Team-BHP (https://www.team-bhp.com/forum/)

-   The Indian Car Scene (https://www.team-bhp.com/forum/indian-car-scene/)

-   -   Compromise on basic safety features for cost cutting? (https://www.team-bhp.com/forum/indian-car-scene/36162-compromise-basic-safety-features-cost-cutting-3.html)

Guys, the sheet metal thickness mentioned in my post was only an example, please do not consider it the absolute topic of discussion. Let me come to your own topic, Crumple zones are fine, but how do you believe it when not tested? If the car passes a crash test with a certain gauge of sheet metal and when the sheet metal thickness is reduced in future for cost cutting, how do you believe that the crumple zones are still intact? Are the manufacturers strengthening the chassis to over come this? Aren't we being taken for a ride here? Or should we still be talking about how we shouldn't be worried about the sheet metal thickness, but only about crumple zones?

When we are talking about cost cutting, we include removal of impact bars(i10), removal of rear disk brakes(verna), no rear wiper(Swift VDI), no fog lamps(Honda city), no proper rubber(all cars below 15 lacs), etc.

Aerodynamics. The need is more for hatches, SUVs and similar vehicles where the smooth air-flow over the vehicle is disrupted near the rear windshield area! Dirt will easily settle on the glass.

EDIT: Just got the thread for it-
http://www.team-bhp.com/forum/techni...ot-sedans.html

Its a pity that this thread closed down about three years ago. Cost cutting should never result in value elimination - you don't starve your pets to save on pet food. Cars should have some mandatory safety features and if these cost more, then they will cost more. Some of the safety features which come as optional extras:
LHS mirror
Day-night interior mirror
ABS braking
Airbags - both for driver and front passenger
head-on and lateral impact certification by specialists in the field - no one should manufacture a car which has no certified crash safety rating
All these and there must be many more will push the price of some cars out of reach of some people. However, I think that the matter should be pushed through for new cars, just like the emissions standards were made mandatory. Airbags as a costly option seems to be all wrong.

In our country, nothing will happen on a voluntary basis until and unless it is "legislated" and "forced" upon companies.
If we look back, most technical improvements that we take for granted today have happened due to changes in homologation norms or government mandated norms - never initiated by an OEM operating in our country! Example: High Mounted Stop Lamps, Side Intrusion bars, MpFi engines, Front ELR safety belts etc etc all came into being because OEM's were forced to do it due to the changes in legislation.

The Government, if it is interested in the welfare of its citizens, should push through come what may, the Crash & Pedestrian Safety norms, suitably derived from the Euro NCAP norms.
From what I hear, the lobbying by OEM's against the implementation of these impending crash norms, which are being planned to be implemented from 2014-2015, is unbelievable. If these norms are implemented many major models, some of them best-sellers in their category, will simply cease to exist

And that will make the roads safer for humans. Thanks for the insight into the European norms - I went to the NCAP website and saw my little Alto dressed differently. The Aveo was quite different from what is being sold here.

Continuing in the same vein, I am not sure whether the ever decreasing size of the rear window in modern hatchbacks is a cost cutting measure but it certainly is not a safe measure. I tried reversing in a Beat and an Eon and I was distinctly uncomfortable with what I could see. But it does seem to be a styling fashion to sweep up the rear into smaller windows.
Again, the single reversing light - it goes against all driving logic. When I learnt how to drive I was clearly taught to reverse as little as possible because reversing is hazardous. A single reversing light is not a good indicator for reversing as one can easily mistake it for a broken brake light, or even miss it altogether.

All things said and done, are we (read Indians) ready to pay the price for safety? The general consensus is as per the average customer: Why we need ABS/EBD? Cant I brake? Let me save Rs 50000! What Rs 130,000 per airbag? Plus replace it each time it deploys? Sorry no need for airbags, we promise not to bang our head on the dashboard.
Cars are still lifestyle products and we will rather pay for bling, the high-end stereo, the voice assist gizmo so that we can brag, but not for most of the active or passive features. Why most of us do not believe in wearing seat belts and have all kind of innovative excuses not to belt up. We buy bling bling alloys but put old worn rubber on them, coz hey who sees my new tires, oh unless i put Tonka truck oversized tires.

And yes please Tata/Mahindra/Audi/BMW/and all others I need a combination of your Safari/XUV/A7/X6 all at a princely sum of Rs 5lac and OTR mind it!!! :D

Have you seen the number of rear wipers hanging loose, cut out etc on small hatchbacks running on the road? When people do not open their OVRMS because they do not want them banged in traffic, what kind of safety requirements are we discussing.

As the famous saying goes: A nation gets the government they deserve. Similarly A nation gets the kind of cars they deserve.

Apart from all of the above may I add few really important stuff that manufacturers overlook or do not do enough R&D. First is brakes some cars mentioned in posts really have a bad brake. Secondly steering feel and feedback.
There are seperate threads for the above but for me such things are glaring omissions.

I did! It was this incident only in wake of which I started this thread years ago! Let the pics do the talking. Was hit by a bus which was trying to overtake me even when I was at 100 kmph. I had to brake suddenly to avoid a villager crossing the road.

We were 5 adults in my Cielo, needless to say the rear seat occupent which was in the middly got severly injured with nurological disorder, including loss of vision in one eye. Thankfully, full recovery was done within 2 months!

I am surprised about seat-belts!
They should also come as an option, with seat belts being provided as a "premium" feature!

***
What a bunch of idiots our legislators, RTO, and traffic police is (and of course Indian public too).

How about the jokers who add bull bars to the front and rear of their cars. All this stuff about crumple zones, etc. goes out of the window. Any impact will be directly transmitted to the frame of the vehicle, and thence to the occupants.

Save the car and kill the occupants or as we say in Hindi 'Chamri Jaaye, Dumri NaJaaye'.

:OT is this bus capable of doing 100KMPH? I reasd somewhere that they cant go beyond 80.

I have come across many trucks doing 80+ on NH2, so 100 should be on the cards. Of course you will need a calender rather than a stop watch to time it!

I like the way you put it sir!lol:

However, the particular bus in question is DTC CNG fitted bus with installed speed governors from Siemens. They may have removed the governors, but is a CNG bus capable of that kind of speed?

Pre- 1990 buses were capable but TATA made some changes as soon as they introduced those low bonnet models. Even their speedometers have 12o as top speed. That is why i raised this question.stupid:

However, if they are capable then I will never make a mistake of being in front of these uncontrollable beasts!

A CNG should not be capable of 100, but then one never knows. If it is an old Diesel converted to CNG then the bhp is down at least 50%. IF a new one then I still doubt it but will not know. A vehicle with a 120kph speedo should not be capable of much over 90!

Thank you again sir.

Just searched and found this new thread on this forum which states the top speed of current gen TATA bus as 87 kmph in this link:
http://www.team-bhp.com/forum/commer...-versions.html