Using a poorly/unrated GNCAP car as a city driver

On Indian roads, the bigger you are, generally the safer you are. An unrated economy hatchback is still 50 times safer than a motorcycle.

GTO recently shared this with other enthusiasts.

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)

Here's what BHPian Marshall had to say on the matter:

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.

Here's what BHPian Raghu_M had to say on the matter:

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!

Here's what BHPian zhopudey had to stay on the matter:

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.

Here's what BHPian TrackDay had to say on the mater:

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.

Here's what BHPian SmartCat had to say on the matter:

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.

Read BHPian comments for more insights and information.