[mxx]

Originally Posted by shekhar_gogoi

The yearly permit renewal system is very logical but scrapping cars based on year of Mfg. or BS1/2/3 is just illogical. Its like saying let a BS IV Indica throwing thick black smoke ply on the road just because its BS IV whereas you scrap a very well maintained and less polluting Fiat Padmini or even an esteem just cos they are not BS I or they are old! It just defies simple logic.

We all know old doesn't always mean polluting vehicles and new doesn't mean non-polluting vehicles. It all comes down to vehicle maintenance.

The thing is plain and simple: Scrap 'polluting vehicles' not 'old vehicles'.

Not really. See the pre-bs/euro vehicles were not made with pollution,green house reduction techniques, hence even the best maintained pre-bd/euro vehicles will be more polluting. Even if an yearly permit system is introduced, these vehicles wont meet the level of environment standards, and hence will anyway be scrapped.
Then, we come to bs/euro vehicles. Yes, badly maintained bs/euro vehicles will be polluting. No doubt about that. The fact is that introducing a yearly permit system will take time if it has to be done effectively. Till then, we need a system to control the pollution, and that is only possible by taking standards into account.

[ramzsys]

My 137D fiat gives me 22kmpl, sips about 750ml litre of oil(out of the 4.2 litre) every service, doesn't churn out black smoke.

Scrapping cars with safety as a reason is logical.

Fuel efficiency and environmental reasons from SIAM is sheer humbug.

[honeybee]

I think even the Mumbai HC has directed that commercial vehicles older than 15 years cannot ply on the city roads, whether converted to CNG or not. Recently there was a case where two tourist buses were confiscated by the Mumbai RTO on these grounds and the owners had to pay a heavy fine to get them released, with a warning not to bring them back to the city.

I also think commercial vehicles more than 8 years old in Mumbai must compulsorily convert to LPG/CNG. This is how most of the taxis have been allowed to stay on the road for this long.

This proposal from SIAM is nothing but another statement of its true intent: protecting the interests of the auto manufacturers.

[shortbread]

I think people have the wrong notion of a scrappage scheme.

Internationally the scheme enables people who have cars of a certain prescribed age to exchange it for a newer car and enjoy benefits from the Govt. either by Tax/duty deductions on the new car or cash back when scrapping the old car.

ITS NOT MANDATORY TO SCRAP THE OLD CAR BUT AN OPTION TO DO SO FOR AGREED BENEFITS.

Of course it primarily benefits the Auto sector, which nonetheless is an important industry. But there are others as well:

• Its a great opportunity for people who cant afford to upgrade from their existing old vehicle to a new car.
• Get rid of older vehicles that pollute more, less efficient and unsafe
• The scheme scraps older vehicles and replaces them with new ones, thus not adding to the vehicle population.

In the UK the scrappage scheme allowed owners of cars registered prior to July'99 to scrap their older cars and buy new ones at a 2000pound rebate of which 1k is from the Govt. and the other half from the new car company.

Nobody is forcing the owners of older cars to scrap it but its simply an excellent opportunity to do so.

[vinya_jag]

I totally disagree with SIAM. The problem with the Indian automotive industry is lack of innovation. Lack of products that sell for bigger profits.

Today the only way an Indian automotive company can survive is by clocking numbers.
And when numbers come into picture, the margins are very low.

The healthier way to make money is to bring in technology that sells for more profits.
Bring super cars, convertibles, Jeeps, Open tops, Electric cars, hybrid cars. There is a market for all these, and each piece can sell for better margins. Handbuild these cars, employ skilled personnel, and you will churn classier cars. Just ask Ferrari, how they do it.

Today, a normal City household can easily keep more than one car. One for office, one for offroading, one for long drives etc. Addressing each issue with a new car will create market. Electric cars and hybrid cars can go a long way. Subsidizing these cars will simply promote them, and thus would easily lead to a greener environment, than banning cars.

For now, I dont see any visionary manufacturer who wants to play his own rules. Instead, I can see all of them flocking one behind the other trying to get a piece of the cake. There are some 20 manufacturers all trying to grab a 30K (per month) diesel car market. How sad :(

At the end of this post, I strongly feel TATA should bring their pixel right now

[shekhar_gogoi]

Originally Posted by mxx

Not really. See the pre-bs/euro vehicles were not made with pollution,green house reduction techniques, hence even the best maintained pre-bd/euro vehicles will be more polluting. Even if an yearly permit system is introduced, these vehicles wont meet the level of environment standards, and hence will anyway be scrapped.
Then, we come to bs/euro vehicles. Yes, badly maintained bs/euro vehicles will be polluting. No doubt about that. The fact is that introducing a yearly permit system will take time if it has to be done effectively. Till then, we need a system to control the pollution, and that is only possible by taking standards into account.

Precisely my point. Forget the year of Mfg. Put on stringent pollution norms. If the car, irrespective of if its 1996 or 2006 Mfg., fails to meet the set standards then scrap it. No excuses. Sounds more logical to me.

[Leepower]

I am no activist. But I will not remain quiet if some profit-minded, heartless organisation tries to prevent vintage/classic vehicles from plying on road. This is not a debate about preventing old public or transport vehicles from running on road (I am all for it), I am talking about the ''great'' proposal of SIAM (Society of Indian Automobile Manufacturers) which is calling for the scrapping of all private vehicles registered before 1996.

This is not the first time SIAM has pushed this agenda. They have been doing it before every budget session, in every meeting with government. Despite several rejections, they have been persistent in their agenda. A Google search on ''SIAM old vehicles'' will clear your doubts.

The government was sensible enough to reject the proposal outright at Central Motor Vehicles Rules-Technical Standing Committee meeting on Thursday. But the outrage it caused in me and some other vintage/classic lovers can't be described in words. Why does automobile manufacturers want to kill the already dwindling vintage/classic vehicles, take away their legal status, prevent them from plying on roads, confine them to museums? They say it is to ''save environment'', bring out more ''eco-friendly vehicles''. But according to the Times of India article, SIAM make a hue and cry when ever their sales are down. The main reason why SIAM has been persistently trying to push their agenda is this: If ''old vehicles'' are made illegal, around 60 lakh private vehicles will have to be scrapped i.e. people will be forced to buy ''new'' vehicles, it will rain money for SIAM members.

But, I feel, SIAM need to look inwards as to why sales are down, rather than blame old vehicles for their plight. Poor quality of products, lack of innovation, exorbitant price – these are a few reasons according to me that has led to low sales of local manufacturers' products.

Here are some classic example which will give you a clear picture of why aam aadmi still vouches for the oldies:

A, I own a 1975 Bullet 350, there is not even a speck of rust on it. I have taken it to Kerala, Raan of Kutch, nothing not even a speck of rust is on it. My brother owns a 2012 Bullet UCE 350, it's got rust spots all over it.

B, If you want to buy a new 250 be ready to shell out a lakh or more, but on the other hand you can get a Yezdi Classic for 25,000 bucks

It is a not just a question about our passion. I am not saying that all older vehicles without papers should be allowed to ply on roads. All I am saying is that why we have tried so hard to keep alive for the next generation to see must remain running. I don't want to see my 67 Jawa in a museum, I want my child to see it on the road, experience it alive, understand it history, and why it is an integral part of my life and to what lengths I can go to keep it on road. In this context, I completely agree with what the government says. Let every vehicle which is more than 15 years old undergo fitness test every 5 years. And let it be a through fitness test.

Already there are a lot of restrictions on vintage/classic vehicles, if ever this plan is implemented, it will be the final nail in the coffin for the small, struggling vintage/classic vehicles. I am not alone in opposing their agenda. Heck we need to unite and make a lot of noise to prevent them from pushing this agenda again.

Source:
http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/b...w/33256283.cms

[RSR]

This is a very ill-advised move by SIAM meant to further their own interests. On one hand they want to finish off these old beauties in order to "save the environment", and on the other hand they try hard along with their allies (the notoriously slothful oil PSUs) to delay the introduction of the latest Euro emission norms in place in the developed countries. This kind of lobbying doesn't reflect well on them.

Even if they somehow manage to get the GoI to accept their agenda in finishing off vintage & classic cars, I hope it is immediately challenged legally and overturned by the judicial system. The existing system is just fine - scrap very old commercial vehicles, but allow private vehicles to ply even after 15 years, with 5 year extensions after inspection. There is no need to tinker with this at all.

I've always been suspicious of the agenda of SIAM.

Although they function openly as a respectable association of peers (automobile manufacturers), several things on their agenda are meant to further the interests of the few members who dominate the association, even if it goes against the interests of the ordinary public.

If one examines the stuff regularly emanating from SIAM, one will understand that the association is dominated by a few big local manufacturers (along with one large manufacturer which used to be half-owned by the GoI). The rest of the manufacturers, such as the small local ones and even the large MNCs merely have a token presence. This is just to portray to the public that SIAM represents the entire industry. SIAM's agenda has always been to lobby for the interests of its dominant members - such as maintaining the large disparity in the price of fuels, lobbying to delay the latest, stringent emission and safety norms, ensuring the continuation of the restrictive trade practices in terms of spare parts supply etc.

Only when there is a conflict of interest between the dominant members of SIAM, does one understand its true composition. The best example is the issue of quadricycles. The question of introducing these four-wheeled contraptions pitted some of SIAM's dominant members against one another, and the spat became public knowledge. The manufacturer who lobbied hard to introduce quadricycles even stated to the media that he faced absolutely no opposition from the MNC car companies as they were reported to have said they were not in the business of manufacturing "four-wheeled autorickshaws". He lamented that some local manufacturers were strongly against introducing quadricycles (or delaying their introduction) and this was responsible for the GoI's dilemma in allowing quadricycles to ply on the road.

On this issue (of scrapping old cars), they seem to be united as they think it would benefit all of them if vintage and classic beauties and other old cars are scrapped. I hope their efforts are in vain.

[eq24]

This makes perfect sense for them to do. It's ethical ramifications are a whole different issue. By making old cars illegal,the owners will have to buy new ones. An action which will translate into more and more sales and in effect revenue for member companies.

But getting such a law into action in a country like ours is quite impossible. For one vintage cars are a status symbol, its not old days where people say what a piece of junk, today a vintage cars pulls up admirers like never before.

At a recent vintage rally in Delhi, my first, majority of the people there were under 40's and a big chunk of them in the 18-30 category. All of them admiring the cars and lauding the owners for keeping a piece of history and more importantly a stepping stone in Car Engineering alive.

Not to forget that most of the serious vintage car collectors or restorers are very affluent people and with good political connections. They will not idly sit as their investments go to waste.

I think SIAM can keep trying, such a law will never pass. Even the most developed countries have much bigger vintage car collections than us in India and they have pollution controls more stringent than we can ever implement.

[FINTAIL]

Originally Posted by Leepower

A, I own a 1975 Bullet 350, there is not even a speck of rust on it. I have taken it to Kerala, Raan of Kutch, nothing not even a speck of rust is on it. My brother owns a 2012 Bullet UCE 350, it's got rust spots all over it.

Now take a West German made W115/W123 240D. Is the W212 E220 CDI a superior car? NO

Electronic failures and what not! Lot of nonsense. A heap of ....Thats what a good for nothing a W212 is, in my opinion.

OR, lets just compare the lovely fins of the W111, to the confused rear of the W222.

The 2014 Impala is not such a revolution, when compared to what the Impala was, in 1959. Same goes to the Beetle.

Originally Posted by eq24

I think SIAM can keep trying, such a law will never pass. Even the most developed countries have much bigger vintage car collections than us in India and they have pollution controls more stringent than we can ever implement.

Actually, recurrence of this thing, makes me quite cross. I mean, is it ethical?

All our automotive lawmakers...can they be so....Well, you know what I mean.

These organizations should be focussed on improvising the automotive situation in India. This can be done by implementing more stringent crash test laws. And instead of improving the situation, they are leaving a certain section of car lovers disgruntled.

Now imagine, all those who maintain their cars with such love......
My Grandfathers three decades of Sundays shall be destroyed, if our 1100D is taken away. .

Imagine! The 1100D, and the (SuperSelect MHP/MHN XXXX) and Willys CJ3B (MHN/2191) before that , were maintained with such care, and what not...!

SIAM seems to have a twisted agenda behind it.

Lastly, what will happen to the Maharajah cars? It is a good thing the petition was rejected.

No cheers!

[foby.sebastian]

That’s an opportunity for government to classify the old vehicles as Vintage/Classics and make special laws to protect the automobile heritage of the nation rather than scrapping the old automobiles.



We need the Vintage and Classics automobile scene to be more organized , at least by allocating Vintage number plates and giving tax benefits.

I have seen old vehicles classified as vintage and special number plates for them , we need a similar system here in our nation to preserve the legacies on road and not in museums.

[commonman]

Not supporting those old lorries and buses which run illegally ,SIAM is unnecessarily putting its head in to trouble. The vintage vehicles are not used on a day to day basis.Whats so much pollution that these old vehicles are making? The year 1996 is a very recent year to cut out the vehicles. If at all ,a special law must be brought for the collectors. Let us say a vehicle must be termed vintage if it passes 50 years and above ,classic if between 25 and 50 years. The taxation can be different ,if they are really worried about environment. But they must give full insurance cover for these vehicles if they are road worthy.
At the same time see the link below, as usual we have double standards.
http://indiatoday.intoday.in/story/r.../1/306750.html

[amolbh]

I've seen Mahindra Veritos (not more than two years old) emitting black smoke even while idling. 20 year old cars if maintained well will still pollute lesser than these examples.

MODS: There's a thread on this: http://www.team-bhp.com/forum/indian...cle-sales.html

[anjan_c2007]

The SIAM members who propagated such an idea (What an idea?)need to take some counseling sessions from good psychiatrists and preferably from psychiatrists who own cars or bikes made before 1996, or else vintages too !
In a growing economy like India, where people are just emerging out of their erstwhile income brackets to higher income levels viz. the lower class turning into middle class and the middle class emerging as upper middle class and so on, owning older motor vehicles is the norm.

A lowly paid labourer will go for a second hand Luna moped or a Bajaj scooter as his entry level, two wheeler. He may later upgrade to a second hand 100 cc Hero Honda bike and so on. This is happening right before our very eyes. A retired man or even woman may have bought a car when he could afford one, while in service. Now if his car is scrapped, he does not have any money to buy a new one.

Any government that gives in to the unpopular, wishful, erratic and rather mad thinking of the SIAM will face a tough time in Parliament and with the media, appended with the other manifestations of the popular angst.

About destruction of the vintages, even if any government takes such an unpopular decision, the courts of law may take harsh steps to quash such a decision, based on petitions by vintage lovers.

Hence any right thinking government will ignore such mad pleas and go by the popular sentiment.

[C.S.ANANTH]

California which has the stringest emmission norms, exempts vintage and classic vehicles, even from the smog test.Unfortunately, there are several city clubs for such cars, but, we do not have a national body like the FMSCI for motor sports. The less said the better of VCCI the better. It is high time we think of having a national body. This will help to fight the stupid, silly move by SIAM, besides fighting for tyre imports etc