lotus Elan. Fiat Panda (2003-12). Renault 16. Morgan 3-wheeler, both past and present. Quote:
But to tell the truth, I would never spend anywhere near as much money on a car which was going to depreciate. In the UK, the max I spend on an everyday car is 1.2L - and that buys something like an Audi A6 2.5TDi, MB W124 300TD, Skoda Octavia 1.9TDi. Mileage is usually nearer 200,000 than 100,000 and none the worse for it! By the way, I couldn't agree more with everything you say. | |||||||
(1) Thanks |
The following BHPian Thanks FlatOut for this useful post: | Simple_car |
31st July 2013, 15:09 | #158 | |
BHPian Join Date: Jul 2013 Location: Dance Bar City!
Posts: 355
Thanked: 692 Times
| Re: Pure, simple and quality or many extras, bling and neighbour-appeal? Quote:
Thanks, Simple_car | |
() Thanks |
31st July 2013, 20:44 | #159 | |
BANNED Join Date: Dec 2011 Location: Chennai
Posts: 818
Thanked: 1,722 Times
| Re: Pure, simple and quality or many extras, bling and neighbour-appeal? Quote:
At the end of the day it all boils down to one man's meat being another man's poison- all just a point of view. Last edited by VeyronSuperSprt : 31st July 2013 at 20:47. | |
(1) Thanks |
The following BHPian Thanks VeyronSuperSprt for this useful post: | B O V |
31st July 2013, 21:34 | #160 | |
BHPian Join Date: Apr 2013 Location: Yorkshire Dales
Posts: 300
Thanked: 385 Times
| Re: Pure, simple and quality or many extras, bling and neighbour-appeal? Quote:
Certain people may rise to the top because of their combination of looks, brain and charm - but they are still human and no better than the beggar in the street? | |
() Thanks |
31st July 2013, 21:45 | #161 | |
BHPian Join Date: Feb 2013 Location: Cochin
Posts: 307
Thanked: 245 Times
| Re: Pure, simple and quality or many extras, bling and neighbour-appeal? Flatout, You raise quite thought provoking questions.I myself would a very responsive and a well handling car over one which might have all the goodies yet lacks the oompfh.IMHO not everyone feels this way(at least in India),Most of the general car buying public will easily choose say a less powerful car with more creature comforts over one which has more power.I don't suppose a car which is very well built and has an excellent engine but lacks some features which might be considered to be standard would sell very well.It all boils down to the personal choice of an individual. An example would be,A friend recently sought my advice since he wanted to buy a new car.For the use he mentioned I suggested the Toyota Innova.For which he replied."Dude,its an innova".See what I mean.It varies from person to person. Quote:
| |
() Thanks |
|
31st July 2013, 22:06 | #162 |
BHPian Join Date: Apr 2013 Location: Yorkshire Dales
Posts: 300
Thanked: 385 Times
| Re: Pure, simple and quality or many extras, bling and neighbour-appeal? MODERATOR - please combine these two posts - accidentally posted separately. Perhaps you're hoping I can be more specific on certain vehicles available for sale? If this is the case, it is a little difficult if I don't have personal experience. I understand your logic for choosing the vehicle you have, all I can add is that if you can find a good SUV without four wheel drive, then choose it - unless this feature is a necessity for you, which is unlikely unless you routinely pull a trailer through slippery ground. I do see that the SUV or 'soft-roader' is just the motor car evolving to suit 21st century needs - I'm not suggesting this is a bad thing! I suppose I am rather too much of an old-fashioned engineer to wish for many electronic gizmos, additionally I appreciate character in anything, especially a good car. I'm also a musician and so a sweet engine can literally be music to my ears. This may sound to some as if my head is in the clouds - totally the opposite, in fact. A pure sweet sound will enhance your brain's alertness whereas a mish-mash of unpleasant white noise will greatly reduce its abilities, especially over a period of more than an hour. Last edited by FlatOut : 31st July 2013 at 22:08. |
() Thanks |
31st July 2013, 22:12 | #163 |
BANNED Join Date: Dec 2011 Location: Chennai
Posts: 818
Thanked: 1,722 Times
| Re: Pure, simple and quality or many extras, bling and neighbour-appeal?
Sought after by whom? A handful of people who appreciate and can afford them. For the rest those classics don't serve any purpose and they wouldn't take it even if it were given to them free as they wouldn't be able to maintain them nor would they find any value in using them as they are meant to be used. A person rising to the top can also carry out World War III that could destroy mankind. You'll be better off with the beggar - at the least he would be humane whilst still being a human. Last edited by VeyronSuperSprt : 31st July 2013 at 22:21. |
() Thanks |
31st July 2013, 22:32 | #164 | |
BHPian Join Date: Apr 2013 Location: Yorkshire Dales
Posts: 300
Thanked: 385 Times
| Re: Pure, simple and quality or many extras, bling and neighbour-appeal? Quote:
Knowing your stuff and being ahead of trends can help, although cars were produced in such numbers that values of some thoroughbred classics may never rise too much. Totally agree, somehow we need to work out a way of getting better quality people to the positions of power in this mad world! | |
() Thanks |
13th March 2017, 22:17 | #165 |
BHPian | Not So Useful Technologies in Cars - What's Next? I've been considering getting a new car. Now ordinarily I'd try putting up a thread to take help from fellow members on the most suitable purchase. But I guess the search is at a nascent stage. I currently drive a Chevrolet Beat. Most stuff that I use is either manually actuated or doesn't exist in the car. As I thought about the stuff I need, I started thinking about stuff I probably DON'T NEED. And I came across this very interesting video on the topic. Here's the link: For those who don't want to go through the whole video, the guy lists down the the top 6 most useless (read less useful/could use more development) technologies in today's cars. Listed in the order they show up in the video:
It'd be interesting to know opinions of fellow team bhpians here on this topic. Note to mods: I couldn't find a thread on a similar topic. Please shift the thread/merge as needed. Thanks. Last edited by samarth.bhatia : 13th March 2017 at 22:24. |
(9) Thanks |
The following 9 BHPians Thank samarth.bhatia for this useful post: | ankan.m.blr, arunphilip, browneyes, GTO, ike, Karthik Chandra, mvadg, The Brutailer, vishy76 |