[Debajyoti]

Originally Posted by sun_king

...just about two percent of India's population owns a car. If buying it is optional, then it should be left to the buyer to decide how much the lives inside the vehicle is worth.

2% of 127crore is 2.54crores, that is not a small number. Cars are driven in public roads filled with other people, then why should we let a buyer decide how much the lives outside the vehicle is worth?

Originally Posted by sun_king

...If the buyer has that power, then why should the government impose it? ... Is consumer education (for non-essential goods) a government responsibility?

Buyers always had that power but sadly majority of them don't want to pay a premium for safety features. Jago grahak jago campaign is all about consumer education.

Originally Posted by sun_king

It is that common sense that we are missing here. Car buyers places themselves in the less than 2% of the population, it is not too much to expect basic awareness from them.

This lack of common sense is the reason I said that safety features in a car and stricter laws must be made mandatory otherwise people will simply choose the lower priced airbag, ABS less variants.

[shobhitk]

Originally Posted by Debajyoti

....I said that safety features in a car and stricter laws must be made mandatory otherwise people will simply choose the lower priced airbag, ABS less variants.

yes, I agree. in fact in all my previous posts, I have been saying that government intervention is essential.

The following news item appeared in Economic Times (e-paper) dated 31st March 2015.

[FONT=&quot]31 March 2015, 11:52 PM IST[/FONT]

[FONT=&quot]
NEW DELHI: With the dawn of financial year 2015-16 India has taken another step towards road safety. Government of India has made it mandatory for all commercial vehicles (bus & trucks) manufactured on April 1, 2015 onward to have anti braking system.

ABS helps control vehicles during emergency braking at high speeds by unlocking the wheels and allowing traction control by electronic distribution of pressure to wheels.

So far the safety feature was mandatory only for the commercial vehicles carrying petroleum and explosive items. Since 2006, ABS has been obligatory for 40- and 49-tonne tractor-trailers.

The new law will bring a wide range of commercial vehicles under the mandatory ABS fitment which brings a good news for auto component industry. [/FONT]

It is good that Government has added safety in the commercial vehicles. Its time that the government should make the following safety features in all the cars mandatory:-

1. The air bags.
2. ABS
3. Effective crumpled zones, which take the impact on the event of crash.

With a small piece of legislation, the cars will become much safer.

[Thad E Ginathom]

Originally Posted by Debajyoti

But the sales person advised the Xcent S variant saying ABS & airbags are not needed inside city so why waste that money,

It is time to reintroduce public executions for people like that. Medieval nasty stuff: heads on stakes outside the showrooms, with signs like "This idiot thought "city" driving isn't dangerous."

Talk like that costs lives.

[Yeldo]

The basic questions from a car buyer's perspective are two:

1) How effective are safety equipment- both active and passive- like crumple zones, intrusion bars, airbags, ABS, ESP, VSC etc. are in the event of an accident.

My take would be: You never know.

Accidents are just that. Accidents. You may escape from a head on collision by 1/10th of a second. Or be saved from being pushed over a ledge by 1 inch or less.

In such cases, any- I repeat ANY safety equipment, any safety factor, anything can help. What saves you you may never know. So whatever is available, we need every one of those safety features in every vehicle, every situation, and every occasion.

2) The factor of cost.

What would be the cost implication of safety, percentage wise?

Can we put a price on our lives, on well being and safety? No.

So the discussion of cost is irrelevant.

Simply factor in the cost of safety features when calculating the price/ affordability of your car purchase.

I fail to see it in any other way.

[MadiMaama]

Originally Posted by shobhitk

yes, I agree. in fact in all my previous posts, I have been saying that government intervention is essential.

The following news item appeared in Economic Times (e-paper) dated 31st March 2015.

[FONT=&quot]31 March 2015, 11:52 PM IST[/FONT]

[FONT=&quot][b][i]
NEW DELHI: With the dawn of financial year 2015-16 India has taken another step towards road safety. Government of India has made it mandatory for all commercial vehicles (bus & trucks) manufactured on April 1, 2015 onward to have anti braking system

. Anti Braking system!!! I thought our trucks and buses are fitted with it already.

But seriously, it is a very good move by the government to introduce these safety features on CV. But the first step should be to instruct the drivers to wear seatbelts. Make it compulsory. All bus passengers too must wear seatbelts if provided.

[Thad E Ginathom]

Originally Posted by Yeldo

The basic questions from a car buyer's perspective are two:

1) How effective are safety equipment- both active and passive- like crumple zones, intrusion bars, airbags, ABS, ESP, VSC etc. are in the event of an accident.

My take would be: You never know.

Tests such as those under discussion here deal with what happens in an accident, this, yes, indeed we do know: we can even watch the videos

Equipment which is designed to help avoid accidents is another matter. It is tested, and we can see tests of stuff like ABS and ESP.

Accidents are just that. Accidents.

No they are not. I wish we didn't use this word, which implies something that we could not avoid. Accidents happen because someone made a mistake, got something wrong, drove badly, etc etc etc. The fault may be more or less innocent, but there is always a fault.

Can we put a price on our lives, on well being and safety? No.

So the discussion of cost is irrelevant.

There has to be a minimum standard that is mandated, and the cost of that becomes part of simply being able to afford a car or not. Above that will be a matter of personal choice and wallet size

and, on a lighter note...

I fail to see it in any other way.

I think that's called failsafe!

[kiku007]

That Kwid crash video is chilling. The cabin just folds like paper. It's super light weight always raised questions about it's lack of safety and now the tests confirm it.

It's incredible how human lives are less important than SUV looks and fuel efficiency.

[Debajyoti]

Lets take an example, Baleno has ABS & airbags standard across all variants. So any buyer of Baleno, whether they choose base, mid or top end variant is relatively safer for themselves (airbags) and others (ABS). But a buyer of base variant of say a Dzire or Swift generally have a low budget, so they will not buy the optional safety pack even if its available as an option. This is why these must be made mandatory, not just optional.
Is it possible to get the individual numbers of normal and safety pack variants in the monthly car sales thread?

[McLaren Rulez]

What I find extremely disturbing is this snippet which audioholic posted earlier and hasn't seemed to have got enough attention.

Following safety improvements Renault proposed that Global NCAP test an updated evolution of the Kwid in production from early April 2016. The car was tested with and without an airbag.

The structure did not collapse however it was rated as unstable and that it could not withstand further loadings. It was possible to see the structural reinforcements implemented in this version of the Kwid but when Global NCAP checked the left (passenger) side, there were no reinforcements. The structure was reinforced only on the driver side.

Disgusting disgusting practice by Renault to game the system since the crash tests are only done on the driver's side. This should be criminal.

[Motard_Blr]

Ford tried to game the IIHS crash test system in the USA with their F150:
http://blog.caranddriver.com/iihs-20...-extended-cab/

Clearly no manufacturer is above unethical behaviour, whether it's safety, emissions or performance.

[deetjohn]

More tests will happen as soon as Global NCAP can convince the poor dummies to get into another car made in India.









Source

[mayankk]

Originally Posted by deetjohn

More tests will happen as soon as Global NCAP can convince the poor dummies to get into another car made in India.

Who needs dummies in India? Put a shiny in the car, you will have dummies lined up.


In other news, manufacturers are "questioning" the timing of these tests, saying that soon new norms are coming in india. Current versions did not need to be tested.They are basically saying that the new cars will be able to comply with the norms?
Ok, First: You are capable of reengineering your cars in the next 18 odd months?
Second: If so, then why have you been putting this stuff out for the last few decades?

[deetjohn]

Originally Posted by mayankk

In other news, manufacturers are "questioning" the timing of these tests, saying that soon new norms are coming in india.

The existing models need to meet the norms only by October 2018. So, its minting money for manufacturers for the next 30 months at least! No wonder they are saying the timing is wrong.

We might even see a flurry of new launches before October 2017 to beat the deadlines.

Then again, the proposed Bharat NCAP norms will only be voluntary. So, I doubt how much that is going to change the way both manufacturers and prospective customers think. It should be made mandatory, else it will fail to take off.

I think we can totally expect the scenario where a new customer prefers a car from the higher segment with no rating against one which has passed the voluntary tests from a segment below.

Originally Posted by mayankk

Ok, First: You are capable of reengineering your cars in the next 18 odd months?

Sad but true. Kwid 1 to Kwid 3 shows some manufacturers clearly know what is missing from the cars. And they might not need many months to 'fix' them. This will be especially true for the global models.

Originally Posted by mayankk

Second: If so, then why have you been putting this stuff out for the last few decades?

Yes, that's the bigger question! The answer for which lies in profitability.

[mayankk]

Originally Posted by deetjohn

Then again, the proposed Bharat NCAP norms will only be voluntary. So, I doubt how much that is going to change the way both manufacturers and prospective customers think. It should be made mandatory, else it will fail to take off.

SO, basically the (O) base-level maruti models business, which apparently are never available(?), but Sir can always buy the Vxi, which has power windows!

Originally Posted by deetjohn

I think we can totally expect the scenario where a new customer prefers a car from the higher segment with no rating against one which has passed the voluntary tests from a segment below.

Well, 3 box is important, isnt it. Sharmaji has a bigger one.
I feel when a person goes to get his Driver's permit, he should first be shown videos of crash tests, and real crash victims from 1 star till 5 star rated cars.
I am sure a majority of the buyers today are uninformed people, who are further screwed over by low-IQ/unscrupulous sales people, who get away with the "In-city" uselessness of AntiBrakingSystem and Airbags on which you bounce off and can geta hurta real bad.
Even after someone has seen a mangled victim, and still goes ahead with the 0 star bigger car? Well, his funeral (puntended).

[shobhitk]

Originally Posted by mayankk

I feel when a person goes to get his Driver's permit, he should first be shown videos of crash tests, and real crash victims from 1 star till 5 star rated cars.

a very good idea.

youtube has hoard of crash videos, involving Indian adventurists.
such videos will make a person realise that ' You only live Twice' is true only about James Bond. For normal human beings, loss of life, loss of limbs or other sufferings come after major accidents.