Edmunds.com | Inside Line | Auto Observer Your Account | Help | Directory
You are here:
![[F]](http://a332.g.akamai.net/f/332/936/12h/www.edmunds.com/media/townhall/webxicons/site.gif){kind=small}
Forums
Automotive News & Views The Tata Nano, India's $2,500 Car
133 messages, Last post on Sep 08, 2009 at 8:20 AM
You are in the Automotive News & Views Forum. Your Hosts are steve_ & claires
2009 Tata Nano First Drive - First Impressions: Not ready for life in America, but a real car nonetheless.(more)
|
|
|---|---|
|
Nothing can save them but, quality autos and trucks. |
|
|
|
|
Looks like this car is rugged and very well built. These guys have built a real roadworthy safe car. http://wheels.blogs.nytimes.com/2009/07/15/video-nano-passes-european-crash-test- / Tata Motors said it was “delighted but not surprised” that its Nano subcompact passed European front- and side-impact crash tests last week. This is according to Autocar, which reports that the Nano was subjected to tests at the MIRA testing center in England: The crash tests included a 40 percent offset and a 56km/h (35 m.p.h.) frontal impact, and are tougher than those that exist in India — currently the Nano’s only market — but they are due to be adopted in India in three years’ time. “We’ve conducted these tests in India already,” Clive Hickman, Tata’s head of engineering, told Autocar, which has a gallery of photos here, “so we knew the car would pass. But it’s still a great moment.” For Americans, who have harbored strong doubts about the Nano’s crashworthiness, the results must be more surprising. Ever since Ratan Tata, the chairman of Tata Motors, said that he planned to sell the Nano in Europe (and possibly the United States) by 2011, there have been doubts about the small car’s ability to provide safe, comfortable transportation in Western traffic. But Tata seems prepared for the challenge. Nick Kurczewski, in his review of the Nano for The New York Times, wrote that the Nano Europe would be better equipped with air bags, revised bumpers and a bigger engine. According to company officials, an automatic transmission and a hatchback version are in the works.
|
|
|
|
|
Tata Motors said it was “delighted but not surprised” that its Nano subcompact passed European front- and side-impact crash tests last week. This is according to Autocar, which reports that the Nano was subjected to tests at the MIRA testing center in England: The crash tests included a 40 percent offset and a 56km/h (35 m.p.h.) frontal impact, and are tougher than those that exist in India — currently the Nano’s only market — but they are due to be adopted in India in three years’ time. “We’ve conducted these tests in India already,” Clive Hickman, Tata’s head of engineering, told Autocar, which has a gallery of photos here, “so we knew the car would pass. But it’s still a great moment.” For Americans, who have harbored strong doubts about the Nano’s crashworthiness, the results must be more surprising. Ever since Ratan Tata, the chairman of Tata Motors, said that he planned to sell the Nano in Europe (and possibly the United States) by 2011, there have been doubts about the small car’s ability to provide safe, comfortable transportation in Western traffic. But Tata seems prepared for the challenge. Nick Kurczewski, in his review of the Nano for The New York Times, wrote that the Nano Europe would be better equipped with air bags, revised bumpers and a bigger engine. According to company officials, an automatic transmission and a hatchback version are in the works.
|
|
|
Replying to: planetauto1 (Sep 03, 2009 1:45 am) Little cars like that with any modicum of enginnering are essentially little rollcages on wheels, so it's not completely surprising. I'll believe more when I see it pass IIHS muster. |
|
|
Replying to: planetauto1 (Sep 03, 2009 1:41 am) That release was very light on actual information. I don't think crash tests are pass/fail. If you think about it, all cars pass, even 3 stars NHTSA results and "Marginal" IIHS results. I still want to see 4-5 NHTSA stars and at least an Acceptable IIHS score.
|
|
|
Replying to: ateixeira (Sep 03, 2009 6:15 am)
|
|
|
Replying to: gagrice (Sep 03, 2009 6:32 am)  I was the one saying that the Nano competes with bicycles and donkeys, not other cars. I still would like to see detailed results. Sure, it passed the Euro tests, i.e. it's not so unsafe that it's illegal on european streets. But how well did it do? The photos actually look good. From what I cal tall the A-pillar didn't budge at all. I just would like to see the detailed scores, rather than just pass/fail. |
|
|
Replying to: gagrice (Sep 03, 2009 6:32 am) As far as comparisons with the Ford F150 pick-up is concerned, European crash tests show you are safer in a Tata Nano. The European version of the Ford F150, called the Ford Ranger got a 2 star EuroNCAP rating. A link to the crash test is shown below: 2008 Ford Ranger EuroNCAP crash test 2008 Ford Ranger recieves 2 Star EuroNCAP rating The US test is not much different: Ford F150 US Test The first stage of the Tata Nano the video crash tests which the Nano passed with flying colours were done at 35mph, for certification for sale in Europe. Nano initial crash test video Photos of the crashed vehicle show the passenger compartment intact, doors open, passengers protected, and even the windscreen is intact. Nano initial crash test photos The star rating tests for the EuroNCAP rating will be done at 40mph to assign a safety star rating. If the Nano gets a 4 star EuroNCAP rating, then it is safer than the Ford F150 at any speed. Lots of people in the US think driving around in a big truck or SUV is safer. That is not the case. SUVs in particular tend to provide poor passenger safety in crashes because they are based on a frame chassis and lack a monocque cage to protect the occupants, and the passenger compartment folds up as in the Ford F150/Ranger crash test, trapping or injuring the passengers. As far as crashing into other vehicles is concerned, that is a lot safer in the Nano than crashing into the concrete block in the test. This is because in a very small car like the Nano or the Smart, the main problem is the small crumple depth. It takes very careful engineering to stop the car in the crash without subjecting the occupants to decelerations that would cause internal organ damage as monitored by the test dummy sensors. This is difficult with a concrete block, but easily achieved when crashing into the crumple zone of another car. Crashing into a Ford F150 would be safer than crashing into a concrete block at the same speed, and you would be safer in the Nano than the Ford F150. Here is a video of a crash between a Smart car and a Mercedes to illustrate this. Smart vs Mercedes OK the Smart car toppled over because it is so light and tall, but both sets of occupants would have survived, and the Mercedes' crumple zone adds to the Smart's crumple zone, protecting the Smart's occupants as well. The Mercedes is of course a very safe car with a monocoque safety cage and a deep well designed crumple zone, so although a lot of metal twisting goes on, its passengers are very safe. In the case of the Nano vs Ford F150, the Nano's occupants would be well protected by the Nano's safety cage and additionally the Ford's crumple zone, but the Nano may penetrate into the Ford F150's cab and kill or injure the Ford's occupants. |
|
|
The interesting thing about the Nano is that next cheapest car the Suzuki/Maruti 800 with a similar performance but with slightly less interior space and lower crash test rating, and also built in India is double the price. I think there is a lot of inertia and unwillingness among auto companies worldwide to spend R&D on cost reduction because they want to charge us more. |
|
|
Replying to: spm4 (Sep 04, 2009 9:18 am) Comparisons to large trucks are irrelevant. You have to compare to other entry-level cars or alternatives at the same price. And then we go back to the safer-than-a-bicycle argument.
|
|
You are here:
Forums
Automotive News & Views The Tata Nano, India's $2,500 Car
