[sa_kiran]

So, the bottomline of the discussion is that quadricycle is not a solution. In fact, it will create more problems.

There are many sections in almost all cities, where the average speed is 80 kmph (a large stretch of Eastern Express Highway in Mumbai is an example). Everyday, we see idiots in the right lane driving at 40 kmph, causing problem for all other drivers. This quadricycle will compound such a problem. What will be their capability to go up a flyover? We see innumerable rickshaws, buses and trucks struggling to move and occupying all the lanes! Should we let in quadricycle to squeeze into the available space?

The whole basis of Mr. Bajaj's argument is rubbish. The interview seems to be planted, the interviewer does not ask any relevant questions!

Finally, a lot of problems in cities can be solved by SENSIBLE and RELIABLE public transport system. I will anyday travel by an AC bus than drive my car and always try to avoid rickshaws.

A recent example - I had been to Mysore last week. I took the bus from Vashi, I paid 300/- to the rickshaw driver to travel from Thane to Vashi. Upon reaching Mysore, I got an AC bus to my parent's place, in about 2 min and paid 24/-. Again, while coming back, I paid 24/- for a comfortable drive. I paid 350/- to the thuggish rickshaw driver to travel from Vashi to Thane. These thuggish rickshaw drivers are the result of decades of lobbying by Senior and Junior Bajajs.

[Daewood]

Originally Posted by sa_kiran

These thuggish rickshaw drivers are the result of decades of lobbying by Senior and Junior Bajajs.

If you stop selling autorickshaws, these thugs will migrate to cabs.
It's already happening in Chennai. With the transport authorities tightening the norms for autorickshaw permits, many of them have started driving Indicas, Etioses and Xylos. Till a couple of years back we had only around 5 call-taxi operators. Today the number exceeds 50.

Blaming Bajaj or Tata for errant driving is similar to how our news channels scream 'BMW mows down..' They blame BMW and not the driver, and initiate a talk show discussion on why these powerful cars are allowed to be sold in india.
I bet even if you give a EuroNCAP 5 star rated vehicle to these rick drivers, it woudn't make any difference, unless they themselves change their driving habits.

[anurag.somani]

Originally Posted by Daewood

If you stop selling autorickshaws, these thugs will migrate to cabs.
It's already happening in Chennai. With the transport authorities tightening the norms for autorickshaw permits, many of them have started driving Indicas, Etioses and Xylos. Till a couple of years back we had only around 5 call-taxi operators. Today the number exceeds 50.

Blaming Bajaj or Tata for errant driving is similar to how our news channels scream 'BMW mows down..' They blame BMW and not the driver, and initiate a talk show discussion on why these powerful cars are allowed to be sold in india.
I bet even if you give a EuroNCAP 5 star rated vehicle to these rick drivers, it woudn't make any difference, unless they themselves change their driving habits.

Makes it all the more important not to have quadricycles on the roads. If an accident happens due to driver negligence; what would you as a passenger prefer being in: a taxi or quadricycle?

[R.I.P]

I am kind of confused by the arguments given here
In my humble opinion quadcycles are an evolution of 3-wheelers with better safety(4 is better than 3). They are not an LMV due to engine and dimension restrictions. They offer better fuel efficiency and emissions than any 4-wheeler on the road today.

The safety issue is there with respect to them plying on Highways(i agree that they should not be allowed on highways/expressways) but then again it is in the implementation of rules where we lack. I see plenty of 2-wheelers, 3-wheelers on banned roads, fast lanes and they do not offer much safety either(even small 4-wheelers like ace and related products).

Please remember majority of places where these vehicles will ply are not just metros. Think of the advantage in smaller towns.

Safety standards as far as crash testing is concerned is hardly followed by most of the manufacturers(domestic atleast). We still do not have any crash testing facility in India or rating agency of the same. No domestic manufacturer thinks about it before rolling out a product.

The fact that the top speed is limited, effects hugely in avoiding serious injuries in an accident. For those who give an example about head-on collision with a vehicle@100kmph, try smashing a SUV with any small/budget car in india at those speeds and we will see how many survive. As for our discomfort on having them on the roads, we must be more accommodating. The roads are not just made for big cars.

1. Quads should be allowed so that eventually we phase out 3-wheelers in 5-10-15 years.
2. Quads should only be sold for commercial use for plying within City limits and not allowed on highways/expressways. Those who want personal vehicles, go buy a nano so that you can use it anywhere.
3. A comprehensive safety standards and rating agency is the need of the hour not just for quads but for every vehicle on the road. (Hilariously, i noticed that electric 2-wheelers can be driven on city roads without the need for a helmet, someone please explain me that first)
4. The limit on top speed is welcome news as it would help in reducing serious injuries period.
5. The efficiency and emission figures of these engines is second to none, be it Merc, BMW, VW, Ford, GM(none of them by the way work or specialize on engines of such low cc) so yes they are more "green" and better engineered and most importantly cheaper on the wallet of the passenger.

[Magnaspectre]

I personally believe that quadricycles are a good thing for our country today. The three wheeler needs to be made a vehicle of the past for it offers nothing in the name of safety. A quad would provide better in terms of safety to occupants.

Also, city administration in India needs to implement measures to phase out 3-wheelers. Only then will this work.

I agree completely with R.I.P, on the points he stated. And yes, we need a thorough rework on our safety standards, driver licensing, etc... (Wishful thinking in our country)

[saket77]

RIP, Though some of your points are valid and logical, but in our context, they look impractical.

Originally Posted by R.I.P

I am kind of confused by the arguments given here
In my humble opinion quadcycles are an evolution of 3-wheelers with better safety(4 is better than 3). They are not an LMV due to engine and dimension restrictions. They offer better fuel efficiency and emissions than any 4-wheeler on the road today.

May be an evolution, but not sure that if in the right direction. If we have to opt for a technology for long term solution, so that it can stay for long and we do not need to phase them out again in 10 years, I don't think quadricycles are the best way forward. One side we make a hue & cry for safety features, which are not supplied by car manufacturers like air bags, ABS, etc and here we are advocating these only because they are 4 wheeled? Something much better is needed for a longer proposition in the Indian market.

Originally Posted by R.I.P

The safety issue is there with respect to them plying on Highways(i agree that they should not be allowed on highways/expressways) but then again it is in the implementation of rules where we lack. I see plenty of 2-wheelers, 3-wheelers on banned roads, fast lanes and they do not offer much safety either(even small 4-wheelers like ace and related products).

Spot on!

Originally Posted by R.I.P

Please remember majority of places where these vehicles will ply are not just metros. Think of the advantage in smaller towns.

Safety standards as far as crash testing is concerned is hardly followed by most of the manufacturers(domestic atleast). We still do not have any crash testing facility in India or rating agency of the same. No domestic manufacturer thinks about it before rolling out a product.

But no car comes without seat belts and crumple zones, thanks to the law, though outdated. Also, we cannot overlook the fact that even smaller cars like the 800 or Nano would fare much better in case of a crash than the proposed quadricycle. And when our motor vehicles act is as outdated as the prehistoric times, it's too much to assume that an act regarding the quadricycles will come soon.

Originally Posted by R.I.P

The fact that the top speed is limited, effects hugely in avoiding serious injuries in an accident. For those who give an example about head-on collision with a vehicle@100kmph, try smashing a SUV with any small/budget car in india at those speeds and we will see how many survive. As for our discomfort on having them on the roads, we must be more accommodating. The roads are not just made for big cars.

I disagree. As said above, even the small cars have better safety features than the RE. And the number of auto on the roads will not decrease, the congestion will increase because the Govt. cannot ban the use of autos as soon as quads come, because it will open-up the lobbying secret. Hence, the auto drivers who can buy the quads will sell their autos to others and get themselves a quad may be. Hence now we have 1 auto + 1 quad on the road for almost every quad sold.

Originally Posted by R.I.P

1. Quads should be allowed so that eventually we phase out 3-wheelers in 5-10-15 years.

With the expected price of the quad & looking at the features, engine and safety, Nano is much better proposition as a commercial vehicle. May be Nano lovers will blast me for that, but there are many small cars like wagon-r, zen, uno, or even the alto which can be seen plying as taxis, hence Nano should be a better choice as per its price & FE.

Originally Posted by R.I.P

2. Quads should only be sold for commercial use for plying within City limits and not allowed on highways/expressways.

The current state where one can always find the autos plying on highways flaunting all rules, we cannot expect the above. Not only this, autos can be found driving on wrong/ opposite lane on the highways too. Highways as important as NH-2! Its not only about imposing rules but the general mindset of the sect of the people who are the target buyers is responsible for that. That may sound harsh, but the bitter truth is that they cannot be taught driving sense, responsibility and rules overnight.
You would be surprised to know that there are many diesel autos in kerala which are used as private vehicles as well.

Originally Posted by R.I.P

3. A comprehensive safety standards and rating agency is the need of the hour not just for quads but for every vehicle on the road. (Hilariously, i noticed that electric 2-wheelers can be driven on city roads without the need for a helmet, someone please explain me that first)

I am with you on that. Also on the point of electric vehicles. I told you about our ancient motor laws.

Originally Posted by R.I.P

4. The limit on top speed is welcome news as it would help in reducing serious injuries period.

I think I have discussed it above.

Originally Posted by R.I.P

5. The efficiency and emission figures of these engines is second to none, be it Merc, BMW, VW, Ford, GM(none of them by the way work or specialize on engines of such low cc) so yes they are more "green" and better engineered and most importantly cheaper on the wallet of the passenger.

FE, may be true. But still all that is on papers. Lets see what the actual figures come to. But disagree with the point where you say its 'better engineered'. Its merely a 200 cc engine. They ought to drink less fuel but certainly not better engineered.
Cheaper on wallet? Again not sure, just look at the auto fares even when they are powered by cheap CNG. The guys will always extract as much as they can.

Nobody is doing charity, its all business. Please be informed that first the RE60 was aimed as a small car by Bajaj, to counter the Nano. Now, since they already sense the strong competition in the segment and a 'not so' healthy run of the Nano in the market, Bajaj has positioned it in the different segment altogether.

[Daewood]

Originally Posted by saket77

With the expected price of the quad & looking at the features, engine and safety, Nano is much better proposition as a commercial vehicle.

Guess you didn't read the full interview wherin he has showed some calculations on cost per month for a Nano owner vs a Quad user.

Please be informed that first the RE60 was aimed as a small car by Bajaj, to counter the Nano. Now, since they already sense the strong competition in the segment and a 'not so' healthy run of the Nano in the market, Bajaj has positioned it in the different segment altogether.

So what? If changing your plans midway because of changing market dynamics is immoral/ illegal, then the current sub-4m Maruti Dzire too shouldn't be allowed.

[saket77]

Originally Posted by Daewood

Guess you didn't read the full interview wherin he has showed some calculations on cost per month for a Nano owner vs a Quad user.

Yes I didn't read that interview and guess what, even after reading it, I could not find those 'some calculations' that you are talking about. Quoting imaginary figures is not calculation.

So my price has to be between Rs 1.25 lakh of an autorickshaw and Rs 2.5 lakh of an Alto.

Moreover, what is he talking when he says that his price band will be in between the 3 wheeler auto & the Alto, which is 1.2 lacs to 2.5 lacs? What is he smoking. Go, price it even closer to the Nano & see what disaster awaits.

The weight of the cars then used to be 350 kg on an average and top speed 40-60 kmph. Then, people wanted cars to go faster. But, as they went faster, accidents happened and safety became a big concern in the ’70s and ’80s. So, seat belts, air bags, crumple tests, front and angular crash tests, besides the need to reinforce doors, came in — the car became heavier. The point to ponder is, while everything else is becoming lighter or slimmer — from cameras, TVs and PCs to phones — the weight of the smallest car has doubled over the past fifty years. So, as cars were becoming heavier, people wanted more speed and engines became bigger. So, today, they guzzle a lot of petrol and emit a lot of carbon dioxide.

Its strange that Mr Bajaj talks only fuel, no safety. Looks like he has a problem with cars getting heavier by incorporating safety features in them!
Moreover, comparing cars with tvs & cameras?? Going by this law, people should also start living in microscopic houses by 2020.

We have put in a lot of technology. We have a fuel-injected engine from Bosch, like the BMW. The Nano does not have it.

What is he talking about? Stuck in the prehistoric times? Who says Nano does not have a fuel-injected engine? This guy is speaking blatant lies misleading general people.

So what? If changing your plans midway because of changing market dynamics is immoral/ illegal, then the current sub-4m Maruti Dzire too shouldn't be allowed.

No changing plans midway is not immoral or illegal. Just goes on to show what kind of small car he was planning to gift us. And can you elaborate, why D'zire should not be allowed?

Regarding personal usage of this quad, why it is so difficult to understand for the manufacturers that we do no want cheaper vehicles, but better vehicles. Had being cheap the only factor, the Nano would have been a run away success. Give a good A or B segment car and a good service to follow, I don't see any reason that why people should not look beyond the Maruti, Hyundai & Tata.

Also, it may be news for some, Maruti has accepted the entry of Quads, but has stated to remain away from manufacturing any. http://www.dnaindia.com/money/184486...won-t-make-any

No problems discussing the issue, as long as we do it in a civilized way

[SAE40 in veins]

All said and done, Mr Bajaj's (Junior or senior doesn't matter) astrological skills are great. They go through a 3-4 year product development cycle investing over 500 Crores of rupees and then once they are ready, here comes the quadricycle policy. This is 'Abhra kadabhra' rabbit out of the hat stuff. Policy getting ready along with the vehicle.

The policy is so watertight to exclude similar and existing 4 wheelers from Piaggio, Mahindra and Tata. Thats 'Abhra Kadabhra' no 2.

The policy makers can add a disclaimer to the official note below. "Any resemblance of the policy to the spec sheet of the RE 60 is purely coincidental". Yes we know that it is derived from European norms but that doesn't mean that it has to be so brazen so as to benefit just one manufacturer.

If The 4 meter Dzire and Indigo CS were ready before the excise cut was out, would hyundai and Mahindra watch quietly and resign themselves to fate? This kind of a move by the govt is not going to create a level playing field in the industry.

[R.I.P]

Originally Posted by saket77

1. May be an evolution, but not sure that if in the right direction. If we have to opt for a technology for long term solution, so that it can stay for long and we do not need to phase them out again in 10 years, I don't think quadricycles are the best way forward. One side we make a hue & cry for safety features, which are not supplied by car manufacturers like air bags, ABS, etc and here we are advocating these only because they are 4 wheeled? Something much better is needed for a longer proposition in the Indian market.

2. But no car comes without seat belts and crumple zones, thanks to the law, though outdated. Also, we cannot overlook the fact that even smaller cars like the 800 or Nano would fare much better in case of a crash than the proposed quadricycle. And when our motor vehicles act is as outdated as the prehistoric times, it's too much to assume that an act regarding the quadricycles will come soon.
I disagree. As said above, even the small cars have better safety features than the RE. And the number of auto on the roads will not decrease, the congestion will increase because the Govt. cannot ban the use of autos as soon as quads come, because it will open-up the lobbying secret. Hence, the auto drivers who can buy the quads will sell their autos to others and get themselves a quad may be. Hence now we have 1 auto + 1 quad on the road for almost every quad sold.

3. With the expected price of the quad & looking at the features, engine and safety, Nano is much better proposition as a commercial vehicle. May be Nano lovers will blast me for that, but there are many small cars like wagon-r, zen, uno, or even the alto which can be seen plying as taxis, hence Nano should be a better choice as per its price & FE.

4. The current state where one can always find the autos plying on highways flaunting all rules, we cannot expect the above. Not only this, autos can be found driving on wrong/ opposite lane on the highways too. Highways as important as NH-2! Its not only about imposing rules but the general mindset of the sect of the people who are the target buyers is responsible for that. That may sound harsh, but the bitter truth is that they cannot be taught driving sense, responsibility and rules overnight.
You would be surprised to know that there are many diesel autos in kerala which are used as private vehicles as well.

5. FE, may be true. But still all that is on papers. Lets see what the actual figures come to. But disagree with the point where you say its 'better engineered'. Its merely a 200 cc engine. They ought to drink less fuel but certainly not better engineered.
Cheaper on wallet? Again not sure, just look at the auto fares even when they are powered by cheap CNG. The guys will always extract as much as they can.

6. Nobody is doing charity, its all business. Please be informed that first the RE60 was aimed as a small car by Bajaj, to counter the Nano. Now, since they already sense the strong competition in the segment and a 'not so' healthy run of the Nano in the market, Bajaj has positioned it in the different segment altogether.

My rebuttal

1. Evolution does not mean that you make something and then keep it unchanged for the next 10 years. What i meant was that quads is a good evolution from 3-wheelers and this category should be improved upon by gradually improving standards every 5 years or so like the emission standards. The more safety features you add, the more increase you see in the cost of an already price sensitive product. Some features can only be added once economies of scale are achieved. Even the nano will cost upwards of 2L if it was to be made upto the european standards

2. Accidents are just that an accident. But tests in europe have showed the dramatic difference between damage to cars/passengers/pedestrians at high and low speeds. The 800 is very poor in terms of safety even when compared to a nano because of its prehistoric safety features(think of quad as a nano and 3-wheeler as a 800 here in terms of evolution). it is time that 3-wheelers should be phased out for quads, obviously in a phased manner just like the 800. Your argument on 1 auto + 1 quad is fine but that would happen in any case(that is evolution). Every automobile should be used for its lifecycle otherwise we are not utilizing our resources efficiently.

3. Nano is larger than a quad in engine capacity, overall dimensions, weight and cost of ownership. How will you justify it to an autowala who will upgrade and the passenger who has to shell out more money per Km? For the one to talk about practicality, you sure forget about economics.

4. My point is also same here, rules and its enforcement does not come overnight. Autos ply even here on NH1/NH22, nothing shocking about it. Dude not just autos, even cars, buses, trucks, ghoda-gaadi travel on the wrong side of the road in this country. But just because it is like this right now does not mean that it should remain the same. But if we limit quad's use within the confines of a city(by issuing a limited within city commercial permit), we automatically prohibit/discourage its use on highways. Even here i see private autos(although a very small number) running on petrol but they have to get their registration changed after buying it as a commercial vehicle(a loophole).

5. It is in all probability the same engine seen right now on the pulsar family and for that i stand by my statement on it being "better engineered". It being "merely 200" does not imply that no R&D has gone into it. Bajaj may not have invested much in R&D in the past but in the last decade or so they have(and reaped the rewards). Remember, even Kawasaki was unable to help Bajaj in the development of this engine and it is an Indian achievement(be proud of that). The way we are charged in an auto is an entirely different issue and it will remain unchanged regardless of what we travel in.

6. I know RE60 was to be a rival for nano. It is good business sense to repackage the product differently if the demand in a particular segment is bleak. Nothing wrong in that, instead kudos to Bajaj. Since when have we started to crucify a company in its ingenuity to come out with a new product which can completely change a segment. By that logic 3M should never have been allowed to sell/market post it(or Pfizer to sell Viagra). Also, Please be informed that M&M are also planning to enter this segment.

One point i missed in my last post regarding their comparison with buses, well these quads can act like feeders to buses since buses cannot go into every small alley/road.

These small vehicles are here to stay, because of its abundant use by the "aam-aadmi" and no cheaper alternative(cheaper sells in this country and those who disagree live in an imaginary India). anyone who disagrees should see an overcrowded shared auto on the roads, then ask yourself this "between a 4-wheeled or 3-wheeled option, which is safer"

PS: I tried to be as practical as possible

[R.I.P]

Originally Posted by SAE40 in veins

They go through a 3-4 year product development cycle investing over 500 Crores of rupees and then once they are ready, here comes the quadricycle policy. This is 'Abhra kadabhra' rabbit out of the hat stuff. Policy getting ready along with the vehicle.

The policy is so watertight to exclude similar and existing 4 wheelers from Piaggio, Mahindra and Tata. Thats 'Abhra Kadabhra' no 2.

The policy makers can add a disclaimer to the official note below. "Any resemblance of the policy to the spec sheet of the RE 60 is purely coincidental". Yes we know that it is derived from European norms but that doesn't mean that it has to be so brazen so as to benefit just one manufacturer.

If The 4 meter Dzire and Indigo CS were ready before the excise cut was out, would hyundai and Mahindra watch quietly and resign themselves to fate? This kind of a move by the govt is not going to create a level playing field in the industry.

policy getting ready with the vehicle/product is nothing new. every major company does it(it is called lobbying) be it the Tatas, M&M, Bajaj, Birlas, Reliance, Bharti, etc.

It is the smartness of Bajaj to develop a product on lines with the European standards as we do look to them whenever we want any standard put in place. Nothing wrong in that. As i said before M&M is also entering this segment.

Level playing field is a myth in business. There would always be at least one competitor who will feel outmaneuvered by new policies.

[apachelongbow]

What is the smartness of Bajaj in this? Are they smart because they bribed the corrupt minister to pass a quad cycle law which suited only one player, namely Bajaj? I am not accusing Bajaj or the minister, it is open speculation considering how fine tuned the quad policy is in promoting the RE60, as if its a match made in heaven.

Its high time Indian motor vehicle law, bans all kinds of three wheeled transport period. They may have been necessary when we were a poor nation lacking resources, but now with a matured auto industry and increasing buying power we must send these relics to the history pages where they belong. Minimum standards for public transport should be a four wheeled vehicle with seatbelts, crumple zones and covered body.

[saket77]

Originally Posted by R.I.P

The 800 is very poor in terms of safety even when compared to a nano because of its prehistoric safety features(think of quad as a nano and 3-wheeler as a 800 here in terms of evolution).

Appreciate your point of view on the Quads, but I do not agree with the quoted text. Though, OT, but will like to draw your attention to the following fact due to which the 800 is far more safer than the Nano, IMO:

1. The build of 800 is more sturdy & robust as compared to the Nano.
2. 800 Has much better brakes due to disc-drum combination whereas nano has only drum brakes.
3. 800 is not affected by the cross winds generated by other vehicles on the highway.
4. Nano's ECU will cut out at the most crucial time and it can be deadly on the highway while overtaking.
5. Different tyre sizes try to control the oversteer on the Nano, but when on the spare wheel, the speed limit is just 50kmph. When this wheel is at the rear, the car's stability is compromised.

Only because the 800 is old, we cannot term it unsafe.

Returning to the topic, don't you think that most of the quads may end up replacing taxis (for eg. like Ambys in Kolkata & Padminis in Mumbai) rather than puny autos? If that's the case, we may end be getting more unsafe on the roads. Isn't it?

Regards,
Saket

[discoverwild]

Originally Posted by saket77

Appreciate your point of view on the Quads, but I do not agree with the quoted text. Though, OT, but will like to draw your attention to the following fact due to which the 800 is far more safer than the Nano, IMO:

1. The build of 800 is more sturdy & robust as compared to the Nano.
2. 800 Has much better brakes due to disc-drum combination whereas nano has only drum brakes.
3. 800 is not affected by the cross winds generated by other vehicles on the highway.
4. Nano's ECU will cut out at the most crucial time and it can be deadly on the highway while overtaking.
5. Different tyre sizes try to control the oversteer on the Nano, but when on the spare wheel, the speed limit is just 50kmph. When this wheel is at the rear, the car's stability is compromised.

Only because the 800 is old, we cannot term it unsafe.

Regards,
Saket

Is there anyway that you can prove any of this?
Please do not make blanket statements if you have never lived with one. Your 4th point is hilarious to say the least. On a side note, I own both the cars.

[saket77]

Originally Posted by discoverwild

Is there anyway that you can prove any of this?
Please do not make blanket statements if you have never lived with one. Your 4th point is hilarious to say the least. On a side note, I own both the cars.

Then probably you have the lightest foot around. & more than laughing at these points, it would have been more fruitful for the discussion if you had posted some points in your favour, however, in a relevant thread. As I said in my previous post, we are going way OT.