[streetlife]

The safety of the passengers in a crash depends on the stiffness of shell and not outer body. The light body and bumpers front and back consists of crumple zone which acts as a cushion during a crash.

Hope this Video helps

YouTube - Fifth Gear - 4x4 Crash Test

[gvivek75]

This is exactly the kind of thought I used to have till about couple of years back. Then one friend casually remarked 'By that logic the Ambys should be one of the safest cars around' - which made me realize the fallacy of the entire thought process.

Any car's 'safety' is dependant on a multitude of factors like crumple zones, airbags, seatbelts, collapsible steering, anti roll bars, ABS, EBD, head restraints, puncture proof fuel tanks, dashboard design, windscreen glass et al not to mention consideration for external entities like pedestrians and animals.

Having said that in the Indian context of haphazard traffic all around, thinner sheet metal always ends up getting more visible dents and nicks which translates into more load on the owners' pockets.

Given a choice most of us would want to stick to heavier built cars but then the average fuel consumption of lighter cars is something hard to ignore, especially for day to day running.

[ani_meher]

Good question syravi. Even I feel a thicker metal gives good feeling about the quality of the vehicle. In case of motorcycles, see how original pulsar's tank was built with thick metal, and see how it got thinner and thinner in each version! You can spot the difference by tapping on the metal or in case of cars, by pressing. I too feel Marutis' outer bodies are becoming thinner, as in Wagon R and Ritz. In fact, Ritz was fully finalized as the choice to buy, before I got suspicious about the quality. The plastics inside as well as the body, somehow doesn't come across as something that commands a premium.

Now I am rooting for Figo and Estilo hatch, yet to test either. Hope they have good quality as compared to Maruti.

[shortbread]

No they are not related.

The rigidity and safety of a car is primarily measured by the stiffness of its chassis/passenger cell. The surrounding body panels have the responsibility of absorbing and dissipating energy, not resisting it.

Modern cars have body panels that deform easily which does not mean that the car is not safe. A thicker or stronger component will have higher chances of intruding into the passenger cell during the event of a forceful impact.

[mb_jg]

I beg to differ, & for various reasons. I have witnessed cars that are know for using heavy metal sheets being crumpled like tin boxes due to the nature of the drastic impact in an accident. e.g. Mercedes, Fiat.
Early automobile design theories saw extremely rigid bodies that were very resistant during an accident and didn't allow too many deformations. As a consequence, all the forces were transferred to the occupants, most of the times this being quite fatal.
It wasn't until 1953 that the first crumple zones were implemented on vehicles. Like many other technologies in the automotive work, the company responsible for it was Mercedes-Benz.

The Theory
Like it or not, physics has the explanation as to why crumple zones are necessary. Isaac Newton's first law states that an object in motion will stay in motion with the same speed and in the same direction unless acted upon by an unbalanced force. If a vehicle is traveling at 50 mph, so are the bodies inside and if this vehicle stops abruptly into a solid wall, the bodies will “feel” the need to keep going in the same direction at 50 mph, unless of course something stops them. What's more, even if the bodies themselves stop, the internal organs will move, causing severe injuries.

We're still not out of the physics woods yet. There's another law, the second, from the same Newton saying that force equals mass multiplied by acceleration. Translated to our situation, that of an accident, it means that the force experienced by the automobile and its occupants decreases if the time required by the vehicle to stop increases.

So What Do Crumple Zones Do Anyway?
They work exactly according to the two laws. Placed at the front and the rear of the car, they absorb the crash energy developed during an impact. This is achieved by deformation, something unheard of in the early days of automobile design. While certain parts of the car are designed to allow deformations, the passenger cabin is strengthened by using high-strength steel and more beams.
Second, crumple zones delay the collision. Instead of having two rigid bodies instantaneously colliding, crumple zones increase the time before the vehicle comes to a halt.
There was a radical design to accommodate the safety for small cars by Pininfarina Nido Concept. You can look this up on Google.

Yes, but having said that, I still prefer psychological state when I get into my Palio, it seems much safer than a Maruti 800.

There is much left to be desired of the Indian mentality of road sense, be it driving, walking, riding, crossing streets etc. The sooner we vow to change that, our roads might get a bit safer!!! Drive safe everyone.

[srishiva]

@mb_jg, Palio is indeed safer than 800 by many times !!

Automobile safety is about the people inside the car not the car itself. A rigid body without crumple zones will let the collision forces destroy internal parts of humans.

[girishglg]

A refresh on build quality, many rides of today do have great build quality even in the compact and mid segment which was originally the preserve of the top German marquees. Some of them which come to mind are the like of i10, Micra, new Swift, VW range. These cars are not only build well on the outside but the interiors do seem to last for a very long time. It extends to their mechanicals as well with no major issues with long term ownership. Actually good build quality builds up its reputation leading to higher referrals and sales.

[aravind.anand]

Originally Posted by girishglg

A refresh on build quality, many rides of today do have great build quality even in the compact and mid segment which was originally the preserve of the top German marquees. Some of them which come to mind are the like of i10, Micra, new Swift, VW range. These cars are not only build well on the outside but the interiors do seem to last for a very long time. It extends to their mechanicals as well with no major issues with long term ownership. Actually good build quality builds up its reputation leading to higher referrals and sales.

Though I am completely agreeing with you on how the build quality afftects the resale value, I cant understand how you managed to classify the 'New' Swift and the Micra as long lasting cars, as they are relatively new cars.
And also, I can't understand how reviewres say that the Punto and the Linea have really good build quality, since I have seen, heard and experienced cases where plastics parts like the hood release lever, hand brake release button keeps falling off! :(

[anky]

Maruti wins Hands down . Having driven a 800 AcTg for 8 yrs and an alto for 7 and still going the are the best in build quality , they never break down on the road nothing ever falls off or fades or breaks or fails.As compared to my tata indigo all of the above happens quite regularly but for its price and features its worth it.Its like all the vendors maruti rejected tata took for them (ie all maruti failed vendors tata regular vendors). Atleast upto Indica/Indigo. I hear Vista and Manza are much better.

[airbender]

We talk a lot about build quality of various brands but here are a couple of examples for Maruti Suzuki. The second one actually is a bit of a surprise as it involves Tata Nano(Entry level car and not know to be tough) and a car from much higher segment.

http://www.drivespark.com/off-beat/t...68-016994.html

If you come across more instances, please post them here.

[SPARKled]

I have read here and else where that the newer Maruti's are really light and flimsy in build. But I guess as long as the crumple zones and protective zones are designed well and work well, they should be pretty competitive. But that being said, my earlier gen Ritz is very well built more so that my first gen Figo, Etios and Spark.

[CoolFire]

Its true that Maruti Suzuki safety standards are not among the best in India. However, the given examples are not good case studies to prove this. It has been discussed many a times on Team-BHP that the crumple zone on front portion is designed to take the maximum damage, whereas the rear, even for a basic car could be much more rigid.

[anjan_c2007]

Maruti cars sell for their reliability, after sales service, huge dealer network and the brand image that they have built over the last 32 years.

The build quality has rarely been its forte ever. A well informed buyer knows that the car he or she is buying is from amongst the most fragile and ductile make of cars. The D- Day comes only for those who drive recklessly or on the other hand are victimised by someone else's recklessness. Or else, these cars lug on for years with the least of maintenance and repair bills.

[CrAzY dRiVeR]

Here's another one reported by Cartoq -

We all know for a fact that Swift doesn't have a stable structure. So no big surprises here.



http://www.cartoq.com/maruti-swift-c...is-the-result/

[Chetan_Rao]

I can't locate the picture now, but someone once posted a comparo of the front crash structure of an Indian Swift vis a vis a European version.

I distinctly remember the front crash beam behind the bumper was flimsy on the Indian version, almost as good (err...bad) as not being there.

No idea if that's still the case.