[sunsetorange]

Originally Posted by nakul0888

I somehow don't get the point of this thread.

If in a family, if the guy is making most of the money, isn't it fair that he gets to have the more expensive car. I don't see anything wrong with it.
Of course there is usually a norm in the degree of difference of both the parties' cars here.

I mean if the guy decides to buy himself a 5 series and gifts his wife an alto, then there are some moral issues there.

But if he drives a swift and gifts his wife an eon or something, there is nothing morally wrong in that. Of course if he is making his purchase with his wife's money and then keeping the better car for himself, then he is a douchebag.

Consider this example, a guy has a budget to buy a known safe car and poorly built car. He can't stretch beyond this budget. He can

1) buy himself better car, gift his wife inferior car.
2) buy two inferior cars, and save some money.
3) gift the wife the better car, get himself inferior car

No. 2 is obviously a poor choice. Both are in unsafe cars. But there won't be any guilty feelings between the two.

No.1 is the one I agree with. The higher earning partner gets the better car. Be it wife or husband. They earned it, they work harder, they make more money, they are paying for it. Fair deal I would say.

No. 3 can be justified in a " I am sacrificing everything for my loved one " kind of thinking.
Personally I don't agree with it. If you are making most of the money in your house, you deserve to treat yourself to the stuff you want if you got the cash for it. But you should not neglect your partner. You should get him/her something "reasonable" too in case you don't have infinite money like Ambanis, which most people don't. This " reasonability" will differ from people to people. But there is no obligation on the higher earning partners to treat to the other the exact same amount of goodies that they are getting since they simply don't have the budget for it. If the other person disagrees with this even though he/she is being treated fairly then they are the ones who are being unreasonable.

In the aforementioned example the safest option for the wife since her husband CANNOT afford two good cars would be taking the public transport. I don't see any other reasonable way. No.3 would be unreasonable towards the husband in my opinion.

I would say it is a matter of priorities.
I hop around town in narrow streets and lanes on my Figo Exi (No ABS/airbags )while my wife goes to her clinic and picks up the kids from school in a Vento highline. It gives me peace of mind to know that they are safer on the road.
It is another matter that the Vento runs up lesser kilometres everyday and is saved from the frequent scratches on the body my Figo suffers in the lanes.

At the end of the day, peace of mind really matters.

[AirWind]

IMHO, everybody needs a safe vehicle, there should be no exceptions - period!

[apachelongbow]

this entire thread is turning on its head so to speak. What safety are we speaking about? First of all are we traveling only in our cars? Don't we take public transport (buses, trains or cabs/autos) frequently? Do we have any kind of safety features on these vehicles? How many among us transport their kids to school on school buses or worse in those tin box ominis and rickshaws? Do we have any safety features on these contraptions? How many among us travel on unsafe commuter bikes and scooters to work each day? Do we have anything apart from helmets to protect us?

Safety has to be integrated into the very fabric of our social lives. Our roads need to be safe, well lit, marked and free of obstructions. Our public transport needs to be comfortable, safe and have all essential safety equipments (lets start with seatbelts/lapbelts for all passengers first). Our cabs need to have the latest in safety devices, rickshaws and other unsafe contraptions need to be kicked out. School children must not be transported like cattle in small vans. Trucks must not enter cities. The list is endless. Only when we start behaving like civilized societies can we think and decide how safe our cars need to be, and who should buy what.
In today's road a driver in a Mercedes is equally unsafe as a driver in a 3rd hand 800. After all his biggest safety feature is the nimbu mirchi hanging down the front end of his car!!!

[Jeroen]

Let me add my thoughts to this interesting thread. It was interesting to see some of the posts, especially those eluding to the fact that he/she who brings in the most money is entitled to the biggest car. I think the term "that is only fair" was used.

We will have been married for 33 years at the end of this year. My wife worked for aboutprobably about twenty years. We both had jobs when we started dating, when we got married. Even after our first son was born she continued to work, but with the second and the third, she felt she wanted to stay home for some years, raise the kids etc. In the end that is a decision we took as a couple. I could not have pursued my career, unless my wife stopped hers. Whatever money was coming into our household, from one or two salaris, irrespective who's salary (I've been unemployed for a while whilst my wife held a full time job and did some consultancy) all the money is ours and we decide how it gets spend. It is not relevant who earned it.

My wife is not interested in cars really and she doesnt like to drive any big cars, with the exception of our Jeep Cherokee. So my Mercedes, Audi's, Jaguars and BMWs never hold any interest for her. Even so, she knows what cars she likes, she just choses them on completely different critiria then I do.

The one thing she is wary of, is her car breaking down. I have never ever bought a new car for myself, (my company (lease) cars were always new, but I dont pay for those). But my wife prefers new(er) cars as she believes they are more reliable. For her safety, is mostly about reliability. Once, she drove our Volve 340 and it broke down on the motorway with her and our three small children in it. She abandoned the car, put the family in a taxi, phoned me and told me in no uncertain terms that she would not ever drive that car again. So I went out and bought her a new one.

I used to drive upward of 75-80.000 kms a year, whereas my wife rarely does more then 6-8.000 km. I also had some health isues due to this high mileage, so to some extend that all determined what sort of car I could/would be driving. My wife was alwasy very supportive in ensuring I got an appropiote car for the mileage and my health.

If we would go by statistics alone, in the west, there are a few rules of thumb:
- Insurance companies will tell you, you are most likely involved in accidents during the first five years after obtaining your drivers license.
- Women drivers, even when normalized for mileage, will have fewer serious accidents then men. They might have more small dings and scratches

In our family that is true as well. All my kids have been in various fender benders during the first few years of them hitting the road. Also, my wife has clocked up quite a number of smaller accidents. In all those years I have been driving I have been involved in just a few accidents, but those few accidents were serious ones, involving totalling a Ford Mondeo and a Audi A4 or A6. In both cases, apart from some bruises, I was unhurt.

So in our family who gets what car is always a joint decision based on some rationale (i.e. mileage), some not so rational (a new car is more reliable then an old/second hand one) and a lot of personal preference, budgets and usually very little to do with safety features.

I also have a few Classic Cars and we easily totalled 10-15.000 kms per year with those as well. No safety features at all! No airbags, no ABS, no crumple zone etc.

To come back to the original question, who needs a safe car - an expert of a novice? I'm not sure what the definition is, but I suspect it has something to do with years of experience? Going by that, based on Western statistics, it is actually the expert (i.e. lots of years of driving experience and mileage) that, statistically speaking, has the biggest chance of being in a serious accident. My own example proves that too!

I would look at it from a somewhat different angle as well. I think the most important aspect of a car is to find one that suits one's overall preferences. My wife isn't comfortable driving my big flashy (very safe) cars. On those few occassions when she did drive them, it was a strain on her, she is nervous, she makes mistakes etc. Safety comes first and foremost through the mindset of the driver. If the car just isn't to your liking, to big, too powerfull, I would think by definition that has a big impact on how safe you would be on the road, irrespective of the technical passive and active safety features of said car.

My wife did enjoy driving our 1998 Jeep Cherokee. That is not a safe car by any modern definition. It has leaf sprung rear suspension, terrrible brakes, no ABS, no nothing really. But she could get herself very comfortable behind the steering wheel, the controls were very light, She sits upright, so she could see all four corners of the car. So she felt in control and that peace of mind is probably more important for being safe on the road.

Jeroen

[Rajeevraj]

Originally Posted by Jeroen

My wife isn't comfortable driving my big flashy (very safe) cars. On those few occassions when she did drive them, it was a strain on her, she is nervous, she makes mistakes etc. Safety comes first and foremost through the mindset of the driver. If the car just isn't to your liking, to big, too powerfull, I would think by definition that has a big impact on how safe you would be on the road, irrespective of the technical passive and active safety features of said car.

Lovely post. Can totally relate to the above point. I drive a Vento TSI DSG (Not really a big flashy car by pure definition). But for my wife it is too big, too new and too powerful and driving it is a strain for her.

She was much more comfortable driving my earlier SX4 which was bigger, heavier and a manual. It was a pre owned car and being a Maruti, she felt that it would be easier and cheaper to fix. So she was always more relaxed in it.

[MunnabhaiMBBS]

Face it :
- We live in a country where no one follows the traffic rules unless one spots the cop 200 meters ahead! (Exceptions are always there)
- We live in a country where everyone curses a person following the traffic rules (Shameless honking at traffic signals)
- We live in a country where getting a driving license is easier than buying grocery (True skills are never assessed)
- We live in a country where unskilled people handle mean machines (Autos, cabs, buses, trucks, tempos)
- We live in a country where readily available vehicle loans result into ever increasing number of vehicles on narrow roads

So what?
- No one can drive at ease during daytime in most of the cities
- You never know how the other person will manoeuvre his/her machine

Now what to do?
- Better care for yourself and your family members
- Take a stand, don't ever let others pressurize you to break traffic rules
- Come out of tendency of buying a cheap car for wife / dad with minimal safety rating /features
- Go for additional safety features by spending extra $$$
- Install a dashcam for documentation purpose
- Paste Conspicuity tapes to increase visibility at night
- Basic thing, Check tail lamps, indicators, head lamps, air pressure on weekly basis
- And please don't be adamant on stretching the tyre life, immediately change them as per the requirement

Happy driving!

[ashishs]

To anyone who is planning to buy a car without airbags.

I was in the same boat as you three years ago when I bought my swift VDI. I was naive and applied the logic that i will not be in accident as I drive safe so I dont need the airbags. Let me tell you in advance that thankfully I have not been in any accident which required airbags. I still however fear everyday and hope that I do not get into one. Initially the amount of money that we save on taking a car one trim lower seems like a big deal. It is however nothing compared to the peace of mind that you lose later. I am now thinking of upgrading from my three year old swift and the primary reason is the lack of safety features. As our circumstances become better the small amount of money we save by buying a car without safety features seems so insignificant. Within the next year as soon as I can manage the finances I am upgrading and the primary requirement is dual airbags and ABS etc . I can compromise on everything else.

[vb-saan]

Originally Posted by Jeroen

Let me add my thoughts to this interesting thread. It was interesting to see some of the posts, especially those eluding to the fact that he/she who brings in the most money is entitled to the biggest car. I think the term "that is only fair" was used.

Excellent post Jeroen! Thank you.

Originally Posted by Jeroen

To come back to the original question, who needs a safe car - an expert of a novice? I'm not sure what the definition is, but I suspect it has something to do with years of experience? Going by that, based on Western statistics, it is actually the expert (i.e. lots of years of driving experience and mileage) that, statistically speaking, has the biggest chance of being in a serious accident. My own example proves that too!

That's an interesting viewpoint - drawn from your own experience. And it does make sense

Originally Posted by Jeroen

My wife did enjoy driving our 1998 Jeep Cherokee. That is not a safe car by any modern definition. It has leaf sprung rear suspension, terrrible brakes, no ABS, no nothing really. But she could get herself very comfortable behind the steering wheel, the controls were very light, She sits upright, so she could see all four corners of the car. So she felt in control and that peace of mind is probably more important for being safe on the road.

True, in my recent trip to the US, similar sentiment was echoed by my colleague there. She drives a 7 seater Jeep Commander, and mentioned that she'll never go back to a conventional small sedan. According to her the SUV is so easy to drive, give commanding view and seating position, and offers great peace of mind.

[Jeeper1941]

Originally Posted by vb-san

True, in my recent trip to the US, similar sentiment was echoed by my colleague there. She drives a 7 seater Jeep Commander, and mentioned that she'll never go back to a conventional small sedan. According to her the SUV is so easy to drive, give commanding view and seating position, and offers great peace of mind.

Except for the fact that it is just a perception of safety. SUVs represent a greater risk to other road users and are more prone to rollovers. Also the fact that SUV drivers "can look down" on other drivers is very powerful psychologically and adds to this perception of safety.

http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases...0514135417.htm

http://www.safetyhumanfactors.org/wp...nzola20101.pdf

www.atrf.info/papers/2006/2006_thomas_walton.pdf

Getting back to the topic though, I think it has all to do with the attitude of the driver, irrespective of the kind of car (including SUVs). Recent research done by the London School of Economics and Goodyear identified 7 different driving personalities. All of us here will sure fit into many of these personalities!

http://www.goodyear.eu/corporate_eme...s-roads_178422

[V.Narayan]

Novices are more likely to get into silly spots that cause a safety problem. This could be due to inexperience or lack of confidence or, if they are eager or young enough, due to over confidence. The novice needs the safer car I believe. Most, though not all, of my 'stupid' moments in driving were in my first few years and some driven by the voltage of youth were really idiotic things. Now I worry that my children may be doing exactly the same thing!

In our family we have a twist to this situation. My wife doesn't drive - tried to learn but didn't succeed and as we have had a driver(s) forever her enthusiasm to learn petered out very rapidly. The family & wifey have always used the bigger car in the household - Cielo, Opel Astra, Laura and now Superb as I feel better they have the car with the safety features and strength. My chariot over the years was M800, Padmini, Corsa and now Jazz. Wife does a lot of short distance inter-town travel so the bigger car goes without question. It is good to see safety featuring up in the minds of the Indian customer. Seatbelts became compulsory in Delhi only in 1997 or 1998 I think. 50% of my driving life was without seatbelts.

[ssambyal1980]

Thanks alot for a very interesting and useful thread. Novice or expert, having a safe vehicle is imperative for everyone. With traffic conditions becoming dynamic wherein surprises (mostly unpleasant) spring up from nowhere, anything can be expected to happen. No matter how much good driver one is, there is always a scope for improvement because nobody is perfect, the endeavour should be to strive for perfection.

A road is place which we share with all kinds of drivers. A novice driver is vulnerable most of the times mainly due to the fear he/she is battling with and also his/her being over conscious about others attention towards him/her, similarly an expert driver can also commit a mistake due to overconfidence. Mostly accident happens when one is least thinking about it, hence being in a safe car is always desirable. Last but not the least, no safety feature can prevent injuries or fatalities unless they are used wisely. Seat belts are primary amongst them. So always buckle up before the drive and be safe.

[JediKnight]

Originally Posted by VeluM

The latest iterations of ABS have been tuned to react differently on sand/dirt/gravel/snow. The pulses "intelligently" become slower to allow build up of material in front of the wheels, thus negating the negative impact of ABS on such surfaces (double negative, sorry).

This is not true for most cars. Most cars will have longer braking distances with ABS in gravel/dirt road conditions. The new generation ABS systems are improved but still cause trouble on these surface especially if you try a rally style high speed run.I can say so from experience ( Honda City ).

What you are talking about is only available in high end cars. I mean systems like the Range Rover "Terrain Response System" . Here you actually dial in the type of surface you are traveling on and the calibration of all the systems is changed accordingly.

[navin]

Originally Posted by vb-san

We all love our family, so why an inferior option for the immediate family member (spouse / parents). Shouldn't the so-called lesser expert driver need a safer car? Why should your wife/dad drive a Wagon R and not an Ecosport?

Firstly in most cases women do choose their own car (often accompanied by their brother, husband, son etc.).

The fact is that many women prefer the maneuverability of a small compact car in crowded metros over the comfort of a larger sedan/SUV. That said I know at least 3 women who regularly drive Pajero/Discovery/GLS class vehicles, several who drive Creta/EcoSport/S-Cross class vehicles and one that really rips in a Skoda 1.8 Tsi.

As a rule, it is easier to make larger vehicle safe (bigger engine, more space, more weight, larger budget, etc.). If the women in your life are comfortable with a larger vehicle they should drive one.

I don't see why a woman can't/shouldn't drive a big car: my friend's wife (who drives a GLS) throws it around hair pin curves quite confidently; my wife has driven my Camry on occasion (although she prefers her City). If it indeed is the men in their lives that don't give them the confidence to then it is up to the men to change.

Originally Posted by V.Narayan

Now I worry that my children may be doing exactly the same thing!

Wife does a lot of short distance inter-town travel so the bigger car goes without question.

I worry too.

We are also mostly chauffeured, although my wife and I, both, can drive and mom used to till age and illness (she is over 80) caught up with her. The unwritten rule is whoever is going the longer distance, even if it within the city, takes the bigger car. Bigger cars just offer more comfort.

[vb-saan]

Ah… a 3-year old thread got revived! Brilliant! 

Originally Posted by navin

I don't see why a woman can't/shouldn't drive a big car: my friend's wife (who drives a GLS) throws it around hair pin curves quite confidently; my wife has driven my Camry on occasion (although she prefers her City). If it indeed is the men in their lives that don't give them the confidence to then it is up to the men to change.

Absolutely! That’s what I see here as well – many of my female friends/colleagues prefer their SUVs (XC90, Evoque etc.). Back in Pune, my SIL drives around in her Creta, and her hubby goes to office in his humble old Santro. And she says it has to be a manual, AT is for weak drivers! Girl power

[navin]

Originally Posted by vb-san

Ah… a 3-year old thread got revived! Brilliant!

Oops! I did not see the date!