[GTO]

Simple question, although it might have complicated responses!

Going for what might be the unpopular opinion here = I have voted yes, but purely for the city only.

Reasons:

• I already do so with my 1997 Jeep which is a favourite for city driving. But I have strictly stopped highway runs with it due to its age & lack of safety. Even otherwise, the new rule in our family is that only the 2 German sedans go out on the highway. Jeep & Sunny = purely Bombay usage.

• Many of my family members do so as well. We have a couple of cheap Marutis & Hyundais doing duty as urban runners. A close pal uses the Seltos and I recently told her "go easy, and take your VW for highway runs".

• I also use Uber & Ola all the time. In fact, during a working day if I have to step out for a meeting or similar, it is always an Uber / Ola so that I can work during the commute + no parking worries (I cannot park my 5-Series / open Jeep / brand new Superb just anywhere). I buckle up even on the back seat and keep a close eye on the driver's speed & quality of driving, but I'm not going to stop taking Uber / Ola cabs because their entire fleet has unrated / poorly rated cars.

• On Indian roads, the bigger you are, generally the safer you are. An unrated economy hatchback is still 50 times safer than a motorcycle. On a related note, I recall a BHPian calling a 0-star car a death-trap. Said BHPian rides a motorcycle everyday too. Go figure. If that 0-star car is a death-trap, IMHO, that motorcycle is a moving coffin!

• I'm a big believer of cheap + fun cars and I'll never buy a car with a lame engine. Some of the hatchbacks with the best engines are either not crash tested, or fared poorly. Example = S-Presso & i10 turbo-petrol. The ugly duckling S-Presso is one heck of a fun car in the city, while the space + tall seating make it practical too. Very few cars are fun + safe + affordable like the Polo TSI or Altroz Diesel. This triple combination is rare.

• The biggest contributor to safety is that nut behind the steering wheel . Being a great, safe driver is as important - if not more than - your car's safety rating (check out one of our many threads with invaluable driving advice). For a Mumbai-Goa drive, if you gave me the option of riding shotgun in a Benz by an ordinary driver or a Scorpio by SS-Traveller, I would most definitely choose the latter.

• Due to inherently lower speeds + more discipline + closer hospitals, city driving is far safer than highway driving (2/3rds of all road accident deaths are on the highway). More so if you're in a car (2-wheelers & pedestrians account for a majority of road accident deaths). 2019 stats show that 17% of road accident deaths were for occupants of a car / Jeep / taxi and remember, a majority of those were on the highway. Going by the stats, city driving in a car accounts for a small percentage of fatal accidents (for the car's occupants). My anecdotal evidence tells me that 99% of those who I personally knew and were fatally / seriously injured in a crash were on the highway and / or on a motorcycle.

I am lucky enough to own multiple cars, 2 of which are absolutely top-of-the-line when it comes to safety. But if I owned just a cheap hatchback, I would happily drive it in the city and rent a 5-star rated car for my road-trip holidays. There are so many well-priced self-drive rentals available now.

Must-Read Thread - Understanding the NCAP crash tests (NCAP tests: Things to keep in mind as a buyer / misconceptions about NCAP)

[GTO]

Thread moved from the Assembly Line to the Road Safety section!

[Marshall]

Unsafe cars have no purpose to be on the road. If its a compromise, then why bother with any, Kuch bhi chalega must not be acceptable any more. The attitude must change. Incompetency must be weeded out.

[sam264_2000]

Voted Yes as I already have a 0 rated car used in city - Celerio. I didn't care for safety rating much when I bought the car since I knew the usage was strictly within city limits. However, in unavoidable circumstances when we have to take the Celerio out of Pune within a radius of 125km, I drive absolutely sedately and with utmost caution.

[Raghu M]

Originally Posted by GTO

• On Indian roads, the bigger you are, generally the safer you are. An unrated economy hatchback is still 50 times safer than a motorcycle. On a related note, I recall a BHPian calling a 0-star car a death-trap. Said BHPian rides a motorcycle everyday too. Go figure. If that 0-star car is a death-trap, IMHO, that motorcycle is a moving coffin!

Absolutely agree with you on this. Seated in a Nano is much much safer than riding a 20+ lakh HD. Two wheels make you very vulnerable and losing balance is just one nick away while it can be a biker kissing that rear guard or a car accidently giving you a tail spin. Riding a motorcycle with ABS on Indian roads is way more dangerous than sitting in a 0 star safety rated car on any day!

[zhopudey]

If you already own an "unsafe" car, then there's not much that can be done. You will continue to use it. The question should be - "would you buy an low gncap rated car for use inside the city?". I believe there already are threads about this. In my case, if my budget was only enough for an Alto/kwid or similar, then again there is no choice. If budget allows, say - a Tiago, then there's no reason to choose an unsafe car.

[YD14]

Voted no. I would rather look for a safest car in the budget. Yes, when driving at 50kmph, even an Alto can keep you away from death, but, it cannot keep you safe from small injuries. I have seen a crash at moderate speeds and the driver was limping out of the car. Things like steering coming towards chest, pedals forced into feet and of course a T-boning at junction and subsequent roll over, are always a threat even at city speeds. Road infrastructure is improving even in cities (at least in the cities I visit) and average speed of traffic is also going up.

But yes, if I had the budget of a two-wheeler, I would happily buy a second hand Alto and drive it around in the city with a big smile on my face.

[TrackDay]

Voted No.

I guess such an option works only if one has multiple cars in their garage. Nowadays with reduced car numbers in ownership, Most cars in the garage have to be ready for highway as well as city duty & hence a safer car. This from my situation, and could vary from person to person and city to city.

Another factor is whether family member would agree to the reason of not taking out an unsafe car on a highway. Take for instance a garage made up of an unsafe and a safe car. While the safe car is away on some trip and some situation arises where the members back at home have to make a highway trip, the excuse that the unsafe car cant be used wont work out. It will just fall on deaf ears. Imagine telling relatives I couldn't turn up because I didn't have a safe car !

Due to the reasons above I would not go for an unsafe car as it cant be restricted to city use alone. In the end it will also have to serve highway trips.

[Thermodynamics]

5 years ago dual airbags was not a norm. So, a lot many of us would be having an unsafe car at home. If that is the case, I will continue to use. But, if I have to buy a new car regardless of City or Highway usage, I would prefer a safer option. It is all worth paying 1-2 lakh more.

Vote: No

Reasons:
- Safety tests are conducted at 50-60 kmph which is quite possible in cities on certain stretches.
- It is not just about speed, momentum of colliding vehicle is equally important. A heavy truck at 30 kmph can cause severe impact.
- Safer car in a city is only more safe.

[SmartCat]

I think so. After all, I have no problems driving around in my A-star AT (which does not have airbags). I actually love driving it in town.

Money saved in developing unsafe cars is usually transferred to the customer, either in terms of lower price point or better features or better engine/transmission combo etc. The profit from sale of such "unsafe" vehicles are NOT pocketed by the manufacturer - since he has an incentive to price the car right, to generate the required sales volumes. In car business, if there are no volumes, there are no profits.

So when we are buying an "unsafe" vehicle for city use, we are not getting a bad deal financially per se. We are just opting for lower crash safety in return for something else. So if I'm not using a city car for airport runs or on the ring road at 80 kmph, I think I will be fine with a new car with known low safety rating or unknown safety rating from a manufacturer who has a bad reputation in this department.

[TheHelix0202]

Originally Posted by Raghu M

Riding a motorcycle with ABS on Indian roads is way more dangerous than sitting in a 0 star safety rated car on any day!

Off topic, but can you elaborate?

[Keeleri_Achu]

Is it just me or is the poll/title slightly confusing? People who would never buy an unrated/poorly rated car are voting NO. But that is the same answer I have although for an entirely different reason. I would never buy such a car for city purpose only. It needs to serve on highways, if needed. Isn't that a bit contradictory?

I would take any car with working brakes, good tires and a decent audio system on the highway. Even if it's a 20 year old Maruti. Just like GTO said, I believe the driver behind the wheel is more important than the car itself. I'm not saying cars should remain unsafe. Safe driver and a safe car is the dream combination. But if I can't have that, I would always prefer a safe driver. Well, what about the risk of some nut crashing in to you then? I acknowledge that risk and am willing to live with it. After all star ratings are probabilities of injury/survival. Not guarantees. That is why I'm a strong proponent of defensive driving. Anything beyond that, I leave it to fate.

[V.Narayan]

Voted Yes.

Car safety ratings, in India at least, are a recent phenomena and even today more talked about on car forums than in the consumer market. It is good to know your car safety rating but these safety ratings only cover the ultimate safety event - a big crash, mainly head-on. And I believe, not a popular view on T-BHP, that we are assuming that a car with a 1-star or 2-star or no rating is a death trap - I read this phrase too often these days. Allow me to offer a different perspective with 42+ years of (touch wood, God's Grace) safe driving over ~quarter million or more kilometres.

To start with a car is a safe cocoon. Period. A car with the occupants wearing their seat belts, being driven at a moderate speed and with brakes in good order is already addressing 3/4ths of our extreme case safety needs. If the car has ABS make that 5/6ths. All the modern technology around crumple zones, safe structures, airbags, automatic safety braking etc are addressing, IMHO, the final 1/6th of safety. The best safety is to not get into a situation in the first place. Of course there is that one in a lakh chance that despite all your safe driving some moron in India will crash into you head-on. Yes that can happen. So can we die in a 5-star rated car crash!

I find too many readers of car forums these days assuming that safety means surviving a head-on crash only and are too focused on ratings. Ratings are a guide, not a binary filter. How did we as drivers stay safe in the era before airbags and ratings or worse in the era before seat belts - we did it by driving sensibly. Rule 1.01.

Ratings are doing a dis-favour to the cause of safety by making consumers assume that a 1-star rated car is a death trap. How very wrong if what you are graduating from is a scooter. And the ratings focus only on head-on or, more recently, side crashes. It takes the dialogue away from the more important discussion of not getting into the situation in the first place. And I don't agree with the contention that stuff can happen over which we have no control. I for one believe, based on my experience, that if you are watching what situation is forming 500 or 800 metres ahead of you, you can eliminate 99.99999% of these 1 in 100,000 situations involving a moron on the other side. In India, especially when driving over 60 kmph, let the other man in a hurry pass, make way for the bus driving on the wrong side while overtaking, always assume some pedestrian will jump across without warning, keep your ego locked up, etc. as most of us know.

So yes for my beater car to run around doing chores I am comfortable with an unrated car from a well known manufacturer.

[gkveda]

There are many complexities involved here.
1. How accurate the GNCAP ratings are?
2. How unbiased the ratings are?
3. What does the rating really mean to our style of driving?

While 1st and 2nd questions above do not have very straight forward answers in india, For me, third question is the decision making one.

If I am a sedate driver and safe driver(who takes very calculated risks on roads and drives conservatively), then chances of me meeting accidents is very remote.

If I am a race track driver who hardly know the difference between race track and narrow lanes within city, then even 5 star rated car won't help on highways.

So, I believe my safety driving habits more than the GNCAP ratings and follow them very strongly rather than believing the ratings of the car and drive without relying on safety habits. car

All the above points make me think safety driving habits are more important than safety ratings of the car. And when the purpose is only within city, it makes much more sense to rely on our driving habits as compared to safety ratings of the car

[zhopudey]

Originally Posted by SmartCat

Money saved in developing unsafe cars is usually transferred to the customer, either in terms of lower price point or better features or better engine/transmission combo etc. The profit from sale of such "unsafe" vehicles are NOT pocketed by the manufacturer - since he has an incentive to price the car right, to generate the required sales volumes. In car business, if there are no volumes, there are no profits.

I think this is applicable only to the lowest budget cars like alto, kwid etc. It doesn't apply as we move up the ladder.

PS - editing to add my thoughts on V.Narayan's post. I feel what he has said makes perfect sense. Buying a 5* rated car is somewhat like buying term insurance. You don't get your money's worth until you experience a serious accident.

That been said, are there any reviewers who properly test the safety features of a car which can prevent a crash? Starting from steering response to braking quality, and going up to abs, ebd, and whatnot? I wouldn't trust any YouTube reviewer who spends limited time with a media car to be able to cover this thoroughly.