[GTO]

Originally Posted by zenren

Someone who purchased a Go after last November knew about the safety concerns and still went ahead with their purchase because of budget constraints. In case he didn't know, it shows a lack of research which is again his fault considering how this news had come in mainstream media as well.

I don't entirely agree with this. While the Datsun Go fared poorly in the crash test, it's competitors aren't safe either (including the Alto & i10). What choice does a safety-conscious customer have in the entry level segment? It's not like he picked one unsafe car over a safe alternative.

In the Suzuki-Maruti Alto 800, the Tata Nano and the Hyundai i10, the vehicle structures proved inadequate and collapsed to varying degrees, resulting in high risks of life-threatening injuries to the occupants. The extent of the structural weaknesses in these models were such that fitting airbags would not be effective in reducing the risk of serious injury.

Source

If one desires safety for 3.xx lakhs, the only option is to go used.

[sridhar-v]

Kudos to Datsun for atleast trying to rectify a major problem.

Compare this to Mahindra's studied silence on the results of the Australian NCAP tests on its XUV500.

The vehicle got 4 stars due to all the safety features like Airbags, ABS, ESP etc. But the mechanical performance of the cabin was quite pathetic. There was a collapase of a cross member (most probably due to poor welds) and the driver footwell area fared poorly. The pedals were pushed back by over 200mm. That means serious damage to the feet and legs.

Had tweeted this to Anand Mahindra but he did not respond. At that time he was waxing lyrical about some inconsequential marketing events.

Email to their customer support met with a standard PR reply.

So all XUV owners pray to the almighty thay u never suffer a serious frontal collission. And I definitelty wish and pray for all you to have safe accident free journeys.

[zenren]

Originally Posted by GTO

I don't entirely agree with this. While the Datsun Go fared poorly in the crash test, it's competitors aren't safe either (including the Alto & i10). What choice does a safety-conscious customer have in the entry level segment? It's not like he picked one unsafe car over a safe alternative.

My perspective is that we should probably welcome a positive change like this rather than shooting the messenger by making unreasonable expectations that would act as a deterrent for others who want to follow suit. If companies feel that even the introduction of a safer body shell and better steel would be perceived with negativity because it doesn't change the situation for existing subscribers, they would probably not get too enthusiastic about implementing such reforms.

I agree with the above part that the customer didn't have a choice and was probably forced into buying an unsafe option due to budget constraints and lack of better options. If it was worse than their competitors, the buyer knew about it and still went ahead with the purchase. If Go was no worse than the other options, I don't see any reason why Datsun should fix this for existing customers free of cost. All I'm saying is that such an expectation is highly unrealistic. Recalls can be demanded when there is a deviation from the intended specification, not when the original specification itself was sub-optimal and common knowledge.

Originally Posted by GTO

If one desires safety for 3.xx lakhs, the only option is to go used.

Frankly, even this is easier said than done, considering most of the models south of 7-8 lakhs only had safety kit in the top end that got sold in very few numbers. Most of the buyers who go for safety options keep their car for a longer period and these do not get into the used car market so fast. Much more bigger cars are probably not going to be affordable for someone on a 3.XX budget from maintenance cost perspective.

[Chetan_Rao]

What we need to do first and foremost is get rid of TWO bits of consumer perception/mindset:

1. Safety equipment is a luxury for those who can afford it, not a 'necessity' of everyday motoring.
2. A manufacturer is doing the consumer a favor by offering a better-engineered product or safety equipment.

The average Indian consumer is not only unaware of what should be rightfully given to him, but also falls for vested interests preying on their cost-consciousness, proclaiming they don't really 'need' a safer automobile or deserve one at their 'budget'.

Cost-consciousness/effectiveness/VFM (call it whatever) and safety can co-exist, and it's time the Indian consumer woke up to that fact and demanded it from irresponsible manufacturers who'd happily shortchange all of us for an extra dime of profit.

[zenren]

Originally Posted by Chetan_Rao

Cost-consciousness/effectiveness/VFM (call it whatever) and safety can co-exist, and it's time the Indian consumer woke up to that fact and demanded it from irresponsible manufacturers who'd happily shortchange all of us for an extra dime of profit.

I think we are forgetting one group that should be made accountable but are still in the stone age. Companies are out there to make a profit out of selling cars. That is a business and they are accountable to their share holders. However, it is the duty of the government and regulatory authorities to ensure that these companies provide the minimum standards to the customers. Here, I see this control practically non-existent and they should be the first ones to take the blame. From government's side, they could at least demand these standards to be met to be eligible for the lower tax rates that they currently enjoy which would force the car manufacturers to offer safety features while still being financially responsible to their share holders.

[turbodude]

A month ago Datsun Go+ marketing & sales team was trying to get some customers outside my office gate.

Few of my colleagues asked me whether they should go for it because the price tag is attractive. My obvious reply was showing them the NCAP results and actions taken by other companies. After watching those videos, they didn't even opt for a test drive. Those Datsun sales guys were standing all day and hardly received any enquiries.

Our office parking is dominated by Maruti Suzuki vehicles, closely followed by Hyundai and Honda. While I didn't spot any Team-BHP stickers yet but am sure that there are many bhpians in my office because our firewall allows access to Team-BHP .

Personally I found Mobilio and even Ertiga better than Datsun Go+. Nissan vehicles are hardly visible on the road, Dusters sell more than Terrano in here. Nissan needs to focus on the safety issues as well as other issues also.

[arjab]

Came across the following interesting bit of information. Seems things are going down the right path, at least for now.

http://www.theguardian.com/sustainab...versy-in-india

[zenren]

Originally Posted by turbodude

Personally I found Mobilio and even Ertiga better than Datsun Go+. Nissan vehicles are hardly visible on the road, Dusters sell more than Terrano in here. Nissan needs to focus on the safety issues as well as other issues also.

These are totally different segments and different price points. Comparing Go+ with Ertiga or Mobilio is like comparing Indigo CS with Honda City.

Originally Posted by turbodude

While I didn't spot any Team-BHP stickers yet but am sure that there are many bhpians in my office because our firewall allows access to Team-BHP .

Off topic, but you just need one BHPian in the right place (network administration or leadership team) to make that happen.

[roy_libran]

Just saw this Datsun Go at a Noida A.A.S. Look at the cage collapse. Scary!

[anuragn]

Saw this ad in today's Times of India.

[jetti]

These words in the ad are ironic - "Break Through". Break through what? Hit something and it will break through the car?

[4x4addict]

Couple of years back when Nissan Micra was launched, I wanted to get it, but cancelled plans after I came to know that ABS was not offered even on the top end Micra Deisel. I went for a Ritz VDI (ABS).

Don't understand why most auto majors are not concerned about safety of Indian customers. They can put keyless entry and push button start, but no ABS or Air Bags...

[Tushar]

It has been learnt that Datsun is offering a driver side airbag with the T (O) variant, on the GO and GO+.

The update has not been reflected in the official brochures on the website yet, but dealerships have started accepting bookings and the price lists reflect the same. The addition of the driver airbag raises the price for both models by around Rs. 15,000/-, over the T-variant.

Link to Team-BHP news article

[Doge]

But didn't the Ncap rate the GO's chassis as too weak to pass the test? If I remember, they found out that airbags are not going to help much if the structural integrity is this bad. So why is Nissan offering an airbag? Looks like they actually want to improve their image in the market and are not actually bothered about safety.

[i74js]

Originally Posted by Doge

But didn't the Ncap rate the GO's chassis as too weak to pass the test? If I remember, they found out that airbags are not going to help much if the structural integrity is this bad. So why is Nissan offering an airbag? Looks like they actually want to improve their image in the market and are not actually bothered about safety.

Nissan has already changed the white body of the car by using steel of higher tensile strength that has addressed the issue to a great extent. Its just that revised safety / crash test has not been carried out.
I am sure with improved steel and driver side airbag, the car will have better credentials.

You may wish to read through this link

http://www.team-bhp.com/forum/indian...rbags-abs.html


Cheers