[CarManMotorcycl]

Voted No, Reasons being as follows:-

1) Indian roads are unpredictable, even though we might be careful there will be nincompoops who are not scared to die and will speed through city streets, If one such nincompoop was to crash into me I would be not safe in a poorly rated car.

2) Some of my friends who have two wheelers have two helmets- one for city rides and one for highway rides, the highway one being a lot more expensive and safer.

3) Speed limits in the city are 60kmph which is high enough to cause injuries and possibily a fatal accident.

Taking the secong point into consideration, if we swap the helmets with a car does that mean my safety is less of a priority in the city than on the highway? Do I not deserve the utmost safety? You can replace cars but you can't replace your body, you will only know the importance of a highly rated car when you get into an accident.

[V.Narayan]

Originally Posted by zhopudey

I feel this is happening due to the unfortunate wording of the thread title. Gncap seems to be looked on as the villian in most threads discussing car safety here. Is it because they are not favouring 75% of the cars sold here? I find really confusing that whenever the topic of gncap comes up, the common reply seems to be about affordability of Alto. Why this is so, when the cars scoring 4 or 5 stars in gncap - those which are the point of discussion - are nowhere near the budget range of Alto?

Then there's the other side of the story, with few over excited fans of our local brand sometimes going overboard

You make a valid point. Thank you for putting across your perspective.

Can't say about others but the points I am trying to communicate are:-

(a) GNACP is not the be all and end all of safety. It is only one aspect of safety. It is valid and important but it cannot be treated as the primary or worse only qualification. A substantial part of my career was spent in aviation and amongst other things certifying aircraft for air worthiness and ensuring flight safety for our flights. It is as we know another mode of transportation with technical & operational complexity higher than what we encounter in cars. Safety as I have learnt is a wider more holistic subject of which GNCAP is an important sub-set but a sub-set nevertheless.

(b) A discussion around safety cannot be restricted to more expensive cars that are GNCAP rated and ignore less expensive cars that are not because there are millions who do drive those less expensive ones too. And who is to say what is expensive - that it self will vary amongst owners.

I think we have beaten this topic to death.

[McLaren Rulez]

There's a lot in V. Narayan's post but permit me to address some points.

The question isn't about 5-star or not - we have 0, 1, 2, 3, 4 and 5 star cars on the market and the correlation between more stars and better safety is fairly strong. It is a bit disingenuous to claim that because GNCAP doesn't test every aspect of safety that we should disregard those ratings altogether and rely on the much weaker government mandated norms. In fairness to the latter, those government norms are heading in the right direction but still need a few years before they're there.

Originally Posted by V.Narayan

If only 5-star rated cars were to be permitted to be sold then 90% of the readers on this forum may not be able to afford cars.

Barring the budget limited Alto buyer who literally has no option but an Alto, nearly everyone else has a choice. The Tiago is the cheapest car with emphasis on safety and achieves a respectable 4 stars on the test. I'm not sure about the forum's average wealth but I suspect it's pretty likely that a very high percentage have access to safe choices within their budget.

More problematic is that manufacturers save pennies on the dollar by compromising safety. A 4-star Alto is not going to cost a lot more than a 2-star Alto. For proof, look at how much more expensive Tatas and Mahindras are relative to their competition. The minute consumers put their foot down and stop buying unsafe cars, manufacturers will suddenly find a way.

The trouble with the Indian consumer's psychology is most obvious in the higher price brackets where there are very safe cars but also some absolute howlers (hi Kia!). Yet, the sales charts don't reflect this. Whether it's down to a lack of awareness or just a don't-care attitude, this certainly is something to be critical of. The sooner it changes, the better things get for the market as a whole.

[rpm]

Originally Posted by McLaren Rulez

.......The trouble with the Indian consumer's psychology is most obvious in the higher price brackets where there are very safe cars but also some absolute howlers (hi Kia!). Yet, the sales charts don't reflect this. Whether it's down to a lack of awareness or just a don't-care attitude, this certainly is something to be critical of. The sooner it changes, the better things get for the market as a whole.

I only wish to address this particular part of your post, because I either agree with the other points or can understand the rationale behind them.

Getting to the point, the higher price bracket is actually devoid of tested/GNCAP rated cars. A lot of us have to work with the assumption that the cars that belong to this higher price bracket are safe (otherwise many of us will be left scratching our heads as far as a crash rating is concerned) e.g. Innova, Endeavor, Fortuner and the like. Even when we talk about Seltos' competition, I can't really point anyone to a safer alternative, because they either do not exist or I can't concretely say that they do.

If we assume price as the criteria (including overlapping variants of cars from a higher and/or lower starting price that still fall within 10-18 lakh ex-showroom range) instead of the type of vehicle or segment, buying anything above 4 m in this price bracket is a gamble of sorts. Seltos, Creta, Harrier, Hector, Compass, Duster, Kicks, Innova, Ertiga, Marazzo, TUV 300 plus, Safari, XUV 500, Scorpio, Hector plus, City, Ciaz, Verna, etc., yet none have an India specific crash rating except Seltos, Ertiga and Duster, all of which scored a dismal 3-star (though less so for Duster because it managed the feat with just a driver side airbag and the rating may need to be updated since dual airbags are now mandatory); the Scorpio with a zero-star (though that rating may not be applicable now since airbags are now mandatory); and Marazzo, the only option with a respectable 4-star. On the contrary, we are spoilt for choices in the lower price bracket than this particular Seltos price bracket.

[Kosfactor]

Originally Posted by McLaren Rulez

Whether it's down to a lack of awareness or just a don't-care attitude, this certainly is something to be critical of. The sooner it changes, the better things get for the market as a whole.

Our government cannot change their standards due to the tune of a self serving NGO, slowly we`ll get there as we now have airbags and ABS as standard among many other things. In 6 months GNCAP can arbitrarily decide its going to now think EU standards should apply to India and then the government has to order stop sales of 90% or more of the cars on sale, the entire auto industry will come to a stand still because lets face it - safety will not attract customers towards a boring undesirable car, at least not in good numbers.

Our government regulations are very detailed, about different parts of the car, from headlights to brakes, lets not throw stones at it without knowing how they contribute to road safety in a country with one of the largest road network and the largest population as well in the world coupled with one of THE lowest per capita car ownership.

Look at the well aware segment - The premium segment, Volvo is not the sales leader, its Mercedes. So Safety alone does not sell, what does not sell is a bad product usually.

To make this even easier to understand - You could add stuff to make a Nissan Kicks NCAP 5 rated, even then only ones who happened to get distracted while shopping for Magnite would even take a second look at it, let alone buy it.

[McLaren Rulez]

Originally Posted by rpm

Getting to the point, the higher price bracket is actually devoid of tested/GNCAP rated cars.

Very true! A lot of our choices rely on guesswork in the absence of full testing data. Hopefully, this changes soon and GNCAP or someone else is able to scale up their testing rate.

[blueshift]

I would vote Yes and No.

Yes; because then we as a buyer are sure of the safety aspect of the car which we would otherwise don't know.
No; because not every other good car is GNCAP tested.

GNCAP is not an end to the testimonial of the car on its safety. It is also the general awareness and common sense. Like I would never rely on Datsun cars for its safety and this is coming from my own experience that I learned through news around. For example, Ford cars were never tested here in India but they are one reliable piece of hardware.

Also, GTO rightly pointed, the safety depends more on the car's driver. But would also mention, it is not just about car safety during accidents but also minor scratches and bumps we receive in traffic mostly by bikers. Some cars get a huge dent even for the slightest of the abuse. So, yes I may choose a non-GNCAP rated car but definitely not a very susceptible one. (I will never choose Spresso btw )

[playingpossum]

Had voted Yes.

Because I ride a motorcycle, I'm already riding a death trap (even compared to a 0-star car).

When my parents bought their cars, I tried convincing them to go for a VW or some other car - but could not get them to choose a non-Maruti Suzuki car. It's their money, their choice in the end. They preferred the service network (familiar people and costs etc) and the low running costs (FE and repairs).

In the end, I convinced them to get the higher variants with ABS, airbags as a compromise. I am still comfortable with going out in those cars, although I would buy a car with a better safety rating if it were my money.

[Piyush Kanthak]

For those who are telling that safety depends on driving, what about other people who drive unsafe? What if a 5 star rated car comes and crashes into your 1-2 stars car?

Most of the time accidents happen due to others fault, just last month I took my car on the main road and while taking a turn, 2 girls on a scooter can see me turning in spite of that they turn into my lane the opposite way and touch the bumper, now is this my fault?

Just yesterday I was crossing an intersection while following all the rules properly, out of no where an i20 jumps it's lane for an illegal u turn, I was only seconds from T-Boning it, thanks to God, I and the i20 guy was saved. Now is this my fault?

Now coming to the cars part, I would use an unsafe car strictly for city rides because I have seen people falling off bikes and injuring their heads, I would prefer Nano over 2 Wheeler, atleast it will save me from head injuries.

But we should also consider on how many cars we can maintain, in my case, I can only afford to maintain one car and moreover the running isn't much, in these cases buying a safe car even for city runs is important

[Small Bot]

I voted No, even as I drive an i10 as my daily beater. So many of us did not have much choice / awareness / budget to go for a safer car. Now when the options are increasing, and safety has become the USP for certain brands, I would rather live with a slightly weaker engine as compared to a more unsafe car.

So given a somewhat similar budget, I'd prefer to buy the Altroz iTurbo over the i20 TGdi, purely for the perceived safety.

[fiat_tarun]

Voted yes for the following reasons.

Our second car at home is an Alto AMT and this is used by wife and for odd jobs around the city. If we did not have the Alto, that part of the commute would have been via a 2 Wheeler or Ola / Uber.

The second car had a budget of ~5L & had to be automatic, so we really didn't have too many choices and pre-owned was not an option.

Given this situation, the self driven Alto is a safer option that a 2W or an equally unsafe cab with an unknown driver, apart from the HUGE gains in convenience of driving around in your own car.

Safety is always relative and needs to be looked at holistically. The Alto is never taken out of the city and even within the city barely goes outside a 10km radius from home.

[rajk15]

I don't get the idea that a strictly city car can be unsafe- NCAP tests are conducted at 64kmph. Maybe it's different in other cities/states but in Chandigarh, the usual speed is 50-60 kmph, come to the airport/aerocity roads to reach the newer parts of Mohali and that speed becomes 80kmph. Beyond me, why when someone is buying a new (new/pre-owned) car would they buy an unsafe one except for budget constraints; You can save as much money as you want if you are alive. Of course, if you are continuing with an old car, then you have no choice unless it's an Alto/S-presso which just don't seem to loose their value over time.

[TSEA]

Voted No. If I purchase a new car, I would prefer to have one with better safety. I have been in nasty situations (one involved a JCB, don't ask) within Bangalore city.

[shashi792]

For folks who have answered YES. Would you buy a 0 star-rated car/allow a 0-star rated car to be driven even within city limits by your Children/Wife/Mother/Father?. Probably No. I think everything else is an excuse for a compromise already made. I would buy a car without a stereo but not without an airbag.

[gurminder_81]

I would VOTE for a 'NO'

I am looking at this poll question in an alternate reality:

Would I like to be in an unsafe / poorly rated car meant for city driving only which met with an accident?

The answer is an absolute NO.

Everyone should answer this question considering the time when you are actually involved in a crash, and at that critical time no argument will suffice for you which would have led you to a decision to buy an unrated / poorly rated car even though it is strictly meant for city usage.

We have discontinued the usage of 2 wheeler, and have increased OLA/Uber usage where I do not like to drive and elsewhere use our beater car for even smaller distances of less than a km.