Crash tests EuroNCAP cz. 2 – compacts and roadsters
We present the results of crash tests of compact class cars and roadsters. It must be admitted that the level of rivals is very even. In total, we present the results of five constructions.
Convertibles and roadsters are usually used for "roofless" driving, so they are also subjected to frontal crash tests for a more reliable result. In short, it's definitely worse than what they would get "riding with a roof." The roof folds in a side impact. Thus, it is checked whether it is dangerous for those traveling by car. We combined compacts and roadsters because they are similar in size and should therefore give similar results. It also allows for a direct comparison of whether a real sports car is safer than a small family vehicle. One of the reasons is also the appearance of the Peugeot 307cc - a compact with an open body throughout. Let's get down to business...
In a sporty Audi, the passengers' heads are best protected. Much worse at chest level. The belts put too much pressure on it, the overload due to the violent reaction is too high. The steering column in the company with the rest of the cabin is the worst enemy of the legs of passengers, the risk of injury is high. In a side impact, a faulty airbag protected the head well. Actually this is an interesting case. Usually the opposite happens. The only area prone to injury is the chest. Pedestrian ... well, in a collision with the "aunt" he just dies. Even armor won't help passers-by... Audi didn't score a single point in the pedestrian protection test, but received a severe reprimand from EuroNCAP.
In the TF model, we already know a slightly old design, partly borrowed from its predecessor. However, the upgrades carried out have improved the result. Only the heads are properly protected. The chest is too loaded. Legs attack the steering column and dashboard. Pedals too aggressively "climb" into the cabin and take away living space at the feet. Of course, the driver would suffer much more. A side impact can damage the chest and abdomen. The MG does not have side airbags. A pedestrian in a collision with an "Englishman" probably has more chances than with an English sports fan. Only the areas with which the knocked down child comes into contact need a slight improvement. Three stars speak for themselves, which is a very good result.
We are getting used to the good performance of French cars. The 307cc has a good level of passive safety. The driver's thighs are most vulnerable in a frontal collision. As always, the reason is in the steering column. The passenger could have received minor chest injuries. In general, the seat belts and pretensioners work properly.
The only risk is carrying an 18-month-old baby. It is subjected to excessive stress on the neck. There is minimal risk to the chest in a side impact. The French still need to work on the safety of pedestrians, but not bad. Only the bumper and edge of the hood can be dangerous.
The new Megan is, of course, the king of this class in terms of safety. In a head-on collision, Renault lost only two points. All safety systems, including belt force limiters, worked properly and reduced the likelihood of injury. The ideal is a megan in the field of side impacts, a set of points. Pedestrian protection is average, the hood with wheel arches is the least friendly.
The Corolla flexed a bit, which lowered the frontal impact score. However, in general, the design of the "passenger compartment" is not too broken. The driver's hips are too vulnerable to steering column injuries. There are also small overloads in the chest area. There is little room for legs. Unfortunately, the Japanese pay too little attention to the safety of children traveling in child seats, we risk the least when transporting a child under 9 months of age. In the case of a rearward-facing child twice his age, using a whisk in any collision is simply not the best idea. For a pedestrian, the edge of the hood and the bumper represent the greatest danger.
A
Protection Efficiency: Frontal Impact: 75% Side Impact: 89% Rating ****
Pedestrian crossing: 0% (no stars)
MG TF
Protection Efficiency: Frontal Impact: 63% Side Impact: 89% Rating ****
Pedestrian collision: 53% ***
Peugeot 307cc
Protection Efficiency: Frontal Impact: 81% Side Impact: 83% Rating ****
Pedestrian crossing: 28% **
Renault Megan
Protection efficiency: frontal impact: 88% side impact: 100% rating *****
Pedestrian crossing: 31% **
Toyota Corolla
Protection Efficiency: Frontal Impact: 75% Side Impact: 89% Rating ****
Pedestrian crossing: 31% **
Summation
Only by the results can we conclude that the competitors are very similar. Most of them have problems typical for this class of cars related to their size. The best example is the steering column.
Audi tt unpleasantly surprised, because it does not protect pedestrians in any way. Its complete opposite is the English mg. Protecting pedestrians is just as important as protecting passengers. The ultimate model could be the Renault Megane, one of the safest cars on the market. It surpasses even the most powerful limousines and SUVs.
In general, the rating is high, all the tested models received at least four stars for protecting passengers, and this is the most important thing. The next episode is upper middle class.
