[aaggoswami]

Originally Posted by anmol2k4

Therefore, this test was NOT conducted on the European model, this was not a PR stunt. They did this because this test will become regulatory requirement in India by 2012. Again this was done on our Desi Nano.

Please refer to the following from the link in the opening post of this thread :

To be strong enough for this demanding impact, the Nano has been equipped with an additional airbag. Further Hickman´s engineers reinforced the front longitudinal structure and added a structure to the front of the vehicle behind the bumper and on the firewall. Another structure is added to the front doors. All of these enhancements are added to the Body-in-White (BIW) on the assembly line for the base vehicle and add 18 kilograms weight to the BIW.

What this means :

1) The car was extensively modified to pass the test so much so that its body in white weight was increased by 18 kg.

2) A member was reinforced and there were three structures that were added :

a) behind the bumper.
b) near firewall
c) in the doors.
d) The front longitudinal structure was reinforced.
e) Airbag was added.

These are quite extensive modifications that are done. I am taking the liberty to post an image of what BODY-IN-WHITE means.



Now I hope that it is clear to everyone that after modifications of this extent, any car with reasonable front crash space can pass the test. I wonder how we are able to call this car safer than M800, and even an Alto. Its comparing extensively modified car with normal stock car. Not fair. I feel that Tata must have done the test on normal Stock car that will be available in showroom.


Now,

Nevertheless, (4)even this version will not be the 2012 announced European version of the Nano. The vehicle for the European market will have 15 centimetres more in length and 5 centimetres more in width. It than will be equipped with a turbo-charged version of the engine, delivering 56 horsepower or approximately 42 kilowatts and 5 gears. (5)It will also be designed to get a four-star rating at the Euro NCAP test.

4) Even so much modified and " test cleared " version is not the one for European market.

5) The version of nano that is expected in Europe in 2012 will be designed to get 4-star rating in EuroNCAP test.

What does this mean :
d) This test is not as per the tough EuroNCAP norms.
e) This is not the version that we will be getting as modifications were done. So this test was done on extensively modified Desi Nano, which IMO, has no significance to us in any means. This is a glorified stunt by Tata.

[jassi]

^^ i quite wanna agree with Aggo - unless someone has a really compelling counter to above :-)

[anmol2k4]

Originally Posted by aaggoswami

Please refer to the following from the link in the opening post of this thread :


What this means :

1) The car was extensively modified to pass the test so much so that its body in white weight was increased by 18 kg.

2) A member was reinforced and there were three structures that were added :

a) behind the bumper.
b) near firewall
c) in the doors.
d) The front longitudinal structure was reinforced.
e) Airbag was added.

These are quite extensive modifications that are done. I am taking the liberty to post an image of what BODY-IN-WHITE means.

Attachment 159837

Now I hope that it is clear to everyone that after modifications of this extent, any car with reasonable front crash space can pass the test. I wonder how we are able to call this car safer than M800, and even an Alto. Its comparing extensively modified car with normal stock car. Not fair. I feel that Tata must have done the test on normal Stock car that will be available in showroom.


Now,


4) Even so much modified and " test cleared " version is not the one for European market.

5) The version of nano that is expected in Europe in 2012 will be designed to get 4-star rating in EuroNCAP test.

What does this mean :
d) This test is not as per the tough EuroNCAP norms.
e) This is not the version that we will be getting as modifications were done. So this test was done on extensively modified Desi Nano, which IMO, has no significance to us in any means. This is a glorified stunt by Tata.

Sir, you are the senior of the forum and i happen to be a noob. And i know my place, but sir you should know that you are being stubborn.

Now i think your arguments on this story are :-

1) This was not EuroNCAP test.
2) The car was extensively modified.
3) Glorified stunt by Tata.
4) We wont get this car.

Sir, i have been wondering what can make you think in this manner. And the only logical conclusion i have come to is :- that you have some grudge against Tata and that is preventing you to read / comprehend the articles you have just quoted.

For your first argument, sir kindly read the heading of this post again, i am posting it below :-

Tata Nano Crash Tested on July 10, in Birmingham. Passed ECE-R 12 specification

Kindly tell me how does this heading, or whatever the ae-plus or autocar.co.uk or autoblog have written is falsely implying that the car was tested for EuroNCAP.

And BTW, how is Tata even involved in this ? Have they told you that Nano was tested for EuroNCAP ?

For your second argument, sir this happens to be the cheapest car in the world and with slight modification it has passed the crash test. Now you have implied that the modification have been too extensive.

Please tell me how does the modification of ~18kg on a body of ~500-600 kg seems to extensive you ?

I have a feeling that you don't happen to be an expert in automobile engineering, nor am I therefore neither of us are right people to pass on the judgment that nano was extensively modified or not.

But extensive or not,how much do you think these modifications will cost ?

As far as the Japanese kei cars are concerned (Which you believe to be safer than Indian Nano), TBH i don't believe that Japanese or any other foreigners will care more about our safety than the Indian companies.

But it seems that you trust videshis over hindustanis when it comes to safety.

Therefore kindly read what a videshi said about Nano's structural integrity :-

The tests were certified by Nic Fasci, type approval engineer working for the UK government’s Vehicle Certification Agency. After the frontal crash, Fasci said: “It looks no different from other cars doing this test. It’s a good crash.”

For the last two arguments, you implied that this was a glorified stunt by Tata and we won't get this car.

I would again request you to read the following :-

Tata engineers brought two modified Nanos to the UK test house MIRA this month to put them through a 50 km/h side impact test and a 56 km/h offset frontal impact test. The two tests are the minimum required for a legal vehicle in Europe and will become the Indian structural safety standard in 2012.

Sir can you read / comprehend the text above ? Because i have serious doubts you do. It has been clearly stated that Tata did this test because passing this test will become mandatory norm in India by 2012.

So we will get this car with these modification soon. And Tata did this because they are getting their cheapest car ready for future norms.

I tried my best sir, to show you what you intentionally or unintentionally overlooked. From here it is up to you to believe whatever you want to believe.

BTW if in the act of rebuttal i have offended you or any other senior of this forum, i would like to apologize in advance.

[jassi]

^^ i quite wanna agree with anmol2k4 - unless someone has a really compelling counter to above :-)

[setuniket]

Originally Posted by anmol2k4

For your second argument, sir this happens to be the cheapest car in the world and with slight modification it has passed the crash test. Now you have implied that the modification have been too extensive.

Sorry to interrupt, Isnt it strage, the car is being modified for pass the tests done. Which means the actual(stock) car which is being sold in India wont be able to clear the crash test.

Originally Posted by anmol2k4

But extensive or not,how much do you think these modifications will cost ?

The question is 'whether TATA will make those changes in the production version(for India) so as have the same standards which this modified version passed? '

Originally Posted by anmol2k4

As far as the Japanese kei cars are concerned (Which you believe to be safer than Indian Nano), TBH i don't believe that Japanese or any other foreigners will care more about our safety than the Indian companies.

Companies care only about their bottomline and nothing else, until and unless we the customers start buying/demanding safer cars or the government regulations, dont expect any company to provide safer cars.

Originally Posted by anmol2k4

But it seems that you trust videshis over hindustanis when it comes to safety.

It about a company, its car and its safety standards.

Originally Posted by anmol2k4

Therefore kindly read what a videshi said about Nano's structural integrity :-

It doesnt matter, when a car crashes, no one I say no expert's comment will save the occupants. Ultimately it will be the car.

Originally Posted by anmol2k4

Sir can you read / comprehend the text above ? Because i have serious doubts you do. It has been clearly stated that Tata did this test because passing this test will become mandatory norm in India by 2012.

so if as claimed by you Indian companies care for our safety, why are they waiting for the 2012 deadline. Implement from DAY ONE. That shows the 'care' by the companies.

Yes I am being critical but then thats for the benefit of car users.

[jassi]

i quite wanna agree with - aah what the - come on guys lets give ourselves a break.
Tata did a great thing by doing these tests for the cheapest car ever. Sure it maybe a marketing gimmick to garner attention from international customers, or maybe they are really testing for 2012 deadline. Either ways they are pro-active and future looking. It maybe unsafe, but still is the cheapest car and in most cases the car won't go past 30kmph anyway.

[aaggoswami]

Originally Posted by anmol2k4

1) For your second argument, sir this happens to be the cheapest car in the world and with slight modification it has passed the crash test. Now you have implied that the modification have been too extensive.

Please tell me how does the modification of ~18kg on a body of ~500-600 kg seems to extensive you ?

2) I have a feeling that you don't happen to be an expert in automobile engineering, nor am I therefore neither of us are right people to pass on the judgment that nano was extensively modified or not.

But extensive or not,how much do you think these modifications will cost ?

3) As far as the Japanese kei cars are concerned (Which you believe to be safer than Indian Nano), TBH i don't believe that Japanese or any other foreigners will care more about our safety than the Indian companies.

4) Sir can you read / comprehend the text above ? Because i have serious doubts you do. It has been clearly stated that Tata did this test because passing this test will become mandatory norm in India by 2012.


5) BTW if in the act of rebuttal i have offended you or any other senior of this forum, i would like to apologize in advance.

1) 500-600kg weight is the kerb weight i.e. with engine, seats, transmission, door, etc.

Body in white is the diagram I am posted above. Body in white it the main unitary body in which seats, transmission, engine, doors, etc. will be installed. So 600kg is the weight of the car, not body in white. Globally manufacturers are trying to reduce the body in white weight. Body in white is much lighter than kerb weight of the car. So 18 kg is not a small amount.
Now adding 18 kg to body in white means quite a bit of modifications. I have listed them above so will not list them down again. My intention of putting body in white image in my above post is to make everybody understand that

a) Body in white is much ligher than kerb weight of the car.

b) Reinforcing doors, front longitudinal members and adding members can significantly stop intrusion into cabin and help in energy absorption.

I hope I have made a few thing clear. Now somethings about monocoque construction. The construction is done such that each and every structural member supports the members adjacent to it. this way the impact energy is
c) Absorbed better.
d) Deviated away from passenger cell.
Maximum effort is made to let crumple zones absorb energy and maximum efforts are made to make the passenger cell as rigid as possible to stop intrusion.

Here addition of structural members and reinforcement of front member helps in improving the safety result.

2) Yes, missing automotive branch for studies after 10+2 is a very very negative step in my academic career and also you are absolutely correct that I am not an automotive expert. But please refer to point no. 1 of my reply and you will come to know that atleast my arguments have some weight this time around.

3) The list of active safety equipments in Vista are proof enough that Indian companies are not the best in offering safety. Even foreign manufacturers are not able to provide a lot. Recently launched i20 is one step forward.

4) Agreed. They will become the norm. And this test was carried out to prove nano meets the regulations ?
I say NO. Because modifications were carried out.

e) Is this the Nano, i.e. modified Nano going to hit the streets in India ? Tata never told me anything, but I am sure they never did tell you a thing or two.

f) If Nano is safe ( and people here have actually appreciated the car ), why changes were made in the first place ?

If Tata fails to deliver this Nano in India before 2012, then can we say that just like M800, this nano was never tested for safety ?

2012 regulations or not, my point is clear and this time I am making a very sincere attempt to summarize my point :

g) The stock Nano, that is supposed to hit our streets, without modifications must appear for EuroNCAP crash testing. After the rating for that Nano is available, I will agree that Nano is safe.

Right now I believe nano is not safe enough as even for not a full fledged 64 kmph test, they had to make changes and add structural components.

5) Forget this issue here in this discussion.

[lancer_rit]

I don't understand some of the -ve comments on the nano here, frankly. Let's go by facts:

* Nano is ARAI certified for current Indian safety norms
- so Tata has done what any other manufacturer has done for their Indian vehicle model - If you start applying need to pass Euro NCAP, then most Maruti models will fail badly.

* Indian govt is looking to improve safety regulations to catch up with higher safety requirements in many parts of the world. Step in the right direction, I say.

* Tata is making and evaluating modifications to Nano that will meet the improved standards - Good I say, since they have started well in advance of the deadline for it. We can hope that Tata will not wait for 2012 deadline, but make this available well in advance - we have to wait and see.

* The Nano with modifications met the ECE-R12 crash test norms. Good achievement I say. 18kg difference in weight is not that high (body-in-white weight is still a significant part of the kerb weight). I guess Tata may make some more experiments with the structures to see if they can reduce the additional weight

* No one has tested for EuroNCAP or claimed to have. The Europa Nano will be significantly redesigned to meet Euro NCAP needs and that has not a direct bearing on Indian nano.

[Mayavi]

Originally Posted by setuniket

Sorry to interrupt, Isnt it strage, the car is being modified for pass the tests done. Which means the actual(stock) car which is being sold in India wont be able to clear the crash test.

It isn't strange. What is strange is that you cannot read a simple report. TATA Nano does not have to clear any Euro crash tests to be sold in India. What it has to pass is Indian regulations set by ARAI and it did. I guess it did because
1. TATA crash tests all their vehicles
2. TATA is the only Indian company to have a crash test facility. If they weren't going to test their vehicles and improve their crash worthiness, they wouldn't bother to build a separate facility.
3. It is being allowed to be sold in the market.

Now for the question of modifying the car. I do not understand that Crash test regulations but if understand my English correctly, the car is tested in Europe to pass the European regulations. It so happens that India is going to adopt the same regulations in 2012. So in essence, TATA is working in advance to make sure that their model passes the regulation in 2012!! Tell me now, aren't you proud of the company that is thinking ahead and planning for the future?

Bottom line, The car passes current safety regulations. Had Nano been revealed three years back, we would have read how an under development model was crash tested so that it can pass the 2009 safety regulations. Unfortunately, the car wasn't public in 2006, so the crash tests are not well publicized (I do think that TATA should publicize their crash test on all cars).
Now it is public and we are following Nano and we find that they are preparing it for 2012. What is the problem??

[srh]

Originally Posted by aaggoswami

1)
Body in white is the diagram I am posted above. Body in white it the main unitary body in which seats, transmission, engine, doors, etc. will be installed.

Small correction here. Body in white (BIW) includes other components like doors, bonnet etc. BIW is the body shell which generally goes for anti corrosion treatment and then for painting (with doors, bonnet, hatch fitted on it)

[aaggoswami]

Originally Posted by lancer_rit

1) If you start applying need to pass Euro NCAP, then most Maruti models will fail badly.

2) Indian govt is looking to improve safety regulations to catch up with higher safety requirements in many parts of the world. Step in the right direction, I say.

3) Tata is making and evaluating modifications to Nano that will meet the improved standards - Good I say, since they have started well in advance of the deadline for it. We can hope that Tata will not wait for 2012 deadline, but make this available well in advance - we have to wait and see.

4) The Nano with modifications met the ECE-R12 crash test norms. Good achievement I say. 18kg difference in weight is not that high (body-in-white weight is still a significant part of the kerb weight). I guess Tata may make some more experiments with the structures to see if they can reduce the additional weight

5) No one has tested for EuroNCAP or claimed to have. The Europa Nano will be significantly redesigned to meet Euro NCAP needs and that has not a direct bearing on Indian nano.

1) Can you please elaborate ? But I would love to see that if Maruti comes in discussion, it is with reference with Nano.

2) They are still not up to date in any standards. Rather than wait till 2012, can Indian government pay EuroNCAP to let them test all cars manufactured in India ? This will be a good beginning. Also the standards must be as good as EuroNCAP is following.
We are quite late to start and are not even reasonably quick in progress in automotive safety.

3) Yes, wait and watch.

4) Its matter of how and what is installed. Here the front end was worked upon that helped in improving results. Let say that that they put in two 10 kg dumbbells from gym and strap on the roof. Will this improve results. In case of members being reinforced and new members added, then this much weight difference can give misleading results. And if 18kg is not so significant, why even add it to increase kinetic energy ? What was the need to add it ?

5) Exactly, so how this result or rating is helpful to us. I say it has no meaning for us unless and untill this type of Nano ( with structural modifications ) is sold in India.

[extreme_torque]

@aggoswami..... the fact remains Nano matches or exceeds the current indian crash test requirements and will meet the 2012 norms when they are implemented... simple! Keep in mind that we are talking about a car that was designed from grounds up to be a 1 lakh rupee car.
Its just ridiculous and dissapointing how we undermine our achievements.

[anmol2k4]

Originally Posted by setuniket

Sorry to interrupt, Isnt it strage, the car is being modified for pass the tests done. Which means the actual(stock) car which is being sold in India wont be able to clear the crash test.

Wrong, for your kind information a) It is not unusual for car companies including likes of BMW to modify their cars before the crash test. b) Tata Nano have already passed the ARAI's mandatory crash test. c) They have conducted this test to prepare the Nano for 2012 norms.

The question is 'whether TATA will make those changes in the production version(for India) so as have the same standards which this modified version passed? '

I seriously fail to understand your logic, do you think Tata is doing some tamasha ? Do you think after investing $400 million in the development of the car, 2000 crores in production and after getting Nano passed for ECE-R 12 they will simply wind up production when in 2012 the ECE-R 12 specification will become mandatory ?

Companies care only about their bottomline and nothing else, until and unless we the customers start buying/demanding safer cars or the government regulations, dont expect any company to provide safer cars.

Right, then why are you expecting them to comply with future norms ? And what do you think Ratan Tata mean't when he said "We are not doing this for charity" ? While complying with safety norms this car still manages to be cheaper than the videshi kei cars on the road.

It about a company, its car and its safety standards.

In our country safety norms are same for all companies(desi or videshi), and Tata Nano complies with same safety norms.

It doesnt matter, when a car crashes, no one I say no expert's comment will save the occupants. Ultimately it will be the car.

It may not matter to you but to most people verdict of bodies like ARAI, NHTSA, EuroNCAP and VCA matters a lot if they care enough about safety. But tell me if such people's review of crash test does not matter to you then why do you even care about Nano passing the test ?

so if as claimed by you Indian companies care for our safety, why are they waiting for the 2012 deadline. Implement from DAY ONE. That shows the 'care' by the companies.

WT@ ? There is no deadline, those norms may or may not be enforced from 2012. And the companies will care about implementing future norms when Indian buyers will be ready to dole out more money.

Yes I am being critical but then thats for the benefit of car users.

I am sorry, but you are being stupid. World haven't even figured out how Tata made it possible for Indian masses to afford a safe all weather means of transport and you think Tata don't care because they are not implementing future safety norms in their present line up of cars.

I truly believe that Tata cares a lot, they cared about the bottom of Pyramid which the world neglected.

[anmol2k4]

Originally Posted by aaggoswami

1) 500-600kg weight is the kerb weight i.e. with engine, seats, transmission, door, etc.

Body in white is the diagram I am posted above. Body in white it the main unitary body in which seats, transmission, engine, doors, etc. will be installed. So 600kg is the weight of the car, not body in white. Globally manufacturers are trying to reduce the body in white weight. Body in white is much lighter than kerb weight of the car. So 18 kg is not a small amount.
Now adding 18 kg to body in white means quite a bit of modifications. I have listed them above so will not list them down again. My intention of putting body in white image in my above post is to make everybody understand that


a) Body in white is much ligher than kerb weight of the car.

b) Reinforcing doors, front longitudinal members and adding members can significantly stop intrusion into cabin and help in energy absorption.

I hope I have made a few thing clear. Now somethings about monocoque construction. The construction is done such that each and every structural member supports the members adjacent to it. this way the impact energy is
c) Absorbed better.
d) Deviated away from passenger cell.
Maximum effort is made to let crumple zones absorb energy and maximum efforts are made to make the passenger cell as rigid as possible to stop intrusion.

Here addition of structural members and reinforcement of front member helps in improving the safety result.

Like i said in my last post, neither of us is an automotive engineer that is why i made an effort to do simple google search and gather some information of stuff we are debating about. But it seems you didn't do the same, if you would have you would have known that the body in white weight is the most substantial part of kerb weight. And also Body in White includes the doors, the boot / bonnet lids, the bumpers.

In most cars, of the total weight around 70-80% is body in white weight. So, of nano's total weight which is above 600kg, the body in white weight would be around ~450kgs and 18 kgs is only 4% of that. I don't understand how you can claim that modifications which increased nano weight by only 4% is "excessive" even when you aren't an automotive engineer.

Originally Posted by aaggoswami

3) The list of active safety equipments in Vista are proof enough that Indian companies are not the best in offering safety. Even foreign manufacturers are not able to provide a lot. Recently launched i20 is one step forward.

What is best in safety ? Korean ?. Very few cars are best in safety. Indian cars comply with Indian norms, and as the Indian buyers is extremely sensitive to price car companies don't sell what isn't mandatory. And these videshi companies don't give safety equipments for free, and Nano was made for price conscious buyer in mind.

Originally Posted by aaggoswami

4) Agreed. They will become the norm. And this test was carried out to prove nano meets the regulations ?
I say NO. Because modifications were carried out.

Modification which only increased weight by ~4% and companies do that as norms change, i don't quite understand why this irks you so much.

Originally Posted by aaggoswami

e) Is this the Nano, i.e. modified Nano going to hit the streets in India ? Tata never told me anything, but I am sure they never did tell you a thing or two.

How hard is to read ? Please tell me how many time i have to point out the following quote :-

Tata engineers brought two modified Nanos to the UK test house MIRA this month to put them through a 50 km/h side impact test and a 56 km/h offset frontal impact test. The two tests are the minimum required for a legal vehicle in Europe and will become the Indian structural safety standard in 2012.

Seriously this is becoming quite irritating. Do you expect Tatas to wind up production when ECE-R 12 become mandatory even though they have invested around one BILLION dollars in this car project even when this car passes the ECE-R 12 with slight modification.

Originally Posted by aaggoswami

f) If Nano is safe ( and people here have actually appreciated the car ), why changes were made in the first place ?

Are you trolling ? Their car already passes ARAI's crash test and they made slight changes so that it passes ECE-R 12 which will be norm in 2012. How hard is this to understand ?

Originally Posted by aaggoswami

If Tata fails to deliver this Nano in India before 2012, then can we say that just like M800, this nano was never tested for safety ?

Dude, you are seriously trolling. Do you expect Tatas to wind up production when ECE-R 12 become mandatory even though they have invested around one BILLION dollars in this car project even though this car passes the ECE-R 12 with slight modification.

Originally Posted by aaggoswami

g) The stock Nano, that is supposed to hit our streets, without modifications must appear for EuroNCAP crash testing. After the rating for that Nano is available, I will agree that Nano is safe.

Tata Nano is made for India, and it complies with Indian(ARAI) norms and with only slight changes it even complies with ECE-R 12. The one which will be sold in Europe will comply with the norms of Europe, the one which will be sold in US will comply with NHTSA's norms and in UK it will comply with VCA's norms and people only care about ARAI, NHTSA, EuroNCAP and VCA verdict.

Originally Posted by aaggoswami

5) Forget this issue here in this discussion.

[salilpawar1]

The points are fair and simple. I don't understand the merit of these arguments from both sides.

The current Indian Nano conforms to Indian safety norms laid down by the Motor Vehicles Act / ARAI. It might not be safe as per the current European norms. At the end of the day, the Indian Nano is anyday safer than a scooter which is its target audience. If anybody still thinks that the current Indian Nano is not a safe car, he/she can buy another car. India is a free country. Tata is doing just what all other economy car manufacturers are doing: fulfill the minimum safety requirements laid down by the laws of the country.

Now if we come back to the question of morality on the part of Tata Motors, Tata would be doing great injustice if they are marketing these test results to promote the current version of the Nano being sold in India. As of now, they are not doing it. So, I see no harm.

I don't see this test as a publicity stunt specially for the Indian market. If at all it is a stunt, it is more for the European market which still has its apprehensions about the Nano's production feasibility upto European specifications.

Guys, it's that simple. You can go on to argue further with all the technical gibberish: white body weight, ECE-R12 and what not.