[chevelle]

Originally Posted by tsk1979

This is indeed a tremendous achievement. Hats of to them. But on a personal note, I was a bit disappointed when I saw a Fortuner as a support vehicle. This makes it more of a personal record.
People go to Leh on cycles with a support team(some without), but it does not prove its the ideal vehicle. It just proves their endurance.

Hey TSK, i read the log posted by Sanjay, and the fortuner is not the support vehicle. It was with them till Jispa where they were stuck for 3-6 days. After 3 days, fortuner went back with the family that came in while Sanjay and his friends stayed at the hotel and waited for weather to clear and a go ahead which they managed after 6 days. After wards they were on their own.

Just thought to let you know.

[airbender]

Originally Posted by supremeBaleno

Yes, against an M800. And I did not say this - a Nano user said this some posts above.

Tyre size—
Nano Front:135/70R12 and Back: 155/65R12,

M 800: 145/70 R 12
Nano's front tires are smaller but the back ones are bigger by the same size. S0 I would not say Nano's Tyres are smaller than M800.

Well, I can answer the other things too but do not see any value when Nano owners are called poor chaps and Nano itself termed an illusion or M800 compared to a passat.

[supremeBaleno]

Originally Posted by airbender

Nano's front tires are smaller but the back ones are bigger by the same size. S0 I would not say Nano's Tyres are smaller than M800.

The point raised by longhorn was not about Nano's tyres being smaller than M800s, but about issues due to using different sizes at front and rear. And looks like he has a point, given the user/owner feedback below.

Originally Posted by svsantosh

Also to showcase this car with lot of 'steering ease' with light tyres in the front - crappy idea I say!! High speeds - sheesh, major drift all over.

[airbender]

Originally Posted by supremeBaleno

The point raised by longhorn was not about Nano's tyres being smaller than M800s, but about issues due to using different sizes at front and rear. And looks like he has a point, given the user/owner feedback below.

If you notice my previous thread I was replying to hashim's post not longhorn. Also consider that Nano uses tubeless tyres.

Originally Posted by Hashim

Small and thin wheels will definitely not provide a good braking and road grip, hence not safe.

[GTO]

Originally Posted by airbender

but do not see any value when Nano owners are called poor chaps

: There is "nothing" poor about the Nano. Its a great li'l hatch that does somethings better than the 800 / Alto / Spark (of course, there are some it doesn't). And I do know of several fairly well off Nano customers.

Originally Posted by ownerofazkaban

My perspective as a owner of both (family owned)
All comparatives are with 5 Speed 800 vs Nano Lx and trying to keep it non- technical/specy.
You decide whether a particular point is +ve or -Ve for you.

NANO:
1. Its not cheap, Nano Lx costs 2,13,000+ On Road in B'lore
2. Nano is cheaper by 25k compared to 800 features.
3. Very Good A/C, the high torque is great for city drive.
4. head lamps with best beam focus, spread, lumen o/ps.
5. Very easy ingress/egress. Upright seating best for city driving.
6. typical Auto noise from rear

800 (5 Speed)
1. Best highway/high speed cruising, breaking.
2. Comparatively cramped, small, non-airy
3. Steering better than Nano
4. A/C is no compitition for Nano.
5. Better space due to hatch door and folding seats, The configuration that is used while shifting homes, out of city travel.

For a small family that travels out of Town - 800.
However in City Nano is many many times better, so Buy Nano and take the bus while going out of town.

I refrain from voting.

Excellent post! Thanks for sharing. If there was a way to rate posts on a 5 star scale, I'd have given this one a 5 right away.

[airbender]

Originally Posted by GTO

: There is "nothing" poor about the Nano. Its a great li'l hatch that does somethings better than the 800 / Alto / Spark (of course, there are some it doesn't). And I do know of several fairly well off Nano customers.

Agreed. For some reason, this talk of poor chap didnot come up when M800 was the lowest selling car in india.

[supremeBaleno]

Maybe because of the difference in the way both cars were positioned by the makers.

In '83, the M800 was not positioned as a "cheap" car, though I have no idea how the initial batches (sold at 40K) fared cost-wise against the Amby/Padmini then. Anyone knows how much an Amby/Padmini cost then ?

The Nano on the other hand was promoted as "cheapest car in the world", "1-lakh car", "upgrade for bikers", "2500$ car" etc, given which it is only natural for people to have an impression that this is a cheap car. Though at 2L+ for the top-version, IMO it is anything but that.

I see quite some Nanos in Kerala (more than what I see in Chennai) and almost all are driven by people who look really well-off.

P.S.: I do remember the M800 getting its fair share of ridicule back then as a "toy car", "soap box" etc.

[longhorn]

Originally Posted by supremeBaleno

In '83, the M800 was not positioned as a "cheap" car, though I have no idea how the initial batches (sold at 40K) fared cost-wise against the Amby/Padmini then. Anyone knows how much an Amby/Padmini cost then ?

IIRC, in 1985 the diesel Amby came in at around 1.6 lakhs. During those times the diesel Amby was the in thing as people did not prefer petrol engined cars back then. My vague memory tells me that diesel was Rs.3 and petrol Rs. 7 then.

Maruti did not overthrow the reigning kings overnight. It took the masses a good 6-7 years to realise what Maruti stood for when compared to the Ambys and Padminis.It was only in the early 90's that the market preference slowly starting shifting from the old school to the new school. There was no turning back for them after that.

In 1995-96, when the demand for M 800 was at its peak, there used to be a one year waiting period for this car in Kerala. Heck a one year old example used to sell for more than the ex showroom price of the car back then due to this very reason. As things stand today, the SB 308 IN should easily hold the record for the most number of 4 wheelers manufactured and sold in India.

[GTO]

Originally Posted by supremeBaleno

In '83, the M800 was not positioned as a "cheap" car

It was actually the cheapest car you could buy in India. Onroad Delhi = Rs. 52,500 (47,500 ex-showroom). The Padmini was a little less than double the price.

Originally Posted by longhorn

It took the masses a good 6-7 years to realise what Maruti stood for when compared to the Ambys and Padminis.

Not really. They had 1.4 lakh bookings within a short time of launch. That was more than 3 years of their production capacity at the time. When the new M800 arrived in 86, it was such a hit that wait periods extended to 3 - 4 years.

In a couple of months (from the time that bookings opened), the M800 became the best selling car in India. It retained that title until finally, handing it over to the M Alto.

There was some initial skepticism by the market as to how fragile the 800 looked, and if it would ever last on Indian roads. Even Premier & HM downplayed the "3 cylinder" engine bigtime. As always, the car proved itself and word of mouth built its reputation.

[dr.faramroze]

Except for the autorixaw type exhaust growl, no other negative. I hope TASC doesnt swindle nano service bills as they do with other Tata passenger vehicles. There must be some design requirement for putting different set of tyres in front and rear. Nano is 2010, Maruti 800 is a dated coarse mill.