Recent Comment
Share
.jpg)
It's time to choose sides in the Tata Nano debate. The car has officially hit streets in India, and will likely be coming to the U.S. in 2011 or 2012. The price for the Indian market is under $2,000, making it the cheapest new car in history. It's likely that you should have an opinion about it. Here are the camps where people have started setting up their tents, just in case you're curious.
- America, Europe and Japan have been working their butts off trying to get a high mileage car on the roads, and the only way they've done it is with magnificent technology that costs far more than traditional cars. India did it for $2,000. We should be ashamed
- The Tata Nano is going to destroy the world. Suddenly two billion more people can afford cars! What we have is not people replacing their cars with a more efficient car, we have people buying cars who have never owned cars before. This will more than double the greenhouse gas inputs from the developing world. In the words of the chief scientist of the IPCC "I'm having nightmares” about this car.
- The U.S. and Europe can't hold back the developing world in ways they were never held back. Inexpensive microcars will usher in a new age of economic development in India and China.
- The lack of good mass transit anywhere in the world is a disgrace and single-passenger vehicles are simply never going to be a solution for urban areas. We need to move forward with convenient, safe and comfortable mass transit. That's where real economic development comes from.
I'm pretty much in the fourth camp here. There are good and obvious reasons why America has never produced this kind of cheap microcar. The obvious ones being that no one bought Geos when GM made them and that American / European emissions and safety regulations make cars much heavier and more expensive than the Nano.
The Nano won't destroy the world, and we can't deny the developing world what we've already granted ourselves (and oh so much more.) But I don't think that the Nano will be much more than another small step towards India's future economic strength.
We've known forever that the growing world-wide middle class will be a strain on the environment. What we need are mass transit solutions and clean vehicle technologies for this coming boom, and we need them soon.
Hits: 6245
Comments (24)
Subscribe to this comment's feed
written by Murphy, March 24, 2009
I think a mitigating factor for millions of people suddenly owning a car they could not afford before is that millions of more cars also requires alot of roads. Roads also cost money and you can only fit so much road space in a given area. If 2 billion people went out and bought a car, the resulting traffic jam would negate any benifit to owning one in the first place.
-
- +1
-
-
written by Rabuon Gimoh, March 24, 2009
India is going to rule the world automotive industry. It wasn't so long ago that the Model T Ford (which is much more primitive and polluting than the Nano) was heralded as a wonder.
There are too many Americans on the world's roads, let alone in the USA.
There are too many Americans on the world's roads, let alone in the USA.
-
- +1
-
-
written by Teko, March 25, 2009
If we can stop wasting money on wars, other BS, and instead:
1. Improve public transportation(make them affordable, & accessible)
2. Build cities so that driving isn't necessary(Make smaller community, and stores within walking/bicycling distance, etc. Instead of corporate giant strip mall/suburban life style)
3. Stop selling big SUVs/trucks to people that don't need them (people doing 9-5 jobs does not need to drive those big ugly SUVs) If people needed to prove their use, then I'm sure there'll be a lot less people driving them.
4. If things in this world were based on needs it wouldn't be such a mess, instead things are based on greed, and childish desires.
I'm sure we can get somewhere...
1. Improve public transportation(make them affordable, & accessible)
2. Build cities so that driving isn't necessary(Make smaller community, and stores within walking/bicycling distance, etc. Instead of corporate giant strip mall/suburban life style)
3. Stop selling big SUVs/trucks to people that don't need them (people doing 9-5 jobs does not need to drive those big ugly SUVs) If people needed to prove their use, then I'm sure there'll be a lot less people driving them.
4. If things in this world were based on needs it wouldn't be such a mess, instead things are based on greed, and childish desires.
I'm sure we can get somewhere...
-
- -1
-
-
written by Space, March 25, 2009
1. I wonder how they plan to fuel all these cars.
2. ok, he rich bastards who had cars for decades shouldn't deny India to drive cars, but the difference is that now we know the damage cars do and must find another solution for both rich and poor, simultaneously.
And that means we should get started at home now.
2. ok, he rich bastards who had cars for decades shouldn't deny India to drive cars, but the difference is that now we know the damage cars do and must find another solution for both rich and poor, simultaneously.
And that means we should get started at home now.
-
- -1
-
-
written by hyperspaced, March 25, 2009
Is it? In the world of economy globalization, you get what you pay. There is a big difference between my humble €20,000 Toyota and that crap. Why? By EU regulations, car insurance companies will compensate €1,000,000 for every life lost in a car accident. I would really like to know what is the compensation in India (provided the driver responsible is insured).
Having this piece of crap is a serious health hazard. How can a whole car cost $2,000 when my standard 190/60R15 tires cost €450? Compromises is the answer.
Having this piece of crap is a serious health hazard. How can a whole car cost $2,000 when my standard 190/60R15 tires cost €450? Compromises is the answer.
-
- -2
-
-
written by hyperspaced, March 25, 2009
There aren't technology advancements used in this vehicle as to explain this high mileage: it's the weight! That thing is made of plastic and sheets of tin around it.
56MPG? Of course. If I could fit a 0.1 liter engine on my bicycle I would probably do a lot better than that!
56MPG? Of course. If I could fit a 0.1 liter engine on my bicycle I would probably do a lot better than that!
-
- -1
-
-
written by smithinparis, March 25, 2009
I've got to wonder what gives our culture the perceived notion that our opinion matters, and that we can pass judgment on something like this. We can whine and moan all we want while we hope in our SUVs to swing by the drive-through of the local coffee shop.
We're such hypocrites!
We're such hypocrites!
-
- +1
-
-
written by consumatron, March 25, 2009
I'm with you, Hank. I'm in the fourth camp with a toe or two in the second camp's pond. One reservation though... Single passenger vehicles may never be the total solution, but they could be a part of it...bicycles. If more able-bodied city dwellers rode their bicycles (especially here in the U.S.A.), I have no doubt that commutes would be smoother as well as the positive effects that would affect the air we breathe and our long-term environmental health.
I do hope that the Nano asserts India's economic strength, but let's hope they are smart enough to not build an entire economy on automobiles like we did. Hopefully the way the local governmental power is structured in India will act as a fail-safe against this, though if the Nano catches on and jobs spread from region to region, I don't know if the people will vote against anything that could boost their local economy.
I do hope that the Nano asserts India's economic strength, but let's hope they are smart enough to not build an entire economy on automobiles like we did. Hopefully the way the local governmental power is structured in India will act as a fail-safe against this, though if the Nano catches on and jobs spread from region to region, I don't know if the people will vote against anything that could boost their local economy.
-
- +0
-
-
written by Grant, March 25, 2009
First of all, this car is not the same as any other inexpensive sedan you'd buy in the US. This basically has a lawn mower engine in it. I had heard the top speed is only 45 mph. It's not meant for highway driving. And it doesn't get 56 mpg, it's more like 45 mpg. I'm pretty sure it doesn't have a catalytic converter so this thing is going to be a pollution nightmare. They have already said that if it is ever made for other markets (US, Europe), it's going to have to be "souped up." So obviously with all the performance, emissions and safety improvements that would be required, it would not be anywhere near $2,000 if it was sold elsewhere.
-
- -1
-
-
written by russ, March 25, 2009
This is Rajiv Gahndi's dream of 20 years back - surprisingly the cost has remained about the same as he proposed.
In many Indian cities traffic comes to a standstill during rush hour (and other hours too) today - imagine the future.
The most horrific accidents I have ever seen were on roads in India. Many drivers only have one throttle position and that is 100%.
The only positive thing is that traffic is generally slow - maybe the tin can won't fold up too bad in an accident.
In many Indian cities traffic comes to a standstill during rush hour (and other hours too) today - imagine the future.
The most horrific accidents I have ever seen were on roads in India. Many drivers only have one throttle position and that is 100%.
The only positive thing is that traffic is generally slow - maybe the tin can won't fold up too bad in an accident.
-
- +1
-
-
written by Luke, March 25, 2009
My motorcycle (a 2005 Kawasaki Vulcan 500) got over 50mpg, and had the power-to-weight ratio of a sports car.
Making a high MPG car is easy -- cut the weight, and cut the frontal cross-section. If you do that, you'll save fuel. Done! Put the motor from my Vulcan into an original Volkswagen beetle, and you're probably 80% nearly there. From the pictures, it looks like the Nano gets these MPG numbers and cost-savings by taking this approach -- and it'll probably be wildly successful in getting normal Indian families to travel on something safer than a moped.
But making a "real car" (as the American and European governments and citizens understand it) that gets 50+ mpg -- that's much harder. You end up with something like the Prius or the VW Golf TDI in the US. Neither are cheap. Both are a pleasure to drive on the Interstate.
So, how many of you in the audience would drive the original Volkswagen Beetle down the Interstate? I rode as a passenger in an original VW Beetle on the Interstate once, and I'm pretty sure I wouldn't do it again -- and I'm crazy enough to have ridden a motorcycle at 90+ mph...
From the pictures, it looks like the Nano is a lot like the original Beetle. It's cheap, economical, simple, and many compromises were made. I be some people will love the Nano, just like some people continue to love the original Bettle.
Making a high MPG car is easy -- cut the weight, and cut the frontal cross-section. If you do that, you'll save fuel. Done! Put the motor from my Vulcan into an original Volkswagen beetle, and you're probably 80% nearly there. From the pictures, it looks like the Nano gets these MPG numbers and cost-savings by taking this approach -- and it'll probably be wildly successful in getting normal Indian families to travel on something safer than a moped.
But making a "real car" (as the American and European governments and citizens understand it) that gets 50+ mpg -- that's much harder. You end up with something like the Prius or the VW Golf TDI in the US. Neither are cheap. Both are a pleasure to drive on the Interstate.
So, how many of you in the audience would drive the original Volkswagen Beetle down the Interstate? I rode as a passenger in an original VW Beetle on the Interstate once, and I'm pretty sure I wouldn't do it again -- and I'm crazy enough to have ridden a motorcycle at 90+ mph...
From the pictures, it looks like the Nano is a lot like the original Beetle. It's cheap, economical, simple, and many compromises were made. I be some people will love the Nano, just like some people continue to love the original Bettle.
-
- +0
-
-
written by MD, March 25, 2009
Plenty of people own Geo's and Sprint aka Suzuki swift.. my coworker has 2 of them.. plenty of the people I went to school with owned them too.
-
- +0
-
-
written by bob, March 25, 2009
We have the technology for a really nice hybrid of single person and mass transit. It would take some infrastructure upgrades though. There's no reason we can't have individual cars with some kind of road tracker and a tie-in to an automated freeway system. There would be a transition period, but eventually you could just queue up to an on ramp, take your hands off the wheel, let the car drive itself to your off ramp, and take the wheel back over when you hit the surface streets. Heck, eventually it could be automated from parking spot to parking spot. It's just a matter of integrating existing technologies.
-
- +0
-
-
written by Benji, March 25, 2009
For the record I don't drive an SUV or a car smithinparis, I walk or take the transit. Not everyone posting here drives, so don't try to lump us all in. I am guilty of take out coffee though :( .
A step forward for India will be better economic strength and technology available to more people.
A step backward will be more traffic congestion and air pollution.
Another step backward will be more power and influence to the Indian auto industry. They will have more lobbying power in government, and more influence over the people who just want job security.
Will better mass transit catch on then? It's hard for us to scrutinize when we have the same problems. Most cities in North America are structured for car use. The auto industry is in trouble but still has lobbying power to get governments to hand out billions of dollars in bailouts and tax exemptions. That's money that go into investing in better mass transit and greener energy.
A step forward for India will be better economic strength and technology available to more people.
A step backward will be more traffic congestion and air pollution.
Another step backward will be more power and influence to the Indian auto industry. They will have more lobbying power in government, and more influence over the people who just want job security.
Will better mass transit catch on then? It's hard for us to scrutinize when we have the same problems. Most cities in North America are structured for car use. The auto industry is in trouble but still has lobbying power to get governments to hand out billions of dollars in bailouts and tax exemptions. That's money that go into investing in better mass transit and greener energy.
-
- +0
-
-
written by smithinparis, March 26, 2009
Benji,
You're absolutely right, and I realize that most people (ummm all) on ecogeek might not be like my neighbor who hops into his H3 to drive 3 blocks at 8:00 AM to get his Tim Horton's fix, only to return by a couple of minutes later to have his coffee at home.
My comment was about our culture in general that is just so hypocritical that we can look at how other people are doing the wrong thing, without addressing the issues in our own backyard.
The ecogeek audience (and other like minded people) are an exception.
What's my take on the Nano? I absolutely think smaller is better, safety can be addressed through common sense (in the nano, you're only going to kill yourself - in a hummer your killing the other person - I personally would prefer to come up against a nano frankly), but emissions need to be cleared up.
Meanwhile, I'll be continuing to beef up my electric bike.
You're absolutely right, and I realize that most people (ummm all) on ecogeek might not be like my neighbor who hops into his H3 to drive 3 blocks at 8:00 AM to get his Tim Horton's fix, only to return by a couple of minutes later to have his coffee at home.
My comment was about our culture in general that is just so hypocritical that we can look at how other people are doing the wrong thing, without addressing the issues in our own backyard.
The ecogeek audience (and other like minded people) are an exception.
What's my take on the Nano? I absolutely think smaller is better, safety can be addressed through common sense (in the nano, you're only going to kill yourself - in a hummer your killing the other person - I personally would prefer to come up against a nano frankly), but emissions need to be cleared up.
Meanwhile, I'll be continuing to beef up my electric bike.
-
- +0
-
-
written by dialtone, March 26, 2009
Google it - read about it - an alternative to buses, much cheaper than light rail - takes up very little real estate
My first motorcycle when I was 16 - a Honda Trail 90 - 60 MPG or more - cant remember exactly - my motorcycle today - a Honda Shadow 1100 - 50 MPG on the highway at 60 MPH - in town stop & go - 40 MPG
should I ride a bicycle to work - sure - will I? somedays
My first motorcycle when I was 16 - a Honda Trail 90 - 60 MPG or more - cant remember exactly - my motorcycle today - a Honda Shadow 1100 - 50 MPG on the highway at 60 MPH - in town stop & go - 40 MPG
should I ride a bicycle to work - sure - will I? somedays
-
- +0
-
-
written by googlr, March 26, 2009
Talking about safety, Nano breathes air for same purpose. Ratan Tata wants the entire family off their single motorcyles.
-
- +0
-
-
written by Trevor Heath, March 26, 2009
How can a $2000 car be the cheapest in history? What for example did a new Mini cost in 1959?, a model T in the last year of production 1926?
56 mpg for this car is rubbish.
My 1992 Metro can beat that and does.....every day!
56 mpg for this car is rubbish.
My 1992 Metro can beat that and does.....every day!
-
- -1
-
-
written by zhaphod, March 31, 2009
When someone is making comments on safety/usability/eco impact of Nano they need to know the ground reality in India.
1. There are over 100million people in India who use motor cycles. The pollution they create, pound for pound compared to a car is much greater. The more motor cycles the Nano replaces the better it is in the current context. Also note that it produces around 101grams of CO2 per km. Now go an find a car anywhere in the world which does better. On road testing, not standard conditions, show that Nano does 65mpg.
2. I live in Bangalore and I own a Honda Civic. The average speed I get when I commute to office is around 15miles per hour. Now the top speed of Nano which is 65mph, not 45mph as some one claimed above, is not a problem at all in citi driving. Obviously Nano is not meant for high way driving. And it is very important to note that the percentage of high way driving compared to city driving is much less in India compared to western countries. And given the congestion I face, I would gladly give up my Civic for a Nano.
3. There are millions of families in India which use motor cycle for transport. What I mean is four people traveling on a motor cycle precariously. Also 90% of the victims of road accidents in india are people traveling on motor cycles. Nano is going to save lot of lives.
5. Unlike people in the west, not many people in India would mind owning a car which has 35bhp, when all these years all they could afford was only a motor cycle with 8bhp, and which increased their chance of getting killed in an accident by 20 times.
5. Those who degrade Nano by saying that it is made of plastic or tin should check out the specs of the car. It is made of steel just like any other car. Only the bumpers are plastic. Also it has passed all the safety laws in India just like the Honda Civic that I drive. It is as safe or unsafe as any other normal car in India.
6. I have also heard people saying that Nano doesnt have air bags and hence is very unsafe. Civic that I own, for which I payed $30,000/- also does not have an air bag. Air bags are considered luxury in India.
7. Nano in its current form is not meant for western countries. Period. So stop judging it based on your experiences. It is meant for millions of Indians who could only afford a motor cycle till now.
1. There are over 100million people in India who use motor cycles. The pollution they create, pound for pound compared to a car is much greater. The more motor cycles the Nano replaces the better it is in the current context. Also note that it produces around 101grams of CO2 per km. Now go an find a car anywhere in the world which does better. On road testing, not standard conditions, show that Nano does 65mpg.
2. I live in Bangalore and I own a Honda Civic. The average speed I get when I commute to office is around 15miles per hour. Now the top speed of Nano which is 65mph, not 45mph as some one claimed above, is not a problem at all in citi driving. Obviously Nano is not meant for high way driving. And it is very important to note that the percentage of high way driving compared to city driving is much less in India compared to western countries. And given the congestion I face, I would gladly give up my Civic for a Nano.
3. There are millions of families in India which use motor cycle for transport. What I mean is four people traveling on a motor cycle precariously. Also 90% of the victims of road accidents in india are people traveling on motor cycles. Nano is going to save lot of lives.
5. Unlike people in the west, not many people in India would mind owning a car which has 35bhp, when all these years all they could afford was only a motor cycle with 8bhp, and which increased their chance of getting killed in an accident by 20 times.
5. Those who degrade Nano by saying that it is made of plastic or tin should check out the specs of the car. It is made of steel just like any other car. Only the bumpers are plastic. Also it has passed all the safety laws in India just like the Honda Civic that I drive. It is as safe or unsafe as any other normal car in India.
6. I have also heard people saying that Nano doesnt have air bags and hence is very unsafe. Civic that I own, for which I payed $30,000/- also does not have an air bag. Air bags are considered luxury in India.
7. Nano in its current form is not meant for western countries. Period. So stop judging it based on your experiences. It is meant for millions of Indians who could only afford a motor cycle till now.
-
- +2
-
-
written by bill, April 03, 2009
zhaphod is exactly right, and if they could use ethanol blends- (when we can make ethonol from non food products of course) then they can get even closer to carbon neutral- but the bottom line is the west should shut up.
-
- +1
-
-
written by bill, April 03, 2009
Trevor Heath- the Model T cost $300 dollars in 1926 which would translate to around $4000 dollars in 2009's dollars. The mini was £497 in 1959 the conversion into dollars is 1pound = 2.8 dollars so $1391.8 converting this to 2009 money = around $10,000- ummm so what's your point
-
- +2
-
-
written by SPM, August 25, 2009
There are many people, particularly in the US still claiming that the Nano is unsafe. The Nano is actually safer than the best selling US SUV - the Ford Ranger (or F150). The Euro NCAP crash tests prove it beyond any shadow of doubt.
Americans have this strange idea that driving a big SUV makes them safer. Nothing could be further from the truth. SUVs lack a monocoque cage structure that protects occupants and allows effective crumple zones to be provided. Also, it is the design of the vehicle and not its size that has the biggest impact on vehicle safety.
Compare the crash test video. See how the Ford Ranger's cabin folds up on the offset test. The Nano cabin remains intact and protects the driver. The tests are carried out at 35-40mph and take into account occupant protection and deceleration forces that occupants are subjected to. Basically, in a 35-40 mph crash, the Nano is safer than a Ford Ranger SUV.
At higher speeds, occupants of neither is likely to be safe, but those in the Nano will still be safer than those in the Ford SUV. In real world crashes with other vehicles, the Nano will do much better safety wise in comparison to the Ford SUV than in the EuroNCAP tests where it is crashed into a concrete block. This is because the difficulty in designing small cars the Nano is in the limited crush depth available. They need to employ clever design and extensive computer and real crash testing to achieve the necessary safety rating. However when crashing into another vehicle, the other vehicle's crumple zone adds to the Nano's crumple depth, making for a much safer crash than crashing into a concrete block.
The tests don't lie, and they prove once and for all that the Tata Nano is safe for US roads, and in fact safer than most SUVs driving on US roads.
Ford Ranger 2008 - EuroNCAP rating - 2 Star
http://www.euroncap.com/tests/ford_ranger_2008/342.aspx
Crash Test:
http://www.euroncap.com/Player.aspx?nk=d204eaa3-b2dd-4da6-bbb9-0c7b7ffc3133
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QtsZyfll5uk
Tata Nano - 2009 Testing - Expected EuroNCAP Rating - 4 Star
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=R1FckXItYbo
Americans have this strange idea that driving a big SUV makes them safer. Nothing could be further from the truth. SUVs lack a monocoque cage structure that protects occupants and allows effective crumple zones to be provided. Also, it is the design of the vehicle and not its size that has the biggest impact on vehicle safety.
Compare the crash test video. See how the Ford Ranger's cabin folds up on the offset test. The Nano cabin remains intact and protects the driver. The tests are carried out at 35-40mph and take into account occupant protection and deceleration forces that occupants are subjected to. Basically, in a 35-40 mph crash, the Nano is safer than a Ford Ranger SUV.
At higher speeds, occupants of neither is likely to be safe, but those in the Nano will still be safer than those in the Ford SUV. In real world crashes with other vehicles, the Nano will do much better safety wise in comparison to the Ford SUV than in the EuroNCAP tests where it is crashed into a concrete block. This is because the difficulty in designing small cars the Nano is in the limited crush depth available. They need to employ clever design and extensive computer and real crash testing to achieve the necessary safety rating. However when crashing into another vehicle, the other vehicle's crumple zone adds to the Nano's crumple depth, making for a much safer crash than crashing into a concrete block.
The tests don't lie, and they prove once and for all that the Tata Nano is safe for US roads, and in fact safer than most SUVs driving on US roads.
Ford Ranger 2008 - EuroNCAP rating - 2 Star
http://www.euroncap.com/tests/ford_ranger_2008/342.aspx
Crash Test:
http://www.euroncap.com/Player.aspx?nk=d204eaa3-b2dd-4da6-bbb9-0c7b7ffc3133
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QtsZyfll5uk
Tata Nano - 2009 Testing - Expected EuroNCAP Rating - 4 Star
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=R1FckXItYbo
-
- +0
-
-
written by Andyouknowit!, March 10, 2010
I think this is wonderful. Not the best built car in the world, but you get what you pay for. Can't handle our winters, but lovely summer car, with low winds. Go India! I would buy one for just the summer months, our weather is too rainy for motorbikes. Again, people don't be hatin! Go India!
-
- +0
-
-
Write comment
| < Prev | Next > |
|---|
Simple is beautiful. thats what the Tata Nano teaches , precahes and breaches.
Maybe a back-to-the-basics wont make cavemen out of us ...yet
Shedding "excesses", turned out to be a trim-fatting experience for the Fast-Everything Generation.
Its time to reflect on what we have to done to this planet and not what the planet has done for us.
What I am really concerned besides the eco-evangelism nonsense is whos cleaning up the space-junk debris of my Universe.
My grandkids speace rides could be in jeopardy if we don't own up to Real Responsibility and Not Text-Book Responsibility.
Enuff said.