[libranof1987]

There's hypocrisy when it comes to safety because we have created the situation for it.

Our regulations don't care about safety features; there's no rule to make ABS, EBD, Airbags mandatory in *every* car.

1) Everyone knows that the brakes on Swift LXi and VXi are poorer compared to ZXi; but is *anyone* doing anything about it?

How about something file a case against MS - naah, that ain't happening.

2) The lower variants of so many cars don't have Airbags and ABS - is anyone revolting against that? No! And no one will, because many many people can afford that car because of the price and ABS and Airbags will just shoot it out of their reach.

3) We are obsessed with FE; and this must come at a cost. Hence, the cars are under-tyred. Only a fraction of us actually get tyre upgrades.

4) We allow such trucks, buses and autos to ply on the road that are fit only to be displayed in a Victorian museum. But they just can't be pulled off the road - the taxi class erupts to protest.

5) Forget all this - how many states actually have the guts to enforce compulsory use of seat-belt and helmet? Hardly!

I remember the tamasha the public created in Pune when the PMC made helmets compulsory. It was disgusting to see educated people fighting with the Govt. when the move was aimed at their safety.


Here's the thing - we have created and continue to encourage the hypocrisy. Fight against it and watch how manufacturers fall into line.

[DieselFan]

Originally Posted by Samurai

It is not tightrope walking all the time. When you modify well within limits, you are not compromising on safety.

We do not have the kind of luxury on FOS (Factor of Safety) now a days as compared to the 80s. Each car company are trying ways and means to reduce cost by reducing weight/thickness of various parts.

Is it the manufacturers or us who are competent enough to decide what is the limit beyond which we will not be compromising Safety and the long term durability of various car components. If we are not compotent to judge this I am better off staying stock and not modifying the critical components.

Having said that not all components are sacred and not to be modified. Some modifications actually enhance the safety and durability of the car- Alloys, better tyres, good headlights, better engine oils (yes even this is a mod).

[rock75]

The most amusing thing I find on Team Bhp is that members bragging about doing 150,160 or even higher speeds on public roads (even though expressways) and 'redlining' in each gear again on public roads.

Indian roads and moreover traffic discipline being what it is, is it all right to do so?

[suhaas307]

Originally Posted by DieselFan

I actually meant it 100%. ECU mods are bad for engines,transmission, brakes, tyres etc. All car components are designed for a specific Max/average Power/tourque. If you do stunts like mods to increase the same it will have impact on not just the engine but also related components especially transmission.

There is no good or bad way to carry out ECU mod. If it was that simple to increase power/tourque without affecting the components of the car then the manufacturers themselves would have done the same. You seem to suggest all our car manufacturers are dumb.

Ummm, assistance required, please?

Dude. Where did I suggest that car manufacturers are dumb?

Every car has some extra potential that can be unlocked. As long as you get the modifications right, not only will your car be reliable, it will be more powerful, and it will perform better. And that's that.

You seem to be completely mislead about ECU modifications. There are several world-renowned tuners who swear by ECU modifications to get the best out of their engines. And every other component is tweaked to allow it to perform better.

You think if you try and extract 10 extra horses from your engine, the engine will go boom? Is that what you're saying? Lol!

This is like the Unnecessary OEM Accessories thread discussion all over again, where someone said that the Tacho-meter is useless and an extra addition that isn't required!

Do I have to repeat myself? I did mention, in my earlier post, that manufacturers do not build a car to its full potential, as they have to cater to the masses, who would expect a fuel-efficient and easy-to-drive car. Power isn't priority for the common man. And that's why manufacturers choose to build a car that will be accepted by every one. And the rest 10% of the enthusiasts among the masses may choose to spruce their car up in which ever way they like.

But you seem to have completely ignored this in my earlier post.

I will suggest two things for you, dieselfan.

- Please take the time to read posts clearly, before repeating yourself, and forcing others to repeat themselves.

- Suggesting that performance mods aren't good AT ALL, on a forum like 'Team BHP' isn't the smartest thing

You're completely entitled to your view and opinion, but that doesn't make it a fact. Also, I believe you're probably in the wrong forum.

Cheers,
Suhaas.

EDIT:

Originally Posted by DieselFan

Is it the manufacturers or us who are competent enough to decide what is the limit beyond which we will not be compromising Safety and the long term durability of various car components. If we are not compotent to judge this I am better off staying stock and not modifying the critical components.

Umm, so you're suggesting that the manufacturers know it all, and the public and the enthusiasts are clueless about cars and how they work?

Originally Posted by DieselFan

Having said that not all components are sacred and not to be modified. Some modifications actually enhance the safety and durability of the car- Alloys, better tyres, good headlights, better engine oils (yes even this is a mod).

Better engine oil is modification?

[kaynmantis]

Considering car manufacturers will often make decisions based on the lowest denominator, example, stamped wheels instead of alloys even though good alloys are not hard to procure. Its often the cost. Hence, owners will often upgrade them with better after market ones. The scope of modification can range from stupidity to mind-blowing, depending on whats available and how much one can spend.

[thoma]

Is my grammar that bad that not many have got my question clearly?

My point was-

When one is cribbing on the non-availability of safety features (as long as they are not mandatory, they remain features) on some models, the same person buys a safety loaded model and goes straight to the accessories shop to modify things. Now, the safety of the whole car as such is NOT quantified, unless we know the tolerance limits provided by the manufacturer, and that of the items we change.

Is this not a double stand from our (the customer's) end?

[mayankk]

Originally Posted by thoma

Is my grammar that bad that not many have got my question clearly?

My point was-

When one is cribbing on the non-availability of safety features (as long as they are not mandatory, they remain features) on some models, the same person buys a safety loaded model and goes straight to the accessories shop to modify things. Now, the safety of the whole car as such is NOT quantified, unless we know the tolerance limits provided by the manufacturer, and that of the items we change.

Is this not a double stand from our (the customer's) end?

would you care to elaborate as to what features on a "safety loaded model" are affected by the mods under discussion here, or in fact carried out by a large percentage of TBHP?

EDIT:Thoma, ref your post below.
I am just quoting what your post says.
If you wanted it to mean something other than what you typed, well, you should have typed THAT.
im out of this classroom now.

[thoma]

Originally Posted by mayankk

would you care to elaborate as to what features on a "safety loaded model" are affected by the mods under discussion here, or in fact carried out by a large percentage of TBHP?

I don't think I have ever told that any 'feature on a "safety loaded model" are affected by the mods' specifically. I have only told 'Now, the safety of the whole car as such is NOT quantified'. Could you please please refer my initial posts which might help you clear any further doubts.

[dhanushs]

Originally Posted by thoma

are we not mocking the countless hours of R & D put behind in building such a wonderful engineering, the car?

It depends on the type of modification and quality/intend of the R&D.

For example the so called R&D provide us with slimmy tyres and underrated brakes.. why? To make the engineering wonderful?.. NO.. To keep the cost price down, and gain the FE USP brownie points.

Now.. is that Safe?.. NO.. So, **upgrade** is the only option. Ultimately, we are a bunch of car lovers. And we all intend to do whats best for our cars.

I agree that lot of thought has gone into the design of a car, but its not always to get the best out of it, but to meet the manufactures (or rather target customers) requirements.

I would not upgrade anything in my car, if the manufacturer sold me a car whose ALL aspects matches my requirements. But, unfortunately.. NO car in India offeres that. I have to compromise atleast a slightest bit. So, I WILL **sensibly upgrade**.

[shankar.balan]

I quite agree with you on this point.
Given our roads and infrastructure it is best to stick with some more peaceful (read safer) speeds. Optimum would be between 90-110kmph on highways. The additional upsides are less wear and tear, less hard braking and gearing down, far greater fuel efficiency and a longer lasting engine, mechanicals and body.

Originally Posted by rock75

The most amusing thing I find on Team Bhp is that members bragging about doing 150,160 or even higher speeds on public roads (even though expressways) and 'redlining' in each gear again on public roads.

Indian roads and moreover traffic discipline being what it is, is it all right to do so?

[DieselFan]

Originally Posted by suhaas307

Every car has some extra potential that can be unlocked. As long as you get the modifications right, not only will your car be reliable, it will be more powerful, and it will perform better. And that's that.

My opinion is car manufacturers are the best people to decide design parameters on the cars they manufacture. It would be foolhardy to refute this.

Originally Posted by suhaas307

- Suggesting that performance mods aren't good AT ALL, on a forum like 'Team BHP' isn't the smartest thing
You're completely entitled to your view and opinion, but that doesn't make it a fact. Also, I believe you're probably in the wrong forum.

I think you got it all wrong mate. Team-BHP as a forum appreciates all views and a healthy debate. I think one should be discussing points of view rather than personal mud slinging.

Originally Posted by suhaas307

Umm, so you're suggesting that the manufacturers know it all, and the public and the enthusiasts are clueless about cars and how they work?

Yes I am suggesting the same. Can you list out the design parameters of the engine of the car you drive?

Public or the enthusiasts would have very limited knowledge if at all on how a specific car is designed. why do you think car manufacturers invest in R&D facilities?

[kaynmantis]

Originally Posted by thoma

Is my grammar that bad that not many have got my question clearly?

My point was-

When one is cribbing on the non-availability of safety features (as long as they are not mandatory, they remain features) on some models, the same person buys a safety loaded model and goes straight to the accessories shop to modify things. Now, the safety of the whole car as such is NOT quantified, unless we know the tolerance limits provided by the manufacturer, and that of the items we change.

Is this not a double stand from our (the customer's) end?

I think your point is understood. A feature is a feature whether its mandatory or not. The question is whether such and such features is AVAILABLE on certain models.

Now coming to "safety loaded model". I am not sure what would be termed as safety features. Side impact bars? ABS? Seat belts? Collapsible steering column? Traction controls? etc. etc. I don't think there are many who would be doing modification on them as these are not stuffs one can simply walk into accessories shops, purchase them off the shelves and plonk them in.

Coming to stuffs like music system, lights, tyres, etc. These are small changes that will hardly compromise the car in a major way. In fact, with correct decision can improve upon the stock. Yes there are ignorants folks who could make a simple modification such as upgrading headlight bulbs hazardous.

Let me give one actual example. I got a used car. The previous owner had upgraded to 100/90w bulbs, it has burned the sockets as stock wires are meant to handle 60/55w. Precious owner certainly was ignorant about the...in your words "tolerance limits" in this case. Anyhow, stock lights are pathetic. But simply plonking in a higher rated bulb is not the answer. You need up upgrade the wires as well, like relay. So you are right in saying, knowing the "tolerance limits". Do it right, and you will get much better result than stock.

Besides I changed the entire headlight setup. My current headlight has nothing in common with the stock. Now the lights are much, and I mean MUCH better than stock. Been using it without issue for the past four years. Not forgetting, still using the same battery and still going strong. Similarly, my bike stock headlight and horns are at the least pathetic. Its does not mean manufacturers are clueless about making better lights, it just means they are cheaper, hence affordable. One can modify and make them better.

Coming to the brakes. My stock brakes sucks big time, unfortunately, these stuffs are very difficult to upgrade without seriously spending. So had to settle for slightly wider tyres to improve braking.

What I mentioned above are what most people does. Lets be clear, Manufacturers does do a lot of R&D no doubt. But the options they pick are often the least expensive, perhaps just enough to pass certain level of industry standard.

[suhaas307]

Originally Posted by DieselFan

My opinion is car manufacturers are the best people to decide design parameters on the cars they manufacture. It would be foolhardy to refute this.

Yes I am suggesting the same. Can you list out the design parameters of the engine of the car you drive?

Public or the enthusiasts would have very limited knowledge if at all on how a specific car is designed. why do you think car manufacturers invest in R&D facilities?

Right. So car manufacturers achieve perfection every time? Even the most reliable companies like Toyota and Honda fall back, despite all the R&D and investment.

I hope you haven't forgotten that every year, several car manufacturers recall cars due to manufacturing defects and issues. Even Toyota does that, and more often than not, these few years.

So even our car manufacturers don't get it right every time.

One must realize that cars are made for the masses. We make the cars. Car manufacturers and people running the business aren't a different breed of people who know it all. They can make mistakes too. No one is perfect, mate. There is always room for improvement in every field. Cars can be improved too.

There are several people on Team BHP who are closely related to the automotive scene, and have their hand in the activities of the Indian automotive sector. There are several Mechanical engineers here, who would propagate modifications. Are you saying Team BHP is full of enthusiasts who don't know their cars, and it's ONLY the manufacturers who do?

Originally Posted by DieselFan

I think you got it all wrong mate. Team-BHP as a forum appreciates all views and a healthy debate. I think one should be discussing points of view rather than personal mud slinging.

Definitely. I completely agree.

For all practical purposes, you're right.

But think about what you're saying in an enthusiasts forum, mate. Saying that modifications aren't good and 'a definite no-no', in a forum that propagates modifications, and has a complete section dedicated to all the tuners in the country, is like going to the Soviet Union with a khaki trench-coat and a little mustache and waiving a Nazi flag.

[anekho]

Originally Posted by thoma

Agreed, but not on the particular vehicle we buy, right?

Well depending on the modification, yes! Most of the modifications (available from reputed aftermarket/tuning companies) that affect the mechanicals of the vehicle are model-specific! Also note that the many, many manufacturers share components across models (to reduce costs, R&D investments). Similarly modifications that are based on these shared components also apply to all the shared models!

Things like bulbs, are also many a time built to identical specifications by many manufacturers to reduce costs. So in the aftermarket, when Philips offer a brighter bulb, built to match these same specifications (meaning they will function reliably, without compromising the safety of the car) it is a logical and safe upgrade!

Of course there are also 'one-size-fits-all' modifications, but these are typically harmless and in no way affect the mechanicals/electricals of the vehicle.

Originally Posted by thoma

If then why do manufacturers void warranty even if you add a more quality part? Because it is not tested for suitability on that particular make of car.

The warranty voiding threat is often to secure that customers return to their A.S.S and purchase spares from the manufacturer itself. Ideally, they'd like to have a monopoly on all spares/parts of the car, maximizing their profits. Can't blame them for it!

Also, it gives manufacturers a comfort-zone. It's so much easier for the manufacturer to blame any issue with the car on 'that added accessory' than actually look into the problem itself and see what's really wrong.

Originally Posted by thoma

A manufacturer is not an assembler alone. They have to give road worthiness to the car as a whole.

Indeed. But I stress again, they have to do it with certain parameters in mind. Things like cost, the fuel economy rating, the target audience of the car, how many stars it'll receive in a crash test etc are major factors in the decision making process of the manufacturer. Many times, quality of components are sacrificed to meet other goals.

Example. The Hyundai i10. Great car. Delivered with extremely narrow tires. Why? To maximize that fuel efficiency rating and reduce costs for Hyundai. Not because it'll give you good grip in case of an emergency braking maneuver or great stability in a sudden swerve out of danger. An aftermarket tire up-size is recommended!

Again, modify by all means but do your research.

[mayankk]

I wonder carroll shelby thinks of this?