[Mad Max]

Maybe we apply this to all areas of transportation.

Trains with sub-20 meters long don't need bathrooms even if they travel between cities. Buses less than 20 feet don't need blinkers and pollution certificates. All public transport drivers should be between 5 ft and 5.3ft. All ticket agents should be housed in ticket counters not exceeding 4 sq.ft. Planes with less than 10 meter wingspans can land, park and take off from any national highway.

I know you're thinking I've gone mad but that's exactly how this regulation is. For a simpler time, we made some short cuts to help our local small car manufacturers. Good. Now that we have helped them on their way, I think it's high time to rethink our position.

What I cringe the most about is the so called "bumpers" in these sub-4m hatchbacks. There is none. And quite a few of them sport a nice dent on their rear hatch door thanks to a motorbike piling into them. What if it was a car and there were kids in the back? Well, you're fresh out of luck. Because, first, you're a privileged member of society to even own a car. And second, you are always at fault when someone bangs into you with a two-wheeler.

Sorry for the rant.

[PYSO]

Originally Posted by RaghuVis

Guys.. One question.. Which was the first sub 4m CSUV released in India? I thought it was ecosport but some say it's premier Rio.. Can someone confirm pls.. I guess the first Sub 4m car was Tata Indigo

I guess that would be the Ford Fusion.

The Ford Fusion Petrol was launched earlier than 2005 (don't remember precisely which year) , but was 20 mm longer than 4 meters.

In early 2007, Ford fusion diesel was launched, and slightly more than 20 mm was shaved off the rear bumper to make it comply with the 4 m rule.


Premier Rio, Quanto, Ecosport, etc came later.

[AYP]

Originally Posted by PYSO

I guess that would be the Ford Fusion.

The Ford Fusion Petrol was launched earlier than 2005 (don't remember precisely which year) , but was 20 mm longer than 4 meters.

In early 2007, Ford fusion diesel was launched, and slightly more than 20 mm was shaved off the rear bumper to make it comply with the 4 m rule.


Premier Rio, Quanto, Ecosport, etc came later.

Ford Fusion was a hatchback inspite of its big dimensions. The Premier Rio was indeed the 1st Compact SUV of India.

[blackasta]

I find the 4 m / engine cap rule pointless.
They could have mandated tax sops for frugal / greener cars - that way India would have been one step ahead towards adopting hybrid / electric vehicles, preparedness for which at this point of time, sadly, is minimal.

[PYSO]

Originally Posted by AYP

Ford Fusion was a hatchback inspite of its big dimensions. The Premier Rio was indeed the 1st Compact SUV of India.

Depends.

If the WRV (Jazz with bigger tires, higher ground clearance) and Nexon (Tata Bolt raised version) are compact SUVs, then Ford Fusion was definitely one too. As much, if not more.

It had SUVish boxy design, 198 mm ground clearance, SUVish rugged look interiors, bigger tires, anti roll bar, etc.

I think Ford used to call it UAV (urban activity vehicle) and not as hatchback. The CSUV terminology came much later, I guess.

[AYP]

Originally Posted by PYSO

Depends.

If the WRV (Jazz with bigger tires, higher ground clearance) and Nexon (Tata Bolt raised version) are compact SUVs, then Ford Fusion was definitely one too. As much, if not more.

While I agree with you on the WRV, it is like trying to justify one wrong with another. Nexon looks like a proper crossover. The Fusion was a mini-MPV at best, just like the Indigo Marina and the Baleno Altura. In fact the 1st gen Ecosport was itself the SUV version of the Fusion.

Originally Posted by PYSO

It had SUVish boxy design, 198 mm ground clearance, SUVish rugged look interiors, bigger tires, anti roll bar, etc.

I think Ford used to call it UAV (urban activity vehicle) and not as hatchback. The CSUV terminology came much later, I guess.

If that is the case, then it is much like the i20 Active, the Cross Polo or the Etios Cross. Now you don't call the SUV do you?

[PYSO]

Originally Posted by AYP

While I agree with you on the WRV, it is like trying to justify one wrong with another. Nexon looks like a proper crossover. The Fusion was a mini-MPV at best, just like the Indigo Marina and the Baleno Altura. In fact the 1st gen Ecosport was itself the SUV version of the Fusion.



If that is the case, then it is much like the i20 Active, the Cross Polo or the Etios Cross. Now you don't call the SUV do you?

So, I would say that WRV is very much comparable to i20 Active, polo Cross, etc. That is they are merely raised versions of existing hatchbacks.

In my books the Fusion would be comparable to Nexon - mostly based on an existing hatchback, but then designed fresh as some sort of crossover SUV.

But we can agree to disagree on this.

The other vehicles you have mentioned - the IndiGo marina had a ground clearance of 165 mm, and so it definitely belongs to some other category. And the 1st generation Ecosport was 4.3 meters in length and belongs to the Creta, XUV category.

[AYP]

Originally Posted by PYSO

So, I would say that WRV is very much comparable to i20 Active, polo Cross, etc. That is they are merely raised versions of existing hatchbacks.

But we can agree to disagree on this. .

Very true.

Originally Posted by PYSO

The other vehicles you have mentioned - the IndiGo marina had a ground clearance of 165 mm, and so it definitely belongs to some other category. And the 1st generation Ecosport was 4.3 meters in length and belongs to the Creta, XUV category.

XUV is a segment above. And my point was that since there exists an SUV version of a car already, it may not be very apt to call the original car an SUV.

[keith2524]

Some Friday afternoon thoughts after reading this thread:

Public access infrastructure: Road taxes and fuel taxes together come third when it comes to filling the states coffers. The top two being Alcohol and Land registration/taxes. Are you still wondering why states do not invest in good public transport and pedestrian access infrastructure? There's simply no return on investment there. Instead, let us construct more roads and let people buy more cars is the mantra.

I drive my car rarely therefore I deserve it more than that chap who uses his car everyday: The carbon footprint of manufacturing an automobile is massive. Research papers suggest upto 23% of a cars lifecycle carbon emissions are done at manufacture, even before it has travelled a single mile. Are you telling me you are a saint because you have purchased a car "to only drive on the weekends"? Hilarious. Electric vehicles are worse when it comes to production related carbon emission percentages.

[chetancm7]

Originally Posted by dextor

We definitely need some control on 4 wheelers. The numbers are just multiplying every year. A day will come when there will be no space on roads to drive. Whether 4m or not, will not matter.
People in my office are good to do & most of them are having big cars. Daily single person coming to office & returning back in an innova is a crime. And their argument is public transport is unreliable & 2 wheelers are unsafe! But then who is stopping them from car pooling.
And who is making 2 wheelers unsafe? One of us driving a big 4 wheeler (car/truck/van) & not caring about the people on road.
Try driving a bicycle on Bangalore roads & people will honk as if you are an easy target to be driven over.
Only solution is tax heavily on 4 wheelers - any kind. Car parking in offices should not be free at all, atleast Rs 100 per day should be charged for parking.
Parking any where in the city should not be free - like Europe. In a place like Dusseldorf which is hardly crowded, I ended up paying 6 euros for parking for 2 Hrs.
All this money should be used to develop cycling lanes through out the city or providing some kind of cycling infrastructure.
Disclaimer - I own a car but use it only for family outing on weekends or long trips. I never drive alone. If I have to drive to office, I make sure I am pooling with others (quickride app). Thats why my overall mileage is like 4/5k per year.

In Bangalore, most of the commuters use quick ride as a car pooling alternative. I myself use it, even though i have a small car(eon) i still manage to take atleast three people one way towards office. This has become quite popular and i personally know many of my colleagues who employ this method of travel even though they have 4 wheeler.

[Ford_Prefect]

I don't agree with the government's sub-4m rule but for a different reason. In terms of Rs/km, it costs a single person travelling by car approx. the same as travelling in a passenger plane. Car travel is among the most expensive modes of transport. Sure, this rule has introduced affordable cars for the masses but with no regard to the rest of the infrastructure required for safe and efficient transport. The government seems to have put the cart before the horse and expanded the private car industry without the necessary infrastructure in place and also to the detriment of public transportation.

I am not sure what percent of the taxes n vehicle sales, fuel tax, cess, registration charges etc., go towards maintaining roads, signage, education, road safety and enforcement. Maybe one of our knowledgeable members can throw some light on this. Given the lack of transparency, it is hard to know if these monies are being siphoned off for some minister's pet project instead of being used to benefit the road users who are paying these taxes. Also, with no enforcement and few paid parking spots, the number of vehicles being parked on public streets deprives road users from using the streets.

Finally, as a developing country our focus should be on providing safe, affordable and efficient public transport for the majority. I would rather have a 30 minute commute in an air conditioned train than an hour long self-driven hell in a car choked in traffic.

[shajoshi]

Found the dimension specifications of the good old Premier Padmini. Were the designers of the 4000 mm length rule inspired by this role model which did serve as the Indian family car for 3 decades whose length was 3930 mm

[parambyte]

Hello BHPians.

I have been wondering what are the laws against large engine displacements (read CC) in India?
It seems almost all cars under, let’s say, 40 lakhs, are limited to 2 litres and below.
All new “affordable” cars are either 1 or 1.5 litres.
(We had started the car revolution (in a way) with Maruti 800cc if I remember?). 1 litre is so SuperBike category.

Environment, emissions and ethical concerns aside, my guess is there is probably a disproportionately heavy taxation on larger engines?

Even something like the Jeep Wrangler, sold abroad in larger engines, is a 2 litre in India.

I guess we will never get cars like the Dodge Charger or Cadillac Blackwing (6litres?), Dodge RAM, (not these brands necessarily, but large displacement engines) with 3 litre and larger engines? Before that happens we have had the EV revolution.

What gives?

[SS-Traveller]

Originally Posted by parambyte

What gives?

You need to read this thread (10 years of the Small Car rule (<4-metre, <1.2L petrol, <1.5L diesel) : Has India benefitted?) to understand the reasons.