[lemedico]

Apart from the actual safety the airbags provide, I think there is a psychological benefit as well-
Drive safely and properly, else if you crash, they all deploy and you gotta pay heavily to repair them!!

I'd like to see at least the rowdy Maruti Eeco's slow down, those running undercover taxi services all across NCR.

[sidharthg]

I'm so glad and happy with the move! One Mr. Bhargava will not be able to get away with statements like "We at Maurti Suzuki comply to all govt of India standards". D

It is bound to hurt Maruti the most, they have the crappiest of build quality atleast at the lower spectrum. Right from Alto, Spresso, Wagon R, Eeco etc!

As far as other manufacturers are concerned, I think they will be able to manage barring few products.

Many folks here believe that it is too harsh or may not too fruitful. I disagree, we hvae to start somewhere, it is a stepping stone for auto manufacturers to offer by-default, a safe product. The next-gen products will automatically be much more safer both in terms oh "shell" strength as well as in equipment levels.

[vellatechie]

This is another pointless move by the government. Just yesterday, I realized that forget about national highways, majority of the roads in South Delhi don't even have street lights - Saket, Qutub Area, around Vasant Kunj etc are super unsafe to drive late evening. Govt should focus on making roads safe by focusing on road infrastructure instead of focusing on airbags.

Besides instead of airbags, make headrest and seat belt height adjustable in all cars, make rear defogger mandatory, make auto lock and unlock upon accident mandatory, auto IVRM, DLR, etc mandatory. Levy extra taxes on cars with GNCAP 3 and under. These small little things make driving more comfortable and safer for everyone instead of shoving airbags upon everyone.

[Geo_Ipe]

Originally Posted by kadanaJ

I'm going to go against the tide here and say I'm not in support of this move.

6-airbags being mandatory in entry-level cars is going to make them unaffordable for many 2-wheeler riders.

We live in India, a country where the majority of vehicles are 2-wheelers. Many Indian families use their 2-wheelers like family minivans. At that point, even a humble Alto with 0 airbags is a huge step up in safety.

They can all go buy a pre owned car, can't they?

[Maddy3008]

I am happy at any decision the government makes to reduce traffic and congestion on our roads whether by making the roads wider or reducing the number of vehicles. India's vehicle penetration is terribly low as compared to western nations but we are still struggling to keep our roads maintained to serve the 45-50 million cars & 10-15x other vehicles on our roads. We need to push people to use more public transport if we really want to move towards european ways, and that is something I wish the government focusses on much more.

[locusjag]

Originally Posted by Geo_Ipe

They can all go buy a pre owned car, can't they?

But they won't. First time car buyers - who are often first time buyers within their entire family/friend circles - are typically scared of getting a accident/flood damaged car or a lemon. They couldn't possibly know a car mechanic who they can bring along to inspect a prospective used car; in fact they likely mistrust local mechanics.

Rather than getting a pre-owned car, such folks would rather stretch their resources and walk into the nearest new car showroom (as opposed to a used car showroom, i.e.) and buy an entry-level car (S-Presso, Alto etc.) on a loan.

[irdevanand]

Originally Posted by kadanaJ

At that point, even a humble Alto with 0 airbags is a huge step up in safety.

A 0 airbag alto is safe if govt restricts it within city. But we don't have such rule. The moment it enters highways safety flies off the equation even if they drive very carefully. Please check this video

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7oucVJu2DfY

It happened in TamilNadu today. Instead of Alto just replace it with a Ritz as in this case. An XUV 700 tried to avoid a jaywalker and ended up in opposite lane and got T-boned by a Ritz and the Ritz folks perished. For NO FAULT OF THEM they perished. This is the same segment of people you represented in your above line right? Same incident post the 6 airbag rule would have been different. They would have walked with a broken leg or hand but still would have survived this, Right?

Regards
Dev

[McLaren Rulez]

Originally Posted by kadanaJ

entry-level cars is going to make them unaffordable for many 2-wheeler riders.

The same argument can be used to ask why dual airbags, seatbelts, crumple zones, LHS mirror, HMSL and a whole host of other features are mandatory. A car without those is still safer than a bike and indeed would be slightly cheaper for the customer but that isn't really the point of mandated safety features.

[YDS]

There was a news about cars mandatorily getting 3 point seatbelts for all front facing seats. Any update on that?

[fiat_tarun]

Originally Posted by McLaren Rulez

The same argument can be used to ask why dual airbags, seatbelts, crumple zones, LHS mirror, HMSL and a whole host of other features are mandatory. A car without those is still safer than a bike and indeed would be slightly cheaper for the customer but that isn't really the point of mandated safety features.

There needs to be a minimum level of safety mandated and that has been done with a basic crash test, ABS, Airbags, etc. and this is the accepted practice world over. With things like 6 airbags we are going way beyond 'minimum level' and these things should be left to an NCAP and consumer choice.

Inform the end customer on the safety level of the vehicle and let them make their choice based on priorities, affordability, etc.

[Rohan265]

Originally Posted by irdevanand

A 0 airbag alto is safe if govt restricts it within city.

Can you define what "within city" means? Almost all our cities have high-speed roads called freeways/expressways/ring roads passing within the municipal limits. Are vehicles with 0 airbags not to be used on these roads? Or are you proposing that we use these vehicles only within a certain speed limit? If yes, how do we decide the speed limit? Even an impact of 30 kmph can cause fatalities.

I was genuinely amazed when I saw a thread where the usage of unrated cars for city roads was debated (and the poll is nearly 50-50!). There are no "city speeds" per se. You will find vehicles traveling over 60 kmph even within cities. Unless we have strict lower speed limits for our cities just like some European counterparts, we should prefer the same "Safe car" for all roads.

Originally Posted by irdevanand

For NO FAULT OF THEM they perished.

I don't completely agree with this. I agree that the crash was beyond their fault. But, through the limited views I got of the Ritz, I noticed that the Ritz barely has any passenger compartment intrusions. I don't have any wound certificates to correlate, but I feel that a lack of seat belts usage was the cause of the fatalities. The Ritz occupants cannot be completely absolved.

Having 6 or even 10 airbags is a moot point if you don't wear the seat belts.

Originally Posted by fiat_tarun

Inform the end customer on the safety level of the vehicle and let them make their choice based on priorities, affordability, etc.

Manufacturers have to start by informing (in bold) that seat belt usage on all seats is imperative to get the benefits of the 6 airbags or 5-star safety. I haven't seen any manufacturer do this yet.

[Hatari]

Originally Posted by sierrabravo98

Hare-brained schemes like this 6 airbags rule and the Ethanol blending rule only serve to harm the national economy

My cousin was involved in a really bad car accident. If the car had 6 air bags, she would not have suffered multiple fractures and injury to her brain.

It was a side impact, primarily on the front passenger side door. Cars with only 2 air bags dont have side sensors.

Thats when I made a decision that my next car will have 6 airbags.

[ron178]

Originally Posted by Rohan265

I was genuinely amazed when I saw a thread where the usage of unrated cars for city roads was debated (and the poll is nearly 50-50!). There are no "city speeds" per se. You will find vehicles traveling over 60 kmph even within cities.

At highway speeds it's unlikely that the probability of survival would be any better in a five star car. Considering that the ratings are for urban speeds, and besides zero and one stars, very often the big differences in Global NCAP results arise from disabling injuries and not life-threatening injury, I can see why someone would choose to not give the results all that much importance even if they correctly estimated the scale of urban crashes.

As for six airbags, speeds are irrelevant because the additional airbags are intended to provide protection in a side impact, where you absolutely can't decide the speed of the striking vehicle. You could be stationary, for all you know.

[kadanaJ]

Originally Posted by Geo_Ipe

They can all go buy a pre owned car, can't they?

I have bought pre-owned vehicles before. Had the budget for a Rs. 7-10 lakh Swift/Baleno/i20 which I was considering a few years ago. Ended up buying a used Corolla Altis. Safety was one of my reasons for doing so. Key point here is that I have experience maintaining my vehicles (and I have a good FNG).

A first time car buyer is different from you and I. They lack experience in how to maintain a vehicle.

Furthermore, a first car is considered a prestige item. Buying a used car is a big no-no in many communities.

Originally Posted by irdevanand

A 0 airbag alto is safe if govt restricts it within city. But we don't have such rule. The moment it enters highways safety flies off the equation even if they drive very carefully.

It happened in TamilNadu today. Instead of Alto just replace it with a Ritz as in this case. An XUV 700 tried to avoid a jaywalker and ended up in opposite lane and got T-boned by a Ritz and the Ritz folks perished. For NO FAULT OF THEM they perished. This is the same segment of people you represented in your above line right? Same incident post the 6 airbag rule would have been different. They would have walked with a broken leg or hand but still would have survived this, Right?

Regards
Dev

I would argue that 100cc motorcycles should be restricted to cities, but they're not, and expecting such rules in India is unrealistic.

6 airbags in an Alto was not going to save them with how structurally unsound the chassis is. But a 5-star rated Altroz with 2-airbags? Now that would have fared much better.

Just to be clear, I'm not against safety. I'm against 6 air-bags being the magic solution.

But that 0 airbag Ritz was still safer than a 2-wheeler. A 0 air-bag car is unsafe. But a 2-wheeler relative to that, is a death sentence.

Originally Posted by McLaren Rulez

The same argument can be used to ask why dual airbags, seatbelts, crumple zones, LHS mirror, HMSL and a whole host of other features are mandatory. A car without those is still safer than a bike and indeed would be slightly cheaper for the customer but that isn't really the point of mandated safety features.

You said it yourself, a car without those would still be safer than a bike, and be slightly cheaper.

Our country is poor, and we cannot have the same standards as USA and Europe.

The best solution IMO is not mandatory safety features, but a well-implemented, transparent safety rating system.

Let the cars be crash-tested. Let the star rating be displayed in the same way we have 'energy star ratings' on appliances. Let the buyer have the choice between an unsafe entry level car to something like a 4-5 star rated Tata vehicle.

https://www.livemint.com/Auto/N3Ixh0...ata-shows.html

https://www.statista.com/statistics/...heelers-india/

As I've said before, most of India runs on 2-wheelers. Close to 75% apparently.

Raising the price of cars in the name of safety benefits the members of this forum, many of us who own multiple cars. It benefits me personally. I wouldn't think twice about shelling out an additional Rs.50,000-1,00,000 on a Baleno for extra air-bags.

It does not benefit the vast majority of the Indian population when an entry-level car is suddenly priced even more out of their reach.

[vintherace]

Instead of mandate for all cars, the govt could mandate that at least one variant of every car must have 6 airbags. So customers who want better safety will go for the 6 airbag variant of the car by paying extra. Because a car with 2 airbags is definitely safer than a two wheeler for people who wont be able to afford to buy a car due to price increase.