[V12Doc]

I have crash tested swift two times on dogs. Trust me we wouldn't have survived if it was a car @60kmph. Basic structural safety absent. Crumples in like a potato. Hyundai Verna is a safe vehicle both old n New. Ertiga is similar to swift. Toyota cars corolla and up I can vouch for. Pajero is one of the best. These are from accident seen or experienced by me.

[mnrvokk]

It is appalling to hear all these calls for the Govt to mandate what safety features to include on all cars as a minimum. People calling for this should realize that the Govt is not your nanny and it is your responsibility to keep you and your family safe.

No one is forcing consumers to buy products without safety features. The consumer is either uninformed or choosing to value something else compared to safety. The only person to blame here is the consumer.

Granted the Govt can and should enforce basic standardized crash tests like the ones in other countries and force the manufacturers to display this information while selling these automobiles. The burden of acting on this information should stay with the consumer. Period.

There were two points made by other posters earlier that I would like to highlight but I am too lazy to actually quote them here and so I apologize.

1. Have the presence of these safety features in automobiles benefit the consumer on their auto insurance premiums where in, it should be cheaper to insurance a Polo with Airbags versus one without. (Is this already in place in India???)

2. Forcing manufacturers to install airbags on all cars will result in more injuries to passengers since our consumers do not really wear seat belts to begin with. And do not get me started with all the lap children in the front passenger seat happily resting against the 'time bombs' or as they are commonly referred to as air bags.


Same tirade against all the "smoking kills" prompts within the actual movie which is a waste of money. I am sure there are many other ways that the Govt can spend its money in helping the people than this insane approach.

[diffsoft]

I happened to read this response by SIAM and quite expectedly it was biased towards the bigger Indian car makers - "whose bread I eat, his song I sing"

http://economictimes.indiatimes.com/...w/29788169.cms

The most absurd response was that Indian cars are driven at 46 kmph, on average, while the tests were done at 64 kmph. Pretty much like saying you can't drown in a pool with an average depth of 4 feet.

Another absurdity was to say "what is the purchasing power?"

In any case I am glad this has rocked the boat much to the joy of many of us who have been repeatedly saying that Indian car makers need to do more to keep occupants safer.

Cheers,

[Anand3553]

I always fail to understad the Indian car manufacturers (customers as well - including me). Is safety something that is optional ??!! Even the advertisements of cars clearly reflects an average Indian customer. I never saw any car advertisement in India which even uses the word safety.
If government makes the crash tests mandatory, I would not be surprised when the manufacturers include tyres and steering wheel as an optional feature to manage cost

[a4anurag]

^^^

I second that and every other Ad be it on TV or on Newspaper highlights the FE rather than safety it would offer the occupants.

This has to change and we must get to safety also highlighted with FE the vehicle can give - Government + Auto Makers + customers should understand and equally respond to encourage the same.

Anurag.

[vsathyap]

I don't think the manufacturers need to take the blame entirely. Yes, it is partially their assumption that Indian consumers demand more "bling" than actual safety features, but at the same time, the car purchasers a-k-a, the consumers... the kings... (a majority of them at-least) don't bother much about safety features.

To give you an example, just look at a few advertisements of cars that have been aired in the recent past:

The Hyundai i10, focusing more on SRK and the design, rather than the features

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Fz-vNlQI-jg

The Tata Nano ad, celebrating awesomeness and not safety-ness:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jtohhE6-dd4

The Alto800 ad, celebrating festivities:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=K2rt_tEENig

The VW Polo Ad, showcasing the Made in India "fuel efficiency" tagline:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6-EEKNgZLKQ

and I dont know how to describe this ad for the Polo:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zsZMXy1fJlE

and finally, the Figo ad, showcasing "change"

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=f1Cm7Ev77o0

In how many of these do we see features like ABS, airbags, etc. being advertised? All you see are features like a nice power steering, ground clearance, mileage, relationships, etc. being displayed.

The only ad I see sensible is the series from CEAT - truly shows the safety aspect of a product:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ygt4XGEUWEM

From this, its very clear that the manufacturers and the ad-agencies target what the customer wants, and sees as value for money, not value for life.

There is really no point in blaming the manufacturers - this is more of a change that needs to come from within the consumer. I have seen countless people skip the seat-belt citing reasons like "police wala will not be there at this time". With this attitude, I don't see why manufacturer needs to be blamed.

Making it a rule from the government will also fail in a few months - just like the window tint rule. I still see countless cars sporting the darkest of tints on their vehicle. When people don't care about what the highest court in the country has to say, things will still be as they are and rules will still be broken.

What needs to change is the attitude of people.

[Anand3553]

Originally Posted by vsathyap

I don't think the manufacturers need to take the blame entirely. Yes, it is partially their assumption that Indian consumers demand more "bling" than actual safety features, but at the same time, the car purchasers a-k-a, the consumers... the kings... (a majority of them at-least) don't bother much about safety features.

I think it is more of not being informed about safety than not bothering. I do not believe anyone would put their loved ones in an unsafe place if they are educated about the safety factor.

[StarScream]

Originally Posted by mnrvokk

It is appalling to hear all these calls for the Govt to mandate what safety features to include on all cars as a minimum. People calling for this should realize that the Govt is not your nanny and it is your responsibility to keep you and your family safe.

No one is forcing consumers to buy products without safety features. The consumer is either uninformed or choosing to value something else compared to safety. The only person to blame here is the consumer.

Granted the Govt can and should enforce basic standardized crash tests like the ones in other countries and force the manufacturers to display this information while selling these automobiles. The burden of acting on this information should stay with the consumer. Period.

There were two points made by other posters earlier that I would like to highlight but I am too lazy to actually quote them here and so I apologize.

1. Have the presence of these safety features in automobiles benefit the consumer on their auto insurance premiums where in, it should be cheaper to insurance a Polo with Airbags versus one without. (Is this already in place in India???)

2. Forcing manufacturers to install airbags on all cars will result in more injuries to passengers since our consumers do not really wear seat belts to begin with. And do not get me started with all the lap children in the front passenger seat happily resting against the 'time bombs' or as they are commonly referred to as air bags.


Same tirade against all the "smoking kills" prompts within the actual movie which is a waste of money. I am sure there are many other ways that the Govt can spend its money in helping the people than this insane approach.

To use your smoking analogy - don't educate people or tax cigarettes more because its the smoker's fault/risk. Doesn't he/she know what's best for him/her? Similarly, in an ideal world, consumers of cars should make the wise decision and manufacturers should only make and sell safe cars. Raises the broader question that if everything were to work so well, why do we need a government to enforce rules and regulations at all?

Originally Posted by diffsoft

I happened to read this response by SIAM and quite expectedly it was biased towards the bigger Indian car makers - "whose bread I eat, his song I sing"

http://economictimes.indiatimes.com/...w/29788169.cms

The most absurd response was that Indian cars are driven at 46 kmph, on average, while the tests were done at 64 kmph. Pretty much like saying you can't drown in a pool with an average depth of 4 feet.

Another absurdity was to say "what is the purchasing power?"

In any case I am glad this has rocked the boat much to the joy of many of us who have been repeatedly saying that Indian car makers need to do more to keep occupants safer.

Cheers,

Don't worry, the cars meet local regulations...what are those by the way? Seat belts?

[asr245]

My GOD those videos are scary. I knew those cars are unsafe (even the WagonR that I drive) but didn't know that I had no chance of survival if I crash it at 64kmph (or less) into a concrete wall. That steering will break my ribs like a match-stick & open up my head. Frightening!

I was waiting for the Celerio but it wouldn't fair any better even with airbags.

[HighwayofLife]

Originally Posted by FIAT3031

Being a Fiat owner, I know this car is built like a tank and hence has had low mileage mileage issues (Palio & Punto), but where they don't compromise is the safety aspect ( the solidly built structure)
Same goes for other OEs like VW, Ford, Chevy, Toyota etc.

Just wanted to correct you on this point. The VW Polo without airbags got the same rating as the Nano and the Maruti Alto. Hence, the only differentiator is the airbags.

Any sort of standard is a joke in India because if you bribe some official enough, they'll let you get away with anything.

That said, it makes the case for all of us to go for vehicles with ABS and airbags, which are essential features, but treated as fancy items in India

Originally Posted by GrammarNazi

I've come across reports about Ford's Gujarat plant causing the govt a revenue loss of 1 Lakh per car that rolls out of the factory. Maybe thats why the production capacity is utilised mainly for exports while people in India are asked to wait 4-5 months for EcoSport!

When OUR resources are being used, why should only we be left out? I wouldn't limit my demands to crash safety. I'd want more features of global versions. Even a layman should understand why industrialists say stuff like "Gujarat is THE place to invest" & "It is stupid if you are not in Gujarat". Its because there they're benefiting massively from our country's resources. We should somehow stop automakers from shortchanging us.

Let's not get into a political debate here- your source is Tehelka, which itself places a big question mark on the veracity of the report. There is no loss to the exchequer.

The reason why industries are given tax holidays in India and other developing countries is because they help generate employment, and bring in Foreign Exchange through their export activities. We certainly need that and more, given the current state of the INR.

Also, MNCs and other companies setting up shop in any state in India are not taking anything from India other than the land, and the tax holidays that the Government (both state and central governments offer, mind you). They pay employees (almost all of whom are Indians, barring a few expats), they pay for electricity, water, fuel and other utilities, and they also bring in a huge number of suppliers, who further employ people as a result. Each car produced employs probably hundreds of people in the direct (parts) and indirect (connected services) supply chain. Each of those employees represents a consumer, and when they consume, they pay taxes indirectly, which again goes to the national exchequer, apart from their direct taxes (Income Tax). Look at what happened to Detroit as a result of the automakers leaving that place gradually. A country might gain a lot from services, but Manufacturing is what drives the economy. Niranjan Tolia is so busy in his tirade against Narenda Modi, that he forgot to research the facts of his articles, and his talk of "loss to the exchequer" is as much political propoganda and rubbish as you can find anywhere

However, your point on global features in Indian cars is absolutely correct. Top-end variants of global models in India are a joke compared to even the basic variants of the same cars in US or EU markets, especially on the safety features front. If we started mass-producing the safety items, costs automatically go down. Also, the government can incentivize car-makers by waiving off excise duty on the safety items (ABS, Airbags etc.). That said, no one in India, except the educated few who read this forum and other like it, would be willing to pay for the additional safety features

[nishantbhatia84]

I'm quite surprised at the results for the Figo! I've been involved in a massive 6-car pile up with my mom's Figo Zxi (no airbags) and had crashed into the vehicle in front at around 60kph with a Swift crashing into me from behind at the same speed. My car suffered considerable damage however was nowhere as much as the one in the video. The engine was undamaged.

[k_ajay]

We consumers need education (yes) regarding importance of safety against having features like reversing camera, alloy wheels, steering mounted controls, folding mirror, etc.

Manufacturers need to be dealt with strictly, where they ensure the structural strength of every vehicle is good enough, sufficiently to the point that they don't crumple inwards harming passengers in a crash, well, unless a tipper lorry literally falls on one.

Airbags on a car which is structurally weak won't server any purpose, is my guess.


To quote an acquaintance from the place I work when I was discussing about considering the top equipped Ford EcoSport which has 6 airbags, he mentioned - "what will be the use of all airbags, abs and all when your car falls off a flyover/bridge" (and then a giggle too). With such attitude, even amongst the expected educated, the change we want to see won't be soon..

[vb-saan]

Originally Posted by k_ajay

Airbags on a car which is structurally weak won't serve any purpose, is my guess.

Very true! In the NDTV video, they did demonstrate this aspect as well – with a China manufactured sedan. The passenger cabin was completely deformed.

[HighwayofLife]

Originally Posted by nishantbhatia84

I'm quite surprised at the results for the Figo! I've been involved in a massive 6-car pile up with my mom's Figo Zxi (no airbags) and had crashed into the vehicle in front at around 60kph with a Swift crashing into me from behind at the same speed. My car suffered considerable damage however was nowhere as much as the one in the video. The engine was undamaged.

Also, the timing makes one wonder. There was a lot of coverage in the news article that VW with Air Bags was the only one to pass. I wonder if that bit of news was a PR piece, since VW is about to launch the Taigun in India, against very stiff competition from Hyundai, Honda, and Maruti Suzuki.

[asr245]

Originally Posted by nishantbhatia84

I'm quite surprised at the results for the Figo! I've been involved in a massive 6-car pile up with my mom's Figo Zxi (no airbags) and had crashed into the vehicle in front at around 60kph with a Swift crashing into me from behind at the same speed. My car suffered considerable damage however was nowhere as much as the one in the video. The engine was undamaged.

Crashing into something that can move & deform (thus dissipating considerable energy) will be very different than crashing into something that can't move or deform (like a concrete block/pillar).

Originally Posted by k_ajay

Airbags on a car which is structurally weak won't server any purpose, is my guess.

True. In that 800 or Nano, it will probably suffocate you to death, if somehow you had managed to survive the steering being violently shoved into your chest & head.