Quote:
Originally Posted by flyingspur My first statement says that the Swift can hardly be called a compromise as an overal product. In regards of build quality, it sure is. And I suitably assume that neither you nor I are shallow enough to jump to conclusions based on our perception of how thick sheet metal is. |
Exactly, and this thread is full of statements like Safety is an issue in Maruti cars.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Fabiaous Safety is a big compromise, If there is a head on collison betwen Palio / Punto with Sx4 , I wonder what state will Sx4 be.
Even if a Goat comes and hits a swift there are big dents , forget the bull / cow on highway.
Most of cars from Suzuki stable are best cars to drive in city with great VFM |
SX4 has 4/5 star rating at ENCAP. Palio has no rating. For that matter even Indica Vista, Indigo Manza, Innova are not tested at ENCAP. Punto has 5/5 rating, i20 has 5/5.
Civic has 4/5.
So if SX4 is a safety compromise, so even Civic is a safety compromise, isn't it ? Both of them are not very different as far weights go, so we can safely assume that if a Civic crashes into Punto, the state of Civic will also be bad.
Or one step ahead, Laura and Octavia ( both A5 and A4 ) have 4/5 rating, so when Laura crashes into Punto, the state of Laura will be bad.
Here I want to ask what is the definition of build quality In Your Opinion.
For me : I divide it into two:
1) Chassis stiffness, suspension durability, braking
2) Interior fit and finish.
Now some views:
OHC/G1HC never went in for ENCAP test. But the interior fit and finish was quite good, interiors were durable.
So can we conclude that OHC/G1HC is has fantastic build quality and so is safer than Swift and SX4 and Ritz ?
Swift has scored 4/5 stars at ENCAP. There are complains about rattles, but the chassis is stiff. Does this mean that Swift is unsafe and even a rattle free Nano/Santro is safer than Swift ?
My point is, before stating that build quality is bad, please understand that chassis stiffness and safety and interior fit and finish are different things.
Quote:
Originally Posted by samsan02 a) Have you wondered, An Alto Lxi is a bare minimum car, But there is no left ORVM there, only one right one. Now what is that, even bikes have both left and right ORVM. Thats a basic necessity to drive a car safely isn't it. That should be standard on every car right, forget cars cycles have them these days. Isn't it a compromise on safety forget even airbags/ABS here. How much would that ORVM add to the cost when some one is ready to shell out couple of lakhs for an Alto.
) Look at a European Swift and a Indian Swift, dont indian's deserve the european one yet. Japanese made SX4 costs $15K in the US thats about 6.8L INR, Indian made SX4 sells for how much we all know. But do we get the same build quality, interiors ? Atleast Hyundai has started selling the same export quality i10/i20 here as well. |
a) Some bikes offer rear disc brakes too. Are they offered in all Fiat, Hyundai, toyota cars ? Verna is now not available with rear disc brakes. Pulsar220 is. So Verna is a compromise as per your standards, right ?
Alto is not offering left OVRM because its obviously a cost cutting measure. This is for affordability. India is different. What is necessacity in developed markets, is a luxury in India thanks to adaptation of British rules for our system even after independence. So not everyone can afford a good safe 5/5 ENCAP, ABS+EBD, ESP, 6-8 airbags loaded car. Affordability is one reason why Nano is here.
Alto is based on Wagon R platform, so before commenting on Alto's safety, also do mention passive or active safety. This same car's platform was utilized for MR Wagon ( Estilo ) and was sold as Nissan Moco for Japan. The same platform cars were sold to even Subaru and many other manufacturers under badge engineering. So its much stiffer than M800 its compared with.
And before calling Maruti a safety compromise, remember that Maruti was the first one to offer passive safety equipment like Airbags in WagonR/Santro segment. SX4 came with safety equipments that made Honda offer the same for City. City at that time did not even come with ABS where as Swift was available with the same.
Next, about Santro. This car was never tested at ENCAP, and Atoz that was tested was not base for India santro. Santro was later modified to Xing as the earlier Santro did not even meet minimum requirement for safety in developed markets.
Still we call santro and even Santro Xing a safer option than Suzuki cars.
b) Its down to taxation systems. As I mentioned earlier, our system is based on British system that was created when we were slaves. This never changed and we have adopted the same here.
Base Verna is 6,33,250 ( $12665 @ 50rs/$ ) in US. What is the cost here ?
The major difference is due to taxation in India.
I think this is nothing but a Suzuki bashing thread as the points raised specially for safety are biased and without any sort of proof. IMO, the understanding for difference between chassis and skin panels is not there.
More specific points would be good for this thread rather than the generalized use of words like build quality, safety compromise, etc.