[ajaypjayaraj]

Originally Posted by srs_shetty87

Next thing we know, they might start optional lead bricks to be inserted into the door panels to make the doors thud.

Be it German, Jap, Korean, American, Italian, Indian or whatever built...

Door (heavy or light) with Rubber for the dampening, closing = "THUD"
Door with Lead or any heavy or light metal without rubber for dampening, closing = "CLAT"

It is commonsense people! Now the intent of a maker to have such things (small things that go a long way) in place shows attention to detail in designing a product. That's all.

[TheIndian]

Doors close with a "THUD". LOL

Typically, in such discussions, the pet topic usually is those typical accidental pics irrespective of where the impact was, how the impact was, at what speed, what angle etc etc. This thread has a potential to become blockbuster thread, just the word needs to reach out

[prakhar1998]

Interesting thread here.
While we all may agree that NCAP tests are a measure of the safety of a vehicle, the truth is, they are in a controlled environment. Never is a person going to crash in the same way. In such unrealistic conditions, you can't depict completely how safe a car is.

TBH, I personally believe that due to the nature of these tests being so repetitive, in a way car manufactures have actually started to cheat in these test. What they do is that they give special importance to the parts of the car that are being tested, and hence get a better result.

Now, I am not implying that cars that get a high rating are unsafe, but they might not be as safe as we think they are.

Every car company comes to the market to make a profit.

Now coming to your question: I personally would choose a car with thicker sheet metal. It feels way better, it could be safer in various situations, and well feels safer as well.

[Lobogris]

Originally Posted by prakhar1998

Interesting thread here.
While we all may agree that NCAP tests are a measure of the safety of a vehicle, the truth is, they are in a controlled environment. Never is a person going to crash in the same way. In such unrealistic conditions, you can't depict completely how safe a car is.

TBH, I personally believe that due to the nature of these tests being so repetitive, in a way car manufactures have actually started to cheat in these test. What they do is that they give special importance to the parts of the car that are being tested, and hence get a better result.

Now, I am not implying that cars that get a high rating are unsafe, but they might not be as safe as we think they are.

Every car company comes to the market to make a profit.

Now coming to your question: I personally would choose a car with thicker sheet metal. It feels way better, it could be safer in various situations, and well feels safer as well.

On the contrary, the tests are designed to simulate real life situations and are constantly modified to include new criteria such as small offset or pole test. It is true that manufacturers make changes to get better scores but those changes make their cars safer as well. When you state that a person is never going to crash that way, that is incorrect. Most crashes in real life are frontal offsets and that is why after considerable research, the tests are conducted in this manner. Imagine a person driving on a two lane road or someone coming the wrong way. When they see each other, at least one of them will try to get out of the way and would manage to at least swing a part of the car away from the oncoming vehicle in most cases. That is what stats have shown and that is why this test is conducted. In reality, the offset test places a FAR greater strain on the car than a full frontal crash.

[Jeroen]

Originally Posted by Lobogris

On the contrary, the tests are designed to simulate real life situations and are constantly modified to include new criteria such as small offset or pole test. It is true that manufacturers make changes to get better scores but those changes make their cars safer as well. When you state that a person is never going to crash that way, that is incorrect. Most crashes in real life are frontal offsets and that is why after considerable research, the tests are conducted in this manner. Imagine a person driving on a two lane road or someone coming the wrong way. When they see each other, at least one of them will try to get out of the way and would manage to at least swing a part of the car away from the oncoming vehicle in most cases. That is what stats have shown and that is why this test is conducted. In reality, the offset test places a FAR greater strain on the car than a full frontal crash.

I agree and I think you put it very eloquently! Are these crash test a true representation of true to life crashes? Well, probably not exactly, but neither is the way car manufacturers measure fuel efficiency or emissions. But it is a standardized way of measuring it and it is good way to compare and get a good enough feel. The real situation might be different, but the relative difference transpire to the real world to a very large degree. The likelihood of a car with a five star rating doing better in any accident than one with a four star rating is statistically significant. But at the same time you could come up with a crash scenario where a car with a four star rating might actually do better than a car with a five star rating. But unless you can actually predict in what sort of crash you are going to be, you had better go with the averages, which are a fair representation of real life cases.

Its all about understanding and feeling comfortable with statistical analysis and how to apply the results to the real world.

Jeroen

[atul.sxna]

Mod Note : Team-BHP strongly discourages unsafe driving practices that put yourself and other road users at risk. Please do NOT post about illegally high speeds on public roads.

We advise you to read the Forum Rules before proceeding any further.

I have personally survived two major crashes, the cars both the times were a Fiat Palio and a Ford Figo --- both heavy castles on wheels.

I do not care what the NCAP tests says, because these tests are conducted in a controlled environment. A real-time crash involves a lot of factors that these tests do not take into account.

Scene 1:

I was driving my Fiat Palio on the MG Road, the time was around 4am. The next thing I know, I am crawling out of the car. I somehow stand and look at the car trying to access the situation. What had happened was somehow the rear left tyre burst (I'm assuming something on the road), the car hit the divider and went turtle after a somersault across the road. I spotted the left try along with the axel lying in the middle of the road. Had it been your Jap or even our own Maruti, this post won't have made it to the forum.

I to-date thank God for saving my life and also for the fact that no one else was hurt due to that awe-full crash.

I swear by the strength of the sheet metal these Europeans use, I will buy a Ford / VW / Fiat with eyes closed any given day. I do not care that the upkeep of these vehicles might be more than those of Japs/Koreans but it is nothing compared to the safety they provide in a real time crash scenario.

DISCLAIMER : No alcohol was consumed at the time of crash. DO NOT DRINK AND DRINK is the mantra to live by.

[saket77]

Originally Posted by atul.sxna

Had it been your Jap or even our own Maruti, this post won't have made it to the forum.

Pray not to make such sweeping statements without any experience. You never know that there can be people who had worse crash than yours in a Maruti and are still writing on this forum.

[blacksport]

Does Maruti/Toyota/Honda employ thinner sheet metal because of the "international trend" towards lighter vehicles? NO. They are simply cutting costs. And those cost cutting does not stop with sheet metal. Just look at the plastics, the seats, the paint. So if they could cut costs on sheet metal, plastics, paint and fabric, what are we so sure that they don't cut costs on the structure as well?

[atul.sxna]

Originally Posted by saket77

Pray not to make such sweeping statements without any experience. You never know that there can be people who had worse crash than yours in a Maruti and are still writing on this forum.

Hi Saket,

I am sure God is great and He will be kind to all irrespective of the cars we drive.

However, since this discussion is specifically about the sheet metal difference between various manufacturers, and the effect that has on the safety aspect of the car, I said what i said.

When I was standing and looking at the crashed car wondering as to what had happened, those were my exact thoughts and I stand by them even today.

In my limited personal opinion, I do not rate Maruti or Jap/Korean automakers very highly in terms of safety.

That does not mean I am saying people driving these cars are unsafe. These are 2 completely different things.

DISCLAIMER : Intention is to voice an honest opinion without stepping on toes. May God Bless All.

[saket77]

Originally Posted by blacksport

Does Maruti/Toyota/Honda employ thinner sheet metal because of the "international trend" towards lighter vehicles? NO. They are simply cutting costs. And those cost cutting does not stop with sheet metal. Just look at the plastics, the seats, the paint. So if they could cut costs on sheet metal, plastics, paint and fabric, what are we so sure that they don't cut costs on the structure as well?

If one is talking about Alto/ WagonR/ i10/Eon & the rest of the segment, there is no doubt that the structure will be unsafe too. However, I think that for the global offerings like the Swift/ City, the monocoque should be identical. Makes no financial sense to develop a different monocoque than an already researched one.

[ajaypjayaraj]

Originally Posted by saket77

If one is talking about Alto/ WagonR/ i10/Eon & the rest of the segment, there is no doubt that the structure will be unsafe too. However, I think that for the global offerings like the Swift/ City, the monocoque should be identical. Makes no financial sense to develop a different monocoque than an already researched one.

http://www.team-bhp.com/forum/techni...ml#post3533004

This post from another thread shows an example of how components are missing when international models reach our shore. Not saying Swift is unsafe or anything, and not focusing on the nationality of the maker either. But there are several components in various locations of the structure that contributes to safety. One can't be very sure of what is being sacrificed when makers introduce cars in a highly price sensitive markets like ours. It can't be that they offer the same car at 2 different prices. How can one be sure of what is being compromised, safety/features/quality-wise?

[saket77]

Originally Posted by atul.sxna

When I was standing and looking at the crashed car wondering as to what had happened, those were my exact thoughts and I stand by them even today.

The way you described the crash, I really appreciate the car that saved your life. This is what creates respect for the car & makes the owners get attached to it and rightly so.

Originally Posted by atul.sxna

In my limited personal opinion, I do not rate Maruti or Jap/Korean automakers very highly in terms of safety.
That does not mean I am saying people driving these cars are unsafe. These are 2 completely different things.

A long going debate that we still have not reached the ends to. Until & unless the Govt. of India comes out with a proper crash testing and rating facility, we will keep seeing these threads full of references to Euro/ASEAN/Australian...NCAPs.
Also, I must point that it is not in general that Japanese cars are unsafe. We can see that many Japanese cars beat the Euro rivals in such tests in their International avatars. It is in the context of India that the Japanese cars are made flimsily.
Hope that India soon comes out with its own car assessment programs and crash testing & rating facilities so that we know exactly how safe our cars are.

Originally Posted by ajaypjayaraj

This post from another thread shows an example of how components are missing when international models reach our shore.

Sure thing. There is a lot of skimping in most cars. Not only the Swift, I think the Vento too, since the Indian Vento is lighter by 50 kgs than the ASEAN Vento. Also, the Indian Ecosport needed to be modified by adding more than 300 additional parts AND a stronger body structure to meet the crash safety of Euro standard as the Indian Ecosport's structure is weaker.

However, I was making the statement on the monocoque. I think monocoque construction would not change.

Regards,
Saket

[kiku007]

Meanwhile after reading this thread at,

Maruti - LoL. What are these guys fighting for? The lakhs of people who buy our cars don't give a damn about sheet metal or tin or plastic. We just saved 5 mg by replacing the Maruti Suzuki Alto plastic monogram with stickers. Ciaz should be the brand ambassador for VLCC weight loss program.

FIAT, Ford, VW & Skoda - Look at the number of people talking about sheet metal in a country obsessed with FE. There's still hope for us. There are some souls in this country that care about Build Quality.

[atul.sxna]

Originally Posted by saket77

It is in the context of India that the Japanese cars are made flimsily.
Hope that India soon comes out with its own car assessment programs and crash testing & rating facilities so that we know exactly how safe our cars are.

True that.

Digressing from the topic of sheet metal a bit, I think the Indian Govt. should make it mandatory for ALL car makers to provide basic safety features like Airbags, ABS standard across variants.

Respect VW for doing so with Polo.

Originally Posted by kiku007

Ciaz should be the brand ambassador for VLCC weight loss program.

HAHHAHAHA, someone earlier in this thread had mentioned that Ciaz is lighter than a VW POLO

[ajaypjayaraj]

Originally Posted by saket77

Sure thing. There is a lot of skimping in most cars. Not only the Swift, I think the Vento too, since the Indian Vento is lighter by 50 kgs than the ASEAN Vento. Also, the Indian Ecosport needed to be modified by adding more than 300 additional parts AND a stronger body structure to meet the crash safety of Euro standard as the Indian Ecosport's structure is weaker.

However, I was making the statement on the monocoque. I think monocoque construction would not change.

Took the name of Swift as that was the car in the example. I don't know if it was too bad that the example was not that of a Vento and I really don't care about that. I did mention that I am not focusing on the nationality of the maker. So be it Swift or Vento, point of discussion was structural safety based on an example.

It is a hybrid construction that manufacturers finally go for, to meet safety when it comes to structure. It is not purely monocoque. There are several add on safety members that contribute. So overall safety might not remain same if they make compromise in such areas. That is what I meant.