[vasudeva]

Heard about ceteris paribus (all other things being equal). What I have learned is that as a machine, SUVs are generally safer than cars. Period.

The regret was about the Safari/Sumo statement. That is not justified as a sweeping (100% true) statement, but is also not a baseless (100% false) statement (my wife's sister husband who owns a Safari can say that). However, such a statement (on reliability) can also be made for any machine. No more explanations.

[vasudeva]

I have given enough (as per time limitations) for someone to make their own judgment. Unlike the natural laws, it is not definitive because humans are involved and a loony can put all predictions/expectations at risk. One final summary is here:

IIHS report shows the best and worst cars in driver safety

[gitartha]

Originally Posted by vasudeva

I have posted some studies which analyse ceteris paribus. There are different studies giving different results (SUV less safer), but they include death of others (not SUV drivers as such). So in that sense, SUVs could be unsafe only because of (a) mass (b) profile of SUV buyers and their feeling of safety which may encourage them to be more risky.

Even excluding this, there are metaanalysis (which is a pool or a poll) of different studies which indicate ceteris paribus that SUVs are safer than cars overall, but have greater rollover risk.

Stories of Scorpios toppling over for as minor a factor as a passing cyclist are part of Indian Highway folklore now. Statistics apart the responsibility & maturity of the person at the wheel of a vehicle with inherently high momentum (Mass X Velocity) is definately a very significant factor in deciding the relative safety of the passengers of the vehicle as well as pedestrians.(Just because you are in a hulking vehicle doesnt mean that you consider seat belt as a needless fashion accessory)

As regards economy of running (in addition to safety), comparing diesel SUVs and petrol sedans is definately a step up the wrong alley. One should not go by price alone, because as most SUVs are priced nearabout 10 lac and above, it brings them in the price league of D segment petrol sedans which with their 3L engines will never cross the 9kmpl FE barrier. But say if you compare a Scorpio with a Dzire ZDI (ABS, electronic brake force distribution, Airbags, rigid passenger cabin, side impact beams, etc) which has been stretched to up 24kmpl on the highway by some fellow Team-BHPians,the humble sedan come up trumps over the all-conquering SUV. In fact if carrying more people in comfort, safety & economy is also a criterion,i can have two Dzires for the price of one SUV and my passengers, apart from being travelling in relatively more comfort (shoulder room), with more luggage space, my risk will also be mitigated to a huge extent as all my eggs will not be in one basket .
did i miss something here?? O.K. here goes -The FE of two diesel Dzires on a highway should be more or less be at par with a single safari.
(disclaimer - offcourse i am not being ultra serious here)

[McLaren Rulez]

I'd agree with you gitartha if it wasn't for the Dzire's most odious bum

[Sawyer]

I will desist from posting here anymore, but my subscription shall continue!

[srijit]

Originally Posted by freewheelburnin

My Santro consumed Rs2500 Worth fuel on a trip to kerala when my safari consumed 1600 worth of fuel.Now tell me which is the guzzler?If your economics theories could explain this i would be pleased to hear!

Originally Posted by raj_5004

@ srijit: what Mclaren meant is that- when we compare two similarly priced vehicles, like a scorpio/safari with a civic/corolla.

What I quoted was even better, IMO. A hatch (Santro) vs a SUV (Safari).
Savings in fuel are not insignificant. Difference in ride, huge. Speed taken to complete journey? I dunno.

Originally Posted by McLaren Rulez

But isn't a Corolla more powerful? Also, taking into account weight, the sedan should be faster which is a reasonable gain when compared to the lower (if at all) FE. Of course, the diesel vs petrol changes things a bit so any analysis will be slightly off. But overall, in a general case, the weight and aerodynamics make an SUV either slower or less efficient than a similar sedan (which again is a pain to define).

I agree a sedan (Corolla) would be faster. But not on roads which are broken or dug up. An SUV, on the other hand would be able to go faster than a sedan, on such roads. Good roads are not that common.
You cant call a 10kmpl returning SUV as a guzzler. My Alto returns only 10kmpl sometimes!!! So a 10kmpl SUV is fantastic, IMO.

You can get a Dzire if you want more FE, but if I have 10L to spend on a vehicle, SUV's are an attractive proposition cos they return reasonable FE with good ride.

[loving_alaap]

Dzire will get you more FE, but for how much time?

The body is so filmsy, and with those famous rattles, I doubt the life span of the vehicle as well as safety concern (at the time of accident).

SUVs with heavy bodies, can save a life of th passengers in case of a deadly crash. (ofcourse seat belts are must).

[McLaren Rulez]

Originally Posted by srijit

I agree a sedan (Corolla) would be faster. But not on roads which are broken or dug up. An SUV, on the other hand would be able to go faster than a sedan, on such roads. Good roads are not that common.
You cant call a 10kmpl returning SUV as a guzzler. My Alto returns only 10kmpl sometimes!!! So a 10kmpl SUV is fantastic, IMO.

See this is exactly what I meant. Clearly, you drive on roads that are bad on a regular enough basis. Thus, an SUV is a necessity in this case. So there can be absolutely no arguing on whether you should buy one or not. You clearly need the height and comfort.

[freewheelburnin]

@McLarenRulez , If the statement of fuel efficiency and low running cost had come from a maruthi 800 ,santro or swift diesel owner i would have agreed.For your information,Safari and Scorpio are more fuel efficient than corolla,they offer better comfort on bad roads,takes lesser time to commute on most highways owing to bad road conditions and cost much lesser to maintain than a corolla or civic.S.U.Vs are the best vehicles for poor Indian Roads.Yes they are bulky vehicles and should be driven responsibly.For that matter even a car like be corolla or Honda will not save a pedestrian hitting him at 100 kmph.Pedestrian protection is useful in city conditions and bumber to bumper traffic only at speeds of 20kmph.Do not assume that the car will protect pedestrians when travelling at highway speeds.S.U.Vs need to be driven more carefully and responsibly, but this applies to any powerful vehicle as well owing to higher speeds .You cannot generalize that S.U.Vs give more confidence and hence they will be driven faster.
In my case if i were using a sedan/hatch i have a tendency to Overspeed because of the confidence they inspire owing to good cornering abilities and handling .But in an S.U.V i do not take it to the speeds i would have taken a sedan or a hatch.As a matter of fact if i maintain a decent average speed i can reach my destination earlier and achieve better fuel efficiency.Also the added comfort makes you relax rather than drive rash on longer drives.

[amitoj]

Thanks for the stats, Vasu.

They clearly indicate that an SUV is safer than a sedan for the passengers inside the SUV. Take this stat further to project the scenario where there are more n more SUVs and less sedans! That will bring the driver death count even further down!

[vasudeva]

I have posted some data and article relevant to the title thread. Those data indicate that based on accidents/fatalities in real life situations (humans driving rather than lab rats), SUVs should be safer than sedans.

Yet still, since this thread has veered in all directions and various ideologies and preferences have crept in, I thought let it drift one last time (sorry mods for taking up more bandwidth).

Even though SUVs are safer (based on data presented), they (especially the large ones) are now going out of fashion because of various factors.

This paper attempts to show the extent to which SUVs impose an external cost (as opposed to a private benefit) and that external cost is generally higher than cars. External costs in economics means private benefits but social costs.

Specifically, as this paper argues, Vehicle externality costs include emissions of greenhouse and other gases (affecting global warming and human health), crash costs (imposed on crash partners and not on drivers), roadway congestion, and space consumption, among others. These five sources of external costs by vehicle make and model were estimated for the top-selling passenger cars and light-duty trucks in the US. Among these external costs, those associated with crashes and congestion are estimated to be the most practically significant. When crash costs are included, the worst offenders (in terms of highest external costs) were found to be pickups. If crash costs are removed from the comparisons, the worst offenders tend to be four pickups and a very large SUV: the Ford F-350 and F-250, Chevrolet Silverado 3500, Dodge Ram 3500, and Hummer H2, respectively. Regardless of how the costs are estimated, they are considerable in magnitude, and nearly on par with vehicle purchase prices.

[amitk26]

Originally Posted by vasudeva

If crash costs are removed from the comparisons, the worst offenders tend to be four pickups and a very large SUV: the Ford F-350 and F-250, Chevrolet Silverado 3500, Dodge Ram 3500, and Hummer H2, respectively. Regardless of how the costs are estimated, they are considerable in magnitude, and nearly on par with vehicle purchase prices.

Vasudeva with all due respect I would like to reiterate my point once more what we call as affordable SUV in India is no where near to these 4 very large and even thier smaller "fuel Sipper" siblings.
A Doge RAM 3500 is more bigger and powerful then Eicher mid size commercial vehicle which is used for hauling goods here.

The Indian SUV is quite comparable to mid-size / small sedans of USA and large Indian sedan in terms of external costs.

For example Camry and Civic are a mid-size in USA but considered large / premium here ( you can include any other 10+L seaden in the list) , And if you look as external costs as defined in the paper they have large costs on all counts including emissions , fuel efficiency , footprint , crash impact.

Additional point is that these premium seadans are not quite suitable for state highways and more then 70% of roads.

So we need to compare apples with apples and can not apply the US study directly in indian market before finding out how the defination of SUV is altered.

[Sn1p3r]

This thread is a SAT/GMAT Logic nightmare

What is applicable in US/EU is not same for India. Even if US and EU are compared the car culture is totally out of sync.

On the environmental impact: study shows that Prius is more detrimental to environment than Pickups (Source: Google). But again Salmon from Norway served in EU shares the same carbon footprint. What the heck, enjoy the taste.

End of the day, buy what you wish, just make sure you drive it safe.

[AWD]

Allow me to bring us to the most pertinent question & thats "Safety". Other than Safety kit like ABS, Airbags, what has been done to the vehicles basic safety, structural rigidity, crash worthiness, etc? Is this Safari a safer vehicle than the previous Safaris, has this vehicle been crash tested ? If yes do we have EuroNCAP ratings or equivalent. Basically how is the crash absorption in this vehicles.

If still Tata has skimped on basic safety aspect, then this update is a no-go. While if they have done enough to make it a safer vehicle for you & your family specially in the wake of competition offering safer designs in the shape of Dusty, XUV, etc, then in that case, Tata has done their homework.

[AWD]

Originally Posted by jaysmokesleaves

Does xuv, Duster As far as I know the Scorpio didnt fare well Having driven all these contraptions including the Safari I can vouch that the Safari does feel well built enough to survive a crash.

Well im not entirely sure whether there are NCAP ratings for Dusty & XUV, will try to find the same, but I do think that Dusty being a global vehicle & selling across Continents, must be tested for occupants safety. As we all know its a Renault/Dacia which is based in Europe, they have some stringent safety norms.

Now coming to XUV, I believe its a modern day Monocoque design which have body shells that transmit the crash impact away from the interior cabin to the chassis & pillars & impact zone crumples to absorb the impact. So I would place it above the Storm as far as occupant safety is concerned on the outset, now it remains to be ascertained as to how safe it really is, will try to find the info.

You quite rightly mentioned the word "contraptions", I would say the word fits correctly the profile of Storm & Scorp. I would keep XUV & Dusty out of the ambit as these are both modern day vehicles & occupant safety is expected. Following up on this, I think Scorp would be as "safe/unsafe" as the Storm. But Im not sure but I vaguely remember there was a talk of Mahindra taking Scorp to some sort of crash tests. Would try to dig the info.

Let me put a word about the "well built" notion that we still continue to harbour. Pasting piles of Iron/Steel in no way improves the safety. Rather it plays a counter-productive role in an event of a crash. Why? because ideally the Steel is required to crumple & absorb the impact & transmit it to the chassis, pillars & away from the interior shell. What this rigid steel which is not designed to transmit the impact away from the interior compartment does is that it transmits the impact directly to the interior compartment & thus maximizes the damage to the insides & thus the occupants have increased chances of injuries. This is same in vehicles like maruti 800, Omni, Thar, Bolero, etc. These vehicles are very unsafe on roads.

I've added a detailed note for the would be customer of these vehicles to make an informed decision & question the manufacturers on "Safety". Also eg. adding an ABS or Airbags to equipment list on say a 800 or a Bolero, etc. may help in avoiding an impact but in the advent of a crash the airbag here wont really help because the impact would be coming directly on to the insides. Dont know why our Govt. still allows the sale of these!

P.S: So a Storm, Thar, Scorp may win small battles at low speeds in town against some hatches or sedans but in the advent of a big crash @highways, they stand to loose big-time. Eg. say a Head on between a Storm & a safe sedan like Civic, Occupants in a Civic would be the lucky ones.