$2500 Tata Nano Car Unveiled in India 625
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."
Somewhere (Score:4, Funny)
Re: (Score:2, Interesting)
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
I would if I never had to enter a freeway.
Unfortunately, that's not the case.
Re:Somewhere (Score:4, Insightful)
Re:Somewhere (Score:5, Informative)
These new cars are probably a lot safe than the auto-rickshaws running everywhere also.
$2,500 may not seem much to a USA citizen, but it is a huge mount to many Indians. Motorycles are in the $700 range, so this is a 400-500 percent increase when factoring in taxes, etc. New USA motorcycles above 650cc are in the $5,000 and up range, new cars are only about 2.5 to 3 times more expensive.
I applaud Tata motors for bringing to India an automobile that addresses safety and pollution concerns. Would I buy one?? If I could commute completely on city streets, which I can, then yes. You can't buy a used motorcycle of any size in the US for $2,500. Right now, I ride my motorcycle to work as often as I can (probably at least 4 out of 5 days), but even in Phoenix it rains sometimes. For those days, I have to depend on a truck that gets 20 mpg. What a waste for one person, I would rather look into one of these.
And don't tell me about SmartCars. They cost over $20K. I'm not spending that for a car I would use 10 or 15 times a year.
Re:Somewhere (Score:4, Interesting)
Motorcycles easily under $2500 (Score:4, Informative)
If you don't want "butt jewelry" as they call it, finding something under $2500 should be easy. Of course if you can only ride it half the year, it's probably not worth the extra cost of insurance, titling, and capital other than for sake of entertainment.
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
I keep hearing this about the Smart Car and I just don't get it. They're all over the place here in Vancouver, Canada, and zip on and off the freeways with ease (I don't own one, but they often pass my old pickup on the Freeway, then zip off. Cute.). Their construction (basically you're inside a steel cage called a "Tridion Safety Cell") ensures you're pretty safe.
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
Re:Somewhere (Score:5, Funny)
Also, lets be real. How effective is a 30HP car going to be moving a family of fatass American families weighing in at ~1000lbs total.
Re:Somewhere (Score:4, Interesting)
Re:Somewhere (Score:5, Funny)
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Could 30 horses not pull a wagon with 4 fat Americans in it? Perhaps not at Ben Hur speed, but they'd get there.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
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 ove
Re:Somewhere (Score:5, Informative)
An extremely steep public road might have a grade of 15% (rise over horizontal distance, or roughly 8.5 degrees slope. Traveling a measured mile along such a road yields an elevation gain of 780 feet, which might indeed prove a challenge for our 30 hp engine with our four sumo sized occupants, which exclusive of losses is capable of gaining that altitude in a bit under three minutes. However, there are very few straight roads this steep; if we assume lots of switchbacks and hairpin turns, an average speed of fifteen mph or so is not utterly unreasonable, although people who live at the top of such a hill might opt for a more powerful car.
A very steep section of highway might have a grade of 5% or maybe 7%. A measured mile at 7% is a gain of 370 feet and our engine could lift our sumo crew that height in one minute, twenty three seconds, limiting our speed to around 44mph on this stretch theoretically. Let's say we have a continuously variable transmission, or at least one that is appropriate to this car, we might end up limited to 30 mph on this stretch.
Of course, with a single, 250 pound occupant, our engine could raise the car and occupant 370 feet in 62 seconds. Since that would be almost 60mph over our measured mile, our actual speed would be limited by aerodynamic, frictional losses, and the ability of a rudimentary transmission to keep the engine in its power band, but assuming that the transmission is designed for efficient operation in the 30-40 mph speed range, it shouldn't be impossible for a single commuter to achieve speeds of 45mph over such a stretch of highway. Given that this piece of highway probably has a climbing lane, this vehicle would not be impractical for a single occupant, provided he'd rather have fifteen grand in his pocket from the purchase of the car than fifteen mph on that stretch of road. Not to mention the cost of gas.
Uh-oh (Score:3, Insightful)
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
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 generati
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
I'd like to see vehicular manslaughter used more in trials when people are speeding, cause an accident and someone gets killed. I'd especially like to see it if the victim is not breaking the speed limit or as we call it in my city, the law.
Re:Somewhere (Score:5, Insightful)
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).
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
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 incr
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
The only people that appear to "dig" my tight spandex and l33t leg muscles are red necks. At least, I think they're shouting positive things as they whiz by in their trucks (note, sarcasm)
Seriously, the only time chicks pay too much attention is when your spandex isn't so good at camouflage on the male bits, and then I feel more like I'm a zoo exhibit - not exactly the attention I wa
Re:Somewhere (Score:4, Funny)
I wouldn't even need any extra garage space.....I could just build a ramp up into my Armada and park it there.....three cars in a two car garage.
Layne
Re:Somewhere (Score:5, Funny)
Re: (Score:2)
I'd buy one, too. (Score:3, Interesting)
I think we are entering a phase of American driving where people will have a tiny, one-person, gas-sipping commuter car to go to work every day, and a "family car" for long-distance travels on the weekends.
And before everyone freaks out about the safety, I figure it's safer than a motorcycle.
Re:I'd buy one, too. (Score:4, Insightful)
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.
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
Re:I'd buy one, too. (Score:4, Interesting)
The fact is that the best data available today still comes from the Hurt Report (rimary author, Dr. Harry Hurt), even though the study was written in 1981. Just in the last couple of months, the federal government and the AMA have jointly funded a new study intended to update those conclusions.
The summary of the Hurt Report can be found online, but I think that a couple of these conclusions are relevant here:
22. The motorcycle riders involved in accidents are essentially without training; 92% were self-taught or learned from family or friends. Motorcycle rider training experience reduces accident involvement and is related to reduced injuries in the event of accidents.
19. Motorcycle riders between the ages of 16 and 24 are significantly overrepresented in accidents; motorcycle riders between the ages of 30 and 50 are significantly underrepresented. Although the majority of the accident-involved motorcycle riders are male (96%), the female motorcycles riders are significantly overrepresented in the accident data.
23. More than half of the accident-involved motorcycle riders had less than 5 months experience on the accident motorcycle, although the total street riding experience was almost 3 years. Motorcycle riders with dirt bike experience are significantly underrepresented in the accident data.
32. Motorcycles equipped with fairings and windshields are underrepresented in accidents, most likely because of the contribution to conspicuity and the association with more experienced and trained riders.
19 and 32, especially, point to the conclusion that the "older guy on a Harley" is most definitely not more likely to suffer an accident. Younger riders are much more likely to be involved in accidents, as are less experienced riders of any age.
With that said, the thing that I think is most important is founded on these two conclusions:
1. Approximately three-fourths of these motorcycle accidents involved collision with another vehicle, which was most usually a passenger automobile.
6. In the multiple vehicle accidents, the driver of the other vehicle violated the motorcycle right-of-way and caused the accident in two-thirds of those accidents.
According to the Hurt Report, 50% of all motorcycle accidents are caused by another driver violating the motorcycle's right-of-way. More experienced and better educated riders know this. They know that their age and experience will not remove the threat that they face from other drivers on the road, which is the single biggest threat to their safety. They can only mitigate that threat by constant guard against those violations at the places that they are most likely, and development of countersteering, swerving, and braking skills.
I am a motorcyclist.
Probably a young one.
Re:I'd buy one, too. (Score:5, Insightful)
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.
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
Re: (Score:2, Interesting)
That's why it took the SMART almost 8 years to get into the USA. And after "Americanizing" it to make it "safe" (you Canadians and Europeans with your death traps!) it is no longer an affordable car but a expensive curiosity. The Smart can be purchased starting at $18,000 but mostly priced around $24,000 because the only mo
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
Also worth mentioning is that, just because it supposedly gets 54 MPG, it still may not meet emissions requirements in most US states. The article does not say what emissions control systems, if any, are present. Catalytic converter? Crankcase ventilation? Fuel vapor recycling?
=Smidge=
Re:Somewhere (Score:5, Informative)
Rover's 'CityRover', (a re-badged Tata), was a failure in the UK, being panned for virtually everything.
Still, some people in the West have bought the appalling 'Gee Whizz', which lets you have windscreen wipers, or lights, on a rainy night - but not both. It also virtually guarantees that you perish in the inevitable accident. If you want all-electric, get a Tesla, (rather pricy, though)
The Smart car is much safer, but a commercial failure.
BTW, the Beetle was not VW's idea - it was Hitler's. VW was created to produce the Beetle, which was designed by Dr. Porsche, (who also did other fun stuff like Panzers).
Safety is relative (Score:5, Insightful)
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
There are LOADS of Smart Cars around here. It's one of the more popular superminis. But then again, here is Rightpondia, where small cars traditionally sell very well anyway.
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
Seriously people, mentioning Hitler in a factual statement does not invoke Godwin's Law. This is not a comparison, it's a statement. A fact (which should be checked for truth, of course) is not the same as comparing someone to Hitler because he doesn't agree with you.
Re: (Score:2)
It is the same design as the G-Wiz (also Indian by the way). There is a big chunk of weight in the back which will simply collapse the entire frame on top of the passengers in a crash.
There is a reason why the West has abandoned this design. Once upon a time many cars were made like this - Skoda, VW, Citroen, etc all had an engine in the back because you can have a very simple suspension and a very
Re:Nope (Score:5, Funny)
When a car with 30hp clashes with one with 150, who do you guess is gonna win?
I know hitpoints aren't everything, but I fear the nano hasn't got much of a chance there
One critical hit would be enough to kill it.
Re: (Score:2)
Re:Somewhere (Score:4, Funny)
Re:Somewhere (Score:4, Funny)
the VW idea lives on... (Score:3, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2)
Re:the VW idea lives on... (Score:5, Insightful)
I heard Hitler liked breakfast, too.
Re:the VW idea lives on... (Score:4, Interesting)
Hitler was more of a bankroll for the project than inspiration.
Re:the VW idea lives on... (Score:4, Funny)
What's in a name (Score:5, Funny)
$2,500? (Score:2)
Small potatoes.
Please import this to the States... (Score:5, Funny)
Standards, (Score:2)
and I dread to think what the build quality is like!
crumple... (Score:2, Insightful)
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...
Re:crumple... (Score:5, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2, Funny)
Is that you, Yoda?
Re: (Score:2)
Re:crumple... (Score:5, Insightful)
SMART cars use other cars crumple zones... (Score:3, Insightful)
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 foot
Wasn't this tried before... (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Actually I'd be curious to know what the number of traffic fatalities involving people IN a vehicle are in extremely dense cities...
Some addtional facts..... (Score:5, Informative)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tata_Motors [wikipedia.org]
They are in the process of buying Jaguar and Land Rover from Ford:
http://www.theglobeandmail.com/servlet/story/RTGAM.20080103.wford0103/BNStory/Business [theglobeandmail.com]
It also owns pieces of Daewoo to boot. They're not a small player. The big three might want to take notice.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
Good Business Oppurtunity (Score:5, Interesting)
Top speed (Score:3, Informative)
No thanks.... (Score:2)
Why such poor fuel consumption?? (Score:2)
My BMW 320d Touring can do 57.6 mpg (combined cycle) according to the official figures (which is probably the same method that they came up with 54mpg). Since the Tato Nano should weigh so much less than my Beamer, I'd expect it to be more efficient, not less...
I can't find any technical specs for the Nano anywhere to know how the 54mpg was measured, but even if it's in the urban cycle, the BMW does 46.7mpg, which
Re: (Score:2)
But you get my point, you are comparing a $50k car to a $2.5k car.. not quite in the same market..
Re:Why such poor fuel consumption?? (Score:4, Informative)
Your BMW is a diesel, which is not comparable because it uses higher compression on a more energy-dense fuel, and is thus inherently more efficient. Instead, realize that everybody is comparing to a gasoline car, and thinks it's impressive because they're used to 30 mpg or less.
Of course, the real reason it's not impressive is that even non-hybrid gasoline cars, such as the Honda CRX HF and 3-cylinder Geo Metro, were capable of getting fuel economy in the 50 mpg range 15 years ago or so, and did it with more horsepower.
The "Future" has been here for quite some time... (Score:4, Insightful)
Diesel was truly awful in the US until recently. (Score:4, Informative)
Does Sweet Crude ring a bell? Specifically named for lack of sulfur which was the major contaminate in diesel.
The oil industry had the chance to make diesel the fuel of the future but their bean counters got in the way. They have known for ages (since McKinley's time) how to remove sulfur from the fuel BUT THEY DID NOT WANT TO. they did it for speciality uses (kerosene lamps so they would not catch fire or stink) but not vehicles. As such states like California went after them, specifically because nearly a dozen of the contaminents in heavy sulfur diesel fuel are carcinogens. Worse studies showed that air in diesel school buses was worse than the air around them!
Diesel had a futre but the industry got greedy and now will pay for it. Its not going to be until 2010 that we have mandatory clean diesels. Hell the current ones put out contaminents that hard catalytic converters.
Slap a VTEC sticker on (Score:2, Funny)
Robin Williams (Score:2)
Okay, so who can imagine this car parked in front of a black background, slightly steaming, with Robin Williams popping out of it in a garish 1970s striped shirt? He can rant about oddities of the human condition, and close with an odd hand-gesture saying Nano, Nano.
Yes, I watched too much television as a youth. I liked that show until I saw Jonathan Winters in a diaper. Oy!
Optimism (Score:2)
But does it run.. (Score:2)
Seriously though.. seems like a bargain. Wonder how much it will cost us outside india when import duties are added and whaterver other charges the govt. piles on in various parts of the world.
India Finally Shows us its Tatas (Score:2)
Grainy Video from the floor [mrcopilot.com] plus pics and an examination of what Tata had to cut out to make the price.
Missing the point again (Score:5, Insightful)
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.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
* it is still in production
* it costs about 3500EUR brand new
* it has about 1000ccm engine
* you can drive it up to 120kmh without problems (event the noise is not too problematic)
* it consumes about 6l/100km (realistic figure)
* it is designed poorly, but the crappy manufacturing is the main problem, not the design
* it is extremely cheap to maintain
Wish it were available here (Score:5, Interesting)
You could take the engine out without a block and tackle, carry it into your apartment, and mess with it on your kitchen table. You could play around with different engines about as easily as you swap a video card in your computer, playing around with Stirling engines or electrical motors or series hybrid configurations, with the the help of a local machine shop, or with after market kits.
When I was a kid, nearly everybody could do a little work on cars, and everybody at least knew somebody who did fairly major maintenance to their cars, and it was not at all uncommon for people to redesign various aspects of their cars, from boring out their carb jets to monkeying around with their suspension. Today cars are really, really good, and really really reliable. There just isn't much incentive to muck with a $30,000 machine that is pretty damned good already.
But at $2500, it'd be worth doing just for curiosity, not to mention much easier given the small size of the thing.
For those who want metric (Score:3, Informative)
Re:For those who want metric (Score:4, Informative)
Look at the price (Score:3, Insightful)
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.
Disaster for India (Score:3, Interesting)
Suggestions for version 2.0 (Score:3, Interesting)
1) Make it 90% electric and 10% biofuel. I only do not say 100% because in India, even in the most modern cities, power goes out like once every couple of weeks or more.
2) Make a 100% electric one and sell it in China!
If this is done successful (millions sold) in these 2 countries, we may be able to overcome a major environmental hurdle & TATA should deserve a Nobel for that.
3) Get the government to subsidize this thing big time. Bring the price down to 0.25 lahks (~$750) and you will see major adoption. $2500 still WAY too expensive in India
4) Make 100% of parts recyclable & provide locations to do this in major urban cities. That said, Indians are pretty good at using something until it is completely broken and unrepairable. Nearly all buses in Mumbai look like they are from pre-world war II !
5) Make a door-less version & 100% electrical with "wind-up option" (in case electricity fails in city), and force by law diesel rickshaws to use this instead. Polution in cities will be cut back by 90% if you do this!
6) Make the horn 50% less loud (at least!). You almost need earplugs to drive around Indian cities.
7) Make damn well sure it is waterproof; as in, it can be submerssed in 4 feet of water (monsoon seasons) and not leak inside.
Adeptus
Fiat 126p (Score:3, Informative)
To everyone who thinks the Tata Nano is underpowered, that car had 24hp, and was capable of hauling 4 people. It wasn't comfortable, but it worked. It climbed mountains (I was personally in one of those as it climbed to some small village in the Alps). And it consumed very little fuel - around 40 gpm, I think. And since nobody was comparing it to huge western cars, it was just fine. Read the link.
I think this car will be the bomb, and will be imitated by other car manufacturers in India.
m
This won't work in Canada (Score:3, Interesting)
Re:30BHP and only 54MPG? (Score:5, Informative)
Re: (Score:2)
Two Cylinder - Four Stroke (Score:5, Informative)
It's a two cylinder, four stroke [wikipedia.org] engine. I misread that the first time too. From TFA:
Re:30BHP and only 54MPG? (Score:5, Insightful)
Normally you pay extra for a diesel engine, sometimes almost as much as the $2,500 that is the entire cost of this car.
Re: (Score:2)
Screw the Punto; Honda CRX HFs and Geo Metro LSis* got equally good fuel economy 20 years ago!
(*It might be the XFi instead; it was whichever one had the 3-cylinder engine)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
I found the comments from the Greens very enlightening. Notice the lack of joy for the poor who will now be able to drive. Their comments fall in the "let them eat cake" category.
To be fair, the Greens would prefer that we *all* eat cake and live like the poorest indians (excepting other Green leaders and spokespeople, of course). :)
Re: (Score:2)
2) What comments? Safety concerns about the car do appear to be legitimate, and congestion is a *big* issue for India. Adding millions of cars to the roads will wreck havoc upon the national infrastructure, and produce tons of pollution.
It's important for everybody to have access to reliable transportation. However, adding more cars to the roads might not be the best solution to that problem. Personal vehicles are a piss poor solution for large,
"More Cars" is not the answer. (Score:3, Insightful)
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 adeq
Re: (Score:2)
For more see: Wikipedia [wikipedia.org].