[bpapache]

Originally Posted by RSR

I did get some concrete information from the site now.

The "i" suffixes are indeed given to many (not all) Indian models.

I found additional info on the Wikipedia.
Please refer the image below. "i" refers to Indian version.
Link: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hyundai_Venue

And I also found a little more information about the K2 platform on Wikipedia.

Link: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hyundai-Kia_K_platforms

[RSR]

Indian Elantra (ADi) and First World Elantra (AD) - how different are they?

Let's take a look at the Indian Elantra and compare it side by side with a developed market Elantra.

Top view from the front

Indian Elantra (ADi):



First World Elantra (AD):




Top view from the rear

Indian Elantra (ADi):



First World Elantra (AD):




Bottom view

Indian Elantra (ADi):



First World Elantra (AD):



Legend:

Grey denotes mild steel

Blue denotes high strength steel

Red denotes ultra high strength steel


Do note minor errors in these diagrams as well. In the top view (from both, front & rear), the roof cross members which should have been shown are not shown, while they are visible in the bottom view.

Are there any differences between the ADi and AD observable in these diagrams? From the looks of it, no. So, at least as far as the strength of steel used is concerned, the Indian Elantra (ADi) is the same as a First World Elantra (AD).

Coming up in the next post: From a D segment sedan to a compact one at the other side of the price spectrum. We shall take a look at the Hyundai Aura.

[MaheshBapurao]

Clarification: is Verna and Elantra based on same platform?

[padukulkarni9]

Originally Posted by RSR

Coming up in the next post: From a D segment sedan to a compact one at the other side of the price spectrum. We shall take a look at the Hyundai Aura.

Thanks for the thread. I would love to see a comparison between Indian Hyundai Verna (Next Gen 2017) and its first world version (known as Accent in some markets).

[TwerkyC0ffee]

Thanks for this amazing information, RSR sir. This thread really uncovered some informative points that potential Hyundai buyers should definitely be made aware of.

Just a small request - if possible please share the same details of Suzuki cars that are sold internationally vs the same Maruti Suzuki models sold in India. Indian Maruti swift scored 2 stars in adult occupant protection vs 3 stars scored by Suzuki Swift sold in the UK. Also, UK model of the S-Cross scored 5 stars in NCAP tests while the crash results of India model are unknown.

These details will surely be appreciated by forum members and will really uncover how secure Suzuki's Heartect platform is. Thank you.

[RSR]

Thank you for the very positive & encouraging responses, guys!

However, please do understand that I'm not a hacker. I don't go hacking into car manufacturers' internal networks to get access to such diagrams. Hyundai provides these in their online service manuals which I use occassionally, so I'm sharing these images here.

The only other manufacturer for whom I can share such chassis diagrams may be Kia, as I believe I've found Kia's online service manuals as well. Give me some time, and I'll do a similar thread for Kia too.

As for other manufacturers' products, I really can't do anything. I have no access to such diagrams for them, I don't know where I can find them, or even if they're available in the public domain or not.

So I can't create a similar thread for Maruti Suzuki products, and I can't compare the monocoques of cars from different manufacturers. I just don't have access to the data.

----------------------------

I believe I see some misconceptions popping up here and there in some of the posts. So I'll clear up some of them now.

The first misconception seems to be that a car platform can be associated with a crash safety rating. This isn't correct at all.

There is no such thing as a safety rating for a car platform! There are only crash safety ratings for individual cars.

Want an example? Take Maruti Suzuki's Heartect platform. According to the company website, the S-Presso, Wagon R, Swift, DZire, Ignis, Baleno, Ertiga, XL6 and S-Cross are all built on the Heartect platform.

Ertiga got a 3* adult occupant safety rating on the Global-NCAP crash test. Swift got a 2* rating for adult occupants on the same. Wagon R also got a 2* adult occupant rating. S-Presso scored a duck or got a 0* adult occupant rating.

All four cars are built on the Heartect platform only. Then how did they get results varying from 3* to 0* ?

That's because there is nothing as a crash test rating for a platform, there are only ratings for individual cars.

The second misconception seems to be that one can identify a car's crash safety rating just by looking at its chassis diagrams (like the ones we've seen). This is just impossible!

I'm sharing these images only because I want people to know if, and if so, how the products we get in a highly price sensitive developing market like India differ from those offered in the developed First World countries. These images are just for comparative purposes and I have never made, nor will I ever make any claim about the crash test rating of any car whose chassis images I've shared here.

The only way of finding out any car's crash test rating is to test it.

The third misconception seems to be about ultra high strength steel (UHSS) or advanced high strength steel (AHSS). Some seem to believe that having some sections in UHSS/AHSS are an absolute requirement and the only way for a car to get a good crash test rating on the Global-NCAP test.

This is certainly a misconception. There are cars that have no UHSS/AHSS, but have performed well on the Global-NCAP test. Let's take an example.

The previous generation Hyundai Creta (GS) was made in India and exported to Latin America. It was tested by Latin-NCAP in December 2015.

At that time, Latin-NCAP followed the exact same protocol as Global-NCAP. Of course, Latin-NCAP testing protocol has become much more stringent over the years with additional mandatory side test, pole test and many more, but in 2015, Global-NCAP and Latin-NCAP followed the exact same protocol.

The made in India Creta (GS) scored 4* for adult occupant protection and 3* for child occupant protection:

https://youtu.be/l_HqKnyc_wI

The India-made first generation Cretas were given the codename GS (& not GSi) as we can see from this VIN that I took from the VIN decoding thread:



Did the first generation India-made Creta (GS) have any ultra high strength steel in its structure? Let's take a look.

First generation Creta (GS)

Top view from the left:



Bottom view:



Top view from the right (without roof):



Legend:

Grey denotes mild steel

Blue denotes high strength steel


The previous generation Creta (GS) did not have any members in ultra high strength steel. Yet, it was able to get a good rating (4* adult, 3* child, body structure rated as stable & capable of withstanding further loading) on the Latin-NCAP 2015, which followed the exact same protocol then as Global-NCAP still does now.

So, it is indeed a misconception that ultra high strength steel chassis members are a minimum requirement in order to get a good rating on the Global-NCAP test. It can also be done without them, as the Creta (GS) had proved on the Latin-NCAP 2015.

[shancz]

Originally Posted by RSR

The third misconception seems to be about ultra high strength steel (UHSS) or advanced high strength steel (AHSS). Some seem to believe that having some sections in UHSS/AHSS are an absolute requirement and the only way for a car to get a good crash test rating on the Global-NCAP test.

So, it is indeed a misconception that ultra high strength steel chassis members are a minimum requirement in order to get a good rating on the Global-NCAP test. It can also be done without them, as the Creta (GS) had proved on the Latin-NCAP 2015.

Thanks for clearing the misconception RSR, I certainly believed in the third but not anymore.
This also clears another misconception of mine "the older Creta is the current Seltos" which silently implied that inheriting some components and body lines also meant the properties of the older car were also carried over. Your Latin-NCAP ratings for the older Creta and Global-NCAP for the current Seltos also rubbishes that theory. The parameters of Global-NCAP would have also changed but the body shell being "stable" earlier and "unstable" now proves your other two points :

Originally Posted by RSR

That's because there is nothing as a crash test rating for a platform, there are only ratings for individual cars.

Originally Posted by RSR

The only way of finding out any car's crash test rating is to test it.

Fascinating to see how all these points complement each other.
Thanks again for the effort.

[srishiva]

Great information. thanks.
Does using a platform mean the same high strength steel structures used in similar fashion ? (since you mentioned the Heartect platform). There could also be some minor modifications based on dimensions.

When we see high strength steel, it might be working in certain areas like front footwell of driver or passenger. It might prevent a intrusion into the interior after the crumple zones. Ofcourse not designing the crumple zones correctly might put more stress and it might not withstand the forces.

Yes, we need each and every car actually tested to see how it actually fares in terms of safety.

[Turbanator]

Originally Posted by RSR

[h3]Indian Elantra (ADi) and First World Elantra (AD) - how different are they? So, at least as far as the strength of steel used is concerned, the Indian Elantra (ADi) is the same as a First World Elantra (AD).

Grey denotes mild steel

Blue denotes high strength steel

Red denotes ultra high strength steel

These are just different type of steels. These diagrams or usage of similar type of steel means Nothing if Hyundai India is not using similar gauge of steel in India as they use overseas. Is there a way to confirm on this?

I know for sure, Maruti using a thicker gauge on export models vs thinner for domestic.

[Motard_Blr]

Originally Posted by Turbanator

These are just different type of steels. These diagrams or usage of similar type of steel means Nothing if Hyundai India is not using similar gauge of steel in India as they use overseas. Is there a way to confirm on this?

I know for sure, Maruti using a thicker gauge on export models vs thinner for domestic.

So Maruti has 2 sets of tooling for the thicker and thinner sheet metal, respectively? This also means that they have to purchase 2 types of raw material, store it, manufacture 2 different parts that are nearly identical, store finished parts, maintain inventory for spares, etc.
That sounds like an expensive way to produce cars. What are they exporting these days? Their focus seems to be more on the domestic market.

[Turbanator]

Originally Posted by Motard_Blr

So Maruti has 2 sets of tooling for the thicker and thinner sheet metal, respectively? This also means that they have to purchase 2 types of raw material

They do exports, more than domestic sales of many. I am sure there will be many sheets (types of steel as well thickness) that any manufacturer will store and process for different models. Also, factor that for many Export markets, many things will be different (LHD/ RHD) even for the same model, but that's not the point here.

OP has posted schematics and to most readers, it appears Hyundai India is selling exactly same stuff they sell overseas. This may not be correct if they use a different thickness of steel. I am not sure, so have asked.

[ashis89]

Originally Posted by Motard_Blr

So Maruti has 2 sets of tooling for the thicker and thinner sheet metal, respectively? This also means that they have to purchase 2 types of raw material, store it, manufacture 2 different parts that are nearly identical, store finished parts, maintain inventory for spares, etc.
That sounds like an expensive way to produce cars. What are they exporting these days? Their focus seems to be more on the domestic market.

Yes that's correct. They have separate assembly lines and even separate plants to cater to the export market. When their Gujarat plant was inaugurated, AFAIK they built the export version of the Baleno there.

Regarding raw materials, even as small as a bolt could be different in the export and local version of the car. For the Euro spec of the Baleno, they had very different raw materials for the interior trims as the European countries have regulations that certain minerals should not be used at all (India has no such restrictions!).

Edit: Adding to the points by OP, difference between international and Indian version of the cars could also be the type/number of weld points across panels and quality of glue used to hold panels together. These would also add to the overall strength of the car.

[Unstuck]

Originally Posted by RSR

Now, let's take a look at the Grand i10 Nios.
========
So, as we can observe from these diagrams, the Indian Grand i10 Nios (AI3) shares the same K1 platform with the European i10 (AC3) and is a longer car with a longer wheelbase, but there definitely are differences in the strength of steel used for some platform members.

I am guessing that one of the business factors (for having chassis differences) could be for accomodation of sport variants like N line which is on sale in Europe and not here in India. Addition of stabilizer bars, sporty suspensions over a common strong monocoque chassis (with less flex), would make sense for sportier versions.

With regards to safety, I think that the AHSS in the front could offer more footwell protection (in case of European i10)

[RSR]

Now, let's take a look at Hyundai's sub-4m compact sedan, Aura.

Indian Aura (AI3 - 4 door)

Top view from the front:



Top view from the rear:



Bottom view:



Legend:

Grey denotes mild steel

Blue denotes high strength steel


As we can observe, upto the B-pillar, the Indian Aura (AI3 - 4 door) is exactly the same as the Indian Grand i10 Nios (AI3 - 5 door) that we have seen earlier. Only from the B-pillar onwards does the Aura's structure differ from its 5 door version, in order to accomodate the "third box".

The Aura started out as an India-specific car, thanks to the unique 4 metre limit in India (for a lower tax slab). Now, the Aura is being exported to some developing markets from India. In these markets, it's replacing the Grand i10 sedan (called Xcent in India).

The Aura is not sold in any First World country. I believe this car is manufactured only in India (for now), both for the domestic market and exports to other developing markets. The car doesn't have different versions that can be compared side by side.

Coming up in the next post: As we've covered the cars at the extremes of the price spectrum on both sides, we come to the middle, where there is price overlap between the remaining four cars. The new i20, having been launched in India very recently, doesn't have its diagrams uploaded (the last time I checked), and we'll have to wait a bit for that. So, let's next take a look at the Hyundai Verna.

[RSR]

Indian Verna (HCi) and First World Verna/Accent (HC) - how different are they?

The Indian Verna is available only in a 4 door (sedan) version. Internationally, the Verna is known as the Accent and is available in both, 4 door (sedan) and 5 door (hatchback) versions. Let's now take a look at the Indian Verna sedan and compare it side by side with an Accent (Verna) sedan from the First World.

Bottom view

Indian Verna (HCi):



First World Accent (HC):




Top view from the front

Indian Verna (HCi):



First World Accent (HC):




Top view from the rear

Indian Verna (HCi):



First World Accent (HC):




Monocoque with external sheet metal

Indian Verna (HCi):



First World Accent (HC):



Legend:

Grey denotes mild steel

Blue denotes high strength steel

Red denotes ultra high strength steel


We can note a couple of errors in the diagrams. The central cross members on the roof which should have been shown in the top view diagrams are not shown, but are visible in the bottom view. Also, the Indian Verna is shown to have ultra high strength steel throughout the A-pillar, but the First World Accent is shown to have it only at the base and about one-fourth up the A-pillar. It's a very remote possibility that this is correct. It's more likely to be a minor error that occurred during the colouring process for the First World Accent.

Are there any noticeable differences between the Verna and Accent shown above? From the looks of it, no. So, at least as far as the strength of steel used is concerned, the Indian Verna (HCi) is the same as a First World Accent (HC).

Coming up in the next post: We have already seen a part of it in this myth-busting post (Understanding car platforms, starting with the Hyundai Venue), and shall soon see the entire picture by taking a look at the Hyundai Venue.