Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
Transportation The Almighty Buck

World's Cheapest Car Goes On Sale In India 571

Posted by timothy
from the wish-it-had-a-monorail-socket-too dept.
Frankie70 writes "The Tata Nano — the car that caught the world's imagination as the cheapest ever — will finally be rolled out commercially on Monday in Mumbai in a mega event organised by Tata Motors. Ben Oliver, contributing editor, Car Magazine, London test drove the car in December, 08. These were his first impressions. This was his verdict: 'CAR's first ride in the Tata Nano felt far more significant and exciting than a first drive in a Ferrari or Lamborghini, because this car's importance is immeasurably greater. It won't compete on dynamics or quality with European or Japanese city cars, but it doesn't have to. What Tata has achieved at an unprecedented price is astonishing, although we'd guess it will cost Indian consumers closer to £1700 when it finally goes on sale, six months late, in March 2009.'"
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

World's Cheapest Car Goes On Sale In India

Comments Filter:
  • by ActusReus (1162583) on Monday March 23, 2009 @07:21AM (#27296497)
    ... or maybe a Tata Shuffle, with the steering controls obnoxiously embedded in some earbuds?
    • by Threni (635302) on Monday March 23, 2009 @07:23AM (#27296505)

      or the `tata clean air - it was nice knowing you'...

    • by Nerdfest (867930)
      Stop hanging around SlashDot, or you may be waiting forever.
    • by kinnell (607819) on Monday March 23, 2009 @08:27AM (#27297115)
      ...or maybe a single button in the centre of the dashboard which steers you in a random direction.
    • ... or maybe a Tata Shuffle, with the steering controls obnoxiously embedded in some earbuds?

      Wait 'till your first crash. You'll find your Tata Touch has its steering controls obnoxiously embedded in your chest.

    • Re: (Score:3, Funny)

      by shis-ka-bob (595298)
      The car is named 'tata' and the best you can come up with is a iPod interface? Am I the only one with a gutter mind who is looking forward to a ta-ta interface with left and right control silicone controllers?
  • by Lumpy (12016) on Monday March 23, 2009 @07:27AM (#27296543) Homepage

    The UK and Europe as well as the USA will never EVER see this car.
    And honestly, is it really a good idea to enable more people to buy cars?

    I could see it if a very low emissions small car was available to the poor to help get the nasty junk off the road...

    • by Dunbal (464142) on Monday March 23, 2009 @07:30AM (#27296567)

      And honestly, is it really a good idea to enable more people to buy cars?

            No, it's not. So please hand over your car keys.

            (My point being - who the hell are you to decide who gets to drive and who doesn't?)

      • Re: (Score:2, Insightful)

        by furby076 (1461805)
        I agree with the sentiment but it is not black and white. Most people in India have lived their entire lives without cars and didn't need it. Their family, work, friends, home were all (for the most part) in relative distances. This car is so cheap they will get it (even if just 1% that's 10 mil more drivers on a 1 billion pop) and eventually need it.

        Gas demand will go up, pollution will go up.

        This is not some miracle of technology -it is worse then good.

        To turn around to countries that have been
        • by Dunbal (464142) on Monday March 23, 2009 @08:42AM (#27297271)

          To turn around to countries that have been using cars for years in a major way and say "well give up your car" - rememebr those countries' lifestyles have been based around cars for many years...in the US since the 40's-50's (really before then, but that was an insane boom time). The AVERAGE american commute is 30 minutes by car - not feasible by foot/bike...and 30 minutes by car usually means about 1-1.5 hours by train/bus each direction. Again, it's living standard. If you never had it you didn't build your life around it.

                I agree that no one will willingly give up their lifestyle (which is characterized by unparalleled per capita WASTEFULNESS) in America and Europe. The key word here is WILLINGLY. However you need to realize that people in less developed countries will not willingly give up their right to strive for a better standard of living.

                Your argument is basically "we already have it, so you can't" is a non sequitur. Of course it's easy to argue for the position that favors yourself - you've grown comfortable in that position. I'm taking the other side of the argument - first it's not your decision to make - the last barrel of oil will go to the highest bidder. Supply and demand determine this, not pseudo-morality. Second - if you try to enforce a double standard on developing nations (it's ok for us but not for you), be prepared for a fight to the death - since after all a prohibition will be considered "death" by the developing nation anyway, therefore they have nothing to lose.

                Humans will only understand that the oil is gone after the oil is gone. We're not good at forward thinking on a collective basis - if you want examples just look at the US government.

          • by Abcd1234 (188840) on Monday March 23, 2009 @09:11AM (#27297681) Homepage

            Your argument is basically "we already have it, so you can't" is a non sequitur.

            But that's not his argument. His argument is, here in north america, we made the huge mistake of designing communities such that a vehicle was a requirement for living. In particular, the suburban and ex-urban phenomenon has left your average American completely incapable of living without personal long-distance transportation. And this phenomenon is coupled with a truly massive underfunding of public transportation, meaning that even those within a reasonable distance of their place of work have no option but to drive.

            And so, the solution isn't to give Indians more cars, thus encouraging the very lifestyle north america has mistakenly committed themselves to. The solution is to build communities where cars *aren't necessary in the first place*. Not because "we already have it, so you can't", but because "we already have it, and trust me, you really don't want it".

        • by obarthelemy (160321) on Monday March 23, 2009 @08:54AM (#27297441)

          The "I got it first ! now you DIE" argument.

          Or maybe, after taking care of the supply side by invading Iraq, the US should start taking care of the demand side by invading India and regressing them to the stone age ?

        • by khanyisa (595216) on Monday March 23, 2009 @09:30AM (#27297965)
          You have to remember motorbikes and auto-rickshaws which are another common form of transport. Cheap low-emissions cars could well replace those, reducing the net pollution per person transported...
        • by CohibaVancouver (864662) on Monday March 23, 2009 @11:00AM (#27299297)

          Most people in India have lived their entire lives without cars and didn't need it

          The target market for this car is not people who have never had transportation. The target market is people who run their families around on scooters and mopeds, like this: http://images.quickblogcast.com/8849-8518/family_scooter.JPG [quickblogcast.com]

    • Re: (Score:2, Interesting)

      by CRCulver (715279)
      One reason we wouldn't see it is because few drivers in the West now would stand for a car without power steering.
    • by rumith (983060) on Monday March 23, 2009 @07:32AM (#27296579)
      It will be available in Europe in 2011. Link [ft.com].
    • by oldhack (1037484) on Monday March 23, 2009 @07:35AM (#27296609)

      "And honestly, is it really a good idea to enable more people to buy cars?"

      I assume you don't own one, yes?

      "I could see it if a very low emissions small car was available to the poor to help get the nasty junk off the road..."

      Nano's emission would be far more benign than 2-cycle autorickshaws, not mention being far more safe.

      • by mcvos (645701) on Monday March 23, 2009 @08:21AM (#27297043)

        Nano's emission would be far more benign than 2-cycle autorickshaws, not mention being far more safe.

        And that's the real point here. Lots of people in countries like Indian and China are transporting themselves and their entire family on old and dangerous motorbikes not suited for that task. The Nano isn't to get more people on the road, it's to get road users to use a safer vehicle, more suited for their needs.

    • by DigiShaman (671371) on Monday March 23, 2009 @07:39AM (#27296633) Homepage

      This car will never see the light of day in the US. You can thank heavy government regulation and lobbying.

      As for enabling more people to drive? Umm, why is it fair to prevent others from enjoying the same quality of life that you or I have? I mean, if people are going to start worrying about the environment, perhaps the solution is to nuke ourselves off this rock for "Urth Mother"?

      Look folks. The rest of the world wants to have the same same standard of living that US and Europe enjoys today. You can't stop or prevent its progression. What you can do however, is develop more efficient ways of achieving that goal.

      • Re: (Score:2, Insightful)

        by hobbit (5915)

        As for enabling more people to drive? Umm, why is it fair to prevent others from enjoying the same quality of life that you or I have?

        Quite. The solution is for you to give up your car, not for them to get one.

        I mean, if people are going to start worrying about the environment, perhaps the solution is to nuke ourselves off this rock for "Urth Mother"?

        You are welcome to commit suicide if you want, but don't presume to make the decision for the rest of us.

        Look folks. The rest of the world wants to have the same same standard of living that US and Europe enjoys today. You can't stop or prevent its progression.

        I may not be able to, but the fact is that the rest of the world simply cannot have the same standard of living that we have. Indeed, in part, we enjoy it because they work for us to have it.

        What you can do however, is develop more efficient ways of achieving that goal.

        That's a good idea, but I'm afraid it's rather too little too late. We're going to have to prepare ourselves for a severe cut in our standa

      • The rest of the world wants to have the same same standard of living that US and Europe enjoys today. You can't stop or prevent its progression.

        That progression will stop itself, if the whole Earth lived like the US and Europe circa 2000, we (probably all land mammals) would be dead from the pollution within 20 years, if we could even find enough fossil fuel to make "the dream" come true.

      • by Lumpy (12016) on Monday March 23, 2009 @08:25AM (#27297075) Homepage

        Why not spend that money on decent public transportation? just because USA snobs poo-poo riding a bus or train does not mean the rest of the planet has that stick firmly planted in their rear ends as well...

        The public transportation systems in many places need upgrading. Sounds like a better way to spend money than to enable more cars on the road. India already has a traffic nightmare in all it's major cities.. In Chennai, it's near suicide to step off the curb or to be in a car on those roads... How will this car help that?

        Yes I'm a US citizen that has actually left his country and went to other places. Traffic in India is INSANE (France is even more insane!) and I cant see this car helping.

    • Re: (Score:3, Insightful)

      by macshit (157376)

      And honestly, is it really a good idea to enable more people to buy cars?

      Of course not. But it's a sad cycle -- people in very poor countries like this see cars as being status symbols, a sign of wealth. Society (and the government) often treat increase car ownership the same way, as some indicator that they've "made it," and try to emphasize car-oriented development.

      By the time they come to the realization that having every poor schmuck in the city driving to work is a really dumb idea, and not very scalable, it may be too late...

      • "And honestly, is it really a good idea to enable more people to buy cars?"

        "Of course not."

        It is only a bad idea because the parent asked the wrong question. The question should be:

        "Since more people are definitely going to drive cars in the future, should we continue on the current path rather than developing better technologies to reduce emissions and counteract already inflicted environmental damage."

        The answer to that question is indeed of course not . Asking if it is a good idea for more peop

    • Leave the Beaver [wikipedia.org] alone Lumpy [leaveittobeaver.org] ...
    • by furby076 (1461805)
      1% of a 1 billion pop country buying this country = a LOT more pollution & much more demand on oil which means higher gas prices.
      Not to forget this car doesn't have many standard safety features.
      Not to forget India driving rules are a lot less restrictive then other countries
      There is also the issue where many people in India got along fine without cars. They didn't "need" it because their life was based on not having it. Now that this vehicle came out things will change and eventually the India popu
  • by morgan_greywolf (835522) on Monday March 23, 2009 @07:33AM (#27296589) Homepage Journal

    Those of us old enough to remember the 1980s remember the Yugo [wikipedia.org], which was touted then as the cheapest car ever: $3990 when they debuted in the U.S. in 1987 (bear in mind that the U.S. has much tougher safety and emissions standards than India).

    It was tried here and failed miserably, especially after the general consensus among the consumer rags, especially Consumer Reports, was that you were better of with a used car than a new Yugo.

    • by Ritchie70 (860516) on Monday March 23, 2009 @07:39AM (#27296635) Journal

      A lot of the Yugo failure was quality.

      I was in the auto repair business through much of the 90's and we never saw one, despite a pretty decent number of them being sold locally. I don't think they made it out of the 80's still running.

      One of my store managers had been working at an import auto parts store while the Yugo was on sale as a new car.

      I recall him saying that the Yugo dealer bought a lot of starters from them - for new cars before they sold them. Fortunately for the dealer, a new Yugo was mostly just a old Fiat.

      Try to get your mind around that total lack of quality - the dealer replacing an OEM, brand new, factory part with an aftermarket part to get one that would work.

      Wow, talk about crappy.

      • by u38cg (607297)
        Heh. My dad managed to keep one running through the mid 90s. We called it Hugo, and it even once managed to tow a caravan. It was great as a kid, because you often got to stop in interesting places while the AA brought out various bits and pieces to make it go again (including, on one mermorable occasion, a complete new engine).
    • by mcvos (645701) on Monday March 23, 2009 @08:31AM (#27297157)

      Failed?

      The Yugo sold quite a lot of cars, and according to the wikipedia article you link to, they're still being sold. Not in the US, but the Tata Nano isn't aimed at the US either. Lots of stuff isn't. Just because something won't succeed in the US, that doesn't automatically make it a failure.

      • Re: (Score:3, Funny)

        by sorak (246725)

        Failed?

        The Yugo sold quite a lot of cars, and according to the wikipedia article you link to, they're still being sold. Not in the US, but the Tata Nano isn't aimed at the US either. Lots of stuff isn't. Just because something won't succeed in the US, that doesn't automatically make it a failure.

        Yes. Look at David Hasselhoff!

  • Safety.... (Score:3, Interesting)

    by Ritchie70 (860516) on Monday March 23, 2009 @07:33AM (#27296593) Journal

    There aren't many, [safety features] but it's far safer than the bicycles and scooters that many Nano buyers will be trading up from. Tata's engineers are working on a series of upgrades, including airbags, anti-lock brakes, power steering, more powerful three-cylinder petrol and diesel engines and five-speed and automatic gearboxes which will allow the Nano to go on sale beyond its home market, and capitalise on the colossal potential created by its base price.

    So basically it's "safe enough for India" but you couldn't sell it as-is anywhere that has vehicle safety standards.

    Of course, you probably couldn't sell a Geo Metro or a Honda CRX (two 1980's high mileage cars) as a new car in the US today either for the same reasons.

    I'm not convinced that changing the vehicular population makeup of India from bicycles and scooters to have a higher volume of these actually raises the overall safety of the traveling population - and it surely doesn't improve the fuel economy.

    For those of us who are used to dollars, according to Google, the base price of 1700 pounds in the article is about $2500.

    • Re:Safety.... (Score:5, Informative)

      by bytta (904762) on Monday March 23, 2009 @08:18AM (#27297011)
      I live in India an I'm kind of scared...

      The driving exam is a joke here. If you correctly answer 6 out of 10 multiple choice questions (mostly "guess the taffic sign" ones) you get a learners licence. Curiously, 9 out of 36 failed that in my class. 1 month later you get the full licence, provided that you can drive 100m without incident.

      The traffic here is very chaotic already, but it's mostly motorbikes and 3-wheelers. Add more cars to the mix and you're asking for trouble. On the other hand the Tata Nano seems to be a scaled-up rickshaw rather than a scaled-down car.

      TFA is 4 months old, and the price is way off. The base price is 100.000 rupees, or about $2000/£1350. You can still get 2 high-end scooters for that price, not one for £1700 like the article says.

  • by Laxitive (10360) on Monday March 23, 2009 @07:50AM (#27296739) Journal

    I think Indian infrastructure is going to have a hard time coping with this.

    Tried getting anywhere in New Delhi recently? A 10km ride can take HOURS. I'm not exaggerating or kidding. You will literally stand in one spot for half an hour. Nobody obeys traffic rules and gridlock is the norm.

    The Indian middle class is looking to copy the west, and they want their SUVs and their tall lattes too.

    In late afternoon in New Delhi (about 6:00pm or so), you can STARE AT THE SUN without feeling any queasiness in your eyes. That's how bad the pollution is.

    Instead of looking to other cultures and trying to NOT make the same mistakes, India is eager to copycat them. Heh... you think Americans go a little bit overboard with the bling and the super-size-me? Just wait.. just wait.

    -Laxitive

    • Heh. My first visit to New Delhi, I wondered if India followed 'British' driving rules (drive on the left side of the road) vs the right side lane driving seen in many other countries. A couple hours each way, several days in a row, I was unable to call it based on the driving observed.

      These guys would make the Brazilian or Italian drivers blush... It is a wonder we don't see more of them on the race track.

    • America is still having trouble with the "keeping up with the Joneses" concept... I think it's basic human (and animal) nature - monkey see, monkey want.
    • by Orome (159034) on Monday March 23, 2009 @08:40AM (#27297245)

      I'm not sure what the plan is now, but when the Nano was first unveiled Ratan Tata (the CEO) said that they would be focusing on selling the car in smaller cities.

      The larger cities like Delhi and Mumbai have good public transport systems, and most people are pragmatic enough to realize that a train will get them to work faster (and cheaper) than driving in a car. I worked in Mumbai for two years, and I was earning more than enough money to own a regular car (and pay a driver!) but I still used public transport on a daily basis. The same is true for almost all of my peers.

      I don't think there will be too many people buying this thing as a status symbol. I see it being primarily bought by lower-to-middle income families in the smaller cities, or in villages which are well connected to neighboring cities. If you ever visited India, you'd see some of these people taking their whole family on a single motorcycle which is dangerous.

      • Re: (Score:3, Insightful)

        by Laxitive (10360)

        So the smaller cities will become like Delhi or Mumbai, with pollution, dirt, and garbage piling up everywhere.

        If you don't think there will be too many people buying this thing as a status symbol, then you don't know Indians. If there's one thing I know about Indians, Northern and Southern, Rich and Poor, High Caste and Low Caste.. it's that status is everything, wealth is status, and cars are wealth. Sure, so is jewelry, and being able to pay for ridiculously overpriced weddings, and a whole bunch of ot

  • Judgement already! (Score:5, Insightful)

    by bogaboga (793279) on Monday March 23, 2009 @07:52AM (#27296767)

    It won't compete on dynamics or quality with European or Japanese city cars, but it doesn't have to.

    That is precisely how the Japanese "came from behind" in the late seventies and ended up capturing the American mindset when it comes to quality.

    I know what I am talking about because I was around at that time. No body would even think of touching a Japanese front wheel drive car! Guess what! It is second nature to most auto manufacturers now.

    I guess it's the time for the Indians this time round. Let's just watch out after all, Tata's direction on quality can only be up.

    • Re: (Score:2, Insightful)

      I see where you're coming from, but Toyota didn't do what they did overnight. Sure, they were crappy at first, but they kept gaining market share due to their ever-improving quality.
  • Top gear (Score:5, Funny)

    by simonwalton (843796) on Monday March 23, 2009 @07:55AM (#27296789)
    Can't wait to see The Stig powersliding this baby around the Top Gear test track.
    • You know, a model specific racing program using these would be competitive, cheap, and likely safe (due to the relatively low speeds.)

      Would be more entertaining to watch than go-kart racing, more rollover potential!
  • by gurps_npc (621217) on Monday March 23, 2009 @07:56AM (#27296801) Homepage
    India's carbon footprint will be going up no matter what we do. The Nano has a good MPG rating. Better than many hybrids. It's a good thing, not a pollution machine.
  • by v1 (525388) on Monday March 23, 2009 @08:09AM (#27296923) Homepage Journal

    Seriously, look at it. 12" wheels, and how tall and narrow it is!

    But looking at what it's designed for, it appears to be very well thought-out. Anyone that's driven in europe can understand why you need a narrow car because of the streets. And anything that gets your side mirror another half inch away from oncoming traffic's mirrors is a good thing, and then of course there's parking. (no mention of how well it turns to squeeze into a tight spot?) For an in-town car in a big city, it looks to be ideally suited. 60mpg? Heck I could use that right now.

    It said it accomodates "six footers". I'm 6'2, I wonder if I'll be cracking my head on the roof?

    Considering the next-to-nonexistent trunk, it's NOT a family trip car, unless you're a family of two. The back seat really IS the trunk, and the trunk is the glovebox.

    But I wouldn't mind trying one. I wonder what it's top speed is, they only tested it to 60mph and it took 17 sec to get there, i wonder if it can do 70? I have to take an interstate to work here and it's 70 in places.

    I'd also be interested to know its range. At 60mpg though, I wonder what speed that's at? Most larger cars, that's measured at highway speed (55?) and is lower for in-town. This car is targeted almost exclusively for in-town so that's not the number I want to hear. It's not a hybrid so it lacks the regenerative breaking bonus for in-town driving. (unless the thing's got a flywheel? heh) I'm picturing it getting more like 40mph in-town, and guessing at a 5gal tank, so that'd be about a 200 mile in-town range, which I could certainly live with. My exploder gets 300 miles on the highway, 240 in town. It'd shave 70% off my total at the pump too which would be wonderful.

    The review was ok but missed a lot, I'd like to have seen 7 pages, not 2. Airbags I hope? looks to be manual only. (can you smell my clutch yet?) And it doesn't look like they let him drive it, which worries me a little.

    • by eln (21727)

      Regarding city driving, yah the size helps, but the lack of power steering sure doesn't. I lived in an urban area without power steering before, and it can get annoying trying to parallel park without it. On the bright side, my arm strength increased quite a bit during that time.

      My impression regarding any ability to get this in the US is that the company has taken advantage of the fact that India has lax (nonexistent?) safety and emissions standards in order to keep the price low. Making one of these th

  • There are a handful of things fundamental to this existence, regardless of where you live. On the "basic survival" [trackerschool.com] end of the spectrum, you've got shelter, water, and food.

    If you seek something more than just basic subsistence, the list expands to include energy, communications, and transportation.

    If you believe that a modern society is beneficial, then providing more accessible transportation is a good thing. If you believe we should all be subsistence farmers, then the Tata Nano is a plague upon
  • This is the year of the netbook, the cheap car, and next thing you know, they'll be selling houses made out of cardboard for dirt cheap, too.
  • 60mpg really 50 mpg (Score:4, Informative)

    by nightsweat (604367) on Monday March 23, 2009 @08:43AM (#27297289)
    It's a British rag, so the gallons they refer to in the article are imperial gallons. In US terms, it gets 50mpg, not 60.
  • Unthinking racism (Score:4, Interesting)

    by Kupfernigk (1190345) on Monday March 23, 2009 @09:03AM (#27297565)
    That's what we're getting here. Kudos to all the people who are asking "if Indians having cars is a bad thing, are you going to give up yours?". I'm English, I can take a nuanced view. If it's wrong for one of our former colonies to have little cars that do 60mpg, presumably it is even more wrong for another former colony to have big cars that do 15mpg.

    Someone also mocks the Ferrari/Lamborghini comparison. Wrong. To an engineer - that's a real, chartered engineer, not just a jumped up mechanic - Ferraris and Lamborghinis are not very interesting. An example. Evolutionary biologists point out that horses are interesting, not because they are a successful design, but because they are a bit of a failed one. Very few of the world's species are horse based, whereas the beetle design, the bat design, and even the primate design have been wildly successful. (Or look at the dog design, which has proved amazingly flexible, scaling well to a wide range of sizes.) In the same way, few people are motivated to buy Ferraris, whereas the European small hatchback design has proven wildly successful and is the basis of most of the cars on the world's roads, scaling all the way from the Smart car to the "people carrier". The Tata design is interesting because it is likely to be the precursor of what most of the world's drivers are using in 20 years time.

    • Re: (Score:3, Interesting)

      by blitzkrieg3 (995849)
      Careful in your use of the r-word. "Unthinking hubris" would be more apt. I don't think these people are acting out of a "we know what we're talking about because we're white, the white race is smarter than the inferior Indian race" mindset. More like, "we know what we're talking about because we're the developed world, and we've been doing this for awhile and we know what's best for you."

      Perhaps just as demeaning, but not founded in the mistaken belief that whites are inherently better than others.
    • Re: (Score:3, Insightful)

      by Zackbass (457384)

      I'm a Real Engineer with a good bit of auto industry experience (though not a Chartered Engineer or PE as we tend to call them in the US, that's more for the civil engineering types), and I'm not sure where you're getting the idea that engineers aren't just 'jumped up mechanics'. Most of the best engineers I've worked with are captivated with experimentation, elegant design, and high performance applications. The best mechanics work with the same drive. The best engineers I know ARE jumped up mechanics. Jus

  • Pollution in India (Score:3, Interesting)

    by MobyDisk (75490) on Monday March 23, 2009 @10:05AM (#27298451) Homepage

    Fuel consumption will be around 60mpg, and emissions around 100g/km;

    I've been to India, and big cities like Delhi are so polluted it smells like you have your mouth around the back of a Mack truck. I went for a wedding, and the groom had to wear a face mask because his lungs couldn't handle it. Our flight out of Rajasthan was delayed because of "fog" - but this is desert. By "fog" they meant low-lying pollution.

    I'm not sure if this will lead to more cars in India: But this car is much cleaner than the 20+ year old dilapidated taxis that are mainstream in india now. Those things blow visible smoke out of the back, so this might actually help the pollution problem.

  • Too cheap...? (Score:3, Insightful)

    by hesaigo999ca (786966) on Monday March 23, 2009 @12:19PM (#27300705) Homepage Journal

    Yeah, there is a reason we make it expensive, only few people should have a car...
    if we all had cars, it would be 1 billion in India helping the pollution problem along.
    Do these cars run on electricity atleast??? That would be worth the while, as well, by having such a big volume of sales helps push the price of the car even lower, thereby making the electric car technology that much cheaper....but unfortunately I am sure this is a gas car as well.

The reason that every major university maintains a department of mathematics is that it's cheaper than institutionalizing all those people.

Working...