Go Back   Team-BHP > Under the Hood > Technical Stuff


Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old 12th July 2010, 13:32   #31
Senior - BHPian
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Bangalore
Posts: 2,057
Thanked: 420 Times
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Samurai View Post
The title has been changed to reflect the real reason. This is not a design flaw, but a design feature to meet modern pedestrian safety norms.
Somehow this is not digestible , You mean that apart from i10 all other cars which have non-plastic radiator support or plastic radiator support of better quality are not following pedestrian safetry norm ?

Look at this
Euro NCAP car ratings - - News : Overdrive

NCAP rating for pedestrian safety for i10 and Suzuki Swift is same 3.
Mind it these are ratings of 2008 with the new rating System of 2010 it is fully possible that rating will go down further.

There could have been multiple ways to manufacture Radiator support , Probably in multiple peaces fastened together so that an impact breaks only a portion and not the whole frame. Or It could have been designed such that this part does not transfer impact to surrounding areas.

Best of all why not put a bumper which absorbs more energy and does not transfer to radiator support or other portions ?
If you see Swift has bigger bumber which are fastned to the body using plastic clips. On an impact these platic clips come out and also bumper deforms and it has enough space to absorb the energy.
You might have seen in urban scenarios many swifts with bumper coming out from one side.


It is clearly a design fault , Instead of designing a bumper which absorbs more energy they chose to transfer the impact to other parts.

Please revert the title back
amitk26 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 13th July 2010, 09:16   #32
BHPian
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Ajmer / Mumbai
Posts: 210
Thanked: 2 Times
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by amitk26 View Post
Somehow this is not digestible , You mean that apart from i10 all other cars which have non-plastic radiator support or plastic radiator support of better quality are not following pedestrian safetry norm ?

Look at this
Euro NCAP car ratings - - News : Overdrive

NCAP rating for pedestrian safety for i10 and Suzuki Swift is same 3.
Mind it these are ratings of 2008 with the new rating System of 2010 it is fully possible that rating will go down further.

There could have been multiple ways to manufacture Radiator support , Probably in multiple peaces fastened together so that an impact breaks only a portion and not the whole frame. Or It could have been designed such that this part does not transfer impact to surrounding areas.

Best of all why not put a bumper which absorbs more energy and does not transfer to radiator support or other portions ?
If you see Swift has bigger bumber which are fastned to the body using plastic clips. On an impact these platic clips come out and also bumper deforms and it has enough space to absorb the energy.
You might have seen in urban scenarios many swifts with bumper coming out from one side.


It is clearly a design fault , Instead of designing a bumper which absorbs more energy they chose to transfer the impact to other parts.

Please revert the title back
I think I stand vindicated. Why has this MAJOR issue never cropped up in this forum - I do not know, but clearly says something for our own attitude. Take whatever they dish out and don't question or challenge them.

This definitely seems to be a design flaw, or a flaw intentionally left there so that the dealers can make more money during even very minor impacts. This plasticky car definitely increases the profit margins of HYUNDAI and dealers, at the regular cost to the owners. SHAMEFUL

2 persons have already taken them to court over this issue, it seems. Even then HYUNDAI insists that we are FOOLS and they are LORDS.

A similar attitude of Honda led to their problems (though not major right now) in India currently. They were amongst the best and premium car makers here, but they have been TOO arrogant.

Same is happening with Hyundai.

I also request that the title be changed back to original, and The thread moved back to the main forums.

Last edited by GTO : 16th July 2010 at 16:30. Reason: SECOND WARNING : No public discussion on Mod Activity
alankarm@sancha is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 13th July 2010, 09:52   #33
Senior - BHPian
 
sandeepmdas's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Varkala
Posts: 1,155
Thanked: 697 Times
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by kpzen View Post
I'm not doubting your experience and basics. But you need to accept the fact that a lot has changed in cars since 1931 or even in the last decade.
Guys, the point is we are not changed at all. To be frank, we are not discussing tech matters here in this thread.

It looks like all we need is a car that is India-specific in design - a car that should not deform/crumble when an Indian driver hits an Indian pedestrian. We are not worried about the pedestrian - he can die on the spot, on the way to hospital (that is, if someone bothers to take him to one) or after reaching the hospital; if he manages to get attention there, he may/might survive.

He has got choices.
The owner has absolutely no choice! Hyundai is waiting for such an opportunity to cheat us. The only other option we have here is get back to the Gud ol' Amby/Padmini.

Look at the mess the Europeans have created.

Just my 2c. Understood this post violates many a norm of our forum.
sandeepmdas is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 13th July 2010, 10:06   #34
Senior - BHPian
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Bangalore
Posts: 2,057
Thanked: 420 Times
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by sandeepmdas View Post
Guys, the point is we are not changed at all. To be frank, we are not discussing tech matters here in this thread.

It looks like all we need is a car that is India-specific in design - a car that should not deform/crumble when an Indian driver hits an Indian pedestrian. We are not worried about the pedestrian - he can die on the spot, on the way to hospital (that is, if someone bothers to take him to one) or after reaching the hospital; if he manages to get attention there, he may/might survive.
Dob't you think above understandg is using a warped logic ? Who said that pedisterian safety is secondry in this entire disucussion ?
Why it needs to be assumed that pedisterian safety = High repair cost ?
Question is about the repair costs involved due to design. In above paragraph there is an implied assumption that cars which just absorb the impact energy in bumper are some how less safe.

We have example of other cars which also have same Euro NCAP rating
See the example of Suzuki Swift which has same Euro NCAP rating for pedisterian safety as i10 achieved in same year 2008.

It is clearly a design of i10 which makes repair cost for minor impacts very high. If Hundai design team selected a design alternative by which a portion of impact energy should be absorbed by interior parts instead of just bumper it is their design choice .
Consumers never asked them to put a smaller bumper and they could have selected to have more room for impact absorption in a cheaper part.
Or if they know fully well that impact will be transferred to radiator support and other internal plastic parts they can choose to reduce the cost in line with competition.

Last edited by amitk26 : 13th July 2010 at 10:07.
amitk26 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 13th July 2010, 10:29   #35
Senior - BHPian
 
sandeepmdas's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Varkala
Posts: 1,155
Thanked: 697 Times
Default

No one here arguing here that pedestrian safety is not important, and that is good. So shall we consider the following equation:

Pedestrian safety == car taking in energy rather than giving back == more damage == high cost.

A car colliding with 7" thick concrete can break a frame or two damage even if it was in 20 kmph. Deduct VAT + Service tax + Edu. cess from 12500/- and anyone can see the amount H has taken is not very substantial considering the car involved is a modern vehicle.
sandeepmdas is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 13th July 2010, 10:42   #36
Team-BHP Support
 
Samurai's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: B'lore-Manipal
Posts: 22,909
Thanked: 15,770 Times
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by alankarm@sancha View Post
I also request that the title be changed back to original, and The thread moved back to the main forums.
Your title was too sensational, therefore it had to be toned down.

Quote:
Originally Posted by alankarm@sancha View Post
Why is TEAM-BHP trying to hide this discussion, from buyers researching to buy a car?
Please think before making one more sensationalist allegation. We are not a tabloid to allow sensational threads without proper data to back it up. And we are not funded by any auto manufacturer, so we don't have to hide anything. We consider this topic to be technical, so it is here. We have no room for conspiracy theories in Team-BHP.
Samurai is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 13th July 2010, 10:50   #37
BHPian
 
MutantX's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: Madras
Posts: 868
Thanked: 89 Times
Default

Well from the point of discussion, i feel pedestrian safety is equally as important as the passenger's safety. PERIOD! so cars should be designed in such a way that both would be taken care of! Since the pedestrian doesnt have any shield (airbags/impact absorbers/seat-belts) they should be well protected so that the least damange is inflicted.

A bumper can be replaced with 25k (at the max) but loss of a limb cannot! on the other hand, a few people on the road deserve walking lessons! especially people on mobile phones when crossing a signal or walking on the road (not the pavement).

Last edited by MutantX : 13th July 2010 at 10:53.
MutantX is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 13th July 2010, 11:24   #38
Senior - BHPian
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Bangalore
Posts: 2,057
Thanked: 420 Times
Default

I think point of discussion is what is better design keeping the pedestrian safety rating constant, Obviously one for which repair cost is lower.

Quote:
Originally Posted by sandeepmdas View Post
No one here arguing here that pedestrian safety is not important, and that is good. So shall we consider the following equation:

Pedestrian safety == car taking in energy rather than giving back == more damage == high cost.

A car colliding with 7" thick concrete can break a frame or two damage even if it was in 20 kmph. Deduct VAT + Service tax + Edu. cess from 12500/- and anyone can see the amount H has taken is not very substantial considering the car involved is a modern vehicle.
Well if we compare 2 cars available in Indian market of same modernity with same Euro NCAP rating 3 for Pedestrian safety available one from Maruti ( Swift) and one from Hundyai ( i20) in same price bracket then repair costs is a fair enough comparison.
If one manufacturer choose to provide better bumper design so only a 5K bumper is replaced at worst then it is better design then another manufacturer which needs 12500Rs

Quote:
Originally Posted by MutantX View Post
Well from the point of discussion, i feel pedestrian safety is equally as important as the passenger's safety. PERIOD! so cars should be designed in such a way that both would be taken care of! Since the pedestrian doesnt have any shield (airbags/impact absorbers/seat-belts) they should be well protected so that the least damange is inflicted.

A bumper can be replaced with 25k (at the max) but loss of a limb cannot! on the other hand, a few people on the road deserve walking lessons! especially people on mobile phones when crossing a signal or walking on the road (not the pavement).
Ok if you have a choice to make with same rating for pedestrian safety of NCAP 3 which car would you consider better design, one which can be repired in 5K or one which needs 25K ?
amitk26 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 13th July 2010, 11:34   #39
BHPian
 
MutantX's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: Madras
Posts: 868
Thanked: 89 Times
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by amitk26 View Post
Ok if you have a choice to make with same rating for pedestrian safety of NCAP 3 which car would you consider better design, one which can be repired in 5K or one which needs 25K ?
obviously the one which is cheaper in terms of cost. cost & quality go hand-in hand, but there should be a way to reduce the cost but at the same time retaining quality & safety norms.
MutantX is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 13th July 2010, 11:47   #40
Senior - BHPian
 
n.devdath's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: Bangalore
Posts: 4,079
Thanked: 2,150 Times
Default

I feel there are two aspects to this thread:
1. Are we making fragile cars for pedestrian safety? Is this across all manufacturers?
2. Is the i10 more fragile compared to other cars on the road which follow the same pedestrian safety standards?

Coming to the first point, the answer is yes. In interests of pedestrian safety, cars today have crumple zones, collapsible bumpers, soft corners, non protruding door handles..the list goes on and the cars are fragile on the outside compared to earlier years. Is it required? Absolutely yes. Should India have different standards?
Now this is tough. Because if Indian cars are supposed to have tougher bumpers and other parts to protect them from small nicks and bumps, it also means that the pedestrians in India are more vulnerable to injuries compared to other countries which again means that the value of life in India is undermined. Hence this should not be the case in my opinion.
Cars are not meant to casually hit walls, bikes, other cars, poles, dividers, barricades and casually move on as if nothing has happened. So the point that Indian roads are prone to car damage is due to the fact that we drive wrongly. That needs to be corrected to whatever extent possible by us and the system. Making a car strong on the outside is not a solution.

Coming to the next question whether the i10 is weaker than other cars following the same standard, I do not know but looking at the picture, I feel that its parts are too big in themselves. Bumpers can be made by combining child parts to enable cheap repair. Mountings should be properly reinforced and made repairable where possible. Metal can be substituted at a lot of places here and that should be done.

And this, is certainly a required change in the i10 and needs to driven.

Just my 25 naya paisa of thought.
n.devdath is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 13th July 2010, 11:58   #41
BHPian
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: Currently, New Delhi
Posts: 423
Thanked: 94 Times
Default

I think you should come up with pics of the broken frame/ show the frame supporting radiator, condenser etc. & also mark the area where it breaks. A little proof always helps in a textual discussion & it will also justify the previous title. The repair cost of 12k is too much for an impact at 20kmph for a value hatch considering nothing major was damaged.

Last edited by GTO : 16th July 2010 at 16:31. Reason: Quoted post has been edited
JustCause is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 13th July 2010, 12:06   #42
Senior - BHPian
 
srishiva's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: Bengaluru
Posts: 3,704
Thanked: 932 Times
Default

Really sympathize with you. I guess given a constraint (safety), different manufacturers come out with different designs. Maybe Hyundai came out with the one which can cause more damage to the wallet. Kudos to you for bringing it up. People usually are not very critical about their cars.
srishiva is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 13th July 2010, 12:25   #43
Senior - BHPian
 
vnabhi's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: DC -> DC
Posts: 5,345
Thanked: 1,317 Times
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by MutantX View Post
Well from the point of discussion, i feel pedestrian safety is equally as important as the passenger's safety. PERIOD! so cars should be designed in such a way that both would be taken care of! Since the pedestrian doesnt have any shield (airbags/impact absorbers/seat-belts) they should be well protected so that the least damange is inflicted.

A bumper can be replaced with 25k (at the max) but loss of a limb cannot! on the other hand, a few people on the road deserve walking lessons! especially people on mobile phones when crossing a signal or walking on the road (not the pavement).
+1 to your views. But what I'm worried about is that though modern cars are more pedestrian friendly, it is generally dogs and animals hits that occur more often in India.

In my 2 decades of driving, I've never hit a pedestrian, bike or any vehicle, but did hit a dog on NH5 with my M800 long back. I was driving on an empty highway at 75 kmph, when a pack of dogs suddenly darted across--they were not visible earlier as the road was on an embankment, and they suddenly emerged as if from nowhere. Despite hard braking, I hit the last dog at around 30 or 35 kmph. The result was only a broken headlamp. Nothing else had happened. God knows what would have happened with the recent cars.

While harping on this, the Fiesta used to come with a 'dog bar' on its bumper, but it is not seen in models after 2006, perhaps due to the new pedestrian safety norms (keeps dogs safe too )
vnabhi is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 13th July 2010, 16:59   #44
BHPian
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Ajmer / Mumbai
Posts: 210
Thanked: 2 Times
Default

Sandeepmas says that I collided with a 7" concrete slab at 20mph or kmh. I don't know where he got these figures? In fact IF the car can achieve a speed of even 20kmh in about 6" to 12" (As I just started the car), This must be an amazing car. Infact the slab went below the bumper and broke the lower portion of the frame into 2.
alankarm@sancha is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 13th July 2010, 18:54   #45
BHPian
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Ajmer / Mumbai
Posts: 210
Thanked: 2 Times
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by alankarm@sancha View Post
Sandeepmas says that I collided with a 7" concrete slab at 20mph or kmh. I don't know where he got these figures? In fact IF the car can achieve a speed of even 20kmh in about 6" to 12" (As I just started the car), This must be an amazing car. Infact the slab went below the bumper and broke the lower portion of the frame into 2.

Incidentally, this is the 1st incident I am talking about.

Basically I have a habit of putting the car in 1st gear after ignition, and just moving it slightly forward (maybe a few inches), even if I have to reverse the car. Then I put it in reverse gear. call it an idiosyncrasy or whatever.

This slight movement was enough to damage the car in the 1st incidence.

IT WAS VERY DIFFICULT TO BELIEVE.

Today at the Hyundai workshop I also found out that they are changing these frames at the rate of about 3-4 per week. WOW!!! for a city like Ajmer and a car just about 2.5 years or so old THAT IS VERY HIGH. They also seem to be perpetually out of stock with this frame (I was told, they install them as soon as they receive them, there were 3 waiting for this replacement)
alankarm@sancha is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply


Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
SIAM says BS-VI emission norms will compromise vehicle safety! GTO Road Safety 16 26th February 2017 16:08
The Pedestrian Safety Aspect of Cars Xeno Technical Stuff 8 4th January 2013 04:39
European Safety Norms hasopi The Indian Car Scene 20 26th November 2004 14:23
A very very very hot Murcielago. v12 The International Automotive Scene 18 14th July 2004 22:04


All times are GMT +5.5. The time now is 05:27.

Copyright 2000 - 2018, Team-BHP.com
Proudly powered by E2E Networks