[n.devdath]

Originally Posted by MileCruncher

The point I'm trying to make is SUV is not always bad as continuously being harped upon by devdath.

I m sorry if my views were not clear enough on that front. I have indeed said that there are people who need SUVs and should go ahead and buy them.
The idea is about what you mentioned, buy your vehicle as per your use.

[MileCruncher]

Originally Posted by n.devdath

I m sorry if my views were not clear enough on that front. I have indeed said that there are people who need SUVs and should go ahead and buy them.
The idea is about what you mentioned, buy your vehicle as per your use.

Now since you have said yo meant the above, I don't see any point of further discussion as everyone agrees on that point.

So let the ghost lie and discuss on the original topic on safety. And if that's done as well, let us give this thread some rest as I'm tired refreshing

[freewheelburnin]

@Devdath : This discussion is pointless because i need an S.U.V badly atleast till there are better roads in Bangalore and the road conditions to kerala improve.Then probably i would like to be known as the "Monk who sold his Safari". Untill then please let me enjoy my ride.There are more significant issues today rather than having a debate on S.U.V vs Sedan.This is a car enthusiast forum and we have a right to choose the car we love,just like any other choice you make in life.I respect your opinions.They have academic value and i certainly appreciate them.But practically i do not have any other alternative.I have mentioned that every other car will scrape on the roads i travel.I am a person who likes fast cars.The reason i went for S.U.V is because i need it and i cannot afford two cars.Thankfully i have a fuel efficient,comfortable car that can double up for city use as well.I am leaving now.Gotta ride back home.Reclaiming my life!!!

Originally Posted by n.devdath

I m surprised that you do not regard the Sumos, Traxes, Boleros and the like in the MUV market.




I m surprised that I need to answer this.
And before it is interpreted that a sedan carrying one or persons is supported by me, let me clarify it is not, but the the above circumstance, the damage it does is still lesser than an SUV.

Indeed. I do what I can, and nobody sets the limits, it is about arriving at mutually justifiable standards of enviromental and infrastructural usage for all.



That is the whole point, why would you need a vehicle consuming that much fuel, road space and endangering the safety of the other pedestrians and cars in already "congested" cities as you term it when a comfortable sedan can to do the same job.


That is where the difference begins. It is the need Vs want. Most of us need affordable all weather family transport but a few of us want only SUVs.


Both, by buying the Nano as you mentioned which is a need and not a want.



See, there goes the median again. Either an unwanted SUV or a cycle.

Exactly. Which is why I was never against the use of SUVs for people who are on the highway/live in places which have always had no-roads/often travel long distances with family/need to haul goods etc.
Please read what I say before you comment on it.

Anytime mate.



Yes, I did because, like I have said it so many times, we are talking, at least a few of us are, talking averages. How many VRses do you see on the road? And it is a certainly a gas guzzler but still is not as big as an SUV and is much safer for others on the road.


Sorry, but I didn't know that this forum goes to such levels as well.



Again the same point comes to play. You need trucks and buses and a few of us need SUVs as well but the need should be justified, not to me but to yourself. If your purchase is something you require, you would have had better counter views than some haphazard statements in the first place.
Its ok bud, you can have your own views, about everything.

Same point again, how may Accords Vs the "affordable SUVs". Moreover, and this may or may not be true but most of the premium sedans pollute lesser, need lesser space, and have better pedestrian safety standards than SUVs the world over. Isnt it the same here as well??

Do you actually need an answer to it? You just Want it, for the heck of it, right. See the difference.

As someone said, Money is not a license to waste natural resources and deny others their valid rights.

Houses are not public places and common resources like roads, forests, rivers and the like.We are talking different things here.




I m actually laughing louder after reading your answers. Please keep up the good humor.

[SS-Traveller]

Wow, this was one set of rapid-fire posts in a thread if I have ever seen one! Quite a battle... err... debate we have going here!

Originally Posted by MileCruncher

Implement the number of cars one family can purchase to one and see the auto industry grinding to a halt.

One car per family? Umm... mine are 3 families of one person each! Do you mind if I have 3 cars? The FCPAI (Family Car Planning Association of India) just declared us to be 3 families living under one roof!

Originally Posted by n.devdath

What's this? China rules?

No, you bring on a diesel Civic - I'll buy one!

Now which developed nation stopped buying SUVs? Except Japan, because they found big cars tended to fall off their island?

.

Devdath, I really couldn't help putting in some of my comments here, but my advance apologies and advice not to take it personally. That was one extremely impassioned and politically correct dissemination of knowledge that you did, and you almost got me to cancel my own SUV booking. But then, I drive a 140km round trip every day to work whereas you take the bus, and you couldn't care less if I cycled to work every day and suffered an inguinal hernia as a result. So what do I care what other people think about my driving an SUV? Even though it incorporates MicroHybrid and Stage IV emission norms, and leaves less of a carbon footprint than your two-wheeler, you don't care. Even though I need a taller vehicle to get in and out of comfortably because of a slipped disc, you don't care. So I don't care either, as long as the government of this country allows the vehicle to be sold, and allows me to own and drive it, and allows me to afford it, my comfort, health, safety and ego are paramount in my choice of automobile.

Originally Posted by n.devdath

...the need should be justified, not to me but to yourself.

and then you say

Its ok bud, you can have your own views, about everything.

It's a free country after all!

[GTO]

True, but how many s500s do you see on the road compared to "affordable SUVs".......I am surprised the law of averages doesnt work with your line of thinking.

So that effectively means you can't point a finger at the next 4 kpl Landcruiser 200 you see in Bangalore traffic. Just because they are rare, along with 4 kpl S500s, its okay to drive around in them? Hypocritical, would you not agree, just like you seem to think its okay for someone else to drive a 6 kpl RS

But what I am really surprised about is that you are still harping on about "affordable SUVS" when it is very obvious that they are NOT guzzlers. Forget the law of averages, its a simple number = 10 kpl. What is so hard to get? Instead of reiterating, here is my previous post:

Of course. But that doesn't take away from the fact that 9.5 - 10.0 kpl is still a very respectable FE figure for congested cities. Give these affordable SUVs an open road and they'll deliver between 11 - 12 kpl. Hardly a number that we can call a guzzler.

Think of it OBJECTIVELY. Are the affordable SUVs that we are talking about guzzlers? No ways.

Would a diesel sedan be more FE than an SUV? Of course. But then, why stop at sedans? Basically what you are saying is, why do the job with bigger when it can be done with smaller? Considering that 90% of the sedans out there are carrying only 1 - 2 passengers 90% of the time, all of us can buy Tata Nanos. Or wait, even Hero Honda CD100s & mopeds.

Just because there is a more fuel efficient alternative to the same task doesn't make a vehicle that is respectably fuel efficient to start with (e.g. a 10 kpl SUV) a guzzler.

The point is : We can ALWAYS scale down. FE starting from SUV > Sedan > Hatch > Nano > Bike > Moped > Cycling > Walking.

So why stop at sedans? Why not advocate 3 cylinder FE hatchbacks to everyone?

And the reason that the example was brought in, was that India is NOT the only contributor to global warming. Nor are v6s - V8s miniscule around the world. By itself, that V8 sedan is as much, if not more, of a pollutant than the Safari Dicor.

Exactly, so, since we are not the only culprits, or probably we are among the smaller ones, lets not improve any more, we do not need to, even when there are options.

Most importantly, it still doesn't take away from the fact that you use a vehicle (Bullet) that is half as efficient as a CD100, that pretty much does the exact same job. So, by your earlier statement that a 800 can handle the worst of roads, what exactly can a CD100 not do that your bullet does? The improvement always starts at home. Why don't you buy a CD100 first, and then preach the rest to follow.

Exactly. Which is why I was never against the use of SUVs for people who are on the highway/live in places which have always had no-roads....Please read what I say before you comment on it.

I think you need to read your statements first, before advising others. First, you say that 800s have survived the worst of Indian roads, and there isn't a need for SUVs at all. Now you state "highway" or "no roads" as one of the justifications for SUV ownership. Your exact statement:

Havent puny looking Marutis withstood the same and probably worse roads all these decades and come out unscathed? A few scratches, yes but dependablity-100%. All of us know it.

And just FYI, no affordable SUV out there can take "no roads". What they are good at is the rough roads, but then, you think that an M800 can tackle them just as well. So why this sudden new justification?

The reason for increased MUV sales is largely due to 2 reasons. The taxi market forms a large part of their sales. Secondly, there are people who need to haul more passengers or goods or both regularly or need to drive in bad road conditions who buy MUVs. I m surprised I need to tell you this.

The SUV buyers may have the same line of thinking, did that ever occur to you?

And yes, the original argument was about SUVs running in the cities. Well, we do see more partially used MUVs (in capacity) than SUVs in the city. Probably a good time to apply the law of averages that you speak about, since MUVs outsell SUVs by 10:1. It is a FACT that we see more empty MUVs than SUVs, yet no one has a thing against them! Talk about shooting with your eyes shut.

Additional food for thought : MUVs like the Innova & Xylo have substantially large percentages of private buyers.

Or are you of the opinion that every Innova out there always has 7 passengers & is used only on the highway? I have yet to see criticism toward an MUV. Worth thinking about. Worth a point.

My post is still valid. And if that's your excuse for not bringing down MUVs vis a vis SUVs, it could not be more of the mark. Hey, if you insist, we can have another poll.

That is due a simple fact that are more sedans on the road, simple commonsense.

Apply a little bit more of that common sense and you will see that hatchbacks outnumber sedans. And 2 wheelers outnumber them both, combined. Each of these can do the job of sedans, with a higher rate of efficiency.

Also, since most of our modern sedans are more fuel efficient than our "affordable SUVs", they would contribute not only to comparatively lesser pollution but also to a smaller footprint.

That is the whole point, why would you need a vehicle consuming that much fuel, road space and endangering the safety of the other pedestrians and cars in already "congested" cities as you term it when a comfortable sedan can to do the same job.

It is about changing or at least thinking about an equally comfortable and a more fuel efficient alternative with some consideration towards others and the environment.

Why do you need a sedan when a Maruti 800 or a Tata Nano can do the same job? According to you, should we all sell our sedans & large hatchbacks to buy 800s and Nanos? Thankfully, neither the masses nor the government agree with you.

See, the middle line or the "agreeable median" just doesnt work with you. Its either an SUV or a CD 100/Nano. There is nothing in between that can create a win-win situation for the owner, other road user and the environment, Its either and SUV or a cycle. I must say WoW.

Well, its all about the extremes here, isn't it? Considering how people blindly blame SUVs, even the respectably fuel efficient ones, without backing them up with facts. The question is still unanswered : What part of a 10 kpl city / 13 kpl highway SUV do you find a guzzler? Further, an agreeable median, and the market would agree, is a hatchback. Why even go toward the sedans when you will be using the boot as many times as the oft criticised urban SUV would see the highway?!

Its either this way or that. We are discussing "need vs want" and Freedom of Purchase and Exploitation Vs Environmental and Social Responsibility.

Luckily, we do live in a democracy and enjoy a certain level of freedom. The Govt. is smart enough to adopt tough emission norms and only offer us cars which meet modern requirements.

And it is a certainly a gas guzzler but still is not as big as an SUV and is much safer for others on the road.

LOL! So now you have to decide whether you are debating on the fuel efficiency, environmental concerns or the size it occupies on the road. Its amazing to see how someone who cares so much about fuel efficiency and all things green recommends a 6 kpl car to another. A tad hypocritical, ain't it? Or just like the rare S500 buyer, can a 6 - 7 kpl RS buyer also be exempt from your green requirements?

Indeed it is. But a higher car does more damage to a smaller car/pedestrians and this is a very well known fact. Which is why SUVs are potentially more harmful in the same situation compared to a sedan.

And a Verna can do a 100 in half the time that it takes an SUV too, thus it has a far superior probability of doing dangerous speeds in the city than an SUV.

The point : Too many ifs & buts. I repeat : ANY car is a menace in the wrong hands.

That is where it all begins. We tend to do "Only what is Legally Binding". And without a care to what is socially, environmentally or at times even morally binding because nothing stops us from doing it. This is what needs to change.

As someone said, Money is not a license to waste natural resources and deny others their valid rights.

Oh boy, watch out all you Safari, Scorpio & SUV owners : it can now get you the capital punishment. What's that saying about living in a glass house and throwing stones? Why don't you give up your sedan which doesn't even meet the emission norms of today, and a bike that guzzles twice as much fuel as other more modern alternatives before preaching?

The definition of comfort is very simple depending on how you look at it. It is an individual perception but one can draw an acceptable middle line. But for some reason, it doesn't go with your line of thought which is- Either SUV(or whatever I want/can buy) or the NANO and a cycle. And as I have clarified many times, there is no denying the fact that there is a share of people who need and not want and SUV and should go for it.

You would only need to look at my garage to understand my line of view. I own what are pretty much the most fuel efficient vehicles from their segment. And no, I do NOT own an SUV either. I am part of this debate with an extremely neutral view. What I don't understand is how you can blindly call a respectably fuel efficient SUV as a guzzler, and in the same vein justify the presence of the many MUVs / other guzzlers on the road. Why this specific SUV targetting?

My Cielo has not been used continuously for the past year now.

Doesn't make a difference. For the 9 years that it has been used, there were smaller / more fuel efficient alternatives that could do the same job, capiche?

Moreover, and this may or may not be true but most of the premium sedans pollute lesser, need lesser space, and have better pedestrian safety standards than SUVs the world over. Isnt it the same here as well??

Premium sedans pollute lesser despite having V6 - V8 engines . Now I am wowed! Please tell us, according to you, are they running on hot air?

If you want to compare a Civic with an SUV, bring on a petrol SUV. Lets keep a level playing ground when comparing things if it is a bid to arrive at a conclusion, else we could keep talking here for no reason.

Hey, I ain't the one who brought in the affordable SUVs. Pray tell me which affordable petrol SUV is relevant to our market, if not a diesel. Very convenient to change the "focus", isn't it?

Your exact post:

The focus is on more afforable SUVs which are replacing sedans in cities, in the B(read entry mid level) and B+

I don't see any petrol SUV replacing sedans in cities, do you? Where? Even SUV manufacturers aren't aware of this trend.

But it certainly is a very successfull model. And the Laura was just an example. If you havent gotten my point in quoting that

Umm, have you gotten mine? Your Laura statement was viewed independently and corrected. It is NOT a hot seller. Please don't argue for the heck of it.

Ha, see, now the comparison goes to higher levels where there was no debate. It is well known that a world class SUV is as safe as a car.

Actually, you need to revisit my statement again. It was NOT replied to your post, nor was it a part of any debate. It was in agreement with reignofchaos' post. Hope you have the comfort level to laugh at yourself. Please use a little more attention whilst reading.

I m sorry if my views were not clear enough on that front. I have indeed said that there are people who need SUVs and should go ahead and buy them.
The idea is about what you mentioned, buy your vehicle as per your use.

All of us NEED no more than an M800 or an Alto 95% of the time. Who are you to advise the SUV buyers? Pretty surprising that the preacher himself has a pretty inefficient garage.

Most of us need affordable all weather family transport but a few of us want only SUVs.

Incorrect. Look up public polls across the forum. Everyone wants a more expensive car, not necessarily an SUV. A driving enthusiast would prefer a sedan over an SUV for its superior dynamics.

[n.devdath]

Originally Posted by GTO

So that effectively means you can't point a finger at the next 4 kpl Landcruiser 200 you see in Bangalore traffic. Just because they are rare, around with 4 kpl S500s, its okay to drive around in them? Double standards, would you not agree, just like you seem to think its okay for someone else to drive a 6 kpl RS

Not double standards, it is simple, the law of averages again. There can never be the same number of LCs as the "affordable SUVs", at least in the near future. But the increase in the number of "affordable SUVs" in the cities and not being need based can create greater issues on all fronts.

Originally Posted by GTO

But what I am really surprised about is that you are still harping on about "affordable SUVS" when it is very obvious that they are NOT guzzlers. Forget the law of averages, its a simple number = 10 kpl. What is so hard to get? Instead of reiterating, here is my previous post:

They are gas guzzlers when they are purchased inspite of having other options which could satisfy the need of those buyers who need not have bought an SUV.

Originally Posted by GTO

The point is : We can ALWAYS scale down. FE starting from SUV > Sedan > Hatch > Nano > Bike > Moped > Cycling > Walking.
So why stop at sedans? Why not advocate 3 cylinder FE hatchbacks to everyone?

That exactly is the median or the middle line that I was talking about. Buy car based on use and requirement.

Originally Posted by GTO

And the reason that the example was brought in, was that India is NOT the only contributor to global warming. Nor are v6s - V8s miniscule around the world. By itself, that V8 sedan is as much, if not more, of a pollutant than the Safari Dicor.

See the above point about LCs and S500s.

Originally Posted by GTO

Most importantly, it still doesn't take away from the fact that you use a vehicle (Bullet) that is half as efficient as a CD100, that pretty much does the exact same job. So, by your earlier statement that a 800 can handle the worst of roads, what exactly can a CD100 not do that your bullet does? The improvement always starts at home. Why don't you buy a CD100 first, and then preach the rest to follow.

I try to practice what I preach. I have said that there are people who buy SUVs out of need and it is the same case for me as well. I have the bullet only read ONLY for highway use. Just as SUVs are justified for bad road use, large families etc.

Originally Posted by GTO

I think you need to read your statements first, before advising others. First, you say that 800s have survived the worst of Indian roads, and there isn't a need for SUVs at all. Now you state "no roads" as one of the justifications for SUV ownership. Your exact statement:

Right, that was because you had tried to prove SUVs as the best and probably the only comfortable mode of transport in the city and that sedans cannot make it.

Originally Posted by GTO

And just FYI, no affordable SUV out there can take "no roads". What they are good at is the rough roads, but then, you think that an M800 can tackle them just as well. So why this new justification?

Simple, the middle line again for everything. A decent level of comfort, space, economy and other features is offered by today's sedans.

Originally Posted by GTO

The SUV buyers may have the same line of thinking, did that ever occur to you?

And yes, the original argument was about SUVs running in the cities. Well, we do see more partially used MUVs (in capacity) than SUVs in the city. Probably a good time to apply the law of averages that you speak about, since MUVs outsell SUVs by 10:1. It is a FACT that we see more empty MUVs than SUVs, yet no one has a thing against them! Talk about shooting with your eyes closed.

See reply elsewhere.

Originally Posted by GTO

My post is still valid. And if that's your excuse for not bringing down MUVs vis a vis SUVs, it could not be more of the mark. Hey, if you insist, we can have another poll.

And you feel that the cab owners will come to answer it? Dont you think it is better to look on the roads you use daily?

Originally Posted by GTO

Apply a little bit more of that common sense and you will see that hatchbacks outnumber sedans. And 2 wheelers outnumber them both, combined. Each of these can do the job of sedans, with a higher rate of efficiency.

Right, which is why many people who do not require a sedan buy a hatchback. Nothing wrong in it, in fact that the whole point you are missing. Buy a car based on need and environmental considerations not to mention your budget, else I m sure you d say that the Civic Hybrid is green so I feel everyone should buy it.

Originally Posted by GTO

Why do you need a sedan when a Maruti 800 or a Tata Nano can do the same job? According to you, should we all sell our sedans & large hatchbacks to buy 800s and Nanos? Thankfully, either the masses nor the government agree with you.

Well, as far as the masses go, like you said, hatchbacks and sedans sell the most.And for the Government there are tax benefits on smaller cars, and the talk of "gas guzzler"tax. So I guess its time you caught up with some news.

Originally Posted by GTO

Well, its all about the extremes here, isn't it? Considering how people blindly blame SUVs, even the respectably fuel efficient ones, without backing them up with facts. The question is still unanswered : What part of a 10 kpl city / 13 kpl highway SUV do you find a guzzler? Further, an agreeable median, and the market would agree, is a hatchback. Why even go toward the sedans when you will be using the boot as many times as the oft criticised urban SUV would see the highway?!

See above point about hatchbacks and sedans.

Originally Posted by GTO

Luckily, we do live in a democracy and enjoy a certain level of freedom. The Govt. is smart enough to adopt tough emission norms and only offer us cars which meet modern requirements.

Yeah right, and it has also implemented greater taxes for bigger vehicles so that the roads still have some space.

Originally Posted by GTO

LOL! So now you have to decide whether you are debating on the fuel efficiency, environmental concerns or the size it occupies on the road. Its amazing to see how someone who cares so much about fuel efficiency and all things green recommends a 6 kpl car to another. A tad hypocritical, ain't it? Or just like the rare S500 buyer, can a 6 - 7 kpl RS buyer also be exempt from your green requirements?

You still dont get it?It is on all fronts.Its about the overall impact of an SUV purchase without the need for it. And yes,it is a sedan which is still safer than an SUV in the city with drivers being the same. I m not against car rallies and motocross as well, in case you want a point further in the wrong direction.

Originally Posted by GTO

And a Verna can do a 100 in half the time that it takes an SUV too, thus it has a far superior probability of doing dangerous speeds in the city than an SUV.

The point : Too many ifs & buts. I repeat : ANY car is a menace in the wrong hands.

And yet is better controllable, and has pedestrian safety standards
AND: SUVs are a greater menace when compared to cars on the same platform. It has been proven and all of us know it. Please accept the obvious truth.

Originally Posted by GTO

Oh boy, watch out all you Safari, Scorpio & SUV owners : it can now get you the capital punishment. What's that saying about living in a glass house and throwing stones? Why don't you give up your sedan which doesn't even meet the emission norms of today, and a bike that guzzles twice as much fuel as other more modern alternatives before preaching?

Simple, like SUV purchase and use is justified where the need is, it is the same with me. Read the above points carefully. I have clarified that I havent used my Cielo for an year now.

Originally Posted by GTO

You would only need to look at my garage to understand my line of view. I own what are pretty much the most fuel efficient vehicles from their segment. And no, I do NOT own an SUV either. I am part of this debate with an extremely neutral view. What I don't understand is how you can blindly call a respectably fuel efficient SUV as a guzzler, and in the same vein justify the presence of the many MUVs / other guzzlers on the road. Why this specific SUV targetting?

So is mine. But when being socially and environmentally responsible is viewed as a show off, I tend to debate it.
For the gas guzzler thing, pl read my post again.

Originally Posted by GTO

Doesn't make a difference. For the 9 years that it has been used, there were smaller / more fuel efficient alternatives that could do the same job, capiche?

It does. The point is, we were a family of 6 people who had the need for it due to frequent trips to the airport and my grandmother who had to stretch her legs in the rear seat. So, Like I said, it should be need based.

And yes, your fav Govt permits it to move on the roads with a valid PUC certificate, so had I been like you, I would have used it daily and would have defended my use based on your "Democracy" definitions.

Originally Posted by GTO

Premium sedans pollute lesser despite having V6 - V8 engines . Now I am wowed! Please tell us, according to you, are they running on hot air?

I had clearly stated that I was not clear on this point, so it was your responsibility to clarify it. A discussion is not about merely denying all views but at arriving at a conclusion.

Originally Posted by GTO

Hey, I ain't the one who brought in the affordable SUVs. Pray tell me which affordable petrol SUV is relevant to our market, if not a diesel. Very convenient to switch sides, isn;t it?

I m not switching sides but you are. So just because there are no petrol SUVs, you compare the wrong cars. Wow here.

Originally Posted by GTO

I don't see any petrol SUV replacing sedans in cities, do you? Where? Even SUV manufacturers aren't aware of this trend.

I didnt mean petrol SUVs here. I meant the diesel "affordable" SUVs.

Originally Posted by GTO

Umm, have you gotten mine? Your Laura statement was viewed independently and corrected. It is NOT a hot seller. Please don't argue for the heck of it.

I gave you a bigger example and if you still cant understand it, God help you. If you dont want to understand it, God help all of us reading your posts.

Originally Posted by GTO

All of us NEED no more than an M800 or an Alto 95% of the time. Who are you to advise the SUV buyers? Pretty surprising that the preacher himself has a pretty inefficient garage.

And who are you to defend SUVs? Its all about doing our bit for the society and environment looking into our needs and resources.
See hatchback point again. Buy the car you need. Moreover, you "use your cars till they fall apart right?" So I m really not sure how many of your cars are within the norms still.

Originally Posted by GTO

Incorrect. Look up public polls across the forum. Everyone wants a more expensive car, not necessarily an SUV. A driving enthusiast would prefer a sedan over an SUV for its superior dynamics.

Nothing wrong in buying a more expensive car. Again, before you reach your LC heights and gas guzzling stories, let me remind you that most of us cannot reach those levels to make these cars a majority.

And yes, let me sum up my points once again.
1. Buying a car should be a desicion based on requirements and social and environmental considerations.
2. SUVs purchases which can be avoided can easily,if avoided, in the long term, ease our traffic, increase road safety and reduce pollution.
3. Buying an SUV when a car can do the job more efficiently makes the SUV a gas guzzler.
4. Not buying the car you need is not being advocated here. It is about identifying your need and then buying the car.
5.All of us know that India is a democracy. But democracy doesnt mean doing what we like just because the law is lax.
6. Understanding our social and environmental responsibility is not becoming China and we know it very well.
7. Last but not the least, I am no one to force my opinion on anyone and neither does anyone else have that right. This is a public forum and discussions need to be focused on getting solutions and thinking realisitically.
8. GTO, the game still stands closed as there are, like you said, more hatchbacks and sedans on the road than SUVs. I m sure you know this.
Imagine replacing all of them with SUVs....you get the scene right??

I will end my talk here as there is no point in trying extending it further. All of us are aware of what needs to be and can be done to our society and environment. We have been seeing and hearing enough consequences of not agreeing to the fact that our environment and resources have already been overused.

[AbhiJ]

devdath, the beauty about living in India is that we have freedom.. Freedom to choose what I WANT (not NEED).

If I want to travel alone, on congested city streets in a 5 metre, V6, petrol SUV, I can, and no law, no government and no individual has any right to point a finger.

All the government can (and should) do is to raise taxes of guzzlers, which they are doing. I think the government should raise road tax for high emmision vehicles, irrespective of whether they are MUVs, or hot hatches.

p.s. I do my bit for the environment, by running one of the cleanest and greenest manufacturing setups possible in my line of work, even though no norms require me to do so.

[Sawyer]

Originally Posted by AbhiJ

If I want to travel alone, on congested city streets in a 5 metre, V6, petrol SUV, I can, and no law, no government and no individual has any right to point a finger.

p.s. I do my bit for the environment, by running one of the cleanest and greenest manufacturing setups possible in my line of work, even though no norms require me to do so.

Hats off with respect to the postscript, and I am reasonably sure in that case, you will not actually do what you have pointed out in the second paragraph of your post, but will reserve the right to! In your place though, I would concede the right for someone to point a finger at me, but I can always choose to ignore that. Or not, depending on how I process things.
To an earlier post, it is not just Japan, in most of Western Europe, including the UK, large SUVs are on the decline. To those who would jump up and say, show me the statistics, I haven't any to show. I read, and when I visit these places, I talk to people from different places that tell me these things.
One of the reasons for that decline is the appreciation all around of the pressures on the environment, and increase in awareness all around of the kind that leads to a lot of finger pointing, from people whose opinions I respect. For the most part, it is peer pressure that works a lot better than legislation.
In some parts of the world, people in large SUVs get honked at. Wouldn't work here
And people are people, not always easily understood. Logically, they should also honk at the RRs etc., but they don't.

[freewheelburnin]

Devdath,
In that case all sedans which offer mileage less than 10 in city should be banned from Indian Roads
1)SX4
2)Honda City
3)Lancer
4)Cedia
5)Verna Petrol
6)Ford fiesta 1.6
7)Fiat Adventure
8)Fiat Petra
9)Toyota Corolla
10)Honda Civic
11)Baleno

etc(And all out of production cars)

Hatchbacks
1)Palio 1.6
2)Opel Corsa

Banning these cars will kill the Car enthusiast community.There would be no need for a Team-BHP in that scenario.Would that keep you happy?

[amitk26]

Originally Posted by Sawyer

Hats off with respect to the postscript, and I am reasonably sure in that case, you will not actually do what you have pointed out in the second paragraph of your post, but will reserve the right to! In your place though, I would concede the right for someone to point a finger at me, but I can always choose to ignore that. Or not, depending on how I process things.
To an earlier post, it is not just Japan, in most of Western Europe, including the UK, large SUVs are on the decline. To those who would jump up and say, show me the statistics, I haven't any to show. I read, and when I visit these places, I talk to people from different places that tell me these things.
One of the reasons for that decline is the appreciation all around of the pressures on the environment, and increase in awareness all around of the kind that leads to a lot of finger pointing, from people whose opinions I respect. For the most part, it is peer pressure that works a lot better than legislation.
In some parts of the world, people in large SUVs get honked at. Wouldn't work here
And people are people, not always easily understood. Logically, they should also honk at the RRs etc., but they don't.

I think too many people are reading US web sites and watching US TV and influenced by thier social concerns rathern then ours.
If we are really serious about environment we need to stop burning of grabage , mixing organic and inorganic waste and emissions of NOX , SO2 and CO by old vehicles , autos and 2 Wheelers rather then worrying about far and few SUV.

US/Europian definition of SUV is quite different then our definition and even Korean / Japanese definition.

Ford F150 , Dodge RAM , Landrover defender etc. can not be compared to what passes off as SUV on Indian road. Perhaps USA would do a great service to entire huminity if they change defination of SUV in line with India rather then replacing them with still oil guzzling Cars.

PS : In USA 28 Miles per gallon approx 100 BHP Hyundai ( under test conditions) is described as Fuel sipper.

Translating to KM / Liter this is 11.83 KM / Liter so a 140 BHP Tata Safari which gives 14+ on open highway and 10.5 in crowded cities is an fuel smeller. and small cars with 17 - 18 km / liter are just fuel lookers as per US terminology.

[shankar.balan]

if the whole world were to work only on "need based" principle and NOT "want based" principle, then we would have the global warming crisis, the destruction of the rain forests, the killing of wildlife, the need for War and Terrorism etc.

Boss - all this is Utopia. Sorry, but life is all about playing the ball as it lies. Circumstances need to be handled as they arise. Nothing anyone may say, is really going to change someone else's mind once it is made up.

And now, frankly, dont you think this thread is rambling on and on with no end in sight?

[suman]

Devdath, you should actually go through all your posts again (on this thread) and check out the number of times you've evaded giving a direct reply (possibly because you had no answer) and ended up with below -

Originally Posted by n.devdath

I m surprised that I need to answer this.

Originally Posted by n.devdath

Do you actually need an answer to it? You just Want it, for the heck of it, right. See the difference.

Really not being able to convincingly drive home the point IMHO

Originally Posted by n.devdath

They are gas guzzlers when they are purchased inspite of having other options which could satisfy the need of those buyers who need not have bought an SUV.

How? Budget of 10 lacs, buy an SUV that gives 10 kmpl of Diesel vs a Sedan which gives the same, how is the SUV a gas guzzler? Or is it supposed to give more mileage because its bigger? ROTFL.....

Originally Posted by n.devdath

SUVs are a greater menace when compared to cars on the same platform. It has been proven and all of us know it. Please accept the obvious truth.

Just because you say it, the world needs to accept it? LOL again!!

Originally Posted by n.devdath

If you dont want to understand it, God help all of us reading your posts.

Actually, its come to a point where God help all of us reading your posts mate - because the thread has been hijacked completely & successfully from what the OP wanted to find out.

Originally Posted by n.devdath

7. Last but not the least, I am no one to force my opinion on anyone and neither does anyone else have that right. This is a public forum and discussions need to be focused on getting solutions and thinking realisitically.

If your posts actually sounded like you meant the above, I don't think anyone here would have had a problem. After all its a free country.

[amitoj]

Originally Posted by shankar.balan

And now, frankly, dont you think this thread is rambling on and on with no end in sight?

I wholeheartedly agree!!

Originally Posted by amitk26

I think too many people are reading US web sites and watching US TV and influenced by thier social concerns rathern then ours.

I think you hit the nail right on the head there.

[Sawyer]

Since this is a subject of car safety, these two from a recent book I have read are not totally OT - and things to mull over in a more light hearted vein:
1. The most effective car safety device would be a dagger mounted on the steering wheel, aimed at the driver. The incentive to drive safely would be quite high.
2. Head injuries make up half of the country's traffic injury costs in some studies. So, helmets, cheaper and more reliable than side impact airbags, would make a lot more sense. A crazy idea, but so were airbags once.
The first is quoted in jest.

[NIP]

Oh man ! This is one heated thread...on a lighter note, I think I've got the perfect vehicle in my garage, a Ford Fusion. A mix of sedan, hatch and SUV Now I know what ford was thinking ! lol !