World's Cheapest Car Goes On Sale In India

Frankie70 writes "The Tata Nano — the car that caught the world's imagination as the cheapest ever — will finally be rolled out commercially on Monday in Mumbai in a mega event organised by Tata Motors. Ben Oliver, contributing editor, Car Magazine, London test drove the car in December, 08. These were his first impressions. This was his verdict: 'CAR's first ride in the Tata Nano felt far more significant and exciting than a first drive in a Ferrari or Lamborghini, because this car's importance is immeasurably greater. It won't compete on dynamics or quality with European or Japanese city cars, but it doesn't have to. What Tata has achieved at an unprecedented price is astonishing, although we'd guess it will cost Indian consumers closer to £1700 when it finally goes on sale, six months late, in March 2009.'"

Comments

Cheap car already tried and failed!

[morgan_greywolf]

Those of us old enough to remember the 1980s remember the Yugo, which was touted then as the cheapest car ever: $3990 when they debuted in the U.S. in 1987 (bear in mind that the U.S. has much tougher safety and emissions standards than India).

It was tried here and failed miserably, especially after the general consensus among the consumer rags, especially Consumer Reports, was that you were better of with a used car than a new Yugo.

Re:Cheap car already tried and failed!

[Ritchie70]

A lot of the Yugo failure was quality.

I was in the auto repair business through much of the 90's and we never saw one, despite a pretty decent number of them being sold locally. I don't think they made it out of the 80's still running.

One of my store managers had been working at an import auto parts store while the Yugo was on sale as a new car.

I recall him saying that the Yugo dealer bought a lot of starters from them - for new cars before they sold them. Fortunately for the dealer, a new Yugo was mostly just a old Fiat.

Try to get your mind around that total lack of quality - the dealer replacing an OEM, brand new, factory part with an aftermarket part to get one that would work.

Wow, talk about crappy.

Infrastructure will not handle this

[Laxitive]

I think Indian infrastructure is going to have a hard time coping with this.

Tried getting anywhere in New Delhi recently? A 10km ride can take HOURS. I'm not exaggerating or kidding. You will literally stand in one spot for half an hour. Nobody obeys traffic rules and gridlock is the norm.

The Indian middle class is looking to copy the west, and they want their SUVs and their tall lattes too.

In late afternoon in New Delhi (about 6:00pm or so), you can STARE AT THE SUN without feeling any queasiness in your eyes. That's how bad the pollution is.

Instead of looking to other cultures and trying to NOT make the same mistakes, India is eager to copycat them. Heh... you think Americans go a little bit overboard with the bling and the super-size-me? Just wait.. just wait.

-Laxitive

Re:Infrastructure will not handle this

[Orome]

I'm not sure what the plan is now, but when the Nano was first unveiled Ratan Tata (the CEO) said that they would be focusing on selling the car in smaller cities.

The larger cities like Delhi and Mumbai have good public transport systems, and most people are pragmatic enough to realize that a train will get them to work faster (and cheaper) than driving in a car. I worked in Mumbai for two years, and I was earning more than enough money to own a regular car (and pay a driver!) but I still used public transport on a daily basis. The same is true for almost all of my peers.

I don't think there will be too many people buying this thing as a status symbol. I see it being primarily bought by lower-to-middle income families in the smaller cities, or in villages which are well connected to neighboring cities. If you ever visited India, you'd see some of these people taking their whole family on a single motorcycle which is dangerous.

Re:And will be unavailable anyplace else....

[Chris Burke]

Which country would that be? Germany with BMW, Mercedes and Audi? Or rather a scandinacian one? Volvo comes to mind. And what about all the Japanese SUVs?

Meanwhile, my 99 Century Buick V6 needs less gas than a Mitsubishi Galant V6 from approximately the same year.

So what the hell is your point?

Yeah, and where are all the SUVs from those foreign car companies sold? You don't think Toyota started making SUVs to take advantage of the lucrative large-truck-in-Tokyo market, do you?

Oh sure they do sell in other markets, but the point is that nobody has latched onto the gas-guzzling needlessly-oversized truck and SUV like in America. And therefore nobody from there, including those driving Century Buicks, should be pointing fingers at Indians buying the cheapest car ever and saying "Hey you shouldn't do that!"

Re:Oh, Joy, Joy, more oil comsumers

[ricegf]

Although you're speaking facetiously, I'll answer your question honestly.

1. Americans have experienced the severe negative effects of air pollution. It would be unkind not to warn the world's largest democracy to avoid our mistake.
2. Technology molds society. After 70 years, American society cannot simply "stop driving". It will take a generation or more to transform American society into something compatible with less personal transportation - like, say, virtual living.
3. Not everyone in this forum has "talked down" to the developing world. Of those who have, not all "drive big Ford trucks". I drive a small Ford economy car, and power my house with 100% wind energy. So do I have your permission to warn Indians of the risk they are facing, and how they might avoid the worst effects?

I understand the point you are intending, but consider whether your bashing 300,000,000 people with such a broad bat isn't the moral equivalent of those who "talk down" to the developing world.

Re:And will be unavailable anyplace else....

[Chris Burke]

Just because it is the path that America went down doesn't mean that it is the best path for other nations to follow.

Yes, and if India decides that they should follow a different path, then more power to them.

I think that the argument against giving them gas-powered cars is valid.

We aren't giving them anything, and thus it is not our choice to not give them. We are not the Greek gods, and Tata Motors is not Prometheus, okay?

It's the whole attitude here that pisses me off. I'd have no problem if people were saying "Hey India, look at what heavy adoption of cars at the expense of public transportation did to our country. You might want to think before making the same mistake we did." Instead, all I hear is this air of superior judgement, all "India shouldn't be given cars because they're going to fuck up the environment". It's the combination of the hypocrisy of ignoring or downplaying our own effect as polluter, with the sense of superiority where of course nobody can tell us what to do but we can decide whether India should be allowed to have cars that just reeks of hypocrisy and arrogance.

India already has the gift of fire-in-a-cylinder-with-a-piston. That djinni has been out of the bottle for a long time. And I don't see much to complain about with this particular incarnation. Compared to the fuel economy and emissions of the top gas and hybrid cars, it's competitive on fuel economy and emissions. Compared to the average car in the North American fleet, it's very good. Compared to the two-stroke engines running scooters and auto-rickshaws in the cities of India already, and which the Nano is priced to compete against, it is insanely great on emissions.

I think that India would be a perfect market for electric cars. I think that India would be a perfect market for electric cars. Electric cars are not big in America because the average American's commute exceeds the range and speed requirements for the average electric car currently in production.

Except an electric with enough juice for even a short commute is going to cost a hell of a lot more than the Nano. Yes, ICEs are not the ideal solution going forward. In the meantime, electrics serve some few needs, and hopefully will serve more in the future. In the meantime, if they want to improve their standard of living in a way that will be both affordable and get them halfway across the city and back or to the next town and back, and which will actually reduce emissions when it replaces the currently highly emissive vehicles that clog New Delhi, then who are you or I to say no? It's not like we're setting a better example, now are we? There's nothing wrong with discussing the issues, there is something wrong with riding a high horse while doing so.

Re:I'm still waiting for the Tata Touch...

[fugue]

From Wiktionary:

Pollution: [...] the contamination of the environment by harmful substances.

Yup, sounds like CO_2 qualifies. In spades. Sure it's a whole new mechanism for damage--not toxic, not carcinogenic, not a quick dose of nutrients to previously clear water, not ugly, etc--but it's certainly harmful!

Looks like the USA's per capita emissions of CO_2 are on the order of 10 times higher than China's (source: quick amalgam of Google results).

Some sources say that the USA leads in other pollutants as well (see http://www.crystalinks.com/pollution.html for a start, but I'm not happy with that page's rigour). That's no surprise given that the USA is a world leader in consumption and disposal of all kinds of goods--sheer volume overcomes good intentions. OTOH, I hear China is investing heavily in coal-fired power plants, which besides helping them to pull ahead in CO_2 will add a nice dose of mercury and some other nasties. Go team! There are lots of causes of pollution, and the USA comes out ahead on many of them.

Of course, the USA isn't doing too badly (relatively speaking) at controlling pollutants, although we're not doing especially well, either. Far better than China or India, AFAIK, although I'm not happy that my country is "better than the worst"!

This is an area I know little about. Do you have a better reference than what I found?