| || ||Thread Tools||Search this Thread|
|11th January 2008, 16:15||#211|
Join Date: Mar 2005
Thanked: 59 Times
Agree with Zappo on this one 100%.
Wasn't MUL supposed to come out with a "people's car" and instead launched the Maruti 1000 which was way out of reach of most people at that time ?
TATA has done it NOW. close to 2 decades later. Cheaper.
The effort and the achievement needs to be lauded.
And all those who are bemoaning the extra congestion on the roads, need to realise along with THEIR cars, they have not purchased the roads as well. Everyone has the right to our roads and to drive on them, no matter how pathetic our roads are, if she/he can pay for it. The whole premise of the argument against the Nano is just elitist cr*p.
If congestion/pollution etc. really is the concern, how about supporting a one-family-one-car legislation ?
Actually, we need to follow the idea in the post above mine. Replace all cabs / rickshaws countrywide with the Nano. Think about the potential fuel savings.
Last edited by hell_rider : 11th January 2008 at 16:16.
|11th January 2008, 16:21||#212|
Senior - BHPian
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Mostly Mumbai
Thanked: 1,261 Times
To all those who are worried about the environmental impact of the NANO:
Have you considered the following>
1. Pollution caused by the very computer you use. Its consumables. Printing inks, other hazardous wastes that are part of the computer.
2. Pollution caused by your washing machine which uses more water.
3.Pollotution caused by all the plastics you use every single day for almost every single task in your daily routine.
4. Your air conditioners, refrigerator. Your plasma / lcd tv set.
5. Even the excess food you consume causes enough toxic gaseous release that if calculated on an accumulative scale of all humans/indians is enough to cause considerable environmental impact.
To cut it short > A Sustainable environment cannot be achieved unless you target the root cause/s.
Industrialization , growth , etc.
If the solution has to be found probably we will all have to start walking.
So single out one cause and to make it seem like the problem is immature.
If you have the right to drive , then so does the man in the village.If you have the right to use a computer that has 100s of parts that are hazardous to health and cause environmental pollution , then so does the man in the village.
Think again and come up with relevant constructive criticism which is holistic rather than taking a fragmented approach.
|11th January 2008, 16:25||#213|
Join Date: Sep 2006
Thanked: 109 Times
Our roads are not the most orderly of places, we are incapable of understanding simple systems like lane driving, queues etc. Imagine the effect of unleashing a potentially huge number of small cars on to the existing overcrowded and disorderly roads
|11th January 2008, 16:41||#214|
Join Date: Jul 2004
Thanked: 364 Times
I think Ratan Tata's observation is very pertinent here, how may times have you seen families on scooters or bikes exposing themselves and their children to serious harm. This will be a good safe option for them.
Making cars more accessible to people so they have personal independence is a good or bad thing? That's not an argument you can make against the nano or Tata per se, that will be opportunistic and irrelevant. That's a bigger argument and would have to include issues like Public transport and infrastructure that's woefully inadequate in our country, pollution from cars as a whole and not just the nano and what can be done to reduce it. That's a an entirely different argument and its irritating to see people jump to use nano to make that argument because your are simplifying and reducing the issue to Tata and Nano and not cars, pollution and public infrastructure which are the issues to be addressed so why single out Nano. What about other cars, don't they pollute, rickshaws, 6 seaters, bikes are equally polluting, they also cause congestion on our limited roads.
We are an overpopulated country, congestion is everyday life here in every sphere. Western countries use a lot of resources and cause a lot more pollution. Since they are more developed and wealthy they can afford to consume much more than us, to give one example with multiple cars in families. They have no credibility to talk about this. Let's keep things in context.
If you are concerned about pollution and traffic congestion you should be ready to give up your car and campaign for better public transport before criticizing nano, or else its just hypocritical and empty talk.
|11th January 2008, 16:47||#215|
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Mucat, Oman
Thanked: 124 Times
JRD says, the emission is less than a motorcyle, then it should be true not a marketing promise.
1. There is going to be some conversion where we will surely see more cars in road and less bikes.
1a. People will not get rid of their bikes still as its THE good way to commute in certain circumstances.
2. Even now, I know many in india are using bikes for day to day use eventhough they own a car.
3. No way now, the Govt has to build better roads!
4. Commercially Tata will be succeeding in this project no matter what. Even foreigner friend of mine says this will be sure hit, in pure commercial sense.
5. It will rewrite the way the world see India for the first time!
6. No one (esp Pachauri!) needs to be scared though! If a cheap car like Logan in Western countries can survive without any criticism then Nano has many reasons in a developing country like India to survive and succeed.
7. Nano will have Nano 2 soon, and that will be a sure success (as the history says!)
8. Instead of blaming Tata, people should blame Govts for such a poor infrastructure. Because of Tata, the world is looking at us. Remember LR/Jaguar, Corus etc. No one India ever thought this can happen. Tata believe in themselves and doing it.
Last edited by sgmuser : 11th January 2008 at 16:49.
|11th January 2008, 16:58||#216|
Join Date: Mar 2005
Thanked: 59 Times
I am well aware that driving is a privilege and not a right. To clear things up, let me re-phrase it as below:
All other things being equal, everyone has a right to the privilege to drive.
Also your argument is fundamentally flawed, in that you are automatically assuming that bigger cars are being driven in a safer way. Who do you think is going to end up driving in an unsafe manner ?
the 100 bhp hot hatches, the souped up hondas and the lancers - the ones that have beem modded by enthusiasts for max performance....
a 33 bhp Nano ?
Simple question :
Spoilt rich brat after a binge at the pubs on a weekend night decides to go on a ripping drive. What car would you think is safer for him and the other innocents on the road ? A Nano or a bigger more powerful car ?
You need to consider the demographics of the people buying both kinds of cars before you can conclude that the Nano drivers will make the road unsafe.
|11th January 2008, 17:25||#217|
Senior - BHPian
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: Dayton, OH
Thanked: 16 Times
|11th January 2008, 18:26||#218|
Join Date: Oct 2007
Thanked: 7 Times
Palio D, Swift D, Accsent CRDI all would be Taxi's Then what would we buy
Thank god Tata
|11th January 2008, 20:31||#220|
Join Date: Oct 2006
Thanked: 87 Times
I don't care what people say, but i kinda like it. Moreso because, the world ridiculed RT when he announced his plans and told him it wont be possible.
Hats of to him. What a way to silence the critics.
With AC, it would be a perfect second car for slow moving city traffic.
|11th January 2008, 21:26||#223|
Join Date: May 2007
Thanked: 88 Times
Neat Interiors. Speedometer is calibrated to 120 kmph!
Speakers located under rear seat!
Spacious legroom. Notice the front seat map pocket!
Rear Coil Spring suspension
Last edited by akash_m : 11th January 2008 at 21:29.
|11th January 2008, 21:32||#225|
Join Date: Jan 2006
Thanked: 19 Times
Saw in TV that autowallahs are planning to "petition" authorities to allow them upgrade to Nano when it arrives!
Forget Nano for personal use and it replacing 10% of 2-wheelers, I think this "rick-replacement" is an extremely lucrative market for Tata and also the best thing to happen in our roads. Considering that Bajaj and others have made a killing by selling those crappy metal boxes (rather metal platforms, no sides and top, aint it) priced at similar levels for such long time, this should be a welcome change. It also has better safety and forces them into more "saner" drivers compared to 3 wheelers which have turning radius same as its wheelbase!
Even the mileage/running cost figures will not be very different if Nano comes with LPG/CNG options, which it should.
Effectively its the three wheelers that are going to be more affected by Nano than two'ers. Bajaj, of course, saw this coming and immediately announced their intentions of a similar car
Anyway, Tata is going to start a phenomenal change to our roadscape. Congrats Ratanji.
Last edited by appuchan : 11th January 2008 at 21:48.
|Thread Tools||Search this Thread|
|Thread||Thread Starter||Forum||Replies||Last Post|
|2011 i10 Asta A/T - its Korean, its new, its fast, its red, and its coming.||nirupesh||Test-Drives & Initial Ownership Reports||1||8th January 2011 10:45|
|SCOOP! New Tata Sumo Picture. EDIT : Now launched as Sumo Grande||MillionSwords||The Indian Car Scene||217||26th October 2009 20:16|
|Rally Suitability of Swift/SX4 in India||1100D||Indian Motorsport||52||13th March 2009 15:16|
|Suitability of Microsoft Project||naveendhyani||Shifting gears||0||25th August 2006 15:45|