[Tucker48]

This is a general observation from a tier 1 and tier 2 city.
Here on teambhp, why didn't you buy Tata or Mahindra? Whereas on streets people say, why did you buy a Tata or Mahindra?
Now the respective owners are passing the banter around. No offences should be taken as nothing is perfect.

[Thilak29]

Originally Posted by Emvi

Safety!

Good post, I am glad safety conscious tribe is growing!

I work for a company who sees safety a paramount character of an individual. All our key business meetings start with safety topic, including shareholder calls !

I believe it’s not easy transition and remain into a safety conscious individual. Also, it needs imbibe at young age as second character. At personal level, I try to point at potential hazards at all possible daily chores. At times I do get resistance and seen as annoyance. It’s a difficult value to hold on to.

OT : We should do a KA21 meet-up.

[Lowflyer23]

Originally Posted by Kosfactor

If you take a clue from the name itself - automobile, it's meant for transportation at its core, that is it's purpose and the reason behind its existence or invention. All other attributes of an automobile is secondary including safety.

So the next time you shop for a car, think for a moment what it is for. If you have the need for a 7 seater at the lowest budget possible or you want a small vehicle that can also be used for your small business, you buy an Eeco / Omni not a Tiago, it would be completely useless for that purpose neither will it reach places an Eeco will be able to if you live in a place with poor road connectivity.

As they say Horses for courses.

Maybe you didn't read my post clearly before jumping to a conclusion, I clearly stated in this one and the other post on this very thread too that being aware and then choosing an unsafe car due to some gimicks is wrong. There was never a mention of a safer alternative to an Eeco or Omni, Just like there is no safer and similar alternative to a Tractor.

Some purchases are bound by specific utility or necessity. But a family man who wants a hatchback and is very much aware about safety in 5-7 lakhs range can buy a Tiago instead of a tablet or tacky mood lights on wheels.

And going by your logic of automobile just being a means of transport, we would still be stuck in the ambassador era. Times have changed buddy and so should us, emotions need to be sidelined at times.

[lina]

Worst part of the fanboys is that they seem to be very blinkered in their critisicm. While Tata and Mahindra have a few cars with a 5 star rating, they have also produced and are still producing enough and more unsafe cars.

Both Nano and Scorpio scored terrible on safety. Why hasnt Tata sent the Harrier for testing? Why are there no 6 airbags in the Nexon or Altroz? Global NCAP doesnt test for side impact. I really want to know what the crash safety is of a Tata Ace mini truck. Why is Tata making safe cars only for upper class car owners?

People need to understand that companies are here to make money. If the government doesnt mandate safety requirements, no one will make them safe. Blame the government and our collective public for the safety situation of the cars. Trolling someone online because they bought a Hyundai or Maruti to have a stress-free 10 year ownership is just stupid.

[shancz]

Originally Posted by turbo_delight

Remember there are much bigger vehicles, buses, trucks on road, way bigger and SAFER than a nexon or polo.
Our concern for safety is right but let's not go overboard with them.

Thanks, its the crux of this thread IMO.

Also, being tunnel visioned about just one(but very important) part of a car leads to the other deficiencies being overlooked as the feedback loop is overshadowed.
For example, the Tiago has good stability, suspension, sound system and 4-stars, but the noise/vibrations from the engine and especially on the gear lever sour the experience. IMO that's the only thing which has to be fixed in that very capable car which is punching above its price-weight, but seems to be overlooked even by Tata too.
Although I am talking about 2016-18 Tiago. I hope something has been done in the latest gen but I doubt it.

Originally Posted by Emvi

The discussion
is about how the fellow motorists are subjected to unwarranted criticism in social media due to preconceived notions about SAFETY by a few individuals. Yes, we can't change the world, we all BHPians know it's impossible, how about tweaking our thinking? Reasonable?

Well said. Especially on the notions about safety, G-NCAP ratings are good but not the holy grail.

Exaggerating greatly but assume a hypothetical case where all vehicles are 5-star rated.
So that means no one be hurt in a crash ? No. The bigger heavier vehicles will still be better off. Then the people will call names to the hatchback/sedan buyers. Then if all upgrade to SUVs the trucks will do the same. See how its going

But the reality is far from this, everyone has their set of conditions and limitations and that has to be respected.
When it comes to our own cars, like everyone else, we can buy the car we feel most comfortable with.

Originally Posted by Kosfactor

As they say Horses for courses.

Golden words.

When I(guessing most others) want to buy a car the following factors are in consideration, in order :

1. Ease of use in the target environment, like roads conditions, parking spaces etc.
2. Feel of the car, how well the basics of the car(without the bells and whistles) feel to drive and suit your needs.
3. Cost of purchase and maintenance.
4. Basic features like A/C, power steering/windows and rear wash-wipe-demister.
5. Safety kit like star rating, airbags etc.
6. Other features like music system, touchscreen in short the bells and whistles.

Not going in further details but if you start looking at the best match within the constraints, its not that easy.

Examples :
- The competition to the Alto in price is the Kwid and the S-Presso(assuming a 20-25k buffer, else the Alto is alone) but in semi-urban/rural areas how many Renault showrooms/workshops exist and if they do what is the cost of service ? assuming a Kwid isn't that FNG friendly.
- The alternative to Tiago is the Santro in price, where the Tiago is a no brainer but the engine refinement and AMT of the Santro is way ahead of the Tiago which might be preferred by a lot of city drivers.

There are countless examples and there will be more since each person's preferences vary.
Without taking anything away from the focus on safety would like to point out that there are other important factors as well which too cannot be discounted.

That being said, will let the sales figures do the talking

[kaushikduttajsr]

I empathize with OP's point of view. Buying anything, not just a car, is a personal choice and is not up for by-watcher's judgement. Period! Not unless the by-watcher pays for any part of the experience.

We as a 1.3bn populated country lack a much needed sense of privacy and have a habit of poking our nose into businesses we shouldn't. And mind you, this behavior is not restricted to any particular strata of the society. Case in point, the public humiliation of a person found littering via youtube by a very known celebrity and her husband.

That said, safety as an attribute has come up very recently and I'm glad it has come up the way it has. It is much needed, especially on our crowded roads with folks being assigned driving license without basis tests.

Like any other buzzword, it is becoming a symbol of status - i have a safe car, do you have one? I'd urge everyone on this forum to use safety, just like the idea of wearing seatbelts, in an educational manner. The choice of buying a 3 star creta or a 5 star nexon is the buyer's choice. I'm all for sharing options with a fellow Bhpian to make his choice. But once the choice is made, we respect the buyer for his choice and let her / him enjoy what we are all here for - the drive

P. S. I do not endorse OP's comparison of car buying to public transport and work spaces. In the context of safety, we as buyers have control over the former but not the latter. If I feel public transport is unsafe, I will use my car for A-B transport, find out time to drop my kids at their school if I'm as paranoid about safety.

[rpm]

Originally Posted by lina

Worst part of the fanboys is that they seem to be very blinkered in their critisicm. While Tata and Mahindra have a few cars with a 5 star rating, they have also produced and are still producing enough and more unsafe cars.

While I understand the frustration, Tata's current stable has 2 four star rated, 2 five star rated and one unrated passenger car that are currently available for sale. That brings the total to 4/5 of their passenger cars currently on sale being safe, if not 5 star. While your point may stand for Mahindra, for Tata it seems to be in bad taste. Even their Zest with airbags was 4 star and the Indica Vista w/ 2 airbags was rated 3 star by ASEAN NCAP (though that rating may or may not apply to the Indian variant, it does make its safety rating ambiguous). Have they produced unsafe cars? Yes. Have they been actively trying to work on that? Yes. The criticism here for the lack of safety in passenger vehicles at least, I feel, is undeserved.

Both Nano and Scorpio scored terrible on safety. Why hasnt Tata sent the Harrier for testing? Why are there no 6 airbags in the Nexon or Altroz? Global NCAP doesnt test for side impact.

While I understand the rage, why is it that the Nano, which was strictly designed to help people graduate from the relatively unsafe 2 wheels to 4 wheels, criticised for that effort? Surely a car costing just 1 lakh at its launch and 2 lakh (ex-showroom) thereafter would be built to a cost with very thin margins. They even lost money on that product, yet continued with it because it probably had a noble goal (I say probably because it wouldn't make much sense for a business to continue with a loss making product), but I think it's for the best that they shelved it, exactly because of the unnecessary flak it draws for its safety, while nobody questions the likes of Alto, Eon or Kwid. The fact that other manufacturers are unwilling to offer safe products at a price which is almost an order of magnitude higher than that of a Nano is what draws flak, when the cost of building one probably wouldn't affect the fat profit margins as drastically as to turn it into something that sells for a loss. They're a business through and through, and we get it.

Also, to get a 5 star rating from GNCAP, a car has to pass the side impact test, and you can find videos of XUV 300, Nexon and Altroz being tested for the same. Whether you wish to criticise Altroz/Nexon for only 2 airbags is upto you.

I do not wish to contend the rest of the points in your post because I neither have the data for the crash worthiness of the Tata Ace, nor do I know if competing manufacturers offer safer alternatives. Whether you hate/dislike/criticise the brand for that is totally upto you. No issues on this part.

Fuss free ownership is a question mark, atleast for Hyundai. You may search for a thread on team-bhp titled 'Hyundai India - The occasional serious quality lapse and apathetic manufacturer response!' by BHPian CrAzY dRiVeR to get the gist of what I'm hinting at. Yes, Tata's service isn't something that garners a lot of praise or attention and you may criticise them for that. That's upto you again. No issues there. However, I do feel that criticism for the point I mentioned above is unwarranted. Whether you agree or not, is again, upto you.

[Shashwat.75]

Originally Posted by lina

they have also produced and are still producing enough and more unsafe cars.

Both Nano and Scorpio scored terrible on safety. Why hasnt Tata sent the Harrier for testing? Why are there no 6 airbags in the Nexon or Altroz? Global NCAP doesnt test for side impact. I really want to know what the crash safety is of a Tata Ace mini truck. Why is Tata making safe cars only for upper class car owners?

At the risk of being offensive, this just sounds like a pure RANT ! . I acknowledge the fact that there exists of section of Tata Fanboys who can get toxic and unreasonable but you seem to be no different .

And BTW, the cheapest Tata being sold has been rated 4 * by GNCAP

[Emvi]

Originally Posted by kaushikduttajsr

P. S. I do not endorse OP's comparison of car buying to public transport and work spaces. In the context of safety, we as buyers have control over the former but not the latter. If I feel public transport is unsafe, I will use my car for A-B transport, find out time to drop my kids at their school if I'm as paranoid about safety.

Thank you for your views
Let me clarify the context behind my words. It's not about the paranoia regarding public/school transport or comparing workplace safety to road safety. It's about few individuals' fabricated concern about the fellow motorists.
Let me quote an example to clarify it further.
Here is Mr.ABC, a marginal farmer/small businessman. The set of wheels he owns is a two wheeler and a tractor/load carrier. He depends on public transport/two-wheeler for personal travel. None of his well wishers are concerned about his workplace safety or road safety. The moment he purchases a vehicle which suits his requirements, purpose and which he can afford, everyone's concerned about his safety and his entire family's safety. Even though he abides by the traffic rules and drives responsibly, the concern grows so much that the well wishers start hurling words at him and his vehicle. How valid is this? He doesn't own or drive something that is illegal or not road worthy, does he!?

[Lowflyer23]

Originally Posted by Shashwat.75

At the risk of being offensive, this just sounds like a pure RANT ! . I acknowledge the fact that there exists of section of Tata Fanboys who can get toxic and unreasonable but you seem to be no different .

And BTW, the cheapest Tata being sold has been rated 4 * by GNCAP

Harsh but true, slowly this thread will now start flooding with posts of every Tom, Dick and Harry trying to justify the safety of their unsafe cars and ranting about the manufacturers who make safer ones.
I request the mods to kindly close this thread as there has been enough discussion on the seltos crash test thread itself, many BHPians I believe wouldn't like to listen to stuff like "GNCAP is funded by Tata or Mahindra", "how safe is a bimmer from (their unsafe car)?", or "why moderators are not posting anything?". There have been enough personal attacks and blaming done on that thread, so it would be best to close this one.



Lowflyer

[dragracer567]

I think the OP is right in that it is absolutely not okay to troll people online for the choice of their vehicles. These vehicles are available in the market and since 1991 atleast, we've been a free market. Its absolutely the choice of the consumer to go for a car which is perceived as unsafe or indeed is unsafe in the same way it is absolutely okay to build non-earthquake proof buildings in earthquake prone zones as long as the regulations don't required it. This is where the straw is at - REGULATIONS.

Europeans would still be buying the so-called tin-cans with single airbags if it wasn't for EuroNCAP crash tests and regulations which prevent the sales of such unsafe cars. This whole portrayal of Indian people as dumb, gullible or naive while folks from the western being enlightened has been debunked time and time again (look at climate-change denialism, anti-vax movement etc.). So, its not the consumer's fault for buying certain products when the regulators allow for the sale of such cars. It's the job of the regulators, not consumers to decide what should be on the market and what shouldn't be. Cars sold in America or Europe are safe because of regulations there, not consumer demand. Else, everyone would be driving around in Volvos.

Now, an alto would probably cost 50,000-75,000 INR more to meet certain safety requirements. Would a consumer pay that (given the option) just to know that their car is made with higher-strength steel? They won't. But would they pay the extra 50,000 if regulations required the car be made as such? Yes they would. A person spending 3,50,000 INR on a car can certainly afford to spend another 50,000 INR especially on EMI but they won't (not just an Indian, nobody would), but they would spend that money if regulations require the cars be made as such. So, you aren't necessarily making cars more accessible by making them unsafe, just as many people would upgrade from two-wheelers in this case.

[Kosfactor]

Originally Posted by dragracer567

Europeans would still be buying the so-called tin-cans with single airbags if it wasn't for EuroNCAP crash tests and regulations which prevent the sales of such unsafe cars.

Are you comparing Europe and US market with India? Europe and US has a lot more history with automobiles than we have, for starters they did not have to wait till 1985 for a tiny 800CC car.

Our car ownership levels are some of the lowest in the whole world and US and Europe it's the other way around. Making cars more expensive, makes it more unsafe for people to travel. Our government understands this and therefore has prescribed safety requirements accordingly, they have also subsidized the less fortunate with the SUB4M rule forcing manufacturers to release more diverse products in the small car category, the result is that you can have a Baleno with a 1.2L engine that is faster, bigger, more comfortable, safer, more fuel efficient than say an old M800. Adjusted to inflation, you really are not paying a whole lot more, no wonder if sells a ton.

You cannot suddenly move from Bullock carts and Hawaii slippers to a Volvo, unless you win a world war perhaps. For us , we had our M800, now we have our Balenos and the story goes on, we will catch up eventually.

Originally Posted by Lowflyer23

And going by your logic of automobile just being a means of transport, we would still be stuck in the ambassador era. Times have changed buddy and so should us, emotions need to be sidelined at times.

If you read the paragraph above, you will learn how we made that progress.

In ambassador's defence -

Ambassador diesel was reportedly just as fast as Tiago diesel to the 100kmph, You could get a special bulletproof armored version as well.

And there are 20+ cars in the 5-7L segment with varying abilities , Tiago is just one of them.

[charanreddy]

Originally Posted by Emvi

who own the so called UNSAFE cars are looked upon as criminals! The UNSAFE cars are called tincans, carts, coffin on wheels and what not. And the owners of such vehicles are called morons, idiots and stupids! Alas! This is how we treat our fellow motorists for buying something they have long aspired for, spending their hard earned money.
...

Everyone's concerned about themselves or their family more than anyone else. A lot of factors influence a person when he/she spends his/her hard earned money on something. After all, owning or driving a "Tincan" is not a crime by any stretch of imagination. If it is, then a lot of other things that we do is a crime as well. In that case, a lot of sinners and very few saints in this world. Period!

I do agree that we BHPians emphasise on safety a lot, but I seriously doubt we call people stupid or demean them for not buying the safest car.

Lets all talk about SAFE cars and bring about as much awareness as we can. When customers think of car purchase, safety should figure among the top considerations.

Your points about other aspects of our life being unsafe may be true, but it is no reason for anyone to be OK purchasing a less safe car. Actually this point is not even relevant. let me explain with an anology : When you get a vaccine, you are being protected against a certain disease. Just because all diseases in the world cannot be avoided, this is no reason not to take a recommended vaccine.

People may have constraints and may not be able to buy the safest car out there, but they need to be aware of the limitations of the car they do buy! When I started my job, I needed a diesel car and the Beat was the one I could afford. It did not have ABS or Airbags. I drove it accordingly. After 6 years, I could afford a safer car and I did with the Nexon. Even now, I ask my family or close family friends to take my Nexon on long commutes and leave their unsafe small car at my home for local shop runs. Do not misinterpret the voices for safer cars as being demeaning or insulting. If It does happen, its not the thought but the person who is at fault.

[dragracer567]

Originally Posted by Kosfactor

Our car ownership levels are some of the lowest in the whole world and US and Europe it's the other way around. Making cars more expensive, makes it more unsafe for people to travel. Our government understands this and therefore has prescribed safety requirements accordingly, they have also subsidized the less fortunate with the SUB4M rule forcing manufacturers to release more diverse products in the small car category, the result is that you can have a Baleno with a 1.2L engine that is faster, bigger, more comfortable, safer, more fuel efficient than say an old M800. Adjusted to inflation, you really are not paying a whole lot more, no wonder if sells a ton.

You cannot suddenly move from Bullock carts and Hawaii slippers to a Volvo, unless you win a world war perhaps. For us , we had our M800, now we have our Balenos and the story goes on, we will catch up eventually.

There is a lot to unpack here:

1) Car ownership levels have nothing to do with safety. Other developing markets such as ASEAN and Latin America have NCAP regulations and the cars sold there are much safer than ours. I disagree with the statement that safety increased the cost of a vehicle to price it out of reach. A 50k-75K increased for a 3.5 lakh vehicle isn't a huge jump, we've seen a similar increase due to inflation in the past decade without a corresponding increase in wages.

2) The govt. isn't subsidizing cars below 4 m. Rather, you are paying an additional surcharge for cars above 4 m. The rational has nothing to do with making cars more accessible but rather to reduce the space-usage in urban areas (which has been debunked).

3) You make it sound like a person buying a car for 10 lakhs doesn't deserve safety because a Baleno is all they can get (which though hasn't been tested by Global NCAP has a unbelievable low kerb weight and no Maruti isn't using carbon fibre). But a Tata Altroz with a 5 star rating can be had for the same price. So, why doesn't the Indian consumer deserve a Maruti baleno which is as safe as a Tata Altros for the same price? Now, Maruti won't do this on their own and for consumers, safety is just one factor, so that's where the government regulators come in. No one expects an average Indian to afford a Volvo but if a Tata Tiago, Altros or even a Maruti Vitara Brezza can be had under 10 lakhs, why can't all cars under 10 lakhs be built to the same standard? I see no reason other than corporate greed and making a Baleno as safe as an Altros won't force people to ride around in a motor bike.

[Lowflyer23]

Originally Posted by Kosfactor

In ambassador's defence -

Ambassador diesel was reportedly just as fast as Tiago diesel to the 100kmph, You could get a special bulletproof armored version as well.

And there are 20+ cars in the 5-7L segment with varying abilities , Tiago is just one of them.

But aren't we talking about safety here? I could put a turbocharger in my humble Maruti 800 but it won't become a safe car like the Tiago.