[Abes]

Definitly both.
Why would you want to compromise & buy a particular car when it doesnt come with the safety features you want?

[atulmuley]

I too vote for Airbags.

I can control the braking depending on the situation but surely can't do much is case of a crash as mentioned by MX6.

But for sure ABS + Airbags would be the best option.

[aargee]

Originally Posted by MX6

For all you know, you are driving at 35 kph on an undivided 2 lane highway and a drunk trucker swerves and runs all over you

Exactly; that will only be a nightmare. Why would I want to pay with my family when someone else dances on the road?

Originally Posted by rajtheindian

ABS wont increase the stopping distance, in fact it reduce the distance as with ABS you can break harder with out the fear of skidding or wheel locking.

Well, I got the info from - http://www.team-bhp.com/forum/techni...onditions.html

The discussion says that on a good roads (read it NH) a non ABS car stops better than the one equipped with ABS. So in the above discussion, I meant that kind of road. Only when skidding ABS helps.

On a loose gravel or bad roads, I'm not risking my suspension to drive fast.

I agree that preventive is better than cure, however, these days (or even in the forth coming years) preventive will be a question as to whom? Do I need to stay preventive from knocking someone on road or do I need to prevent others from getting hit on my vehicle?

Even if a moronic two-wheeler jump or even a truck swerves & hits me, I'm no way going to get compensated, but atleast, let me or my family live & let the car protect me rather than protecting someone else.

It might sound little selfish, but the point is, I'm not considering the morons who dance on the road. Why would I need to care about them when they don't care for their lives?

Last but not the least, braking is purely dependant on me, means, I've full control & I'm fully responsible for it; but for the morons on road...???

[aks_karthik]

Definitely i would go for ABS.
It's a life saving mechanism and i was already witnessed for so many occasions.
Prevention is better than cure as we can prevent from accident using ABS and AirBag will be helpful once the bad incident occurs.

[powertrain]

Originally Posted by sajo

PS : Powertrain , your friend should go for the Figo TDCi Titanium.

That's exactly what I told him, but he's apprehensive about the Cost Of Ownership factor.

Originally Posted by ghodlur

This is like asking whether you want ears or eyes. Of course both are needed.

Buddy, it's not me, who's asking it !!!!!!

[jigbarai]

Preferably both. In either / or case, has to be Airbags.

ABS use is a parameter you can control based on your driving. i.e. Drive at sane speeds, keep enough braking distance etc. Its a habit that can be learned and followed.

Also, ABS is much more helpful in slippery/icy scenarios than normal tarmac. And yes, it does increase breaking distance/time than normal braking, although marginally as it gives better 'control'. It is simple physics.

Airbags on the other hand are for 'unforseen scenarios' and can be potential life savers.

[anilisanil]

Originally Posted by powertrain

That's exactly what I told him, but he's apprehensive about the Cost Of Ownership factor.

So he is considering Micra diesel over Figo TDCi because he fears cost of ownership of a Ford, very interesting!

Please convey this to your friend- Figo TDCi has a proven diesel engine known for its frugality and no-nonsense ownership and Micra with its waferthin dealer network should pose a greater fear for your friend unless he liked the cute looks of Micra.

My 2 cents:

It is not properly established how an ABS aided vehicle peforms during braking vis-a-vis non ABS. But going by the working principle I would rather go with ABS (and the newer ABS versions of cars come with bigger discs if there is ABS, so this should compensate for increase in braking distance, if any).

ABS works even if you dont wear your seat belts, Airbags dont.

If you are going for a vehicle with only front air bags, but your usage is for four people, go for a ABS vehicle.

Ideal scenario- Gor for both!

[powertrain]

Originally Posted by Abes

Definitly both.
Why would you want to compromise & buy a particular car when it doesnt come with the safety features you want?

Going by that yardstick, my friend, MUL should not be able to sell the swift @ 8000-10000 units p.m. It's the opposite that's happening, since 2005.
Regards,
Varun Nair

[Neilguy]

ABS anytime.

Airbags are secondary restraint systems with the primary being seatbelts. And the airbags that are provided in most Indian cars are only front airbags, not side or cushion airbags as are provided in many other countries.
With ABS, you actually have a chance to avoid an accident and prevent the airbags from deploying (if provided) in the first place. To everyone who says that they will drive safer if they don't have ABS, they should know that accidents happen without warning and in panic situations, people tend to act on reflexes. And the reflex action in a sudden driving situation is (mostly) to slam on the brakes! Without ABS, there is a chance you lose control of your car in dangerous situations and anyone who knows the Pirelli slogan knows "Power is nothing without control" Note, that in times of sudden braking too, seat belts provide the most safety.

For those who are afraid that ABS increases braking distances, do note that while in some cases the braking distances do increase, you still have control over the direction your car is moving in, along with the decrease in speed, so as to better maneuver or steer your car away from the impending accident.

But again, given a choice, I would rather avoid having to choose between the two and opt for a car which provides both.

After all, prevention is better than cure, isn't it!

[avi550m]

Put a gun to my head, I would say ABS. Of course, I cannot see why many manufacturers will not offer it as an option on the base variants, and why people make such a big deal about the Nissan Micra having a drivers Airbag on all models, when most drivers in the country will not wear a seatbelt, unless required by law in their city.

[anilisanil]

Originally Posted by powertrain

Going by that yardstick, my friend, MUL should not be able to sell the swift @ 8000-10000 units p.m. It's the opposite that's happening, since 2005.
Regards,
Varun Nair

I think you are talking different things here. Where was it established that MUL has been selling so many units only because it does not compromise on safety?

All Abes is saying that do not compromise on safety features while you are buying a car when you have other options which offer both! And it, in right sense, has got nothing to do with Swift volumes since 2005, IMHO

[Thad E Ginathom]

Airbags may save the life of the driver: ABS might save somebody else's.

We need both.

We need also to think about the lives of the other people out there, whether they should be where they are or not, particularly pedestrians.

The discussion says that on a good roads (read it NH) a non ABS car stops better than the one equipped with ABS. So in the above discussion, I meant that kind of road. Only when skidding ABS helps.

Some confusion here: ABS only works to prevent skidding. If you are not about to skid, then ABS will not be functioning. ABS is just like airbags: it is an emergency system. In normal driving it has no effect. It's purpose is to maximise braking efficiency and to permit some directional control during braking: except on loose ground, it should stop you quicker than non-ABS. Posts which say "I could have stopped sooner if it hadn't been for ABS" are utterly subjective: please, I want to see the result of the experiment with the same car in the same conditions at the same speed without ABS.

[bullinb]

Originally Posted by Thad E Ginathom

Some confusion here: ABS only works to prevent skidding. If you are not about to skid, then ABS will not be functioning. ABS is just like airbags: it is an emergency system. In normal driving it has no effect. It's purpose is to maximise braking efficiency and to permit some directional control during braking: except on loose ground, it should stop you quicker than non-ABS. Posts which say "I could have stopped sooner if it hadn't been for ABS" are utterly subjective: please, I want to see the result of the experiment with the same car in the same conditions at the same speed without ABS.

Rightly said.

Primary purpose of ABS is NOT shortening the stopping distance but prevent the wheels from locking up. In which case the driver cannot take evasive measures to avoid the obstacle. A corrective steering action will not change the direction of a skidding vehicle.

Having said that, it takes considerable skill and practice to beat ABS in terms of stopping distance. Read up about threshold breaking.

Here is a study of effect of ABS on stopping distance in motorcycles.

If I have to choose, I would choose ABS over airbags because it is an accident prevention mechanism unlike airbags.

[libranof1987]

Recently, I was out on a drive with BHPians and we checked out the ABS on a Xylo.

On braking at a considerable speed, the ABS kicked in and the vehicle decelerated and stopped in a remarkably straight line (we kept the lane demarker in the centre of the car).

I tried to see how my Corsa would behave; in the final stages of braking, the wheels had locked and the car either veered to the left or right.

About Airbags, I wonder how effective the Airbags that are provide in Indian cars would be; given that they are available only for the front passengers. Also, there could be injury (although much less in magnitude than one in a head-on collision) due to the Airbags themselves.

So, I think I'd prefer ABS and EBD and wouldn't mind Airbags.

[download2live]

I will to have both. But if given a choice I will go for ABS. ABS comes into play a lot more time then airbags.