[Nithesh_M]

Problem with making wider cars is that they'll eat up more space on narrow roads of ours. Decongestion should be the goal. The sub 4m rule however idiotic kind of helped us small town folks with narrow roads.

[Sudarshan42]

If anything we should be going smaller, not wider or longer! Our fantastic dual-carriageway road network and lack of parking spaces would only mean bigger cars would be more of a hindrance than a convenience.

Case in point- I moved from a WagonR to a Swift, and now to a Baleno. With each increase in width, I hesitated to venture into even moderately wide roads in Bangalore out of fear of scraping something or not finding adequate parking. Scooter ki jai.

Reminds me of this classic:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dJfS...hannel=TopGear

...and its sequel:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aFdB...hannel=TopGear

[landcruiser123]

As paragsachania says, the internal dimensions matter too. Wider cars would increase the turning radius. It'll be more difficult to get in & out of parking lots & squeezing into tight spaces. We can't redesign our whole infrastructure. Also, I had to be more watchful while driving dad's Innova vs mom's Getz.

Also, entry-level cars are - entry level. I'm sure customers prioritize cheap maintenance, high fuel economy, ease of driving (new drivers), and decent performance - all possible with a small engine powering a lighter, smaller car.

Just don't buy an Alto 800 and expect it to be a Baleno or a Yaris to be a Camry.

[fhdowntheline]

I am surprised no one has mentioned the Duster which is still on sale, and is certainly better than others for reasonable comfort in the rear seat- much better than Creta/Seltos/Compass on that count.It has thinner door panels than say the Creta or Compass and so doesnt feel as robust from the 'thud' point of view.

[PrasannaDhana]

I drive one of the most roomy SUVs in the country, that is 1965 mm in width. Seating 3 in the back seat is a cake walk, making 4 fit adults sit is also pretty much comfortable. But are wider cars better in other ways?(driving ease etc)


No! Specially on rural roads and in tight urban spaces. Just have a look at the screengrab from my Storme's dashcam, that's the road width and any other vehicle has to get off the road to let me pass and vice versa. A pain at times!



Meanwhile my ciaz is just 1730 mm and even then, it could comfortably seat 3 at the back. 1750 mm for smaller cars(hatches and sedans) and 1850 mm for MPVs / SUVs would be ideal if you ask me. Just take rapid/vento in comparison to the ciaz/city, they feel cramped at once you sit in them.

>2000 mm will be a disaster to your peace of mind, in my opinion. When I switch over to my Kwid from my storme, suddenly the roads feel so big and wide So you lose some and gain some.

[roy_libran]

Wider Cars? Let's leave aside the space aspect and think of the dynamic aspects as well.

For most Road use (High Grip) situations, the narrower wheelbase would have the advantage by being more agile and allows quicker weight transfer.
For many Low(er) traction (Typically Off Road) situations a wider wheelbase translates to better chassis flex and thus grip.
At the same time a wider wheelbase will impact maneuverability and make tackling both narrow gullies and narrow trails challenging.

While looking at car wheelbases lets not forget that the rectangular footprint is designed to carry mass at high speeds in one direction only. Changing the dimension of that rectangle isn't possible beyond a point without negatively affecting the dynamic stability.

[Lowflyer23]

My perspective is that the cars we are getting in terms of width are just fine, people need to understand that a car is not a cardboard box with the same volume inside-out. There are several reasons your car doors are thick, they have sound deadening materials, power window assemblies, side impact beams, etc.

Also, everybody likes plus sized wide American SUVs from far off but few people here would be able to keep their calm when driving a (relatively) smaller fortuner in a city like NCR.

Equally, I must add that cars shouldn't be too narrow as it hampers the handling and composure greatly.

[GeeTee TSI]

Giving priority to packaging, I think seat width is a better measure of roominess than vehicle width (if only manufacturers published such information)

On the subject of width and packaging, Fiat Multipla comes to mind for its innovative front row of 3 seats. But then, markets didn't take kindly to it!

[rkv_2401]

Originally Posted by PrasannaDhana

Meanwhile my ciaz is just 1730 mm and even then, it could comfortably seat 3 at the back. Just take rapid/vento in comparison to the ciaz/city, they feel cramped at once you sit in them.

The Vento is 1700mm wide, surely you won't be able to notice a difference of 3cm? (https://www.volkswagen.co.in/idhub/content/dam/onehub_pkw/importers/in/pdf/Vento-Brochure-June.pdf)
The Ciaz has a 10cm longer wheelbase, that's probably a bigger contributor to why it feels more spacious.

This proves the point that it's not just a dimension head-to-head comparison, it's rather up to the manufacturer's design and packaging of the interior. As ajaiD pointed out in his post on the thread, the Ambassador was 'only' 1660mm wide and could seat 3 comfortably, whereas the Compass is 1820mm but isn't as comfortable for 3 abreast.

I have a personal example as well. My Type-I Elantra is 1725mm wide, and my friend who is 6'1 is able to scrunch up his legs and lie down horizontally(and sleep) in the back of that car - whereas I'm 5'8", and just can't find the space to do the same in my Vento.

I've found that most compact(C2) and D1-segment sedans are within 10-20cm of each other along any dimension - it's how that space is utilized that seems to make all the difference. Even the BMW 3 Gran Limo is only 12 cm longer than the regular 3 series! (https://www.team-bhp.com/forum/india...1-50-lakh.html (BMW 3 Series Gran Limousine launched at Rs. 51.50 lakh))

[PrideRed]

Originally Posted by PrasannaDhana

Meanwhile my ciaz is just 1730 mm and even then, it could comfortably seat 3 at the back. 1750 mm for smaller cars(hatches and sedans) and 1850 mm for MPVs / SUVs would be ideal if you ask me. Just take rapid/vento in comparison to the ciaz/city, they feel cramped at once you sit in them.

>2000 mm will be a disaster to your peace of mind, in my opinion. When I switch over to my Kwid from my storme, suddenly the roads feel so big and wide So you lose some and gain some.

So there are two things, absolute width and width inside cabin. Most of the full size SUV's are more than 2000mm wide including ORVM, which is what would matter when driving in congested roads. For interior space for 3 to be seated, as you mentioned size of Ciaz is pretty comfortable. The Storme as i recall is 1855mm in width and 1965 with side steps, so technically its about 120mm wider.

[PrasannaDhana]

Originally Posted by PrideRed

. The Storme as i recall is 1855mm in width and 1965 with side steps, so technically its about 120mm wider.

Yup, I knew that. I was talking about the ease of driving it through congested roads when I mentioned 1965 mm. Hence the external dimensions, and as you rightly said, adding the ORVMs makes things worse in traffic.

[HooghlyBoy]

In Indian roads, wider cars will be disastrous. My garage had 1470 mm Wide Zen Estilo 2007 model to begin with. Then We bought a 1735mm Wide SX4 2010 and I became extra cautious in driving through narrower roads, particularly in suburbs of Kolkata. Recently when we were thinking of a new car, We bought 1680mm Wide Hyundai Aura over 1811mm Wide Tata Nexon as it would be easier to park in our garage where we need to parallel park both our cars. We are not US of A (with wide Highways, wide city roads and ample parking spaces) but India (poorly maintained City Roads, narrow state highways and hardly 10% cars having covered parking) so we don't have the luxury of Wider cars.

Frankly speaking I am looking for a dip in petrol prices ASAP so that I keep enjoying my drives rather than look for wider cars.

[rajshenoy]

Not sure if wider car is the solution here. Various factors such as leg room, shoulder room, head room, floor tunnel, recline angle, knee support, body roll etc. together decide how comfortable rear seat is over a long journey.

irrespective of the categories, here are the Indian cars i personally found spacious for 3 at the back over long journeys

Maruti Ciaz, Toyota Etios twins, TATA Indica/go, Corolla altis, TATA harrier/Safari, Innova, Marazzo etc.

[TheVegabond]

When it comes cabin space nothing beats Honda, IMHO. Take any Honda car and compare within the segment, you will be surprised by the amount of space in the Honda car.

So, more than the car width it's the way the cabin has been designed that defines the space and comfort in any car. And, Honda seems to have mastered it. Dare I say, WRV has a more spacious cabin than the Creta.

[Kln]

Originally Posted by TheVegabond

When it comes cabin space nothing beats Honda, IMHO .

100% agreed. That's why the Jazz is such a strong, solid car for any small family of 4 or 5, especially the CVT. The first time we sat in a Jazz for a TD, I (6'2", heavy build) was sitting behind, and the Missus was driving. It is such a great, spacious car that I was absolutely taken aback by the ease with with my legs fit in in the back. It was especially more striking because we took the TD right after having sat in a Baleno.

I still recommend the Jazz CVT to anyone looking for a reliable daily beater.