[filmaka]

We were lucky to buy this marvel of Engineering just in time. I think ours is one of the last few 100 as we got it last year. Have kept it open always since the day it got off the truck. Had informed the dealer well in advance not to put the canopy on, As the Gypsy soft top comes without canopy and the dealer installs it on their end. The soft top is kept packed and hopefully will stay like this always.

Gypsy has tremendous road presence. I have decided to keep this stock as it came from the factory.

Gets difficult in the summer without AC but would still bear the heat to keep it Stock.

The drive is not bumpy and is a good life style vehicle if your drive to work is not a long commute.

[romeomidhun]

Source: https://gaadiwaadi.com/maruti-suzuki...dian-army/amp/

This news comes as a surprise, but is a sweet revenge from Gypsy and a good news for Gypsy lovers even though they can't buy and drive these new ones unless you are an armyman.

This will be a business for nearly 200crores for Maruti and assuming a fat profit to the tune of Rs 1L per car, it is a small relief for them when sales are declining in all other segments. Also, there were news that the production lines for Gypsy are still running for export markets; so no additional investment is needed.

[starter]

There is an article in Indian Express too.
http://www.newindianexpress.com/busi...y-1985320.html
For us miniscule Gypsy owners, some hope that the spares shall be available a few more years.

[norhog]

http://www.defencenews.in/article/Ma...l-Order-585074

The production for military is re starting as per this bit of news.
Can we have it for civilians too.
Fingers crossed and cheque book ready.

[Reinhard]

Originally Posted by norhog

http://www.defencenews.in/article/Ma...l-Order-585074

The production for military is re starting as per this bit of news.
Can we have it for civilians too.
Fingers crossed and cheque book ready.

No it is exclusively for the Armed forces, in the exact form that it has always existed without any modifications.

That also means that the car will not meet most of the stringent (and necessary) safety norms that kick in this year and also not the BS6 emission norms.
That makes the car not eligible to be road-legal & it will not be opened for civilian sale.


Looks like the field serviceability of a basic 1.3 Petrol engine is easier compared to a highly complex 2.2 VTT Varicor diesel in the Safari Storme. So both will serve the duties now. Roughly 3k odd of both. Not a bad move. But the Gypsy really is old. I'm not fully convinced it is the right vehicle for armed forces going into the future.

[Aroy]

Originally Posted by Reinhard

No it is exclusively for the Armed forces, in the exact form that it has always existed without any modifications.

..........
I'm not fully convinced it is the right vehicle for armed forces going into the future.

What armed forces need is a bullet proof reliability with as simple field repairs as possible. That is why you rarely see advanced engines in their vehicles. All the extras required for pollution control add up to complexity, hence maintenance head aches. The old school Gypsy is very reliable and comparatively easy to maintain if field. Its low weight and petrol engine are also an added advantage in the cold and harsh environment of Himalayas.

[Reinhard]

Originally Posted by Aroy

What armed forces need is a bullet proof reliability with as simple field repairs as possible. That is why you rarely see advanced engines in their vehicles. All the extras required for pollution control add up to complexity, hence maintenance head aches. The old school Gypsy is very reliable and comparatively easy to maintain if field. Its low weight and petrol engine are also an added advantage in the cold and harsh environment of Himalayas.

Agree totally. Trivia wise though, the Gypsy is also the ONLY forward placed petrol powered car with the army and used to cause a logistical overhead to keep carrying petrol for it when all other vehicles used diesel . It was one of the top reasons why the army moved to the Safari.

Also, most of ths armed forces' combat vehicles of today use some of the most complex engines out inthe world. Tanks, APCs, recon vehicles, artillery trucks, mine protected vehicles, tank carriers, communications and radar host vehicles...Thank god we dont use the American M1A2 Abrams tank, it uses a jet turbine engine! Sorry .

If only Maruti ever made a simple DI (Non CRDI) diesel engine to plonk in the Gypsy...Alas...

[Aroy]

Originally Posted by Reinhard

Agree totally. .......
If only Maruti ever made a simple DI (Non CRDI) diesel engine to plonk in the Gypsy...Alas...

I do not think that a DI engine will be able to tackle the current pollution law. Otherwise a simple DI diesel of a century old design with a mechanical injector is ideal for slogging it out in the rough terrain - no electronics, and apart from starting does not need any electricity to run!

[Reinhard]

Originally Posted by Aroy

I do not think that a DI engine will be able to tackle the current pollution law. Otherwise a simple DI diesel of a century old design with a mechanical injector is ideal for slogging it out in the rough terrain - no electronics, and apart from starting does not need any electricity to run!

No I'm not saying we need a DI engine now. I'm saying it should have been available in the past & it could have been a better solution for the army's needs as well, rather than a petrol engine with very low torque at low RPMs. A proper off roader needs good low end torque, especially in the frontier terrains of India.

The army vehicles do not fall within the restrictions of the emissions norms since national security overrides environmental issues.

[Aroy]

Originally Posted by Reinhard

No I'm not saying we need a DI engine now. I'm saying it should have been available in the past & it could have been a better solution for the army's needs as well, rather than a petrol engine with very low torque at low RPMs. A proper off roader needs good low end torque, especially in the frontier terrains of India.

The army vehicles do not fall within the restrictions of the emissions norms since national security overrides environmental issues.

I agree, but higher torque requires a much beefier transmission train which increases weight a lot (apart from the weight of a DI engine compared to petrol one). There have been cases of the axles breaking when the power was boosted either by tuning or putting in a bigger engine. So on the whole in DI guise the Gypsy would easily weight a couple of hundred kilos more.

Yes the Army does not have to bother about emission, but I think that is primarily for combat vehicles. Most of the Large trucks - Tatra and Russian are at the most BS-II, but Cars are mostly used in urban scenario and have to be compliant with emission laws. As Gypsies are used both in Combat as well as in HQ it will be difficult to justify a BS-II engine,

[Reinhard]

Originally Posted by Aroy

I agree, but higher torque requires a much beefier transmission train which increases weight a lot (apart from the weight of a DI engine compared to petrol one). There have been cases of the axles breaking when the power was boosted either by tuning or putting in a bigger engine. So on the whole in DI guise the Gypsy would easily weight a couple of hundred kilos more.

Yes the Army does not have to bother about emission, but I think that is primarily for combat vehicles. Most of the Large trucks - Tatra and Russian are at the most BS-II, but Cars are mostly used in urban scenario and have to be compliant with emission laws. As Gypsies are used both in Combat as well as in HQ it will be difficult to justify a BS-II engine,

I obviously meant a diesel engine with a compliant and compatible transmission & transfer case.

And no. The emission norms apply to those vehicles that get registered as street legal with RTOs and for specific category farm, race track vehicles. Basically those with civilian RTO registration certificates or license plates.

Armed forces vehicles with defense services registration plates (those with up arrows in numbers) are NOT covered by civilian emission norms. Be it the Gypsy used for city commute of an officer, Ciaz, Storme, BMW whatever being used in front or for the commandant of any installations like NDA, IMA etc. While most cars automatically satisfy the norms - they are not obligated to by law. I have been previleged to be in close proximity of these establishments to know it as a fact.

[volkman10]

Maruti Suzuki To Restart Gypsy Production Only For Defence Orders Soon.

The largest carmaker in the country won’t be manufacturing the Gypsy for private customers though as it will be exclusively made for Indian armed forces.

Link

[Leoshashi]

Originally Posted by volkman10

Maruti Suzuki To Restart Gypsy Production Only For Defence Orders Soon.

Yes this is true. They have been working on restarting the assembly line and it was expected to be operational by this month end.

Regards,
Shashi

[shankar.balan]

These latest news articles about the revoked discontinuation of the Gypsy on account of the Armed Forces, makes me very happy as a hard core Gypsy enthusiast.

So now we Gypsy owners dont have to really worry too much about getting parts for the foreseeable future...

Really, this is some of the best news I have read in a long time!

Here's my beautiful 2005 Gypsy King Mpfi 1.3 litre petrol 4x4.
Ex-Forest Services.
Now Properly restored to singing condition.
Driven with affection.
Maintained with care.
Enjoyed responsibly.

[romeomidhun]

Source: https://gaadiwaadi.com/maruti-gypsy-...efence-orders/

Maruti to restart production of Gypsy for armed forces.