Slashdot Log In
The World's Cheapest Car Set To Launch
Posted by
Zonk
on Mon Dec 31, 2007 12:47 AM
from the be-nice-to-have-a-toolin-mobile dept.
from the be-nice-to-have-a-toolin-mobile dept.
theodp writes "Ready for one-automobile-per-child (OAPC)? India's giant Tata Group is on the verge of launching the world's cheapest car. The People's Car, slated to be unveiled January 10th at a New Delhi auto show, will carry a sticker price of 100,000 rupees ($2,500), which some analysts say could revolutionize automobile costs worldwide. The Tata is a pet project of Cornell-trained architect Ratan Tata, who helped design it. The vehicle is aimed at improving driving safety by getting India's masses off their motorbikes and into cars."
Related Stories
[+]
100-MPG Air-Powered Car Headed To US Next Year 45 comments
An anonymous reader sends us to Popular Mechanics for word on a New York automaker with plans to introduce a US version of the air-powered car, with which India's Tata Motors made a splash last year. Zero Pollution Motors plans a sub-$18,000, 6-passenger vehicle that can hit 96 mph and gets over 100 MPG, using an untried dual engine — the air-powered motor being supplemented by a second (unspecified) engine that would kick in above 35 MPH. The company estimates that "a vehicle with one tank of air and, say, 8 gallons of either conventional petrol, ethanol, or biofuel could hit between 800 and 1000 miles." The vehicle could be introduced to the market as early as 2009.
This discussion has been archived.
No new comments can be posted.
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
Tatas (Score:5, Funny)
God, I would love to have a tata to ride around in.. Of course people might say I looked like a boob inside that thing, but I wouldn't care.
Sounds interesting, but any hope of US? (Score:3, Interesting)
Re:Sounds interesting, but any hope of US? (Score:5, Insightful)
The vehicle is aimed at improving driving safety by getting India's masses off their motorbikes and into cars."
Hmm...the world's second most populous nation switching from motorcycles to cars. Yes, that should do wonders for gas prices / global warming.
Re:Sounds interesting, but any hope of US? (Score:5, Interesting)
Re:Sounds interesting, but any hope of US? (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Sounds interesting, but any hope of US? (Score:5, Informative)
- 33 HP 660 cc gas engine. Also a 700 cc diesel option. (4)
- 80 mph top speed (4)
- single windshield wiper blade as a "cost-saving measure"(2)
- Four doors (4)
- 25 kilometers (15.5 miles) per liter. Call it 60 mpg using company supplied numbers(3)
- Picture here maybe with an scanned in article about it listing engine options [blogspot.com]
As for seeing it in the U.S., two things here: In India required safety standards do not currently include full-body crash testing, airbags or antilock braking systems (1). The cars would have to be upgraded to be U.S. street legal. Which brings us to this point: "Roland Berger [consulting group] estimates it would cost as much as $4,000 on top of Tata's $2,500 to engineer the car to meet U.S. safety and emissions regulations, transport it, pay tariffs, market it, pay lawyers and offer warranties. The same would hold true to meet European or Japanese standards. Meanwhile, the Tata would have to compete, too, with a used-car market that turns over 43 million cars a year. A quick Web search shows that $6,500 could buy a 1998 Cadillac Seville with a V-8 engine and a leather interior, or a 2002 Dodge Caravan that seats seven." References: 1 NY Times [nytimes.com] 2 Rediff [rediff.com] 3 Forbes [forbes.com] 4 Business Week [businessweek.com]Re:Sounds interesting, but any hope of US? (Score:4, Funny)
This is not new . . . (Score:5, Interesting)
Re:This is not new . . . (Score:5, Funny)
2500 Rupees? (Score:5, Funny)
Maybe five of us could cut grass together and car pool.
The negative (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:The negative (Score:5, Informative)
What about the Chinese? (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:What about the Chinese? (Score:5, Insightful)
until you people understand this, you will continue to doom the 3rd world with your kindness.
Is it safe? (Score:5, Interesting)
For now, I'll hold on to my Peel P50 [youtube.com].
Just what the world needs..... (Score:5, Insightful)
Clearly these people spend little time IN traffic (Score:4, Interesting)
If you want to fix India traffic issues the solution is not to add MORE CARS. Infact, I would argue one should add more motorcycles to the traffic. The motorcycles are the only vehicles that get around easily in Indian traffic while the rest of the road is jammed up with giant trucks manufacturered by TATA
Real ideas for fixing Indian traffic issues and fatailities:
Purge the Indian traffic police and start over. From what I saw these guys are incredibly ineffective. They stand around and wave during rush hour. They have no power to change the flow of traffic or enforce laws due to the sheer mass and force of violations occuring. You don't get 1 guy running a red light in india, you get the whole damn contents of the Intersection.
Build a new agency from the ground up focused around safety and enforcement of laws, and start ENFORCING the traffic laws.
Increase traffic fines - now my judgement here may be skewed because the standard of living is lower in India and as a result these fines may be more to your average Indian, but check this out:
http://www.bcp.gov.in/english/trafficpolice/trafficdos/spotfines.htm [bcp.gov.in]
It's a list of "spot fines". Note that 40 rupees is about $1 USD.
Speeding? $7.50
Driving without a license? $7.50.
Running a red light? $2.50
Yeah - does anyone else wonder why these offenses continue to happen?
Study traffic calming techniques used in some european countries recently. The problem I see with the roads in India is they're built much like US roads - wide, big, with high curbs, and the sheer design of them encourages speeding. Parking problems in the city has made parking on lots of main roads illegal.
Get rid of the high curbs everywhere, put parked cars back onto the streets to provide a visual and mental barrier for pedestrian traffic, and make the roads "feel" dangerous (which really, if you dont think Indian traffic is dangerous already you dont have a pulse but whatetver...)
Get the giant ass Tata trucks off the roads. I don't know what the hell these Tata trucks do driving around all the time, but theyre huge flatbeds, bigger then everything else on the road, and look dangerous as hell.
Mass transit - finish the projects on time and ahead of schedule. Yeah, that means YOU Bangalore officials sitting on your asses getting kickbacks from the Metro project. Fix the shit.
Crosswalks/pedestrian bridges - Try painting some lines on the road once and a while
Get the wildlife off the roads - Now seriously, I respect the traditional farmers still left in the country and in the cities, but cows do NOT belong on roads, ok?!
Unintended Consequences (Score:4, Informative)
It's incredible how many people start wading into all kinds of issues with the intent of improving safety without the first notion of what risk really is and how we humans evaluate and cope with it.
Anybody who's work may impact public safety should be forced at gunpoint to at least read Risk [amazon.co.uk] by John Adams. It has much to say about the effects of public safety initiatives and their unintended consequences.
For instance, after the introduction of compulsory seatbelt legislation in the UK, the number of motorists who were killed or seriously injured decreased somewhat. Unfortunately more cyclists and pedestrians were killed or seriousy injured in collisions with motor vehicles, such that the overall number of road deaths increased. Adams attributes the increase to drivers' assessment of their own level of risk being reduced, hence they tended to drive more quickly and in a more dangerous fashion, until their personal risk threshold was restored.
"...The vehicle is aimed at improving driving safety by getting India's masses off their motorbikes and into cars..."
In light of what I said previously, look out for a rise in the overall number of people KSI on India's roads...
T&K.
It's for the scooter/rickshaw market in India (Score:4, Informative)
See in India you can already buy a Bajaj 3-wheeler aka motor rickshaw that seats 4 or 5 or more. But they're fairly expensive and they're not really cars per se - they're rickshaws. I may get one myself if gas gets expensive enough. They're registered as motorcycles in the US. And with an 8.5hp engine, max speed about 45mph it's a great around town vehicle.
Re:Exactly What We Need (Score:4, Insightful)
This is what I keep wondering about the US insistence that we do nothing about the environment until China takes action first - even though our per capita CO2 emissions are still 400% of theirs! We might be willing to freeze our emissions at current levels if they freeze theirs at what are (to us) levels from the 1930's? Please.
Yes, I do understand. As an American I find the prospect of equal access to natural resources for everybody on earth very frightening, because I am accustomed to our position of privilege. But I won't try to rationalize that selfish and irrational sentiment.
Re:Exactly What We Need (Score:5, Insightful)
From what I've observed, the USA equates rich and privilege - if you're rich, you fscking well earned it and deserve the right to plunder more. If that $PERSON_FROM_OTHER_COUNTRY were worth anything, they'd have enough money/influence/power to compete, nevermind the huge disparity in resources.
Yes, I do understand. As an American I find the prospect of equal access to natural resources for everybody on earth very frightening, because I am accustomed to our position of privilege. But I won't try to rationalize that selfish and irrational sentiment.
As a Canadian, (where we produce more CO2 per capita than the US - no lily-green condescension here) I fear that situation more. We're in no position to defend ourselves if we become "hostile to American interests", especially if those interests are Big Oil, since we have what they want [wikipedia.org] in spades. Granted, it seems that a less hostile approach *cough*Stephen Harper*COUGH* is being taken, but we are a different lot up here - eventually, we _will_ have a conflict where the US wants our water or oil or trees or whatever, and will take it in whatever means they determine necessary against our will or better judgement. Just so you know - I don't think it will be the majority of Americans who will want to do that, just the moneyed few who will lose control unless they do so, and so will sell it to the American public as "The Right Thing".
In summation - we live in a global plutocracy, where being a USasian or Canoodian or Belizian matters not a whit, only how much money you have and what you can do to further the cause of the privileged few. The trick is to turn (a) green technology(ies) into something they need to hold on to power - then it'll be invested in and promoted like nothing else.
Re:Exactly What We Need (Score:4, Interesting)
There's a big difference between ignorantly pushing technology forward when you don't know the consequences as opposed to pushing forward when you're well aware of what will happen. The BRIC nations can have a much more detrimental effect on the environment than America has ever had. It may not be fair, but guess what - that's life. It ain't fair. Deal.
Re:The problem I see... (Score:4, Informative)
Re:Future owner of the Jag (Score:5, Informative)
you mean a Smart? (Score:4, Insightful)
Or perhaps a Ford Ka, if you do need the 4/5 seats; though at that point, you almost might as well get a regular sedan/hatchback/whatever-as-long-as-it-isn't-an-SUV, imho.
There's many, many cars that are very safe, have a trunk, are cheap, economical, etc. The problem isn't that there aren't such cars; the problem is that people - at least in the U.S. - aren't buying them. Things like...
- top speed being lower than 140mph (which is legal, where? oh, right, you were trying to get away from the crazed axe murderer)
- acceleration from 0-60 not being lower than 4 seconds (which you need to do, when? ah yes, to accelerate out of the way of the runaway semi)
- range being less than 100 miles (because gas stations are so hard to find? Oh right, you like taking your economical car to the Alaskan planes or Utah salt beds; I forgot)
- because an SUV would crush you (good luck trying to crush a Smart, though I'm sure the people in the SUV will have a lesser headache - but let's face it.. chicken&egg problem? Makes me wonder why SUV drivers don't just all have MACK trucks by now; lest their explorer gets crushed by an expedition which gets crushed by an excursion and so forth and so on.)
- looks. Yes, the typical reason why any economical car - especially electrics - are shot down in the U.S. And when one does look good - hey, fall back to the other 'reasons'.
It's funny watching Americans coming to live here (NL).. some of them are keen to hold on to their big cars. Why's that funny? Stand around in Amsterdam, The Hague, Groningen, Utrecht, etc. and watch one of them try to navigate the streets, or find a parking space. It's extra-hilarious when somebody in a 45km/h car (don't need a driver's license, just a 'moped/scooter' certificate; but obviously you can't go on highways with it) snags a spot that the engine compartment of their SUV wouldn't even fit in.