[humyum]

Originally Posted by civic-sense

I think this poll is flawed. It is hard to believe that 2/3rd of cars here have airbags+abs. People driving cars without safety features would refrain from taking the poll itself. Very few would want to admit such things.

Not at all, what's there not to admit? My current car does not have ABS (which I think is highly over rated, but that' all together another discussion) and neither does it have Airbags. That's because when I got it in 2008, it did not have the option for it and if the price of the car was anymore that time, I could have not been able to afford it. I have brilliant tyres though purchased from the very second I got the car and I keep changing it every 45 thousand kilometers.

My second car which I will buy for myself or my parents depending on who decides to keep the Swift and who wants to keep the new car will most probably be a Celerio AMT or an Alto K 10 AMT which again won't have the safety features. Simply don't have the budget for it and I don't mind admitting. It's not that I don't care about safety but my budget does not allow me to afford it at this place in time, when I can, I will definitely buy a car which has Airbags.

[supremeBaleno]

Originally Posted by zenren

Seeing the huge volume of responses for the 2 airbags + ABS option makes me wonder about another aspect. There are a lot of folks here who own more than one car. In that case, what should their response be if one of their cars have all safety features while the other doesn't have any?

Am one of those and I did think a lot before voting. The weekday car (Baleno) has neither ABS nor airbags, while the weekend cars have one or both (the A-Star_AT has ABS, the Swift has both).

I bought the Baleno a few months before joining tbhp. While I strictly used to buckle up even then, I did not really have much info on ABS, while I had some knowledge of how airbags helped. Couple this lack of awareness with the fact that IIRC none of the C-segmenters then had ABS/airbags, the options available were almost none. So went with what was available.

Then TBHP happened, awareness increased and decided that going forward, safety would be the major criteria for any purchase. So it was a no-brainer to opt for the Swift-ZXi. Then when we needed an AT car and it came only with ABS, so had to settle for that (A-star). If airbags were available as an option, would have gladly paid the extra for it.

So inspite of driving a mix of cars with different safety features, opted for the poll-option of ABS+airbags, because these are no longer negotiable features for me.

[civic-sense]

Originally Posted by supremeBaleno

So inspite of driving a mix of cars with different safety features, opted for the poll-option of ABS+airbags, because these are no longer negotiable features for me.

Your vote would have been valid if the question was "what would your next car have". In this case the OP has clearly asked what your "daily drive" has. There was no ambiguity in the poll. Some people just chose to see an ambiguity so that they could choose the more popular opinion.

Originally Posted by TheLizardKing

While taking the poll, please select the option applicable to your daily drive or most frequently used car (in case you have more than one).

[supremeBaleno]

Originally Posted by civic-sense

Your vote would have been valid if the question was "what would your next car have". In this case the OP has clearly asked what your "daily drive" has. There was no ambiguity in the poll. Some people just chose to see an ambiguity so that they could choose the more popular opinion.

There is no ambiguity as far as I (the user) is concerned. I car-pool with 2 other folks to work on the 5 weekdays - so my car sees the road usually once or max. 2 days every week, which means 20km or 40kms max. In contrast, I drive the Swift / A-Star atleast 80-100kms during the weekends. And so I voted based on the car I drive more, without delving into the details.

BTW, this is just an online poll, not something that results in any award or citation. So I see no reason to scramble for any particular option, other than what applies.

[Santoshbhat]

I voted for seatbelts only as my 'city car' which I drive daily to office does not have airbags or ABS. I had the option of going for the top end version which had these two safety features, but I chose to buy the mid level trim even though I had the affordability.

My weekend car and 'out of city car' has ABS and dual airbags. When the time comes for upgrading this car I'll surely look for one with ESP and more no. of airbags.

My reasoning for not opting for the top end version with the safety kit was...

1. The car in question is a slow AT hatch that hardly sees speeds north of 60 kph.
2. Total driving distance to and fro from office is only about 10 kms in rush our traffic, all within city, no ring roads etc...
3. Now I may get flamed for saying this.... To allow my wife and 2 1/2 yr old to sit in the front seat. Whenever we travel in my 'big' car, they sit at the back, with daughter in the car seat. Since that car has airbags, kids are not allowed in the front seat. Also that car is used for longer journeys. The small car is a city run about and if this car had airbags in the front, my wife would have to sit at the back with my kid compulsorily as she does in the big car.
4. To save about Rs. 1 lakh. Now 1 lakh on a 20L car may not sound much, but when its a 6L car, its a big amount. I'd rather save up that 1L and spend it on buying the variant with maximum safety kit for my 'big car' upgrade on which I will appreciate all the safety kit that I can get, as I do about 500 to 1,000 kms per month of highway driving in that car.

[srinath.s]

I have been following T-BHP for over 3 years now and I do realise the importance of safety, and had a strong determination to get only a car that is safe. I have been riding a bike for the past 7 years and of late noticed that the roads were getting dangerous for bikers with every passing day. I decided that I couldn't afford to risk my life as well as that of my pillion (my mother) any more. Also, I had to move to a place farther away from office and take a route that is highly risky everyday. So getting a car turned to a "need" from a "want".

To add to all this, my budget was limited, and there were virtually no options in that price bracket that contained safety features. Therefore I had to settle for an Alto K10. One could argue that I could've saved a little more and got a safer car, but as stated earlier, driving around in a car in itself felt to be a safer option compared to riding a bike.

As mentioned by many earlier in this thread, owning a car is a luxury for many, let alone owning a safe one. The only panacea to this is to make safety features mandatory, which the government has initiated thankfully. This is a step in the right direction; however, until it is implemented in full, the common man with limited earnings has to make do with whatever is accessible to him.

Hopefully my next car will be safe, without me even asking for it!

[freakmuzik]

Originally Posted by zenren

Seeing the huge volume of responses for the 2 airbags + ABS option makes me wonder about another aspect.

There are a lot of folks here who own more than one car. I know a lot of BHPians who have bigger cars with safety features for long trips and small hatchbacks without any safety kit for city driving. In that case, what should their response be if one of their cars have all safety features while the other doesn't have any?

If they're responding with ABS + 2 airbags option in the poll, are they not effectively thinking that these features are not of much use in city and only needed in highways? If so, how is that any different from someone with just one small car that he uses only in city and never goes on long drives?

Is a guy with Corolla (for highways) and Alto (for city) really more safe on the road than a guy with Palio who drives only within the city limits?

That aspect is quite vague in this poll unless options for multiple cars are added. But that'l definitely make things complex though much more clearer. It is quoted in the beginning post that people with more than one car need to vote with the most used vehicle in mind.

And regarding the safety, a car used purely within the city is expected to face accidents of lesser magnitude logically. I take my car at nearly 80kmph - 90kmph in the highways whereas in the city it's about 40kmph to 50kmph. In that case, yes, people driving within the city are much safer for sure! But this is not applicable for certain accidents like falling of a cliff, etc. Therefore it does vary from case to case but generally, accidents in the highway are more fatal hence the option for choosing considering the most used car.

I do agree with your point and wish all the cars could be considered!

[Lobogris]

Originally Posted by shortbread

Saket, I fully understand what you are trying to do here and respect for that.

The BIGGEST & MOST IMPORTANT safety feature in a Car is A STRONG PASSENGER CELL

I'll repeat it again for the effect:
The BIGGEST & MOST IMPORTANT safety feature in a Car is A STRONG PASSENGER CELL

Unfortunately time and again members on this forum believe that adding airbags to a car with a monocouque made out of tin foil will save them. IT WILL NOT!!

If you are buying the likes of a maruti car, or a nissan go, its better to save your money. You are safer without an airbags in cars like that. An airbag is fatal in a front collision in a car whose passenger cell deforms.

There is no doubt that the passenger cell is the first line of defense and is critical. However there is no evidence that adding an airbag would be harmful in ANY car. In fact, when the passenger cabin intrudes inwards and the occupants are pushed towards the deforming/ intruding cabin, having a softer cushion of an airbag would help prevent or lessen injuries. Remember that the airbag would deploy much faster than the person impacting the cabin. Now it is possible that the steering wheel of some cars can move away from the driver taking the airbag with it and thus the airbag provides no benefit but the airbag is unlikely to harm the occupant. You are taking the statement that adding airbags alone would not make some cars safe to mean that the airbag would actually make it worse. That is not the case. Imagine a person sitting inside a house and the wall is hit by a projectile. Case A: the wall is strong and holds without falling on the person. This is the best result- we will leave aside deceleration forces here. Case B: the wall collapses and some bricks fall on the occupant. Here having a thick cushioned mattress over you will help mitigate the injury. Of course if the force is high, the mattress might not save you but it is bound to help.

[Ricci]

Originally Posted by zenren

I had a lengthy debate on this with my brother and my dad a few months ago on whether the government has the right to intervene and force us to wear helmets and seatbelts in the interest of our own safety. What we concluded was that no individual is totally independent of the society, irrespective of how much we earn or are worth.

Here are a few points that came out of the discussion:

It's OT so will try to keep it short.

All valid points I have considered before and sure enough so have others who think of individual rights - be it the emergency medical services, insurance providers, inconvenience to public - but the point is no one plans/intentionally crashes , it's an accident and the key differentiation from suicide. As for suicide itself, the Indian government does not pay for my living expense, so it has no business anyway to order me to live. At least you get unemployment remuneration from western governments, to discourage suicide/crime by the unemployed, while still not making suicide illegal. We (India) have a long way to go.


Back to topic :
Some have written about their choice to buy cars without ABS/airbags citing financial capacity. I understand fully well that line of thought. During the years I was younger and thus working at lower pay, even I could at best only afford an Alto or Eon , Wagon R class of car. But in those years, I didn't feel the temptation to buy those, I stuck on my motorcycle , and being more biker than an automobile junkie, I was dreaming of spending my miserly saved lacs on an (affordable?) SBK before buying a car that would satisfy my desire.

Was it the right decision? An entry level car is safer than a 2 wheeler, under most circumstances. I did see colleagues purchase cars and thought sometimes I should have my own car too, but my bar was a bit higher - I wanted nothing less than a well build but exciting car to drive, something you won't find new south of 5-6 lacs.

Rather than chide those buying the "unsafe" cars for lack of monetary muscle, encourage them to buy something even safer (ABS+airbags) in future. Seeing the videos of the Alto or Datsun Go in the crash videos may make you shudder to think of the occupants in a real life crash, but I reckon that family of 4 might be worse off on a scooter , saving for another 4-5 years to buy a "safe" car as some deem them. You might escape on a two wheeler under some scenarios, where a 4 wheeler would inevitably end up in a crash, but I strongly think, the national accident statistics would be even higher, if those who drive unsafe cars today, would be on 2 wheels.

[blackasta]

ABS + Dual Airbags + Seatbelt Pretensioner (essential for airbag equipped cars) + impact sensing door unlocking - These are available in my only car and therefore my daily drive - the humble little 2009 Hyundai i10 Asta.