[whencut86]

Originally Posted by sasi@8689

Instead of taking examples of manufacturers, we should see product wise. For example, ford also has figo which going by your logic, can be operated with a little finger. They could not afford to give the quality of ecosport or fiesta at figo's price segment. Its the same case with figo aspire which i had checked out yesterday and believe me, its no where near an ecosport or fiesta in build quality (no offence meant to owners please). Similarly, maruti and hyundai have cars which are far from 'tin cans'. Nobody can say that sheet metal of swift (except, maybe the rear hatch) feels like a tin sheet. It may not be euro spec, but certainly not flimsy. Similar would be the case of verna or i20.

If you are saying that euro spec built versions of cars like swift / i20 / i10 can be sold profitably in India by these companies at the current Indian prices and with the current tax structure, i would find it difficult to believe. Airbags not being deployed in case of a crash has been a widely debated topic on this forum with examples across manufacturers all way to the mighty s-class benz. I would skip commenting on that as there are way too many scientific details involved to understand why a particular airbag did (or did not) deploy. As heavy and well built as the punto may be, we will have to see similar tests performed on it before ruling it to be safer than other cars. Hope we don't get any surprises if and when it happens.

I agree to your sentiments on Honda though. It really pains to go through the city niggles thread we have here. They have stretched things a bit too far and across their range not sparing even a premium and trusted name plate like city, which i believe, could have been avoided.

Ford Figo may have less weight doors but still better than Japanese and Korean manufactured ones. The structural integrity is intact. Why I am comparing these is because Puntos, Lineas, Fiestas are all sold globally in few countries and the kerb weight is the same everywhere. But it is not the case with Maruti, Hyndai and Honda. The Malaysian version of City has bigger alloys and tires abd increased kerb wieght. The Chinese version of Creta (ix25) has more kerb wieght. The Creta's kerb weight is never made official in brochures or sites. One member i this forum who bought the top end manually checked it and found that the weight is slightly above 1300 kgs. Heck even the diesel punto/avventura weights around 1200 kgs. Hatchaback to SUV weight comparison. The duster weighs 1280 kgs, Honda City wiehgs 1100 kgs. This gives an indication of structural strength. Puntos and Lineas have their shell intact in a high speed crash. Even Tata Zest/Bolt are stronger compared to the rest. The Polo crash test gives and indication that the shell is strong. But the problem with Maruti, Hyundai and Honda is the shell. It collapses causing danger to occupants. Not against any manufacturer but them giving us a weaker body shell is plain cheating. Agreed our people are herd minded. Very few give importance to safety. But things have to change drastically. Airbags are no use if body shell is weaker.

[apachelongbow]

Originally Posted by Lalvaz

Its easy to call the public "Dumb" and unconcerned about "safety", but in this case, its misplaced and uncalled for. The Indian consumer is unaware about what constitutes a safe vehicle, simply because he does not know the crash test rating for the vehicles he buys.

If the automobile market in India was truly transparent in its crash test results and in spite of people being aware that their cars were structurally unsafe, if they still chose to patronize those manufacturers, perhaps your statement would have some merit. However, in the present scenario, you simply do not know. Even if you bought the top end variant of a car with the bells and whistles of ABS, Airbags etc... you still did not know if the structure was unsafe. So, you were not a DUMB customer, You were simply being CHEATED, and cheated not only of your valuable money, but cheated of the right to a SAFE vehicle, which could cost the LIVES of you and your loved ones.

By calling the Indian consumer "Dumb", you are actually heaping insult on his injuries, and that is uncalled for.

All that rant aside I am sorry to say the Indian consumer is indeed dumb. As well as blind and deaf. That's because all the laws the pleas the policing and education is not helping. The consumer still drives without seatbelt. Three up on a bike, 6 up in a hatchback. Keeps kids in the front seat. Chooses alloys and jingbang lights over airbags. Buys licences, drives wrong side, cuts lanes, signals, routinely drives drunk, makes kids sit on lap and drives. And the list is endless. So let's not have a sob story protecting morons here. The safest car will not save such creatures.

However I still want better safety rules asap. It's important for the 1 % like us who respect rules and want to stay safe.

[racer_ash]

Just yesterday, I had suggested the grand i10 Asta (O) for my dad who is looking to replace his 2008 swift VXi. I strongly wanted him to choose the top spec because it has 2 airbags as I was not comfortable with him driving the seat belts only Swift. But now looking at this post, I immediately smsed him to change his plans. Now we are back to car searching. Figo aspire is at the top of the list now. That's 1 less customer for Hyundai. Not sure if this is safe as I have also read that Ford ecosport needed changes to its body shell to make it EU road worthy.

The problem for consumers is lack of credible data. We assume cars are safe because they are launched as international variants and are sold in Europe as well. Little do we know that Indian made cars are built to cost. This is plain cheating by the manufacturers part and in the name of profit making, they are taking Indian lives for granted. Its high time we Indians take such manufacturers for granted as well.

I was considering Creta as my next purchase maybe a year down the line. But that's not going to happen now. Driving a 2011 i20 which has 1 airbag, I am unsure now if even older Hyundais are safe.

[lurker]

both maruti and hyundai release too many 'bits & pieces' cars every year. There is a model with ABS but without air bags then there is a swift with ABS and airbags but without some structural member upfront. There is a tin can alto without any safety but manual gear the. there is an exaggerated tin can with ABS, airbags and AT. There is a creta for India with different structure and then there is a creta for China with more elaborate honeycomb design. So many insignificant launches by Maruti & Hyundai mean they peddle way too much crap in this country. Btw Renault is. not far behind.

[carwatcher]

I want to post something positive in all this negativity.
Did anyone notice that the front windshield of the India made Swift didn't break in the crash test video, that gives me a lot of assurance about safety, but wait, that's 2010 model, isn't it, I remember reading on official review as well as verifying personally that the new Swift has very thin windows glass, so if they had done something with the windshield too, then I would be feeling more unsafe.

[StepUP!]

I am sure concerns BHPians are raising here are falling on deaf ears. Instead can you guys suggest what could be done in this regard? Instead of waiting Indian Government to come up with crash test / safety laws by 2018, why don't we take a step now and make sure the future laws are indestructible?

Like can we all BHPians sign a petition on Change.org demanding safety of the cars manufactured and sold in India and address it to Mr Prime minister? We can sight 'Make in India' campaign here and highlight how these tin cans manufactured in India is damaging India's image worldwide.

I am also thinking to make use of plethora of material available on the site, print pamphlets and distribute it at traffic signals? Making aware "aam" junta. We BHPians can drive this initiative across pan India.

[Lalvaz]

Originally Posted by StepUP!

I am sure concerns BHPians are raising here are falling on deaf ears. Instead can you guys suggest what could be done in this regard? Instead of waiting Indian Government to come up with crash test / safety laws by 2018, why don't we take a step now and make sure the future laws are indestructible?

Like can we all BHPians sign a petition on Change.org demanding safety of the cars manufactured and sold in India and address it to Mr Prime minister? We can sight 'Make in India' campaign here and highlight how these tin cans manufactured in India is damaging India's image worldwide.

I am also thinking to make use of plethora of material available on the site, print pamphlets and distribute it at traffic signals? Making aware "aam" junta. We BHPians can drive this initiative across pan India.

Excellent ideas StepUP and it resonates beautifully with your nick. I like how you are proposing to do something about the problem rather than wait for others to fix it.

Would love to participate in your initiatives, on my own, I have already emailed ARAI, Bureau of Indian Standards and am currently in talks with a lawyer to examine the possibility of filing a PIL directing the government to follow up on making things more transparent in this space.

Hopefully, with all of us chipping away and doing our bit, the situation should improve over the next few years.

[srishiva]

I dont think blaming the consumer is right. If you take the case of U.S, do all the consumers buy the best car in safety? Its more than just that. People will always buy whats best for them from whats available. Lot of factors like budget, looks etc will come into play.
The govt needs to make sure that whats available is good. I always buy the highest variant in a car so that I get the best in safety. But even then, I also buy the car I like and there could be a better car in terms of safety which I dont like.

[hybridpetrol]

Originally Posted by carwatcher

I want to post something positive in all this negativity.
Did anyone notice that the front windshield of the India made Swift didn't break in the crash test video, that gives me a lot of assurance about safety, but wait, that's 2010 model, isn't it,

Swift has increased in size in the new generation, with a number of additional features, that were not available in the previous generation. However, the weight did not increase proportionally. If I understand correctly, the weight has actually reduced by as much as 30 kg. How is that possible? The use of light metals, and thin glasses.
Refer GTO's Official Review of the Swift, where he points out this.
Most of the manufacturers, these days have resorted to the practise of using thin metals and glasses for the following:
a) Bigger vehicle, with a lot of added features, at less weight.
b) Increasing Power / weight ratio
c) Increasing Fuel Efficiency, due to the less weight.
d) Cost-cutting and maximizing profits
While all the above may be achieved, safety is obviously compromised grossly. Zero ratings at NCAP crash tests is a result of that. But who cares.

[vinit.merchant]

Originally Posted by whencut86

The structural integrity is intact. Why I am comparing these is because Puntos, Lineas, Fiestas are all sold globally in few countries and the kerb weight is the same everywhere. But it is not the case with Maruti, Hyndai and Honda.

To begin with, the weight of the car is not even remotely connected to the structural integrity. This should not be used as a measure for comparison.

Let me put this, the weight of my Palio GTX is lesser than the swift. And I do not have the technical data at hand but I am sure the sheet metal on the Fiat is much thicker than on the Maruti.

On the other hand, Honda's may appear light but they have not compromised the structural integrity of the body shell. I have witnessed this first hand on the expressway when I saw the City rammed into the concrete edge at high speed. The engine had fallen off, there was barely anything left of the bonnet, in fact the front of the car was non existent, but the cockpit was safe. Airbags were deployed. The doors was jammed (maybe locked), took a lot of effort for people outside to open them, and once they was open, both occupants crawled out of the car. Both were dazed and not in their complete senses, maybe a couple of fractures, but they came out safe.

Sheet metal thickness - we have this myth in our minds that heavier and thicker things are good. By this measure, the old Mahindra jeeps/Ambassadors/etc should be the safest, but that is not the case. As explained above, Honda's may have the thinnest sheet metal on their cars, but their crumple zones are great and it is a safe place to be in.

So again, weight & sheet metal thickness is not a measure to look forward to when comparing cars structural integrity.

Also I am not sure how much of costs do the manufacturers save by compromising on the structural strength, for they already have the technology. By not using a few metal parts here and there (Sorry but I am a layman here), I do not think the costs saved would be justifiable.

[Carpainter]

This may be a shocking news to us but not to the general public in India. Even though safety is gaining some priority in some part of customers, most people still think that they don't need an airbag/ABS, let alone structural rigidity because most of their drives are withing city limits. This makes me wonder how we call our market a value conscious market where people are ready to pay even though they are not getting enough value (read safety) for their money. Don't get sad if you see grand i10 among the top three in next months sales figure analysis or if you still see a news advert claiming this car being sold in every 2 minutes. And why blaming just the i10 when most other manufacturers are taking the same path. We all know that cars like Swift, City etc. have gone down in terms of build quality in their new generation compared to their previous gen. It's just the norm in our country and I keep very little hope of this changing anytime soon.

[rav11stars]

Originally Posted by Tushar

Yet another international test that highlights the sorry state of car safety in India has come to light. The Hyundai Grand i10, one of the South Korean car maker's best sellers in India, has scored zero stars

My question may come across as naive but aren't the manufacturers aware (or made aware) during the design phase if the model is not safe or road-worthy?
I'm not referring to airbags, ABS or any other additional safety add-on features, but am referring to the statement " but the poor performing structure is still a matter of concern."
Aren't the models put through some checks to see if it's strong(safe) enough?

Let's put the law of the land aside. What about the motto or philosophy that the manufacturers believe in when building those automobiles?
Hyundai's website says and I quote A car is no longer simply a means of transportation that links people to people; it has become a life space that occupies a central role in people’s lives. As such, Hyundai Motor Company seeks to become a lifetime partner in the everyday lives of customers.

I found something while reading about these responsibilities. https://www.edgarsnyder.com/product-...nsibility.html

The bottom line is that manufacturers are required to make safe products. You may have a product liability case against the manufacturer if:

A product malfunctions, because it wasn't made properly. (Examples: exposed wire, metal hook snaps, helmet cracks upon impact, etc.)
There is a design defect with the product. (Examples: A lack of a safety device on an exposed blade, a guard is missing from a toddler bed, etc.)
The manufacturer fails to instruct and warn users about how to use the product, and about the product's potential dangers. (Examples: Lack of warnings about how not to use a product and failure to warn about risks.)

Whether it's a Datsun Go, a i10 Grande or any other car for that matter, are the manufacturers intentionally putting our lives at risk by offering/promoting unsafe cars?
Do they warn about this in their manuals? For example : This car is not equipped with air-bags, ABS etc as a disclaimer?

In the end it all boils down to us, isn't it? It is because of us, the customers that manufacturers have the audacity to issue comments like
"He said that if carmakers incorporate such features in even entry-level cars, obviously the price would go up, which would lead consumers to opt for two-wheelers, which would be more unsafe."

[whencut86]

Originally Posted by vinit.merchant

To begin with, the weight of the car is not even remotely connected to the structural integrity. This should not be used as a measure for comparison.

Let me put this, the weight of my Palio GTX is lesser than the swift. And I do not have the technical data at hand but I am sure the sheet metal on the Fiat is much thicker than on the Maruti.

On the other hand, Honda's may appear light but they have not compromised the structural integrity of the body shell. I have witnessed this first hand on the expressway when I saw the City rammed into the concrete edge at high speed. The engine had fallen off, there was barely anything left of the bonnet, in fact the front of the car was non existent, but the cockpit was safe. Airbags were deployed. The doors was jammed (maybe locked), took a lot of effort for people outside to open them, and once they was open, both occupants crawled out of the car. Both were dazed and not in their complete senses, maybe a couple of fractures, but they came out safe.

Sheet metal thickness - we have this myth in our minds that heavier and thicker things are good. By this measure, the old Mahindra jeeps/Ambassadors/etc should be the safest, but that is not the case. As explained above, Honda's may have the thinnest sheet metal on their cars, but their crumple zones are great and it is a safe place to be in.

So again, weight & sheet metal thickness is not a measure to look forward to when comparing cars structural integrity.

Also I am not sure how much of costs do the manufacturers save by compromising on the structural strength, for they already have the technology. By not using a few metal parts here and there (Sorry but I am a layman here), I do not think the costs saved would be justifiable.

Was just making a point sir. A hatchback and a sedan/SUV weighing almost the same sure must speak of build of the hatchback. Please don't bring in Honda City here. I have seen current and prev gen Honda City cars in service centres with worse impact in body shell after accidents. Also there was this recent case involving current gen City in which air bags did not deploy. When customer questioned them their reply was that the car didnt crash properly for airbags to deploy

[pgsagar]

Originally Posted by apachelongbow

All that rant aside I am sorry to say the Indian consumer is indeed dumb. As well as blind and deaf. That's because all the laws the pleas the policing and education is not helping. The consumer still drives without seatbelt. Three up on a bike, 6 up in a hatchback. Keeps kids in the front seat. Chooses alloys and jingbang lights over airbags. Buys licences, drives wrong side, cuts lanes, signals, routinely drives drunk, makes kids sit on lap and drives. And the list is endless. So let's not have a sob story protecting morons here. The safest car will not save such creatures.

However I still want better safety rules asap. It's important for the 1 % like us who respect rules and want to stay safe.

I fully agree with what you said. And adding further to that, our manufacturers are also no less guilty. At least some of them. See how Hyundai removes features as it tastes success. They did it in case of Verna. Creta is priced almost twice over Elite i20 but even i10 Grand has features that Creta does not have. And all this at an exorbitant price that Hyundai sells Creta at. Can' we call Hyundai greedy here? But since they have tasted success big time and are in orbit right now, they can resort to anything and yet, can get away with it. That is because of our grand Indian janta, as you have rightly said. They make some cars super hits and some other super flops. Core competence or abilities of the car be damned. All a car has to do in India is reach a magical number and then there would be no looking back.

[wanderlustindia]

At the risk of repetition on the subject, the problem lies mainly with 3 parties.

1. The establishment/administration for not giving due importance to the aspect of safety in passenger vehicles. Heck even the loss of a minister did not bring them out of slumber! I don't know what else will because quite simply they care two hoots about the safety of a commoner!
2. The manufacturer for hiding behind shoddy laws and tom-toming silly features (2-din audio, foldable mirrors and the works!) as their product USPs. Some of us on the forum have said that they are here to do business and they are doing it within the confines of what the law of the land allows them to. But then again there are examples of VW, Ford, etc. who are giving us vehicles that are quality and safe and yet manage to sell in more or less the same price-bands as the competition sells comparable products in their portfolio. Why cannot other manufacturers follow suit? If this isn't unethical and greedy, I don't know what else can be termed such?
3. Last but not the least the car buying 'janta' who are willing to trade in safety features for a few not-so-essential gimmicks in their vehicles. Look around and there is gross disrespect for basic safety, not wearing seatbelts, carrying kids in the front seat. That is just plain 'dumb' as someone rightly pointed out.

Each time I sit in the TSI, I feel a sense of satisfaction of having spent my money well on a product that is safe. It doesn't matter if I don't have the gadgetry of the gimmickry of the competition but I and my family have better chances of survival should things go awry on the road!