Tata Nano
by David Colborne
on June 09, 2009
You knew this was coming. Is it gutless? You betcha. Is it cheap? Of course--it's designed to be the cheapest production car on the planet. Does it prove, like so many before it, that necessity truly is the mother of invention? Absolutely.
So, Car Lust material? Well, yeah. I mean, c'mon - it even comes in hot pink! How lusty is that?
But wait - it gets better. As numerous news outlets are pointing out, Tata is planning on bringing this little bastion of affordable motoring to the United States. Naturally, this begs the question--will it follow the path laid down by the VW Beetle, burrowing a place into our automotive hearts, or will it simply rust out of our consciousness like the Citroen 2CV?
To help us answer that question, let's run through the specs:
Those would be the specs for the Citroen 2CV, which was nearly as successful in the US market as Gamelin was against the Wehrmacht, and that was against '50s and '60s competition. Though I have no doubt that the Nano is nowhere near as agricultural as the Deux Chevaux, it still doesn't change the fact that a stock Yugo GV could run circles around it. The only advantage the Nano would have against other new cars would be its price, which I guarantee you would be well above its legendary $2,500 price after US emissions and safety equipment are bolted on.
- 2 cylinder, 33 horsepower engine
- 4 speed manual transmission
- 0-43 mph in 14 seconds
- Top speed of 75 miles per hour
- 47 miles per gallon
- Drum brakes all around
- Seats four
- 2 cylinder, 28 horsepower engine
- 4 speed manual transmission
- 0-60 mph in a glacial epoch or two
- Top speed of 75 miles per hour
- 34+ miles per gallon
- Byzantine power brake system with weird and proprietary green goo
- Seats four... I think
None of this, however, means that Tata's first effort in the US is completely doomed. Honda originally made a modest living in the US selling kei cars, after all. Assuming the Nano's price tag doesn't swing into Smart ForTwo territory (or, realistically, Nissan Versa territory) and assuming its reliability doesn't drift into Warsaw Pact territory, the Nano could be a small hit among the East Cost urban-dwelling college student crowd.
I doubt it, though.
What are your thoughts? Does the Nano have a prayer, or is it just going to be a strange footnote in American automotive history? For whatever it's worth, I still want one.
The pink Nano pictured above is from Flickr user bbjee; the more conservatively colored one comes from Flickr user ethnu.
--David Colborne
...m... on June 09, 2009 at 05:26 AM
...the nano's coming to the states?..fantastic!..
...realistically, though, unless it can accelerate to sixty comparably to a fully-laden penske truck, it won't be able to safely navigate american freeways...
Steaming Pile on June 09, 2009 at 05:44 AM
Naah. 33 HP is less than many people's lawn tractors. Hell, my entry-level John Deere has 19. Maybe they should throw in a lawn mower deck and a pull-behind cart.
jed on June 09, 2009 at 06:12 AM
I wonder what configuration that 2-cylinder engine is? The next question is where can you find a motorcycle engine that will fit?
Cookie the Dog's Owner on June 09, 2009 at 06:46 AM
The Nano has a lot of potential to outsmart the Smart. The Smart is awfully expensive for a two-seater with a minimalist cargo bay. The Nano has seating for four, which gives it a bigger "utility envelope" than the Smart. If the price comes in below the Smart, and the performance is adequate, and--this is the most important point--the car is solid and bulletproof and all the parts are screwed together properly, it could dominate the "city car" niche.
I can't stress that last point enough. There's a difference between "inexpensive" and "cheap". The Yugo (for example) failed because it had build quality and reliability that would have made a J-Car hang its head in shame, not because it was "too small" or "too low priced".
Steaming Pile on June 09, 2009 at 07:30 AM
@Cookie - OTOH (re. my previous snarky remark), the original VW Type I (Bug) also came with approximately this many horsepower, and we bought millions of them. That car only had two doors and a heater that was best described as useless. People loved them because they were cheap and they ran forever, or until the floor pans rusted out.
Tommy's Dad on June 09, 2009 at 07:46 AM
Absolutely agree with Cookie the Dog's Owner. Price it below the other econoboxes out there and give it decent build quality, and people will buy these up, at least to folks living in the city that need a cheap little urban runabout that aren't going anywhere near a highway. If nothing else it might make Smart take a serious look at adjusting the (ridiculous) pricing of their car to a level reasonable for what you're getting with the goofy thing.
That Car Guy on June 09, 2009 at 07:59 AM
I hope we are seeing the birth of a new class of car here. The Smart, Nano, and other "City" cars (Thanks, Cookie) can replace the 3/4-ton 4WD SUVs of just a few years ago for run-around needs. Oh, they can be fun, too... a little personalizing can go a long way.
Gas is back on the rise, folks. Today (June 9, 2009), the national average is $2.61 a gallon for regular. Let's see where it is on July 4.
David Colborne on June 09, 2009 at 08:57 AM
Now that I've had a little more time to think about it, Cookie, I think you might be on to something. It has to be reasonably well put together, though - if it reminds people more of the original Hyundai Excel or Kia Sephia than anything else, it's toast. That said, I could definitely see getting one myself for daily commuter duty.
PJ on June 09, 2009 at 09:18 AM
I am a 70 year-old, great grandmother, and "I GOT TO GET ME ONE OF THOSE!"
Spanno on June 09, 2009 at 09:39 AM
Can't wait for someone to drop a Hayabusa engine in it.
Turbodave on June 09, 2009 at 09:58 AM
Makes me want - wait - the 2CV!!
Brian DR1665 on June 09, 2009 at 10:36 AM
I can't see this as being successful in the states. Sorry.
First of all, the Beetle and Smart have something this turd doesn't - style. They have fresh looks that catch the eye. The Nano looks like the bastard offspring of a one night stand between the Prius and a Ford Aerostar.
Second, it's a stick shift. American "drivers" are too busy these days with their iPods, their Mega Venti Latte, the GPS, or their cell phones to be bothered with actually shifting gears manually. I say "drivers" because the trend these days seems to be making it easier for operators to engage with the vehicles accessories than with the road. If they want to move these things, they're going to need about 800lbs of slushbox.
Finally, I suspect that warranty work or repairs will require a great deal of time on the phone with Prakesh, er, I mean "Sam," who will be very polite, but unable to actually do anything helpful.
Since it's ugly, nobody is likely to buy one just to stuff it with a hot v-twin. Since it's a stick shift - which requires some effort from the driver - your typical, fiddle-with-my-cell-phone commuter won't be interested. And since just about everyone in the US has spent time on the phone with someone in Delhi, there are serious preconceptions about their ability to get anything worthwhile done over there.
...m... on June 09, 2009 at 11:23 AM
"I hope we are seeing the birth of a new class of car here. The Smart, Nano, and other "City" cars (Thanks, Cookie) can replace the 3/4-ton 4WD SUVs of just a few years ago for run-around needs. Oh, they can be fun, too... a little personalizing can go a long way."
...hey, if it lures a few of the wonderful japanese market kei cars stateside, by all means bring it!..
Anthony Cagle on June 09, 2009 at 11:24 AM
I am not optimistic about it being a success. People expect a lot with their cars these days, far more than when a college student didn't care about a heater that worked. I fear that without airbags, electronics, ABS, and the wherewithal to provide for various electronic gadgets, it won't go anywhere. Modern safety requirements add a lot of weight to a car, emissions control adds a lot of expensive hardware and, as David says, the cumulative effect will be to bump up the price and bump down the mileage.
Max on June 09, 2009 at 12:08 PM
I really don't think that this car will do very well in the US. When you consider what you can get from Hyundai or Kia for under $10k brand new, this car would have to have a sticker price that was insanely low. Even then, it doesn't really make sense to me. Even if the car costs $4000 brand new, why would I buy it? If I was really desperate for a cheap car that got good gas mileage, why wouldn't I buy a Honda, Hyundai or Kia used? While those options may not be brand new, at least they can get up to freeway speed.
CJinSD on June 09, 2009 at 02:54 PM
I've read that reaching the low price meant taking serious shortcuts with mechanical components. The current Tata Nano is not up to the task of highway travel, not even within it's low top speed. The wheel bearings would overheat and fail. Hot rodding a Nano would mean replaceing everything, as there are no built in reserves of strength or durability. The chances of meeting DoT safety standards while maintaining a recognizable similarity to the current Nano is dubious, but redesignining the body and chassis would just be the start of making a car that would work in the US market. I would probably be a good car for tiny island nations that don't have any high speed roads.
Steve on June 09, 2009 at 04:07 PM
The acceleration is so low that I think it's a real hazard in many situations. If America is moving in the direction of these rolling tin cans via federal directive, then for safety's sake there should be a minimum 0-60 mph standard. Imagine this thing merging onto interstates or even local highways. Accidents, accidents, accidents.
Joe on June 09, 2009 at 04:25 PM
They will be cheap until huge tariffs are tacked on to "protect American jobs".
You want a high quality, high value reliable foreign car best buy a couple now before those manufacturers are competing for sales against Government Motors run by the Government Union Complex.
Ferd Berfel on June 09, 2009 at 04:33 PM
Now THIS is truly an SBOW!!!
Gary Gagliardi on June 09, 2009 at 04:50 PM
The issue is totally whether there is an empty spot in the market that this car fits. If reliable, this car will find a ready market among:
1. A fast-growing aging population who don't get on the freeway anyway.
2. High school students who do most of their driving around town and would rather have a cute new car than a ugly, old beater.
3. As a second (or third) "around the town" car for families that want an alternative to taking the SUV to Costco.
4. For the environmentally sensitive who want to make a statement about who they are and who can't afford to pay MORE than a regular car to make it by buying a Prius.
Taken all together, looks like a pretty good market to me and a pretty open one.
Bryon Scott on June 09, 2009 at 05:16 PM
Bring back the Geo Metro I say! Mine got 50+ mpg without all the fancy hybrid stuff on it.
The Grey Man on June 09, 2009 at 05:25 PM
Let's see. My Craftsman has 22hp, and can pull a baby plow, CD (compact disk harrow), and can mow 3 acres as well. No, it won't get me the girls ( got the best one anyway!), but at least no one will be laughing at me. The Tata is an automotive "Kick Me" sign.
SwedishMetal on June 09, 2009 at 05:33 PM
Not everyone has an SUV anymore. the anti-SUV backlash is so last year.
Most of this car's target market have already bought larger, and marginally less efficient sedans. when faced with a 10MPG improvement over a vastly larger Civic or Corolla i don't think most consumers will bite. it will end up as a "statement" vehicle, like the Insight and Smart ForTwo.
Of course, this is all assuming that they can meet US regs without compromising the car's cost, performance and size.
miles on June 09, 2009 at 05:34 PM
That's fine, but where can I find tires to fit on 10 inch rims?
That Car Guy on June 09, 2009 at 06:20 PM
Miles, I just submitted a post on the Austin/Morris Mini that has tiny 10-inch tires. They were developed by Dunlop over 50 years ago. Please stay tuned! ~TCG