[wilful]

(I am posting this as a new thread because the article provides information that is indeed an eye-opener regarding safety features, costs, attitudes of car makers etc. I found it extremely useful. Mods - pl merge if required).

An illuminating article on the NDTV website states the mid-segment cars are priced higher in India than the US and Europe albeit being a lot less safer.
One of the most common myths is that airbags and ABS would make the car substantially more expensive. No so says the article!

But Dinesh Mohan, the Volvo Chair Professor Emeritus at IIT Delhi, says safe doesn’t have to mean expensive. “Safety features such as airbags, ABS (anti-lock brake system) and rear wipers would only add about
Rs 20,000 to the cost of the car. But because it is not mandatory, car manufacturers provide these features only in top-end versions of cars and bundle it with other features making it expensive by over Rs 1.20 lakh, depriving the Indian car buyer of a variant that has safety features,” he says.

I think all the stakeholders will have to lobby for higher safety standards in India. I do hope some of the more India friendly car makers start the ball rolling. It would make a great selling point for the early bird.

http://indianexpress.com/article/ind.../danger-ahead/

[pacman2881]

Shocking to the say the least. If we also consider the poor part quality and finish of cars made for India, these companies are making windfall gains here.

As profit focussed businesses we can't expect them to be any different - either the market has to push for it or it should come from legislations. All these years the former never happened. High time Government takes care of it.

[gsurya]

An excellent article debunking the Munde - Seat Belt debate.

http://www.dnaindia.com/analysis/sta...s-life-1994048

[pacman2881]

Originally Posted by gsurya

An excellent article debunking the Munde - Seat Belt debate.

http://www.dnaindia.com/analysis/sta...s-life-1994048

The article makes very valid points and drives home the idea that strict laws can't do much on it's own and it is more about people's behaviour. Agreed. That should be the larger goal.

However that does not mean whatever that is possible today by mere directive to car manufacturers should be ignored.

Another point is on statistics. Consider this-

So, the real world impact of enforcing strict seat belt laws could potentially reduce road fatalities by a mere 1%.

From Wikipedia road fatalities in 2011 alone comes to 243475. Forget 1%, 0.5% of this number leads to saving 1217 lives.

Further the article states-

...These hypotheses suggest that we compensate for safety features by taking more risks. We drive faster on wider highways and brake late when our car has ABS. This is an interesting hypotheses worth exploring. Even if this hypotheses is ignored, safety experts and auto companies must research and explain why some of these features do not work as expected. Unless these are addressed, we would just be increasing cost without any real benefits.

If at all this is true, it is a misunderstanding of the public that an ABS increases stopping capability. This is like someone jumping off the first floor as he has medical insurance. This again requires better education. Making ABS mandatory is independent of this and has to be done at the earliest.

The author of this article is a behavioural researcher/consultant and the focus rightly remains on it. I wholeheartedly agree to the fact that if people do not change no amount of legislation can help and the main focus area should be on people's behaviour. (Wish the auther had given some innovative solutions on that too!)
But this thread as I understand from the thread starter is on how carmakers inflate the cost of safety features and how it can be easliy brought about for a good start in that direction.

[Hayek]

Interesting article on norms vs. laws. I tend to think of myself as law abiding and safety conscious. I wear seat belts in rear seats (even when in cabs where I force drivers to wait and pull the buckle holders out from under seat covers) and make my kid sit in a child seat. But I don't follow all traffic rules.

For example, after having been rear ended twice early in the morning when I stopped at signals, I don't stop at signals before 8 am or after 10 pm - I instead slow down (irrespective of whether the signal is green or red) and drive through carefully. Similarly, I don't follow the 50 kmph limit on the Worli Bandra sea link or the 30 kmph limit on the JJ flyover - I stick to the normative limit of 80 and 60 respectively.

Agree that pedestrian safety is poor here - but that is because we have too many pedestrians.

[abeerbagul]

Originally Posted by Hayek

Agree that pedestrian safety is poor here - but that is because we have too many pedestrians.

Sorry, I have a different opinion. We dont have too many pedestrians, we have too many cars.
And each car primararily carrying one person for commuting purposes.
In a densely packed urban center like mumbai, we need to decrease the number of cars being used for commuting and increase the number of pedestrians. This might be a case for better public transport, better car pools, bike and two wheeler lanes, better urban planning so that people live near to work or work is relocated near to where they live, etc.

Urban centers are groaning under the weight of private cars the world over.

[Hayek]

Sorry, and we are probably going off topic, but anyone who says Bombay has too many cars does not know what he is talking about.

Some interesting stats here :

http://www.lta.gov.sg/content/dam/lt...Brief_2013.pdf

Singapore, the epitome of low car density and great public transport has 10 cars per 100 people (525,000 cars for 5.25 mm people) and each car runs about 18000 kms a year. Bombay has 700,000 cars for about 20 million people - a car density that is under 1/3rd that of Singapore. Further, while I could not get data to prove this, I am fairly certain that the average private car in Bombay runs less than 10,000 km per year. The problem is Bombay is the lack of good roads, not too many cars. As the city gets richer, the number of cars will at least triple - and we have to plan for that.

Planning better roads with appropriate pedestrian facilities will be costly, but the cost is well worth it if we place a value on lives saved.

[VSRK]

Eye opener thread. It is high time car companies operating from India should start showing some courtesy for Indian consumers wrt safety features. They shall start offering safety packages starting from the basic versions itself. Why Indian consumer should spend 2L extra for safety packages alone? I expect paradigm change in car companies in near future wrt this. Otherwise, Government has to take stick and sort this out to ensure safety for her own citizens.

[DicKy]

Originally Posted by Hayek

Sorry, and we are probably going off topic, but anyone who says Bombay has too many cars does not know what he is talking about.

Some interesting stats here :

http://www.lta.gov.sg/content/dam/lt...Brief_2013.pdf

Singapore, the epitome of low car density and great public transport has 10 cars per 100 people (525,000 cars for 5.25 mm people) and each car runs about 18000 kms a year. Bombay has 700,000 cars for about 20 million people - a car density that is un.............

I too thought like that for some time, but reading about car ownership in Japan and how they manage their roads and parking, i realised we have the space and all., it's our infrastructure and planning that needs to be changed.

[vinya_jag]

The examples in the article are nice, but the actual price difference is not as bad as it sounds.
Yes, tax plays some part, however, there are other reasons. Camry has a lot of parts imported I believe and hence a bigger tax component.

Hyundai cars in America do not have the same favour as they do in India, and hence they undercut their pricing when compared to Ford or any other Japanese brands. This might possibly explain the cost of it in the US to an extent.

Indian Automobile sector plays a fine line between profit margins, customer satisfaction, after sales, exports etc. We have found a balance in the pricing and the feature, not because of Government choice, but because of people's choices.

Now, to impose restrictions on safety and fuel efficiency will hurt the automobile manufacturers further. Imagine a 40% increase in weight on the Celerio to meet safety norms, and if this drops the fuel efficiency of it by 20%, and then the costs by another 75K, the car would lose its USP.

Now, will the government over react to hurt Maruti?

In my opinion, they should, and the rules should provide a level field for all manufacturers. This would speed up technology development. But all this is in an Ideal world.

[Slush_Traveller]

20,000 for airbags and abs ? I have heard they charge 80k to replace a set of deflated airbag. I am not sure if 20k as per volvo would be an in house manufacturing cost. Which would exclude all costs of import and taxes. But if these safety features are available for less cost and madr available in the mid variants of the car then most people would opt for them and this in turn would improve overall safety.
Other thing could be if the government laws can mandatory in force these safety features and reduce some taxes to negate with the costs then this would benefit the end consumers.

[avisidhu]

Originally Posted by wilful

...
Safety features such as airbags, ABS (anti-lock brake system) and rear wipers would only add about
Rs 20,000 to the cost of the car. .....[/url]

If that's truly the case, then why is it that getting Airbags retrofitted post any accident costs significantly more?

I have heard from most that the cost of getting Airbags restored is usually upwards of 1 Lakh. Unfortunately people avoid buying a car equipped with Airbags for this sole reason. It's an incorrect way of looking at the cost involved I know, but sadly that's how it is.

It would be a good idea for the authorities to try and introduce some control on this aspect so that people are not scared into not buying an airbag equipped car for this reason. Perhaps having a 100% coverage in vehicle insurance for the same might be of help?

[hrman]

I was on my way back form Kochi I think. Happened to chat up with a co passenger, who turned out to head some part of Bosch's ABS business. He told me the cost to the manufacturer for fitting ABS should not be more than 6k per car. It seems Bajaj had advanced talks with them to fit ABS in their bikes, which would cost 2k. But these plans were shelved.

So I don't think cost is a constraint when it comes to equipping cars with safety features. It is more of the scant regard to passenger safety from manufacturers owing to lax motor vehicle laws. Its great if it becomes mandatory. And on this, I hope it becomes mandatory for all passengers to belt up.

[one-77]

Originally Posted by avisidhu

If that's truly the case, then why is it that getting Airbags retrofitted post any accident costs significantly more?

Originally Posted by Slush_Traveller

20,000 for airbags and abs ? I have heard they charge 80k to replace a set of deflated airbag. I am not sure if 20k as per volvo would be an in house manufacturing cost.

It would depend on the segment we are dealing with. And that 80,000 includes the cost of the dashboard and steering column, as I understand it. Not the cost of the airbags alone.

Even if it were considerably more than 20,000 rupees, I believe a life is priceless - be it yours or mine.

I really hope the government makes crash tests, airbags and ABS mandatory for all new cars in India.

[a4anurag]

Originally Posted by avisidhu

If that's truly the case, then why is it that getting Airbags retrofitted post any accident costs significantly more?

After the crash, the sensors, wiring, control module, the airbag itself, steering column all need to be changed hence the price is higher for a replacement than to add it in all variants.

Originally Posted by avisidhu

Unfortunately people avoid buying a car equipped with Airbags for this sole reason.

To add to this, "I drive at 30-50 kmph speeds, why do I need ABS and airbags?! These are needs for drivers who drive at high speeds!"

Such comments are disheartening but the truth is people must change their attitude towards safety and get proactive. GOI + manufacturers must make these features mandatory, only then things will fall in line.

Originally Posted by one-77

It would depend on the segment we are dealing with. And that 80,000 includes the cost of the dashboard and steering column, as I understand it. Not the cost of the airbags alone.

+1.

Anurag.