[Yash98]

The Indian Car Buyer has evolved by leaps and bounds in the last 1-2 years. From a nation largely focused on "kitna deti hai" we are now seeing a rapid shift in focus towards safer cars.

Thanks to certain homegrown manufacturers and other European players, the average Indian today has access to 4 and 5-star rated automobiles at an affordable price point. However, many of these safety focused manufactures have also been notorious for niggles and issues in their cars or bad dealership experiences, a few examples of which are below:

https://www.team-bhp.com/forum/techn...solutions.html (2nd-gen Mahindra Thar | Niggles, Problems & Solutions)

https://www.team-bhp.com/forum/techn...ta-altroz.html (Oil leakage in a new Tata Altroz)

https://www.team-bhp.com/forum/techn...a-harrier.html (Errors & Niggles in my Tata Harrier)

https://www.team-bhp.com/forum/india...da-mumbai.html (The new normal, or the old usual - Service nightmare with Autobahn Skoda, Mumbai)


Though everyone would ideally love to own a 4 or 5-star rated car, threads like these surely make some buyers apprehensive of owning cars from certain manufacturers when they are in the market for their next purchase, causing them to instead invest in a relatively "unsafe" 2-star or 3-star car from another manufacturer that can ensure a relatively niggle-free experience in a majority of cases since quite a few owners(including yours truly) hate visiting the dealership for anything other than the annual service.

I was curious to know fellow BHPians thoughts on this matter and any personal anecdotes:

[doxinboy]

Thanks Yash,

The conundrum of safety v/s reliability impacted my previous purchase. I finally bought Hexa XTA. I have aging parents and a baby girl to drive around to family trips across highways. But XTA, the automatic avatar, never came with EPS functionality that was available in manual trims. It was a nerve wracking decision to make. I was almost on the verge of gauging my eyeballs out. What ticked me during the decision making process was the following factors:

1. Six airbags and 2.5 tons mammoth is a battle tank.
2. With family to take care, I gave up race track speeds and wouldn't press beyond 120 kmph
3. Sedate driving on a highway, I could be my own EPS
4. I can give you my limb for a day, but never share my car attitude.
5. Zen mode driving style in the city and on the highway. With 8 speaker setup and a lounge & spa music, you are the pilot in your Airbus 370. Road rage? What's that buddy?
6. Reliable engine and friendly mechanics across, Tatas get help easily by taxi drivers and roadside mechanics for minor issues.

So, to answer your question, its 50-50 for me. Reliable and safe

[fhdowntheline]

It is not such a binary issue as it is being made out to be. Unless you buy an exotic car from some godforsaken manufacturer, most cars are fairly reliable up to say 50000 km , which may also be an average ownership of 4-5 years. It is rare nowadays that people want to keep their cars beyond 7 years of ownership. So most of the perceptible and certified safe cars are also quite reliable in these time frames. We also have a lot of perceptibly reliable cars which are safe by design. Dynamic (active) safety of a car can be gauged over a certain timeframe( brakes, ABS, ESP etc). But structural safety cannot be tested repeatedly . Its usually the one incident that matters. Gone are the days when you could knock an Ambassador about, hammer it back to shape and continue running it forever.

[PrideRed]

We can have both? No? Some segments this might not be an option but there are cars which offer both. Also do note the current crop of cars are in general reliable and have been safer than say a 10 year old car.

[Sebring]

I have both safety and reliability in my Nexon. Days of lugging my Maruti/Hyundai to the service station for every small niggle are long gone. But I think - these days, regardless of brand, cars are pretty niggle free. So choose the safest, I'd say.

[aniyo]

It is wrong to perceive safety as in case of accidents alone.

In India there are may places where reliability is actually the safety net. Our highways are notorious dangerous and lawless. Having a car broken down in unknown city or the highway can have serious consequence. That is why many people chose reliability over safety rating.

Having said that most cars today do not suffer breakdown unless one gets a lemon which is also rare these days.

I was keen on Duster AWD but the fear of injector failure and other part failure prevented me from taking Duster. For me Tata Nexon was a fair compromise. Safe, reliable with few niggles (nothing serious, minor stuff)

[VKumar]

Would prefer to have both, but if you put a gun on my forehead and ask me to choose one, then:

Reliability all the way! If the build is not strong enough, give me a steering that is good enough and a set of brakes that is sharp enough. But no compromise on reliability. I believe that, if your car is dynamically good enough to avoid a crash, it's better than getting crashed with a stronger and safer car.

Can I even rely on the safety features and electronic assists of an unreliable car?

Secondly, it's important for things to work at times. I do a lot of long distance night drives, having safety is a plus, but losing reliability is a big NO. No wonder, I don't take VWs for too long or full night drives, it has to be the humble and highly dependable T from the land of rising Sun!

[Simhi]

Why is there not a BOTH option? I bought Yaris with both Safety and reliability in mind. I think most of the cars in market today are reliable enough and are not going to leave you stranded but it is the safety aspect which is lacking in them.

[giri1.8]

Safety is more than just NCAP rating for me, my Tigor AMT's slow acceleration used to put me in sticky situations very often, that with few niggles and poor service right from day one made me to go for Figo AT. One less star, but accelerated much better, making it safer to overtake on narrow state highways, has ESP, better dynamics, and most importantly better reliability.

If I could have both, I would choose that option.

[androdev]

I don't get this poll. If I prioritise safety, it also means I want those brakes, airbags, etc. to work very reliably.

[Yash98]

Originally Posted by Simhi

Why is there not a BOTH option? I bought Yaris with both Safety and reliability in mind. I think most of the cars in market today are reliable enough and are not going to leave you stranded but it is the safety aspect which is lacking in them.

Thanks for the reply Simhi. However, I intentionally did not add that option since while the Yaris and a few other cars do strike somewhat of a balance, the majority of the cars made for and sold in the Indian market are not crash-tested (yet), oftentimes forcing a customer to make a choice based on perceived safety and reliability.

Hence, I wanted to know the thought process of choosing a car in such scenarios.

Originally Posted by androdev

I don't get this poll. If I prioritise safety, it also means I want those brakes, airbags, etc. to work very reliably.

I meant it more from a body shell/ frame perspective. While features like airbags and the like are common in most cars sold today (and are assumed to be working), there are a lot of top sellers that have been shown to have an unstable body shell in crash tests.

While I completely understand where you are coming from, Brakes are not really a safety feature, but rather a key component of a modern car. Though yes, the Korean twins do have a somewhat patchy history regarding this component.

[saikarthik]

Are both completely independent? In my view, being reliable is also part of being safe. Sure, crash safety is one important thing, but the word safety is taken very lean nowadays.

Say, due to some reliability issue, someone gets stranded on a road or leading to an accident, can we still label it as safe vehicle? I would prefer a 4 star crash rated vehicle + 99% reliable vehicle (on major controls/functions) than a 5 star crash rated vehicle + 85% reliable vehicle.

So, voting for others as per above logic.

[Hayek]

Get the logic behind this poll. Vehicles from Maruti and Hyundai are perceived to be reliable (your AC or music system won’t stop working) but are designed to be unsafe. Vehicles from Tata, VW etc will be much safer but may give you niggles - even a car breaking down on the road does not make it unsafe. Yes, Toyotas are both safe and reliable - but boring, which is the third parameter.

For me, safe and good to drive is important - minor niggles can be dealt with.

[reignofchaos]

Well if these two options mean do I trust Japanese/Korean cars (reliability) or Euro cars (safety)? The answer is pretty obvious - I'd choose the euro cars as they are way safer in general. Also I really don't care about minor niggles that much - they can always be sorted.

[Kosfactor]

Due to our unplanned travel requirements, the vehicle gets fuel and long hours. It is expected to keep up with our speed and wherever we need to go.

Vehicle dependability is very important.