Cheap car

[dutchman]

Weldequip was not far off prophesying that the 1000Quid car was not far away.

http://wheels.blogs.nytimes.com/2008/01/10/tata-nano-the-worlds-cheapest-car/

The producer of this car is also the owner of Corus

 

[malcolm]

Probably going to be the owners of Jaguar and Land Rover soon as well.

Apparantly it's not due to be imported (officially) to the UK any time soon. Pity, as I can't think of any car in the last 40 years of such a free thinking design. What's the point in lugging 2 tonnes of extras around with you when you can have something that's fuel and material efficient like that.

 

[Rich.C]

Interesting to read some of the replies below the story. Americans bemoaning the fact that pollution will increase, talk about hypocritical

 

[will barker]

Interesting that the first reply is that it will push the price of fuel over $7 a gallon! If only! May be the Americans should try paying our fuel prices with Gordon's massive tip on every litre!

Will

 

[rtbcomp]

I would be interested in a cheap economical runaround so I wouldn't have to use my gas-guzzler on trips where I wasn't carrying a load of stuff around. This would actually reduce pollution.

 

[malcolm]

True enough - I think the average over there is $3 US gallon. Our current average is $8 US gallon with the tax.

I notice the Tata Nano has 33hp. My Renault 4 has 34! Cool - something I can drag race against.

 

[bill_gj]

I think that, to be a hypocrit, you need to know that what you're saying is not what is either true, or what you actually subscribe to.

I'm not excusing the sort of things Americans say about energy use and particularly motor transport. It's just that a lot of them are like kids in a chocolate factory and really can't get a grip on what's going on outside the good ole US of A.

I did a lot of work with Americans a few years back, I'm in the motor industry, and it was stagerring to hear their take on how things should be / should be done.
Their waste of energy was amazing. Just because (at the time) their gas, electricity and motor fuel was cheap, it seemed that wasting it was no problemo....there's plenty more.

Hence their national inability to comprehend diesel engines in cars, diesel engines of less that 4 or 5 litres, truck tractor units that take up less road than their load and small cars.

Still, given the dimensions of some of their trousers, they need not worry about the Tata Nano taking over the US auto market. They'll never get into it.

 

[malcolm]

I think that, to be a hypocrit, you need to know that what you're saying is not what is either true, or what you actually subscribe to.

In that case, for the sake of fairness, we're not really any better over here. And the worldwide economic model doesn't really encourage effieiencies of living anywhere else.

 

[bill_gj]

Good afternoon Malcom.
Touché.
However, you do need to talk to some of them about their motors to see why they can't understand stuff like the Nano.
I'm not actually physically slimline myself, but I do try not to waste fuel and resource, it was the way I was brought up because fuel and resource were expensive in the UK in the 50s and 60s. You just don't waste stuff.
It's a different mindset there.
If it hadn't been for the Clean Air movement in the USA in the 60s/70s trying to do something about the amount of crap that needlessly spewed from the exhausts of inefficient V8 monsters, they would not have the technological lead in emission control methods thay have now.
Vehicles like the Tata Nano will accumulate emissions limiting engineering as they develop and will find new markets as a result.
The more suitable attitude for US citizens to have is a little more study of what's going on in the world at large and then compare it to themselves and the lifestyles they have been fortunate enough to lead for the better part of 60 years.

 

[rtbcomp]

Perhaps they will make a retro-fit electric motor when batteries or fuel cells become more viable. At least it doesn't look that bad, unlike current electric cars which look apalling.

 

[dutchman]

OK, just stop me if I get too "economical", but it happens to be my trade....
The problem with the "old" economic model is, I think, that it is too focused on money, which is in my opinion NOTHING! Some economists (among whom the Monetarists) believe it is some Holy Grail with which you can manage practically anything. I think it is mainly a practical convention that can be used for calculus and bean counting.
As commodities and resources become more scarce this will probably become more evident. The current American Monetary policy and banking crisis is also helping to show this.
As for living somewhere else but there have never been so many people on the move on this planet before. So the economic model does provide an incentive to move from place to place, just not for us lazy bums that are pretty well off where we are now.

 

[dutchman]

Pity, as I can't think of any car in the last 40 years of such a free thinking design. What's the point in lugging 2 tonnes of extras around with you when you can have something that's fuel and material efficient like that.

Sorry for disagreeing Malcolm, but do you really find it a free thinking design?
I mean it's not so spectacular after having seen the Smart and all kinds of other small vehicles is it?
Personally I find most of the innovations I have seen lately in transportation rather primitive. Or am I just too demanding?


http://www.twike.com/

Apalling indeed, but a bit more innovative

 

[bill_gj]

I think it's innovative in the same way that the bicycle rickshaw was affected when they started putting scooter engines into them - it suits the market.
It's innovative in terms of costing about $US 2500 when anything else with fourwheels is modelled on a European or Japanese design that has inherent cost and a limited sales market.

If they could offer something similar to a European urban market that met emissions and crash legislation, they'd probably sell some. How many I couldn't guess. It has to beat the pants off some of the electric vehicles that have been tried in London.

 

[peterd51]

Hi,

if it comes over here it'll probably have the same affect as the early Japanese cars...

a friend bought a Datsun in the early 70's, far lower cost than an equivelent British car with 'extras' as standard.

Then she wanted to sell it a year later and found out there was no second-hand value as people could afford a new one as they were so cheap.

Regards
Peter

 

[rtbcomp]

OK, just stop me if I get too "economical", but it happens to be my trade....
The problem with the "old" economic model is, I think, that it is too focused on money, which is in my opinion NOTHING! Some economists (among whom the Monetarists) believe it is some Holy Grail with which you can manage practically anything. I think it is mainly a practical convention that can be used for calculus and bean counting.
As commodities and resources become more scarce this will probably become more evident. The current American Monetary policy and banking crisis is also helping to show this.
As for living somewhere else but there have never been so many people on the move on this planet before. So the economic model does provide an incentive to move from place to place, just not for us lazy bums that are pretty well off where we are now.

Yes, money represents the worth of a nation and when you get people being paid more for pushing other peoples money around than the owners of the money you head for trouble. Every so often a firm crashes and its shares become worthless which brings the value of money nearer to its true value. Or a country prints money to try to get out of problems, e.g. Zimbabwee

 

[shenion]

Looks interesting, wonder how safe it is and its reliability. It could be another Yugo

As far as diesels here, we don't like them because they contribute to smog. Gas cars are cheaper to run and get better mileage. Many cites have converted their fleets of buses to LPG to cut down on smog.

 

[Barking Mat]

On a slight tangent and as a recurring theme running through any issue of buying things, the old mantra 'you get what you pay for' comes to mind, what do you get exactly for 1250 quid? Sure an economical runaround and I'm not knocking that, but yes, when it goes wrong, the quality of parts and the cost of fitting replacement parts. India has an amazing ability to fix things rather like the African 'fix it' philosophy, (and loads of cheap labour), whereas just to get someone to diagnose a infrequent problem may cost 10 to 20 percent of the value of the car, and if say a car depreciates by 60 percent in the first 3 years (randomn statistic) suddenly you have disposable cars, the 'not worth fixing, just bin it' type situation, which no matter how fuel efficient it is the production must produce god only knows how much pollution and energy consumption. Guarantee / Warranty? Personally I'm getting more and more into reusing stuff, from homes to cars to phones etc.... (or i'm skint?)

 

[rtbcomp]

If the engine packs up you change the engine. Then re-cycle the metals. Probably better than trying to fix it anyway because you not only fix the original fault but sort any other niggles at the same time.

I remember years ago the Aussies were working on a disposable ceramic engine.

 

[snowcat]

I think they look cool, I love the idea of a cheepo disposable car, I myself have little intrest in the things I see a car little more as an A-B device.... I actualy owned one of there pick ups years ago when they were first on an import, £4000 new 3 years waranty... badly built and eventualy through a rod at 5 years old, I sold it for parts got £500 for it, now thats still cheep motoring, Im guessing the plant is now geting up to speed on the quality at the time they were loco builders still making steamers alongside the diesels the cars were just an add on....

Its intresting the fuel debate I honestly dont think we pay too little duty on fuel...If it went up say even 50p then how many cars would stop useing the roads? not many id bet......I would much rather see road tax scraped and the whole lot loaded on fuel, It seams much fairer to me....If you want to drive a range rover or other huge lump fine, but your pay for it.......I wonder how many of these little tata runarounds would replace the landcruisers on the school run then?

 

[rtbcomp]

Its intresting the fuel debate I honestly dont think we pay too little duty on fuel...If it went up say even 50p then how many cars would stop useing the roads? not many id bet......I would much rather see road tax scraped and the whole lot loaded on fuel, It seams much fairer to me....If you want to drive a range rover or other huge lump fine, but your pay for it.......I wonder how many of these little tata runarounds would replace the landcruisers on the school run then?

If there was no road tax and insurance companies weren't so awkward about insuring more than one car as I mentioned above I for one would get a little runaround and just use the Volvo for fetching & carrying and long journies.