Slashdot Mirror
$2500 Tata Nano Car Unveiled in India
theodp writes "After months of rumors and tantalizing leaks, Tata Motors has finally unveiled the Tata Nano, its already legendary $2,500 car that promises to change the face of not only the Indian car market, but the global auto industry. The tiny car is a four-door, five-seat hatch, powered by a 30 hp engine that gets 54 miles per gallon."
Nice to see the VW idea (small affordable car for The People) keeping on. Also nice to see that the low horsepower is there, after all, horsepower is for those who can't keep their speeds up in the corners.
Don't blame me, I voted for Kodos
Would any one in the western world even think of buying this car? Even for driving in the cities/small towns?
I would if I never had to enter a freeway.
Unfortunately, that's not the case.
There is no "I disagree" mod for a reason. Flamebait, Troll, and Overrated are not substitutes.
Normally you pay extra for a diesel engine, sometimes almost as much as the $2,500 that is the entire cost of this car.
hmmm, thats a mighty small crumple zone that the passengers all sit in.
no thanks, if I wanted a micro city car then I'd get a SMART. at least that has a safety tridon cage around the passengers, and does better mpg. it also performs surprisingly well on the safety test. though on an impact I would put my money on the other car...
This car isn't designed for US roads, where it would be a menace. It's designed for Indian roads, which I've never seen, but which I suspect are similar to roads in Italy. Imagine a country where the roads are exactly like a huge Target parking lot. This is Italy. The Tata Nano would be perfect.
Beer is proof that God loves us, and wants us to be happy.
It might be safer than a motorcycle in a crash, but loses some of the maneuverability that might help prevent an accident. It's likely got none of the safety features of a "real car," and none of the agility of a motorcycle. The worst of both worlds.
"It is a miracle that curiosity survives formal education." -Albert Einstein
...and it's called diesel. However, we have politicians too stupid to see that diesel powered vehicles can get the gas mileage consumers demand while burning cleaner than gasoline combustion engines can like environmentalists want. Stupid states like California and Massachusetts outright ban these vehicles for new car sales. If diesel is so awful, I saw no evidence of that on a recent trip to Paris where diesel cars are everywhere. Diesel also offers a path to biodiesel through conversion kits which could ultimately smooth the transition to a renewable energy source that a)helps the U.S. economy and b)helps lower carbon emissions dramatically.
Yes, but the mentality of a motorcycle driver is somewhat different from the the mentality of a car driver.
A motorcycle driver *knows* that he will very likely die if he crashes at high speed. Car drivers typically don't tend to exercise the same amount of caution.
Likewise, the handling and braking on a $2500 car can't be all that good. Pedestrian injuries seem extremely likely.
-- If you try to fail and succeed, which have you done? - Uli's moose
I'd be the same, but for the families that drive with 4 people on a motor scooter in India this is a vast improvement in safety.
First, to all the Diesel supporters out there (I'm one too, currently driving my fifth one, and I keep them a long time.) The real reason that the US hardly sees European advanced Diesels, and that India can't use them, is that they don't have the refining and distribution capability to make the fuel needed by advanced car Diesels. There is a reason why my car has a 4-valve per cylinder DOHC with common rail and variable vane turbo, and my boat has the same engine with two valves per cylinder and produces one third of the horsepower. The boat will run on heating oil. The car needs low sulfur fuel with plenty of additives.
Second, to all the "this is underpowered, this is dangerous" mob out there. The alternative is either people hanging off a scooter, or a powered tricycle with no safety features whatsoever. This thing is a huge advance. Thirty HP is plenty for India, where acceleration has to take place in the middle of slow moving traffic, and where the motorway speed limit is 60.
Also, you may not have realised that the quoted fuel consumption of cars is on a special test cycle. American cars with their hugely over-horsepowered engines (often using a 2 litre plus engine where the Europeans would use 1300cc, and around 200HP where we would use 100) exceed the EPA consumption as soon as you put your foot down, yet most of the power can never be legally used for more than a few seconds. A limited capacity, limited power engine will in reality get better MPG simply because you cannot use it to waste fuel in rapid acceleration followed by heavy braking.
It seems to me that what this demonstrates is that Indians are capable of thinking about what works for their society, which is their huge advantage over most of the Third World.
From scarped cliff or quarried stone she cries "A thousand types are gone, I care for nothing, no not one."
And given that the vast majority of driving that the vast majority of people seem to do is driving alone or with a single passenger in the car... it makes a lot more sense to move to motorcycles. They are also smaller, can park 3 in a normal parking space, can even carry your groceries home....
I think it makes a lot of sense for me to have a motorcycle for the warm months, and a car for when I need to carry larger items, more passengers, or there is snow on the ground. I have yet to find a need for a car bigger than my jetta.
Honestly, I think its disgusting that people drive around using SUVs, Minivans, and four by fours as their normal commuting vehicle when 90% of the time its just them.
Such a waste. Not to mention road hazard. Those vehicles do far more damage to anything they hit than a motorcycle or smaller car. They are a menace to everyone around them.
-Steve
"I opened my eyes, and everything went dark again"
Good Lord no...I dunno where you live, but, a 30HP engine in the CITY on regular streets would get you killed around here. I know the 'posted' limits are like 30-45mph, but, no one ever really follows those. 50-60mph in certain areas is more the norm, if you go slower than that....you'll get run over.
The only time people go the limits...is when the cops are out on one of their revenue generation stakeouts (aka radar speed traps).
Light travels faster than sound. This is why some people appear bright until you hear them speak.........
On the upside small cars like the smart car(search youtube for the smart car road test hitting a brick wall at high speed with no cabin intrusion) are made to withstand accidents exceedingly well, while SUVs are not. Anyone who's seen an SUV/compact car accident can tell you that the compact car usually looks completely destroyed, but the cabin looks intact, while the SUV is upside down with its roof collapsed in a ditch.
The lack of maneuverability in SUVs and Trucks combined with their top heaviness, often makes what should have been a simple physics equation (heaviest guy wins) devolve into complete randomness. And unfortunately weight is not a predictor of safety once you're airborne.
I don't want more poor people driving. Or more rich people.
I would prefer it if MUCH fewer people needed to drive in the first place.
As I write this, I'm living in one American suburb, working in another, and am forced to burn fossil fuels just to buy a gallon of milk at the nearest store. I'm dependent on liquified dinosaurs. Walking to said shop from my house would probably only take 15 minutes tops, if a safe footpath existed. (I don't consider a freeway overpass without a pedestrain walkway to be adequate, thank you.) But no-o-o-o, my country decided to build communities around a single point of failure, the availability of cheap hydrocarbons.
The only reason why the new Tata may be a positive development for us in the West is if its energy-saving techniques actually make it to our markets. Otherwise, it's just another case of the inefficient, resource-hungry American lifestyle being appropriated overseas -- and in case you're wondering, no, that is not good news for this planet.
"Hatred" my ass. Read the sig if you need further clues.
--- The American Way of Life is not a birthright. Hell, it's not even sustainable.
hit an object that doesn't crumple in a SMART car and the results will not be pretty.
The key thing I remember from talking to a SMART distributor was how well it fared in accidents with OTHER cars. When some of us asked about fixed objects they kept going back to car versus car.
A car with such a limited crumple zone as the SMART is going to transmit more energy to the occupants upon impact, there simply isn't enough car there to do anything.
Besides the car was woefully underpowered requiring near lead footing to use on the highway... meaning shitty mileage for something that weighs in at 1800lbs
* Winners compare their achievements to their goals, losers compare theirs to that of others.
Could 30 horses not pull a wagon with 4 fat Americans in it? Perhaps not at Ben Hur speed, but they'd get there.
All I hear is discussion about how much this car lacks and how much better all other cars are.
Is anyone going to look at the price and say "Wow finally I could afford this car!" Or are we all spoiled to a point where price does not matter? I think that price is the greatest achivement of this car company.
Imagine getting a loan for the cheapest new car that currently exists and paying it off for next 3-5 years. This car is cheaper than almost any motorcycle you could possibly buy. I could buy it with my petty cash and use it for every day commute to work and I bet insurance for this car would be next to nothing as it's only worth $2.5K to have whole car replaced.
Other car companies should be very afraid. One thing we can expect to come in next few years thanks to this car (if it ever reaches North America due to politic involved selling such a cheap car) - cheap, fuel efficient cars for everyone!
If this car was introduces to North America there would be huge implications on every aspect of our society starting from public transit (not being cost effective way of travel anymore) to lack of roads (due to number of these cars being on the roads), to people traveling greater distances to work (low cost suburban living and low cost of transportation), to mayor North American automakers and massive layoffs to come, including sky rocketing gas prices (increasing MPG but increasing numbers of cars on road - high gasoline demand)... etc.
I somehow doubt that this car will ever get close to North American shores. Or if it does it's starting cost will be $10K which does not make it worth anymore.
Which big three are you talking about? Chrysler isn't even a player anymore (Mercedes could barely sell the company). Ford and GM mostly sell to Americans. I would say the big three now are Toyota, Nissan and Honda or Toyota, Honda and Fiat.
Balderdash!
While I enjoy your comment, I'd like to point out that 30 hp is a lot of power. I managed to get up Baldwin Street on a bicycle -- that's 2/3 horsepower, and there aren't steeper streets in Vermont or anywhere else. Granted, the bike and I, together, only weigh 70 kilos, but with 45x more power, and lower gearing, it'd do just fine... at the expense of speed. One of my friends has a Pinzgauer, that weighs 3000 kilos and can haul 14 people through waist-deep water full of rocks and up a muddy slope on the other side. It has a 65 horsepower engine. Any amount of power can get you up any hill if you have low enough gearing. So the problem isn't that it can't go up hills with heavy loads, it's that fatass American families won't buy a car that can only do 4 mph up the hill to their home when they've packed the back with useless junk they bought at the mall and stuck their enormous selves in every seat.
Nostalgia's not what it used to be.
Well, I can guarantee if you took the revenue aspect of traffic tickets away from the Police coffers, they'd not be nearly so apt be sitting out there trying to write tickets, usually at the EOM.
And if everyone is speeding, the limits are obviously artificially low, otherwise you'd see an increase in accident and death rates.....
Quite often higher speeds are safe for given area conditions and traffic levels, but, the speeds they pick are rather arbitrary....
Light travels faster than sound. This is why some people appear bright until you hear them speak.........
Of course it can. How well it will deal with the six inches of snow that has come down since the plow last came through is a different issue. If the Indian engineers considered muddy roads in the design, it might be OK in snow.
Anyway, I live in Vermont also, and I'd consider using something like this for local driving if it can meet emissions requirements. It's not like you can safely get over 45mph on the roads around here anyway. Not sure I'd take it on I-89 however. At least not until there are a lot of cars like it on the road.
You can't see ANYTHING from a car, You've got to get out of the goddamned contraption and walk...Edward Abbey
Guys, I'm from India and the reason the car is making headlines is cos its cost is estimated to be around Rs 1 lakh (1lakh=100,000). Right now, the cheapest car(Maruti 800) costs around 2 lakhs I believe. The car has not gone into the production phase yet, but a hella lot of people are waiting eagerly for it.
"Do not confuse the unusual with the impossible" - Psmith
In either case, making certain sections of roadway significantly slower than other sections will often cause more accidents as people slam on their brakes to avoid a ticket. Setting large areas of a roadway to a too-slow limit will cause larger numbers of traffic jams as the "good citizens" who insist on driving what it says on the sign slow down everyone else who is driving what the road can safely handle (this happens a lot here in Seattle, where the freeways have a 60 mph limit but free-flow traffic routinely does 65 or 70).
For security, the MD5 hash of this message and sig is 09f911029d74e35bd84156c5635688c0.
Unfortunately, there is ample proof that you are wrong.
If you look at Montana's fatal accident rate, with and without speed limits, you find something peculiar... Fatalities went up when speed limits were imposed.
And when the maximum interstate speed was finally increased from 55 mph? Fatalities increased dramatically. I never knew anyone to drive 80MPH when the limit was 55, but now they do. The roads haven't changed, yet people are now comfortable driving far, far faster. These days, I don't see anyone driving 55 on the freeway.
Slashdot gets worse every day... Pipedot: News for nerds, without the corporate slant
I have a VAZ-11113 "Oka" ( http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lada_Oka ) and its 32 hp engine is ok for driving in Moscow and around. It accelerates easily up to 110 km/h and it's possible to achieve 130 km/h on the good road (but kinda scary above 110-120). Once I got four passengers and we rode for about 200km and it wasn't that different from driving alone, it was just a little slower to accelerate... And it's very cheap to maintain.