[CrackedHead]

Go back into history and look at the American Muscle cars - they often drew flack for providing the masses with an affordable yet powerful car (usually without safety features and with bad handling characteristics). They are a perfect parallel to the kind of criticism that the verna diesel is drawing here.

How many of us can honestly say that we wouldn't want to own one?

[RX135]

Originally Posted by sanagg1

In a given car for a particular running speed (say60 Kmph) the gear ratio remain same so the engine RPM drive the wheels(driven) at fix RPM
Now if RPM is same but due to bigger circum car travel more distance.

Actually that is wrong. Larger circumference also means additional torque acting against the engine and hence, engine has to pump in more fuel. It is not necessary that quantity of fuel consumed by engine at any given RPM has to same in all conditions.

Originally Posted by throttleking

Anyways, i agree to a point, that it all depends on driver. All these cars in bad hands can turn out to be a widow maker for sure.

While it is possible to crash safest car in this world, what matters is how forgiving the car is for driver's errors. Some cars do better job at that due to better handling/braking/road grip etc, while other cars aren't as good.

Just because any car can be crashed, you don't make poor handling cars. Whether Verna fits the bill or not, is open for debate.

[civic-sense]

Originally Posted by CrackedHead

How many of us can honestly say that we wouldn't want to own one?

I don't want to own one. Ever!

Performance and safety need not be mutually exclusive. There are numerous cars out there that perform as good as the Verna, and is much more safer. Heck, cheaper too.

[jkdas]

Originally Posted by anachronix

Is the 100-0 figure not high?

I havent driven a Verna either to comment on it! But there are a few owners who have written about losing confidence on speeds above 120! Looks to be a genuine glitch that needs to be addressed, by Hyundai.

Giving a car that can do 0-100 in under 10 secs is just not enough, the 100-0 matters more than the 0-100 for the driver to be there to see this world.

Braking distance - The Unofficial BMW M5 Messageboard (m5board.com)


0-100-0 MPH - Total elapsed times (sec)
PORSCHE 911 TURBO 9.4s 4.3s 13.7s
DODGE VIPER GTS 8.8s 5.1s 13.9s
FERRARI F355 10.9s 4.5s 15.4s
CHEVROLET CORVETTE 11.1s 4.6s 15.7s
ACURA NSX-T 11.8s 4.5s 16.3s
TOYOTA SUPRA TURBO 12.3s 4.5s 16.8s
MITSUBISHI 3000GT VR-4 13.4s 4.5s 17.9s

Read more: 0-100-0 MPH - Motor Trend Magazine

0-100-0 Autocar test - NSX Prime

SRT performance:
60-0 mph in approximately 110 feet


100-0
CCXR - 104.98ft

80-0kmph
Verna VGT - 104.3ft - 2.72secs
Verna 1.6 -114.5ft - 3.08secs

100-0
Verna VGT - 167.65ft - 3.88secs
Verna 1.6 -167.97ft - 3.76secs

100-0 kph
E34 M5 -75.459ft

112-0 kph
E39 M5 -156 ft

Originally Posted by Sam Kapasi

Bravo! Well said.

~ A living uncrashed Verna CRDi owner. Me.


I disagree. I have seen no crashed Indicas in the Hyundai workshop. You should go to the Tata workshop to take pictures and write about the Indica.

[DieselAddikt]

^^^^ Civic-sense:

Me too. I wouldn't buy one, nor will i encourage people to do so. Powerful cars SHOULD have enough safety features and should have good driving dynamics. Only then can you put all the power to good use. I have made a couple of my friends buy Fiesta and Linea instead of Verna. Reason: They handle better.

Verna is a good car in the hands of an excellent driver. Not a good upgrade from an M800 if you are not used to acceptably powerful cars.

[maglev]

Originally Posted by arunsasi

cars don't cause accidents. people cause accidents
cars don't kill people. people kill people

as long as the market is price sensitive car makers will continue to do such mistakes. we don't really have any good laws on safety otherwise the Omni would not have been around.

+1

I totally Agree.

Its the one who drives and not what he/she drives.

[amitverma123]

Originally Posted by civic-sense

I don't want to own one. Ever!

Performance and safety need not be mutually exclusive. There are numerous cars out there that perform as good as the Verna, and is much more safer. Heck, cheaper too.

The Fiesta 1.6S for one...might be petrol but still super quick and completely planted till even 150.

[KITE RUNNER]

I am sure Hyundai is aware of this drawback of Verna, they are giving much importance to safety & handling in their newer cars like i20.

I am sure, all companies are constantly trying to improve their products and that is what we customers want.

[NOS Power]

@sidindica

If all those accidents are (assuming your theory) due to the Verna's power/torque then why aren't similar stories cropping up from other parts of India or the world (wherever its sold) for that matter. So that means if we had to assume something similarly weird then Delhi/Noida drivers (guys no offence to any one in particular, just a weird example to match the thread) are not ready for the power of the Verna.

Gosh i never new 110 bhp and 24 kgm was too much for an avg. indian driver to handle, and we dream of 500bhp .

Its just about control. There is a famous saying "With great power comes great responsibility". I don't think its right to condemn the capabilities of the Verna just because few people could not (due to circumstances of their own) control it.

[McLaren Rulez]

Originally Posted by RX135

While it is possible to crash safest car in this world, what matters is how forgiving the car is for driver's errors. Some cars do better job at that due to better handling/braking/road grip etc, while other cars aren't as good.

Nail..head..bang! This is exactly the debate. Is the Verna too unforgiving such that misjudgements by drivers inevitably result in an accident? The car's handling and brakes determine how forgiving it is. I have never driven a Verna but those who have will be able to tell you exactly what the answer is.

[cuttingcrew]

Originally Posted by RX135

While it is possible to crash safest car in this world, what matters is how forgiving the car is for driver's errors. Some cars do better job at that due to better handling/braking/road grip etc, while other cars aren't as good.

Just because any car can be crashed, you don't make poor handling cars. Whether Verna fits the bill or not, is open for debate.

+1. And mistake is not always mine. How ever good driver you are, you can still land up in an accident because of somebody else.

I have driven Verna. The power really feels good, but I will never buy one.

[visweshkalambur]

+1 Mclaren Rulez

I have not driven a Verna long enough to comment.

However, I have come across quite a few posts here and in other Tbhp threads saying it is not confidence inspiring beyond 120 kmph.

Question - If a company decides to plonk a powerful engine in a car, should'nt it also ensure that the other dynamics (Chassis, handling, braking, etc.) of the car can cope with it so an average/ normal driver can drive/ enjoy it?

I see people mention accidents of Indica, Omni, Ambassador's ..all of these are no way close to the amount a consumer spends on Verna. If we need a comparison, could it be with cars in the same segment atleast?

[Mi10]

Originally Posted by KITE RUNNER

I am sure Hyundai is aware of this drawback of Verna, they are giving much importance to safety & handling in their newer cars like i20.

I am sure, all companies are constantly trying to improve their products and that is what we customers want.

Importance for Safety ? - Yes, aplenty in i120

But Handling is as miserable as a .......ok, say any other Hyundai in Indian market

..Peace..

[yzfrj]

Hilarious thread.
I'm not Hyundai fan. Its really absurd taking a couple or more pictures of banged up cars and "stating" that the car is bad and "dangerous".

Just for sake of clarity I've not driven the Verna.

Personally I don't think 110bhp is a "huge" risk in a car.
If you gave a bad driver BMW tuned to produce the power of a TVS Luna he is gonna crash the thing.

Perspectives and perceptions can be different. That cannot be used a "evidence" can it ?
Personal choice yeah... I can call even a Ferrari Enzo as "dud". Will that make it a fact ?

If the car really was that dangerous I'd expect to see a banged up car on every turn on every highway. Do I ? No...!
So its really stupid to pin-up some pics and say the car is bad without giving any "relevant" data.

From the data jkdas, shan2nu has shared it does't look the car is a total "disaster" waiting to happen.

I still remember the first fatal accident I've heard about the Verna.
It was around the time this car was launched.

A guy lost control on the highway, skidded off it crossed a vacant plot (around 100mts) hit a pedestrian and 3-4 chaps in a tea shop. If I recall correctly there were 4 fatalities. The point he lost control is right in front of a hospital and 200 mts before a busy junction. So can we blame the car here too ? Well that is exactly what people did. Later it was found this chap was "testing" the car to see how fast it'll go.

So come on folks post couple more pics of say what cracked up Beemer's and Mercs this time and we can make illogical statements and "validate" those cars are dangerous too. Say what ?

Anyway continue the Hyundai bashing, since I don't like the brand (for no reason whatsoever) I'm loving it.

[sanjayc]

Action seems to have cooled down here a bit. Does that mean Hyundai lovers/bashers have now settled for an "unsafe" tag from the previous "deathtrap" tag? So now, at what threshold value "unsafety" will transform into a "deathtrap"?