Go Back   EcoModder Forum > EcoModding > EcoModding Central
Register Now
 Register Now
 

Reply  Post New Thread
 
Submit Tools LinkBack Thread Tools
Old 07-23-2019, 01:55 PM   #1 (permalink)
EcoModding Apprentice
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: ireland
Posts: 102
Thanks: 8
Thanked 52 Times in 34 Posts
Some European Safety Lemons

I have been browsing the EuroNCAP website - they are the regulatory authority in Europe for the testing of cars for safety. They award a ranking system with 5 stars being the safest and 0 stars being the least safe.

Now for a good few years now cars have been scoring 4 to 5 stars so I was taken back to discover that a couple of cars have actually scored zero stars.

Fiat Panda 2018
https://www.euroncap.com/en/results/fiat/panda/34191

Fiat Punto 2017
https://www.euroncap.com/en/results/fiat/punto/29849

Jeep Wrangler 2018
https://www.euroncap.com/en/results/jeep/wrangler/34192

The Jeep actually got 1 star.

Best not to put any of these vehicles on a future buy list!

  Reply With Quote
Alt Today
Popular topics

Other popular topics in this forum...

   
Old 07-27-2019, 10:10 PM   #2 (permalink)
Master EcoModder
 
oldtamiyaphile's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2009
Location: Australia
Posts: 1,510

UFI - '12 Fiat 500 Twinair
Team Turbocharged!
90 day: 40.3 mpg (US)

Jeep - '05 Jeep Wrangler Renegade
90 day: 18.09 mpg (US)

R32 - '89 Nissan Skyline

STiG - '16 Renault Trafic 140dCi Energy
90 day: 30.12 mpg (US)

Prius - '05 Toyota Prius
Team Toyota
90 day: 50.25 mpg (US)

Premodded - '49 Ford Freighter
90 day: 13.48 mpg (US)

F-117 - '10 Proton Arena GLSi
Pickups
Mitsubishi
90 day: 37.82 mpg (US)

Ralica - '85 Toyota Celica ST
90 day: 25.23 mpg (US)

Sx4 - '07 Suzuki Sx4
90 day: 32.21 mpg (US)

F-117 (2) - '03 Citroen Xsara VTS
90 day: 30.06 mpg (US)
Thanks: 325
Thanked 452 Times in 319 Posts
I don't get it. The Panda and Punto came out a decade ago so of course they're not going to get 5 stars when tested today...
__________________






  Reply With Quote
Old 07-28-2019, 02:07 AM   #3 (permalink)
Just cruisin’ along
 
jcp123's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: Rochester, NY
Posts: 1,183

Beater Echo - '00 Toyota Echo
90 day: 42.67 mpg (US)

Hondizzle - '97 Honda Civic DX
Team Honda
90 day: 46.55 mpg (US)

Shaggin Waggin - '14 Chrysler Town + Country
90 day: 22.56 mpg (US)
Thanks: 66
Thanked 200 Times in 170 Posts
Safety is the least reason I buy a car, behind emissions.

Gub’ment can try, but I’ll buy what I want, and my tastes tend to run counter to both of those.

Neither my wife nor I have ever shopped on either of those premises.
__________________



'97 Honda Civic DX Coupe 5MT - dead 2/23
'00 Echo - dead 2/17
'14 Chrysler Town + Country - My DD, for now
'67 Mustang Convertible - gone 1/17

Last edited by jcp123; 07-28-2019 at 03:24 AM..
  Reply With Quote
Old 07-28-2019, 06:59 AM   #4 (permalink)
Master procastinator
 
Join Date: Apr 2017
Location: Panelia, Finland
Posts: 273

Turan turan - '09 Volkswagen Touran Freestyle

Combot - '04 Opel Combo Tour
90 day: 40.37 mpg (US)
Thanks: 103
Thanked 49 Times in 42 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by oldtamiyaphile View Post
I don't get it. The Panda and Punto came out a decade ago so of course they're not going to get 5 stars when tested today...
Well not those fiats that were tested, they were 2017 and 2018 models...
Now what i wonder is what went wrong over the years, at least the punto has been doing pretty well regarding safety
  Reply With Quote
Old 07-28-2019, 07:40 AM   #5 (permalink)
Eco-ventor
 
jakobnev's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: sweden
Posts: 1,631

Princess - '92 Mazda MX-3 GS
House of Tudor
Team Mazda
90 day: 53.54 mpg (US)

Shirubāarō (*´ω`*) - '05 Toyota Prius Executive
Team Toyota
90 day: 54.88 mpg (US)

Blue Thunder - '20 Hyundai IONIQ Trend PHEV
Team Hyundai
Plug-in Hybrids
90 day: 587.16 mpg (US)
Thanks: 74
Thanked 702 Times in 445 Posts
Send a message via MSN to jakobnev
IIRC the Fiats got bad ratings because they lacked driver assist features, not because they were so terrible in actual craches.
__________________




2016: 128.75L for 1875.00km => 6.87L/100km (34.3MPG US)
2017: 209.14L for 4244.00km => 4.93L/100km (47.7MPG US)
  Reply With Quote
Old 07-28-2019, 03:30 PM   #6 (permalink)
Ecomodding Englishman
 
Lemmy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2016
Location: Northampton, England
Posts: 156

The Turdis - '05 Smart Fortwo Cabrio Passion
Thanks: 98
Thanked 48 Times in 32 Posts
A couple of years ago the NCAP system was rejigged entirely. Up to the point nearly every car was new 5 star, so they've essentially moved the bar higher for occupant safety, and introduce a slew of new pedestrian safety tests, as wellman tests for active safety systems.

The Panda scored 3 stars in 2015, so wouldn't have been remarkable then. The exact same same car now scores zero - not because its got any worse, but because the testing system has changed radically. You're as safe today driving a Panda as you were 4 years ago.
__________________
https://themediocrecyclist.home.blog

2004 Smart Fortwo 0.7 petrol.
Motorbike.
Many, many bicycles.
2019 Volvo XC90 T8 - 400BHP plug in hybrid insanity.

All journeys I do under 10 miles are human powered - I make journeys, not excuses..
2019 mileage - 1900 by car, 7100 by bicycle.
  Reply With Quote
The Following User Says Thank You to Lemmy For This Useful Post:
iikhod (07-29-2019)
Old 08-01-2019, 08:43 PM   #7 (permalink)
Master EcoModder
 
oldtamiyaphile's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2009
Location: Australia
Posts: 1,510

UFI - '12 Fiat 500 Twinair
Team Turbocharged!
90 day: 40.3 mpg (US)

Jeep - '05 Jeep Wrangler Renegade
90 day: 18.09 mpg (US)

R32 - '89 Nissan Skyline

STiG - '16 Renault Trafic 140dCi Energy
90 day: 30.12 mpg (US)

Prius - '05 Toyota Prius
Team Toyota
90 day: 50.25 mpg (US)

Premodded - '49 Ford Freighter
90 day: 13.48 mpg (US)

F-117 - '10 Proton Arena GLSi
Pickups
Mitsubishi
90 day: 37.82 mpg (US)

Ralica - '85 Toyota Celica ST
90 day: 25.23 mpg (US)

Sx4 - '07 Suzuki Sx4
90 day: 32.21 mpg (US)

F-117 (2) - '03 Citroen Xsara VTS
90 day: 30.06 mpg (US)
Thanks: 325
Thanked 452 Times in 319 Posts
Safety is an Expensive Illusion:

https://www.mrmoneymustache.com/2012...sive-illusion/
__________________






  Reply With Quote
Old 08-02-2019, 06:20 PM   #8 (permalink)
Master EcoModder
 
Join Date: Feb 2014
Location: Missoula, MT
Posts: 2,652

Dark Egg - '12 VW Touraeg
Thanks: 300
Thanked 1,176 Times in 806 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by oldtamiyaphile View Post
I love the Redd Foxx routine, "you're gonna' feel like a damn fool lying 'bout the hospital dying of nutin' "
https://youtu.be/6grI16niGXA
  Reply With Quote
Old 08-02-2019, 09:34 PM   #9 (permalink)
EcoModding Apprentice
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: ireland
Posts: 102
Thanks: 8
Thanked 52 Times in 34 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lemmy View Post
A couple of years ago the NCAP system was rejigged entirely. Up to the point nearly every car was new 5 star, so they've essentially moved the bar higher for occupant safety, and introduce a slew of new pedestrian safety tests, as wellman tests for active safety systems.

The Panda scored 3 stars in 2015, so wouldn't have been remarkable then. The exact same same car now scores zero - not because its got any worse, but because the testing system has changed radically. You're as safe today driving a Panda as you were 4 years ago.
The major testing shakeup was in 2009.

The Fiat Panda was last tested in 2011.

The fiat Panda is a very dangerous car, particularly for rear seat passengers and children.

Click on the drop down arrows for Adult Occupant and Child Occupant.

https://www.euroncap.com/en/results/fiat/panda/34191

There are 24 pts up for grabs with respect to child safety from doing the crash tests and the Panda scores a big fat zero.

https://www.euroncap.com/en/ratings-...wFitment=false

The overall score for child safety is 16% out of a possible 100%.
  Reply With Quote
Old 08-02-2019, 09:43 PM   #10 (permalink)
EcoModding Apprentice
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: ireland
Posts: 102
Thanks: 8
Thanked 52 Times in 34 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by jakobnev View Post
IIRC the Fiats got bad ratings because they lacked driver assist features, not because they were so terrible in actual craches.
Incorrect!

The poor score is predominantly due to the poor crash test results.

The Panda received 0 out of a possible 24 pts for child safety in the actual crash tests.

They use 6 and 10 year old equivalent crash test dummys for these tests.

Hence this is one very dangerous car to be carrying young children in!

  Reply With Quote
Reply  Post New Thread






Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, vBulletin Solutions Inc.
Content Relevant URLs by vBSEO 3.5.2
All content copyright EcoModder.com