[VS1811]

I, for one think mandating 6 airbags is a step too far too soon!!

I am all for safer cars, safer roads and safer infrastructure et all. But there has to be a point of diminishing returns.

I am all for ABS, and sensors being mandated. An average car user would probably encounter an emergency braking situation and thus deploying ABS probably 10 times a year? Reverse sensors are used every day. There still are 2 front airbags and most cars probably have 70% of their lifetime kms run with 1/2 on-board. Also in terms of cost, ABS and sensors are definitely cheaper add-ons compared to adding four airbags, which will also lead to lot more changes in the car for where would the airbag be stored, its sensors and so on.

If a person is unable to upgrade to four wheels because your alto / kwid / S-presso cost 50-70K dearer due to 4 additional airbags, and is stuck on two wheels, well that defeats the purpose.

I think, while its a noble thought i dont think enough market study, spending power, repurcussions, additional cost, likelihood of their deployment analysis has been done.

[Mohitkumaar]

I have just one thing to say, MSIL needs to realise the world has changed. The India they were brought into is gone!

Someone at MSIL needs to sit in front of a computer and write their version of the burning platform memo lest they become Nokia of Indian passenger car segment.

[DhinaStark94]

Originally Posted by BHPjunkie

Well this is just stupidity by the government. By just making 6 airbags mandatory you don't expect safer roads. The entire safety issue is right down to handing over a drivers license to the infrastructure of roads.

In India you can get a drivers license without even visiting an RTO. What does the government do to ensure who they are handing over a driver's license is fit to drive? I have a friend in Dubai who is giving his fourth driving test to get a license.

Second, the infrastructure. In Mumbai, for example, U-turns are taken from the right most lane which is suppose to be the fast lane. Worst is you are getting on to the other side of the road in the fastest lane. The basic infrastructure of properly laid road is missing. I have driven extensively in Europe and once in USA. They way the road are designed in itself ensures lesser accidents. They have separate lanes for turns and U-turns. While joining a motorway there is a good 200-300 meter stretch before you merge with the traffic. Has anyone gone mid-way on to the Mumbai - Pune expressway, it spells DISASTER!

Thirdly, the government run buses, taxis and 3 wheelers. These guys think they own the roads. They are downright rash and observe no traffic discipline whatsoever.

So Mr. Gadkari, if you really want safer roads, stop going after manufacturers, instead improve your own country's infrastructure first.

Well said!!! Everyone is just focusing on the rules. But what matters more is all the points mentioned by BHPjunkie. With roads having potholes big enough to swallow an alto to dividers in highway that are not marked by any reflectors, to speed breakers without any warning the Indian roads are a safety hazard on theyr own. Government should fix this at the same time theyr mandating other rules.

Its not like that roads and rules are perfect and only the manufacturers are causing all the death's. I know a friends sister who cant differentiate between an horn and ignition switch but still got her license. No amount of air bags will fix this underlying defect. These all things should also be looked at and changed.. only then will indian roads be safe.

An idiot with 6 air bags is still an idiot. This is not an black and white argument that can be made for all segments. The cost increase will surely put entry level cars from out of reach of several buyers.i feel a better build and engineering is more important that just 6 airbags.

[DhinaStark94]

Originally Posted by sreejithkk

Except Toyota and VW/Skoda, none of the manufactures were providing dual airbags in their base models. Maruti actually had a optional variant like Lxi(O), Vxi(O) with dual airbags (though elusive), where other manufactures never provided that option as well. In the premium hatch back segment, other than Polo, it was Baleno that started providing dual airbags as standard. (Jazz E, S variants and i20 variants up to Sportz were not providing even driver airbag at all initially).

Lol forget airbags if Hyundai india had a choice they will sell an ERA variant without en engine itself. I think it was Maruti who gave dual airbags and abs as standard even before others.. i know for a fact that maruti gave it well before Hyundai did. They're era and magna Variants didn't even have body coloured bumpers till 2017. So not that is Maruti is downright bad. Atleast they had a choice and some brands didn't even have rear power windows in the same range.

[hemj]

Originally Posted by AJ56

The gov. shouldn’t be in the business of mandating anything safety related in cars, let the free market decide what safety features it is willing to pay for and not pay for, forcing people of limited financial means to buy safer cars by arbitrarily raising the cost of production is not in line with a free market society.

Your logic is absolutely right in planet filled with highly educated stephen hawkings and einsteins and ramanujans and aryabhattas. They can think for themselves and make decisions. Not for the current world filled with more than half it's people struggling to feed themselves but want to move from point A to point B quicker than their feet would allow.

[GutsyGibbon]

Originally Posted by TusharK

The 6 airbag norm was proposed with an aim to make Indian roads safer.

People will seriously consider an auto for private use. Plenty of air, like a convertible, good protection from sun, its efficient, versatile to move cargo & passengers, super reliable, & easy to park. Yeah unstable, but I trust an auto in my hands than a reckless driver.
I sold my dad's car a few years back. These days when I visit them, I find it hard to get Uber/Ola/auto in time. Too many cancellations. Parents are too old for two wheelers, and a new car is overkill. For people who add very few miles a year, a car makes no sense. An auto made a lot more sense to me. Yes, I know I could have bought a used car.

Also on the topic of life time road tax. It is adding up to be too much. There is all the talk of scrapping cars older than 10 years. Then why call it lifetime. Why not make the registration and tax an annual thing, and much less expensive. This one time tax and fees, inflates the initial ownership costs by a lot.

[Joelinf]

You can mandate 6 airbags. But as long as the structural integrity is compromised, they are of no use. Government should tighten the rules regarding structural integrity. That too in a slow but sure manner.

[ajayc123]

Originally Posted by hemj

Your logic is absolutely right in planet filled with highly educated stephen hawkings and einsteins and ramanujans and aryabhattas. They can think for themselves and make decisions. Not for the current world filled with more than half it's people struggling to feed themselves but want to move from point A to point B quicker than their feet would allow.

Government policy and regulations, if implemented properly, work in the larger interests of the population. So they have a definite place, and I am not agreeing with the free for all to decide idea.

The simplest example that I can think of is traffic intersection. Imagine if the red light are not there and it is free for all.

Also, an Einstein may be an expert in Physics, but he is unlikely to be an expert in all matters of the world. For example, I wouldn’t be surprised if he gets swayed by the marketing talk of a smart sounding car or real estate salesman.

[GST]

Originally Posted by TusharK

Bhargava stated that the company doesn’t make any significant profits on small cars, making them unviable with an increase in costs.

According to Nitin Gadkari, Minister for Road Transport & Highways, India has barely 1% of the vehicles across the globe but records 10% of the world’s road deaths. The 6 airbag norm was proposed with an aim to make Indian roads safer.

There is a lot of sense in allowing people to have the option of a cheap car over buying a bike for their essential commute. It is counter-intuitive to say that people are fools buying cheap unsafe cars: People buy whatever they can afford, and we should be respectful to the idea of them having these choices. Many times we beat Maruti by saying Tata is selling a GNCAP 4-star affordable car. Just for a reference I checked on carwale and this is what I found: The cheapest Tata car costs about 6.5 lacs and the cheapest Maruti costs 3.9 lacs.

We should definitely ask for the best possible safety equipment from a manufacturer but we can not be overly unrealistic. For a lot of people, no matter how much one derides their choices by calling those blings or show-off, many of these choices offer real value proposition to those people: For example, in 2017 I was looking for a car (that suited my needs with least care for show-off or blings!) and among all the choices available to me- after factoring many variables- Ciaz base model was the most affordable and realistic choice for me. I knew it was not the best for safety, but I needed the extra space the car offered due to claustrophobic family members around me who depended on the car for transport, and I needed peace of mind during my ownership.

[pkulkarni.2106]

Originally Posted by ishan12

Going by the same logic, I guess government should also not be in the business of mandating anything safety related in airplanes too, and the onus should be on the passengers to study each airline and pick the safe one, or fly cheap in an unsafe airline? Should the same logic apply to hospitals and pharma industry too? Or even to restaurants and eateries, where people should be free to decide if the place is safe to eat. I guess even theaters and malls also should be free to decide if they should keep any fire safety equipment and let patrons decide of they want to visit or not.

Couldn't agree more, was about to say the same thing.
Personally I think that unless the government intervenes, we'll continue to get unsafe cars. And while we have unsafe cars in the market, every year the cost of them is going to increase, whether or not the manufacturer puts more "airbags".

[mi2n]

If manufactures can hike prices every fortnight on one pretext or the other (generally cost of raw materials, supply chain constraints, tax revisions), why would it be a problem for them to hike prices for adding safety gears? On the contrary, the hike would seem more justified in lieu of added safety kits. Car prices are steadily increasing by an alarming 10% every fiscal as it is. However, at this time, I am more interested for early implementation of mandatory crash tests over mandatory addition of what are, for good reasons, labelled "SRS".

[Jeroen]

From a global perspective; car manufacturers have been dropping small cars from their product portfolio for some time now.

Last Monday news was leaked from Mercedes: They are discontinuing their smallest car, A-class, as from 2025

VAG has announced it will stop development on the VW Up. Skoda Citing and Seat Mii have already been discontinued, Opel discontinued the Karl and the Adam. Renault discontinued the Twingo.

Not many, new real small cars have been launched across the world, in recent years either.

In Europe the total number of small cars produced between 2019-2025 dropped from 1.1 million to just 550000. So almost halved.

It is all down to the same reason. Margins. Small cars just don’t produce enough margin for the manufacturers. Some car manufacturers have sold less cars during the pandemic but with higher margins. e.g. BMW. that’s because they sold a lot less cars, but bigger cars with higher margins.

Manufacturers claim producing small cars is not viable anymore, especially as they need to make the transition to electrical vehicle, which requires massive investments of course.

Jeroen

[whitewing]

Quite a conundrum the Govt has
On safety, the minister expects small cars (most of them being entry level ones) to have safety features on par with premium cars.
If the consequence is that more people either continue moving around in bikes OR extend their budget to buy bigger cars.

Given that the quality of driving and infrastructure (not just tarmac quality) is unlikely to change anytime soon.

Leading to the unintended consequence of lesser safety to those who continue to use bikes and additional fuel burn (assuming a larger % buys ICE cars) due to bigger cars.

Formulating policy is so hard.

[ajayc123]

Very sad direction. It will push the prospective small car customers towards two wheelers, which are even less safer than small cars.

[jalex77]

Why not make it mandatory for rear passengers to wear seat belts and make it compulsory for children under 12 to sit in the rear seats buckled up secure in a child or booster seat first?

What good are six airbags in a car with poor structural rigidity and when rear passengers never use seat belts?
What good are airbags when even toddlers are made to ride in the front seat on someone else's lap?