Would You Drive One?

I would consider it.

I had several "micro cars" in the late '60s, and one built with current materials, would probably work pretty well.

Fiat 600

Fiat 600 Multipla

Fiat 500

Sunbeam Imp

Simca 1000

Vespa 400

The nano is very basic, with no climate control or air bags or... things we want or need in the US. I seriously doubt that it would comply with the nanny state safety regulations: crash tests, anti-skid brakes, electronic stability control, all those air bags, etc. It might not be allowed on interstate highways.

That said, I used to drive a similar car, and would again. It was a two-cylinder Lloyd, with four seats, 1100 lb. wet. It would get 48 MPG at 72 MPH. I bought it almost new for $350.

I find it quite interesting how much regulation there is for automobiles in the US regarding safety, but little of it applied to motor cycles. The safety requirements drive up the production cost of the vehicle as well as the operating costs (i.e more weight)....all in an effort to save lives. But the majority of safety features (air bags, seat belts, etc.) are not required or provided on motor cycles. So why shouldn't the chooser have the option of being more protected (buy and more expensive/heavier vehicle) or less protected?

The Nano has an incredibly low price and all the functionality required in an automobile. The engineering required to achieve this tells me that this is a very refined vehicle. I would not only drive one, it would be my first choice among a lot of other vehicles.

This thing was designed for the low end of the İndian market where the customer is probably stepping up from a scooter. Not something you want to be in on American roads with higher speed traffic! My statement is no! No! NO! Reminds me of driving a rental Fiat Punto in İtaly a few years back - windows didn't even roll down.

Nano has already arrived on the roads in India. I talked to few users they seemed to be happy with performance. American version is yet to be delivered, it will comply with all American regulations.It will be expensive than Indian version as it will have additional features.It is city car not meant for long highway driving.

Friends,

My current car is a 1995 Geo Metro, with a 1-liter 3-cylinder engine. I average 40 mpg on the highway and in the city, and it has over 200,000 miles on the odometer. I find that our (the American) obsession with speed and power is unnecessary. I would be happy to consider a Tata Nano. I am sure that the model introduced here would meet the safety requirements.

Look into the future. As worldwide demand for individual transportation continues to rise, worldwide demand for fuel will also increase. A UN report from about 10 years ago noted that for everyone to have equal access to petroleum products the US consumption would have to be about 10% of its current levels. The Nano is a step in that direction. There are designs for automobiles that can deliver up to 100 mpg, available for production. The US automakers have refused to license them, because of their emphasis on speed, power, and size. The recent downturn in the economy has shown that manufacturers of economical cars are at an advantage. Yet, blindness appears to prevail.

--John M.

The great conspiracy? Fourty mpg today is a starting point for a reasonable car in Europe - a car that can tool along the autobahn at 120 to 140 kph Guaranteed that the model introduced in the US will meet safety requirements - by law it has too. To be successful in the US market it not only has to achieve economy but customer satisfaction from an adequate portion of the market to be profitable - unless we want to try the communist model which didn't seem to turn out all that well.

Although the gas mileage and tax benefit of owning one would be nice, I enjoy driving a vehicle that has good structural integrity for impacts. Not that I would crash my own vehicle, but some rich dumb person on a cell phone with a SUV (TANK) is a deadly weapon on the road, and the stronger vehicle you have to take the brute of the impact the better off you are. I have had 3 people smash into me in the last 8 years. One 90 yr old lady broadsided me when she failed to stop at a red light, one woman in an S10 took out my trunk when she was driving back from eye doctor with dialated eyes and I slowed at a yield and she was speeding and blinded by the sun and sensitive eyes, and a drunk teacher in a toyota corolla managed to imbed her sub-compact corolla into the back seat of our full size mercury sable as we were at a red light. She was going about 70 mph in the 40 zone and would have blown through 3 sets of lights on the overpass of the highway if we werent a target.

Since owning larger vehicles I have gone with a smaller model. Now a 97 Mazda 626 which is longer than a normal compact so it can take a hit and has a 2.0 liter engine to get 35+mpg. That is about as small of a vehicle that I would drive on a daily basis.

With all those people buying "THE SMART CAR", why not buy the NANO? Not much difference. If it's affordable and safe I'm in.

With the Smart you at least get German engineering.

I would not want to invest in a car that I feel like I could tackle and turn it on its side.

If I can gather up 1000 foot-pounds of kinetic energy by just running, imagine what a speeding Escalade could do...

if one wants a small city cruiser, buy an Ariel Atom...

nuff' said

I've just spent a few weeks touring around rural India (between Delhi and Varanasi).

If the Tata can survive India's appalling roads, non existent road rules, insanely fearless drivers, weather, road side repair shops and the wide variety of other road users (cows, dogs, bikes, pedestrians, bullock carts, huge trucks, tuk-tuks etc) then it can survive anything.

I just hope each one comes with a icon of Ganeesh as standard safety equipment.