Slashdot Mirror
$3,000 Tata Nano Car Coming To US
walterbyrd writes "The Nano is currently powered by a 37 hp two-cylinder engine and lacks common safety features such as power steering, traction control and airbags. It was originally designed to compete in the Indian market against scooters and motorcycles. . . Along with added safety equipment, it's likely the car will get a larger, less polluting engine for export markets. Unfortunately, that means the price will increase, as well, possibly tripling by the time it goes on sale in the U.S.."
"Only three years away," doesn't make this news again.
Wake me up when one has successfully passed NHTSA crash saftey tests.
If they were smart they'd partner with someone to make the Fiat-500 or the Ford Fiesta air-powered versions. This is a wheel not worth reinventing, to some degree literally.
Poor people could use a new car. Too many who are making $17,000 a year working 2 jobs end up with cars that cost 50% of their paycheck just in maintaince and have to go hungry half the time if something goes wrong.
There are many walmart workers where this would be perfect and are not fortunate like the poor in Europe or other first world countries.
http://saveie6.com/
As recently as the 90s, power steering was still an option on many Saturns, for instance. Traction control was brand new and not even offered, and ABS brakes were a luxury that many did without, and they did just fine.
I see nothing wrong with getting back to that sort of economy.
Sounds like it will be the equivalent of a Hyundai Accent but with less power and probably a worse warranty.
Time to offend someone
“The Smart and the Fiat 500 have high sticker prices, and people buy them because they are small cars,”
Fiat, maybe, but people aren't buying Smart cars because they want a tiny car. Smart cars are small because that's what the technology required for electric cars at the time.
no windshield!
What a deal!
People aren't buying Smart cars because they want a tiny car. Smart cars are small because that's what the technology required for electric cars at the time.
That is why they are designed that way, but the people I know that own smart cars did buy them because they are quite small (and somewhat because of style). It's not even because of gas prices because the smart car is not especially fuel efficient.
"There is more worth loving than we have strength to love." - Brian Jay Stanley
The reason it's cheap is because it's shit. Not just performance wise, this thing is made of incredibly thin sheets of metal that buckle when you apply slight pressure to them with your hand. It is basically a very slightly less unsafe scooter, or possible more unsafe because at least scooter riders realize how vulnerable they are and sometimes wear a helmet.
const int one = 65536; (Silvermoon, Texture.cs)
SJW, n: "Someone I don't like, and by the way I'm a fuckwit" - AC
That's $9000 in 2015 dollars.
The VW Beetle came to the US, if memory serves, at $1666 in 1960s dollars.
Means no need for a defogging system!
I heard several years ago that Tata was planning to bring the car to Europe and the US with a bigger engine and safety equipment and the price would be around $8000.
The problem with that is: Nissan has figured out how to do that as well. And they have a dealership network. The Nissan Versa (base price) is about $10,000 -- and I'm sure they could figure out how to make it even cheaper if they were in a race to the bottom. But they aren't. You get a Japanese-quality vehicle for not a lot of money and it'll go on the highway.
Basically, Tata needs to figure out how to get the Nano down to a $6000 pricetag for people to even consider it versus the Versa.
In 2 or 3 years, the Chinese are coming: Their cars are cheap and unsafe, but priced so low that people will buy them anyhow. It will start a race to the bottom, but right now, Nissan has the lead because their car is a good value for the money, and a known name brand.
If telephones are outlawed, then only outlaws will have telephones.
So, why not just ditch all the safety features? Nobody will be buying those things for safety anyway. Just call it a motorcycle with four wheels and an enclosure. Just require it to conform to motorcycle safety levels.
Schroedinger's Brexit: The UK is both in and out of the EU at the same time!
In America the safety features usually drive the price up, but for good reason, you probably won't die in an accident. I highly doubt this vehicle would score well on any NTSHA traffic safety test in the states and likely would be rejected by consumers as unsafe.
I nearly vomit every time I have to see a repulsive little Yaris or Smartcar, now i'm going to be forced to look at these phenomenally hideous pieces of shit too?
I've been praying for years that this disgusting heap would not get imported here, but I guess Nikolaus Otto wasn't listening.
http://i.cubeupload.com/T6cyLu.png
A motorcycle with 4 wheels and a canopy, but a motorcycle nonetheless.
Knowledge is how to play a game, intelligence is how to win, wisdom is knowing what game to play.
Power Steering is only needed on cars that are Front Wheel Drive, because they are so nose-heavy. Even then the Geo-series of Suzuki-made el-cheapo cars came without power steering and handled well, and they were front wheel drive.
The Tata Nano on the other hand, really doesn't need power steering because the car itself is very light and the engine is in the rear, making the nose of the car very light and easy to turn the wheel.
If telephones are outlawed, then only outlaws will have telephones.
a $9,995.99 Tata car is coming to the US. and when it's all done I'm betting it's $15,995.95
Do not look at laser with remaining good eye.
Wow the next generation Yugo. I know somebody who bought one. It proved again he was cheap as hell and did really stupid things to prove it.
Federal regs now require stability control, which in turn requires ABS and TCS.
http://blogs.cars.com/kickingtires/2007/04/stability_contr.html
Power steering is a luxury, and not even needed on a car that light. But ABS is a definite safety plus, both for the occupants and everyone else. (Yes, it would be great if everyone was trained in threshold braking and was always alert and ready to employ the technique. It is also an absolutely absurd pipe dream to expect that of two hundred million+ drivers, every day of every week.)
It's a TATA box?
"Ratan Tata told the news outlet that the 10-foot-long car four-door is being redesigned for sales in the U.S. and Europe."
I'm not fucking surprised, we're all becomming fat bastards!
So, why not just ditch all the safety features?
Because it is illegal to do so without completely rewriting the laws in the US and the laws aren't going to change to accommodate this vehicle. For various reasons automobiles sold in the US are required to have certain safety features and if the Nano lacks these features it will not be allowed into the country. While I agree that motorcycles are plenty dangerous, they also are popular. The Tata Nano will not be popular. Might not be terribly logical from a safety standpoint but the safety feature requirements for cars aren't going to go away.
The smart doesn't get that great of fuel mileage. VW beats it in diesel with a ride you can actually fit four people into. most of your other small cars in the US come really close. 10% to 20% less with a bigger vehicle.
the Nano will compete just because this is Merica and damnit, we want it cheap. it doesn't matter if its junk as long as its cheap, we'll buy two just in case.
I don't know if the Tata is the right way to go, but I do think there is a market for commuter car that's small and safe enough for surface roads, may be prohibited on highways (like a moped) but is enclosed and heated. I think there are plenty of in-town commuters who would opt for such a high mileage vehicle if it were done well enough and still stay cheap.
The problem with quotes on the internet, is that nobody bothers to check their veracity. -- Abraham Lincoln
It's built as well as their software!
Which should scare the hell out of you.
(this was the 3-cylinder model) --- a rebadged Suzuki Swift.
~55MPG (no air bags, no air conditioning, no stereo).
I'd like to see some sort of equivalent entry-level vehicle at a reasonable price....
We can start an amateur stock car racing league on a $3000 car platform. A roll cage, safety harness and fire extinguisher won't add more than $1000 to make it race ready.
Given the amount of depreciation in the first few years of a car's life, generally speaking a used car makes far more financial sense than a new one.
Yes, you may get the odd lemon but on the whole you're far ahead financially buying used.
When did power steering become a safety feature?? Personally, as a commuter who uses drives to a train every day, I'm all for getting a car that's cheap and efficient - and this one sounds perfect. Airbags make perfect sense to me as a safety requirement, but I don't see where traction control should be required - this is what insurance is for. I do see the mileage going down however once it's got the weight added to the doors to prevent passenger smush in side collisions.. and in this country, that means the passengers have to live through an SUV collision.
Yugo
hit your brakes to give them room.
Studies show that ABS brakes do NOT reduce accident rates, but electronic traction control does. (It's more complicated and expensive though.)
So lift off the throttle a little for a moment, let the gap open up a bit,
And then another car goes in front of you, and you lift up again...
if the safe gap is too large you cannot maintain a safe gap.
"There is more worth loving than we have strength to love." - Brian Jay Stanley
Odd but true.
Electronic traction control does reduce accident rates, but it usually costs more.
Please tell me what car, any car, (outside an "exotic") requires $8,500 a year in maintenance. (50% a $17,000 paycheck.) I'm having trouble figuring out what you could possibly spend that much money on. That'd be more than enough for a brand-new engine, transmission, tires, and brakes, every single year. Even the most pathetic, rusted out, smoke-belching, heap won't set you back nearly that much.
Many cars easily make it to 100k-200k with nothing but exactly what the manual calls for, along with occasional brakes and tires.
...They're selling cars at the Quickie Mart now!!?!?
Light travels faster than sound. This is why some people appear bright until you hear them speak.........
I for one welcome the bigger Tatas. And the bigger the better.
there's a strange fact that people have missed, here: in France, Category L7e cars (350kg, under 20HP) actually have *less* accidents, and so the insurance is lower. the reason why, i believe, is that these cars are so underpowered and, despite passing crash tests with flying colours they "look" unsafe, that both the drivers themselves and also other road users treat them with much more caution.
if, for example, you have a large vehicle that can do 0-60 in 9 seconds, and you are behind a small vehicle that can do 0-60 in 30, the rate of acceleration is so much what you are not used to that you would immediately realise, just from the look of the other car, that the driver in front of you is not "putting it on": his car *really* can't accelerate any quicker. automatically, you've just adjusted, slowed down, and will now be paying attention.
increased attention means increased awareness. increased awareness means less accidents.
so, far from being "unsafer", these Category L7e "micro-cars", apart from having insane fuel economy (100mpg is not uncommon) actually create a "sea of cautious respect" around them. this could be so much horse-shit speculation, but the insurance statistics speak for themselves.
i think you mean defrosting system when the snow/ice is thick an heavy, and you have miles to go before you sleep
Power Steering is only needed on cars that are Front Wheel Drive, because they are so nose-heavy.
All cars are nose heavy unless they are mid or rear engine vehicles. Has nothing to do with being front wheel drive - it has to do with where the heaviest item in the vehicle (the engine) is located. What determines the need for power steering is the weight of the vehicle and the type of tires. If you've got a heavy vehicle with sticky or wide tires, you are going to have a hard time steering at low speed. Power steering isn't generally needed at high speed as the wheels don't need to turn far. If the vehicle is light odds are power steering is optional.
You can't cram all the stuff needed to meet today's US safety and emissions standards into that car. It will be a different car with the same name, or it won't be street legal.
"When information is power, privacy is freedom" - Jah-Wren Ryel
In the late 1990s, inspired by the extensive use of golf carts for transportation in retirement communities, the feds made a new class of vehicle: the Neighborhood Electric Vehicle. It would be limited to a top speed of 25 mph, and limited to roads with 35 mph. Ultimately, they ended up costing over $7,000, when a real car could be had for $10,000. The original Tata Nano would make a good, cheap, Low Speed Vehicle for 25 mph Neighborhood travel. I do not think a greatly enhanced Tata Nano would have a place in the United States.
Seriously if costs do triple to 9 thousand who the hell is going to buy this when you can get a real car for 18 thousand? (and probably cheaper the 18 thousand figure was just the cheapest new car I could find without even looking for more than 2 seconds)
I think he was talking about the fact the poor people can't buy new cars and have a hard time finding affordable older cars.
Peter predicted that you would "deliberately forget" creation 2000 years ago...
How about 350 euro's or so for public transport costs, tax-free, while my real costs at 209?
The trick if you ever work internationally is to REALLY compare what you get and what you have to pay for. I have many a job offer from American companies they thought was above market value but didn't include all the standard benefits you get in Holland. And 350 euro's untaxed takes a LOT of taxed salary to make up for.
MMO Quests are like orgasms:
You may solo them, I prefer them in a group.
If I were poor (and yes, I was poor at one point) I would still much rather buy a good-quality, reliable used car for the same price as this brand-new eye-sore. So if this car is going to cost $10,000 in the USA, I could think of many used cars that I'd much prefer to own that can be purchased for less money.
If it is likely to cost 3 times the current amount, shouldn't the title read: "Roughly $9,000 car coming to US at some point"
I mean, they may be a bit bigger than the original asian versions, but they'll still be small relative to the rest of the models on the street.
Wait...what were we talking about?
Save the Tatas....
I wish Renault could bring the Twizy to the US. It's electric and has reasonable safety features. (But price could be better and could use some windows...)
These comments are mine; I do not speak for my employer.
Cars that catch fire on the way home from the car yard...
Or the road rage incited by these cars could lead to highway massacres.
I have a 1996 Saturn SC2 and it's been on the road for more than 10 years with very little maintenance.
But I'd buy a Tato Nano.
-- Tigger warning: This post may contain tiggers! --
Sometimes gut feelings are right. The physics is quite simple: momentum M*V is preserved and kinetic energy shock to each vehicle in a crash is proportional to the square of its velocity change. In view of the law of conservation of momentum, the velocity change is inversely proportional to the weight (mass) of the vehicle. The smaller car will thus have the larger velocity change; now note the crash impact is proportional to the square of the square of that velocity change...
FWIW, I drive a small car - I'm not arguing against small cars, but for physical realism.
Have gnu, will travel.
It will be a below $10000 Nano made for the US, but not $3000.
http://www.autoweek.com/article/20121015/CARNEWS/121019906
Sorry, but gray text on gray background is making my eyes bleed.
I bet they could sell a million of 'em if they threw in a couple of those leather harley costumes with each one.
To ensure perfect aim, shoot first and call whatever you hit the target
Doubt it's coming to the USA after patent trolls claim patent infringement on steering wheels, tires, and brakes.
Regardless of whether or not the current used car supply is "adequate", the REAL problem is slightly different.
People in the U.S. earning relatively low wages get clobbered by the costs of maintaining the inexpensive used cars they purchase. One of my good friend's younger sisters is a perfect example. She works full-time as a waitress / bartender where reliable transportation to/from work is a requirement. (People saying, "Just take the bus!" obviously aren't in touch with the reality of suburban restaurants not often being located conveniently close to bus routes, or demands of starting work on various shifts that don't correspond well with bus schedules.)
She's been struggling with a hand-me-down car, purchased affordably from her family. It's in the shop for repairs as often as it's on the road, and it's literally eating up all of her paychecks AND risking her job when she's made late or can't come in. So much for it being a good value.
People like her need RELIABLE vehicles that don't surprise them with unexpected costs over and above the usual, predictable costs of operation (gas, oil changes, etc.). Unfortunately, when one looks at used cars in, say, the under $10,000 price category, one tends to find A) high mileage vehicles, or B) vehicles known to be below average in reliability.
That's why so many people do go out and buy a new car, even though others have the opinion that with budgets as tight as they have, it's fiscally foolish. At least with a new vehicle, you're potentially covered by warranty for all major issues that could go wrong for at least as long as the period of the loan. So you're buying something guaranteed to be functional/drivable for as long as you make a fixed, predictable monthly payment on the loan.
So...does this mean the effective tax (including regulation costs) in the U.S. is 200% or more?
All of these 'safety' devices are costly. A lot of expense is on anti-pollution devices that only operate when the engine is cold. A lot more expense is there to conform to computer standards such as ODBC. What about engines that don't require computers? Are all U.S. cars required to be computerized? What does THAT give us (other than simply an efficient way to handle fuel injection)?
You cut the real tag off and replace it with a known destroyed tag (that they don't have records on)
plus you would have to work with "damaged" vin tags and a whole lot of other "mess".
scrapping the engine is the best way (and leaves the rest of the car for the parts market)
Any person using FTFY or editing my postings agrees to a US$50.00 charge
I could afford to buy my wife three Tatas.
Yep. That's how you drive safely.
Safe driving is keeping up with traffic and keeping alterations of any variables to a minimum. That means where cars are to any side.
Unsafe driving is driving in any manner that violates this. Weaving in an out of traffic causes cars to react suddenly, to slow down, etc. But just as bad is the too slow driver that causes many cars to go around them. You are forcing other cars into other lanes suddenly. You are creating stress for countless drivers where non needed to exist. You are the cause of a rise in the probability of accidents, both ahead of and behind you. You are risking a rear-end collision from someone who does not notice there is a substantially slower car on the road.
All because you were selfishly driving the speed you chose as "right", even though traffic in general when un-impeded naturally chooses a very safe average speed.
If you are causing many people to go around you, you are not taking traffic seriously either.
"There is more worth loving than we have strength to love." - Brian Jay Stanley
Honestly, I'd say this is entirely within the realm of possibility, at least in some years of ownership.
I'll give you a quick example:
2007 Jeep Patriot Sport 4x4 I bought used with about 45K miles on it. Front ball joints and tie-rod ends needed replacement by 49K miles. Battery died and needed replacement. Spent $150 or so on an issue where the plastic "well" behind the gas cap broke and fell down inside the vehicle's frame. CVT transmission bearing wore out at under 70K miles requiring a replacement transmission at a cost of about $5600 from Chrysler. Rear brakes needed new pads/rotors too.
I got a lot of that taken care of by a 3rd. party extended warranty I paid extra for when I bought it -- but otherwise? Oh yeah, we're in that $8500 ballpark right there.
At least with a good shell and on the fairly flat. 50bph easily enough. In WWII we had 30 ton tanks that had 200bhp engines in them.
I'm no physicist, but...
Quote:
Compressed air has relatively low energy density. Air at 30 MPa (4,500 psi) contains about 50 Wh of energy per liter (and normally weighs 372g per liter). For comparison, a lead–acid battery contains 60-75 Wh/l. A lithium-ion battery contains about 250-620 Wh/l. Gasoline contains about 9411 Wh per liter; however, a typical gasoline engine with 18% efficiency can only recover the equivalent of 1694 Wh/l. The energy density of a compressed air system can be more than doubled if the air is heated prior to expansion.
(Wh == Watt-hour == 3600 joules == see here)
So even an inefficient gasoline engine has more an order of magnitude (10 times!) the fuel energy density of compressed air (assuming 3x improvement due to heating, etc)!
Sure, they can build a golf cart, but compressed air (or electric) cars that SUV-loving consumers will actually choose to buy in a free market are still a futuristic fantasy. The governments can hold a gun to people's heads and force them to buy them, but that level of tyranny (which many socialists, including U.S. Democrats, openly advocate) has all sorts of negative side-effects...
It seems that with all the government interventionism and all the money that has been wasted trying to produce viable non-gasoline cars before their time, it would have been possible to come up with more efficient gasoline engines, and technologies that capture CO2 and other pollutants, compress them, and store them on-board the vehicle. AGW and "peak oil" are shams, but local pollution liabilities are a very serious Property Rights issue, and one that government is failing to address. Even a diehard libertarian like myself would agree that taxing pollution (rather than income) is a good idea! Imagine pulling into a gas station, filling up your fuel tank, emptying your pollution tank, and getting a hefty discount!
--libman
Which means it will be another Hyundai (as they started in the US, not as they are now), another Kia, etc. Decent new cars that are affordable but not standout in any way. Over time as they gain in reputation (if they do) their prices will increase, and someone else will step in to fill the role.
TL;DR - someone coming to fill the low end new car market, as Hyundai and Kia have grown up a bit and no longer serve it.
Top Gear and the Reliant Robin FTW: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_bIn_ZgHJaE
Our current regulations for cars in the US are quite strict. They got started for a good reason (prior to regulation, the companies actually had a collusive agreement *not* to bring new safety features to market), but we're reaching the point of diminishing returns. (Mandatory tire pressure monitoring sensors? Really?) It's actually a testament to human ingenuity that new cars in America can be brought to market as cheaply as they currently are.
But there has to be something to fill the gap. Currently we allow regular cars, which bristle with safety features... and motorcycles, which have essentially no safety features at all. This seems bizarre; a car design from 1990 is far, far safer than a motorcycle, but we wouldn't allow the former to be manufactured and sold as a new product today, while the latter is just fine.
What I'd propose is a new category: city cars. These would have a maximum speed of 55 MPH and would not be permitted on interstates. (On limited-access state roads, it would be up to the traffic authorities to decide if they are allowed or not.) From a safety standpoint, they would be treated pretty much like motorcycles: anything goes. No airbag requirements, no ABS requirements, nothing. Consequently, they could be much, much cheaper than normal cars. For people who have a commute that doesn't require going on the highway, this could be a very economical alternative. And at low speeds, safety becomes less of a concern.
I know that the Neighborhood Electric Vehicle classification is similar, but that only applies to electric (not gas) vehicles, and they can only go on roads with speed limits of 35 MPH or less, which means you can't really use them for much of anything in the real world.
http://www.iihs.org/news/rss/pr041409.html
dont buy into the marketing BULL
if, for example, you have a large vehicle that can do 0-60 in 9 seconds, and you are behind a small vehicle that can do 0-60 in 30, the rate of acceleration is so much what you are not used to that you would immediately realise, just from the look of the other car, that the driver in front of you is not "putting it on": his car *really* can't accelerate any quicker. automatically, you've just adjusted, slowed down, and will now be paying attention.
Where do you find these cars that do 0 to 60 mph in less than 30 seconds? I've seen vanishingly few that can do that in the USA. Sure, the manufacturers might claim they do 0 to 60 mph in 9 seconds, but I've rarely seen any car even come close to that. Cars in the USA typically need 60 seconds or more to reach freeway speeds here, they also apparently need around 0.5mi to slow down. I'm suspecting few drivers here understand the concept of the "accelerator" and instead think it a "speed pedal", quite a distinction; then people anticipate their exit from freeways by that much.
Clear thinking should be rewarded.
I never thought I'd own a brand new car; they depreciate so quickly. Recently my '99 Falcon has developed some expensive problems, and my TCO (including purchase/finance, insurance, tyres, servicing, rego, roadside-assist, 30,000km/year with 10% p.a. fuel cost increases) analysis showed $48-$53k over 5 years for ~$9,000 2nd-hand car scenarios, vs $56k for the Hyundai i30 diesel manual wagon I just bought for $20k AUD. If I sell the i30 for $3-$8k, I can break even (which shouldn't be hard, the run-out model I got was discounted $7.5k from list price).
As much as I loved my Falcon, on LPG fuel it cost over $8k to run last year (half of that was LPG fuel, and we normally do 40,000km/year). Almost $900 for registration costs, and we averaged ~$1,000 at each 10,000km service ($300 if nothing is wrong, up to $1500 when new parts are involved). Last time it was new ball joint on the front-left wheel, but in reality all the front suspension needs doing (new bushes/bearings, etc). The final nail is that the LPG mixer has failed so it only works properly on unleaded fuel, which costs ~50% more to run.
I didn't realize I could get a brand new family car for $20k (okay, the i30 is a lot smaller than the Falcon, but it still works for us). With half (or more) savings in fuel, and the km that we do, the option to buy new - with capped servicing costs and 5 year warranty - actually was hard to go past a new car. I think second-hand is more rewarding if you're doing fewer km and/or can maintain them well yourself without a mechanic. Both my brothers are mechanics and my dad taught me a lot about engines as a kid, but these days I just don't have the tools or the time.
Yugo
Nobody pays 5600 for a transmission on a jeep. Your warranty company didn't pay that. They lie.
John McAfee 'It was like that time I hired that Bangkok prostitute; to do my taxes, while I fucked my accountant'
95% of drivers on the road don't leave adequate space in front of them.
My safety is paramount over EVERYTHING else when 95% of the fuckers, er other drivers, can't follow basic rules of driving.
So, I go whatever speed I want in the left lane, and the rest of you can FOAD
ironic captcha: insure
The solution is to start executing drivers who are such assholes that they endanger everyone else on the road.
No, I am not kidding.
I like these little cars, so cheap and fun. I'm in China for a few years so I just brought a BYD F0. Better looking than the Nano and for an entry level car it even has keyless entry. Airbags would have added another USD 1K but complete with factory mags, body kit, tinted windows, registration and insurance it was only USD $7500 on the road. I'm not sure where is stands on crash testing but it is proabably safer than my prefered mode of transport, a motorcycle.
In addition, these golfcarts only make things worse off for car manufacturing - given that they encourage shoddy manufacturing over quality.
These things won't be flying off of dealer lots because of sales, but they'll fly off of bridges because of the wind - much like how a Yugo did.
Twitter supports and protects racists - by smearing their critics with the "Hate Speech" label.
Then you would see gentrification end up isolating groups of people - by using the speed limit or the construction of a (small) freeway to separate/isolate the undesirable city car drivers.
Twitter supports and protects racists - by smearing their critics with the "Hate Speech" label.
Come to think of it, my first car had 1100ccm, 42 hp engine, about 650kg curb weight, and it was 3.9m long sedan. No servo steering or brakes, no A/C, airbags, ABS, stereo, electrical windows, ...
It was a nice ride back in 1979!
I agree that the cost of reliable transportation is a huge hurdle for many families trying to make their way out of poverty.
But what he was rambling about was some mythical vehicle that costs $8,500 a year to maintain. $8,500 a year in total transportation costs, I could believe, if you have a long commute. But not $8,500 a year in maintenance.
Oh come on. I'm not talking about driving super slow. A few MPH slower than the herd in the slow lane and you'll have a nice safe zone in front of you.
Meanwhile you will be causing a HUGE backup behind you, angering a lot of people and causing many potential accidents - some possibly in front of you by frustrated drivers who eventually managed to pass you. You also get to enjoy the feeling of people cutting you off suddenly who didn't like how slow you were going, endangering you and them...
But if it makes you feel better, by all means screw over traffic. No-one else matters.
"There is more worth loving than we have strength to love." - Brian Jay Stanley
Really?
http://www.jeeppatriot.com/forum/showthread.php?t=83320
http://www.justanswer.com/dodge/4v9d4-dodge-caliber-sxt-estimated-cost-replace-cvt-transmission.html
(Dodge Caliber uses the same CVT transmission.)
Both of these message threads have people answering back that it has around a $5,000 replacement cost ... and that's not factoring in the 4 wheel re-alignment you need to do after you disassemble things enough to take the old CVT out and swap the new one in. So $5,600 sounds fairly close
You do realize, it takes non-zero time for a car to pass you, right? Even if you are driving 15 mph slower than the other traffic, it still takes 2-3 seconds or more for a car to pass you... which is why you can easily sustain a proper spacing at 60 mph in a 65 zone, no matter how fast the surrounding traffic "wants" to go.
Even granting 5K$ is retail, your warranty company did not pay that. Maybe 50%, maybe.
I sounds like this CVT is a POS.
John McAfee 'It was like that time I hired that Bangkok prostitute; to do my taxes, while I fucked my accountant'
Having spent a lot of time in India over the last 30 years, I have a soft spot for Tata vehicles. I've seen the company grow from a diesel engine and heavy truck manufacturer to a competitor in the small vehicles market, competing with Suzuki, Honda, Toyota, and others in India. Their diesel engine designs are rock solid and scale down to small city vehicles very well. I recently drove a Tata Indica (which I believe has a 3-4 cylinder diesel, no turbo) from Jaipur to Agra and back and the machine got 60 mpg! I feel like the US is suppressing Americans by forcing them to guzzle gasoline - most Asian and European markets have various small diesel car options. Regarding safety equipment, etc... that's something DOT will need to retrofit into these imports, as it has done for all the others in the past.
On behalf of Indians, non-Indians living in India, NRIs, NROs, NREs, and any tourist who has ever had to ride in a Tata-branded vehicle, I'm sorry in advance for the atrocity that will soon be thrust upon you.
Founder & COO, Hayai India (hayai.in) / USA (hayaibroadband.com)
"better profit margins means more jobs"
No, it means more profit to the executives.
That's a horribly false economy and terrible advice for all but the lemonyest of lemons. If that same waitress budgeted for a fixed, predictable monthly loan payment and simply put that money aside into a "maintenance/rainy day" fund - she would end up far ahead with her used car. Folks get the sticker shock when they get a $700 repair estimate, but compare that to the $300 to $400 per *month* they would be spending on a loan? Don't forget, even with a loan you still need to pay for maintenance.
Look back at those under $10k cars. You'll find heaps of early 2000s cars with maybe 100k miles - most more than capable of going another 100k with modest maintenance costs. I think the problem is more due to discipline than anything else. People seem to be able to swing expensive car payments because they have no choice in the matter. However, in the absence of that car payment, they aren't able to set aside any money for a rainy day fund. They are simply unable to leave money unspent.
+1 Disagree
oh right. a car that goes up in flames which is an utter failure in india. now all set to be a bigger fail in the USA? when will TATA ever learn!
Recently I have found a place for approaching to the millionaires, and dating with them. I think it may be useful to you. Just check lovingrich.com. Thank you.
Sure it wont take you on highways. (Min speed = 55 mph!) But it should be OK for pure city commutes (once it passes all safety regulations).
PS: I am from India. Here it now sells for much above $1000.(between $3072 and $4247) at an exchange rate of Rs.50 per dollar. So once it gets more features added, the cost is likely to triple.
OK
Since when has traction control become a common safety feature? That's absurd. I'd never buy a car with traction control. People who are too inept not to spin their wheels when accelerating shouldn't be driving.
I don't respond to AC's.
actually create a "sea of cautious respect" around them
Wouldn't this be a sea of cautious *disrespect*?
But you knew that. For starters, it's 30hp under powered. No way this thing will get anywhere on hilly terrain. Even if this part addressed question it remains to be seen if this will last for reasonable time span assuming it must be built with dirt cheap parts. Probably under engineered as well. Most of motorcycles go for much more than this. Regardless, if it over comes these issues the reigning automotive monopolies will force the price up to standard inflated prices because they will not tolerate competition.
Water glass, otherwise known as Sodium silicate. It's also used to temporary seal leaking head gaskets. Fun stuff.