2020 Volkswagen Golf and 2020 Volkswagen up - Crash Safety Tests Results

2020 Volkswagen Golf and 2020 Volkswagen up - Crash Safety Tests Results

videos   12/18/2019 04:38:00 AM

2020 Volkswagen Golf Small Family Car and 2020 Volkswagen up Euro ncap Crash Safety Tests videos and Results

The passenger compartment of the Volkswagen Golf remained stable in the frontal offset test.

Dummy readings indicated good protection of the knees and femurs of the driver and passenger.

Volkswagen showed that a similar level of protection would be provided to occupants of different sizes and to those sitting in different positions.

In the full-width rigid barrier test, protection of the chest of the rear passenger was marginal but, otherwise, protection was good or adequate for both the driver and rear passenger. In the side barrier impact, protection of all critical body areas was good and the car scored full points in this test.

However, during the test, the rear driver's side door opened and the car was penalised for the risk of occupant ejection that this represents.

In the side pole impact, protection of all critical body areas was good and the Golf scored maximum points in this test.

Tests on the front seats and head restraints demonstrated good protection against whiplash injuries in the event of a rear-end collision.

A geometric assessment of the rear seats also indicated good whiplash protection.

The standard-fit autonomous emergency braking (AEB) system performed well in tests of its functionality at the low speeds at which many
whiplash injuries occur, with collisions avoided in all test scenarios.

The passenger compartment of the volkswagen up! remained stable in the frontal offset test.

Dummy readings indicated good protection of the knees and femurs of the driver and passenger.

Volkswagen showed that a similar level of protection would be provided to occupants of different sizes and to those sitting in different positions.

Chest protection of both dummies was marginal.

In the full-width rigid barrier test, protection of the chest was again marginal for both occupants, with other critical body areas well or adequately protected. In the side barrier impact, all critical body areas were well protected and the up! scored maximum points in this test.

In the more severe side pole test, protection of the chest was adequate and that of other body areas was good.

Tests on the front seats and head restraints demonstrated good protection against whiplash injuries in the event of a rear-end collision.

A geometric assessment of the rear seats indicated marginal whiplash protection. An autonomous emergency braking (AEB) system is not available on the volkswagen up!

2020 Audi Q7 and 2020 Renault Captur - Crash Safety Tests Results

2020 Audi Q7 and 2020 Renault Captur - Crash Safety Tests Results

videos   12/04/2019 11:32:00 AM

The passenger compartment of the 2020 Audi Q7 remained stable in the frontal offset test. Dummy readings indicated good protection of the knees
and femurs of both the driver and passenger.

Audi showed that a similar level of protection would be provided to occupants of different sizes and to those sitting in different positions. Protection of the chest was marginal for both driver and passenger.

In the full-width rigid barrier test, chest protection was again marginal for the rear passenger but other critical body areas were well or adequately protected, for both occupants.

In both the side barrier test and the pole impact, protection of all critical body areas was good and the Audi Q7 scored maximum points in these tests.

Tests on the front seats and head restraints demonstrated good protection against whiplash injuries in the event of a rear-end collision.

A geometric assessment of the front seats also indicated good whiplash protection.

The standard-fit autonomous emergency braking (AEB) system performed well in tests of its functionality against other vehicles at the low speeds, typical of city driving, at which many whiplash injuries occur, with collisions avoided in almost all test scenarios.

2020 Renault Captur Crash Safety Tests Results

The passenger compartment of the Renault Captur remained stable in the frontal offset test.

Dummy readings indicated good protection of the knees and femurs of the driver and passenger.

Renault showed that a similar level of protection would be provided to occupants of different sizes and to those sitting in different positions.

Protection was rated as good for all critical body areas for the passenger.

In the full-width rigid barrier test, protection was good or adequate for all critical body areas, both for the driver and the rear passenger.

In the side barrier impact, protection of all critical body areas was good and the car scored full points in this test.

Even in the more severe side pole test, protection of the chest was adequate and that of other body regions was good.

Tests on the front seats and head restraints demonstrated good protection against whiplash injuries in the event of a rear-end collision.

A geometric assessment of the rear seats also indicated good whiplash protection.

The standard-fit autonomous emergency braking (AEB) system performed well in tests of its functionality at the low speeds at which many whiplash injuries occur, with collisions avoided in most test scenarios.

2020 Ford Mondeo and 2020 Ford Kuga - Crash Safety Tests Results

2020 Ford Mondeo and 2020 Ford Kuga - Crash Safety Tests Results

videos   12/04/2019 09:31:00 AM

The passenger compartment of the Mondeo remained stable in the frontal offset test. Dummy readings indicated good protection of the knees and femurs of the driver and passenger.

Ford showed that a similar level of protection would be provided to occupants of different sizes and to those sitting in different positions. In the full-width rigid barrier test, protection of all critical body areas was good or adequate for both the driver and rear passenger.

In both the side barrier and the more severe side pole tests, protection of all critical body areas was good and the car scored full points in both of these tests.

Tests on the front seats and head restraints demonstrated good protection against whiplash injuries in the event of a rear-end collision. A geometric assessment of the rear seats also indicated good whiplash protection.

The standard-fit autonomous emergency braking (AEB) system performed well in tests of its functionality at the low speeds at which many whiplash injuries occur.

2020 Ford Kuga crash tests results

The passenger compartment of the Kuga remained stable in the frontal offset test. Dummy readings indicated good protection of the
knees and femurs of the driver and passenger.

Ford showed that a similar level of protection would be provided to occupants of different sizes and to those sitting in different positions. Protection of the driver's chest and lower leg was rated as marginal. In the full-width rigid barrier test, protection the driver's chest was again marginal but that of all other critical body areas was good or adequate for both the driver and rear passenger.

In both the side barrier and the more severe side pole tests, protection of all critical body areas was good and the car scored full points in both of these tests.

Tests on the front seats and head restraints demonstrated good protection against whiplash injuries in the event of a rear-end collision. A geometric assessment of the rear seats also indicated good whiplash protection.

The standard-fit autonomous emergency braking (AEB) system performed well in tests of its functionality at the low speeds at which many
whiplash injuries occur

2020 Mazda CX-30 Small Off-Road Euro Ncap Crash tests video and test results

2020 Mazda CX-30 Small Off-Road Euro Ncap Crash tests video and test results

videos   11/13/2019 12:39:00 PM

The traveler compartment of the Mazda CX-30 stayed stable in the frontal balance test. Sham readings showed great insurance of the knees and femurs of both the driver and traveler.

Mazda demonstrated that a comparable degree of security would be given to tenants of

various sizes and to those sitting in various positions. In the full-width inflexible boundary test, insurance of both the driver and back traveler

was useful for all basic body zones, and the CX-30 scored greatest focuses in this test. Similarly, in both the side boundary sway and the

increasingly serious side post test the Mazda CX-30 scored most extreme focuses, with great security all-round. Tests on the front seats and head-limitations

exhibited great assurance against whiplash wounds in case of a backside crash. A geometric evaluation of the back seats too

shown great whiplash assurance. The standard-fit 'Shrewd Brake Support' (SBS) performed well in trial of its usefulness at the low

speeds, run of the mill of city driving, at which whiplash wounds frequently happen. With crashes maintained a strategic distance from in all test situations, the Mazda CX-30 scored full

focuses in this piece of the evaluation.

In the frontal counterbalance test, insurance of all basic body regions was great or satisfactory for the two fakers, except for the neck of the

multi year old, for which readings of ductile powers demonstrated minor insurance. In the side obstruction sway, insurance was useful for all basic

portions of the body and the Mazda CX-30 scored full focuses for kid tenant insurance in this test. The front traveler airbag can be crippled to

permit a rearward-confronting kid restriction to be utilized in that seating position. Clear data is given to the driver in regards to the status of

the airbag and the framework was compensated. The entirety of the limitation types for which the Mazda CX-30 is structured could be appropriately introduced and

suited in the vehicle.

The assurance offered to the leader of a struck person on foot was great over practically the entirety of the hat surface and satisfactory over a great part of the

rest. Great security was given to people on foot's legs by the guard and insurance of the pelvis was additionally evaluated as great at all test

areas. The self-governing crisis slowing mechanism ('Smart Brake Support') can distinguish helpless street clients like people on foot and

cyclists, just as different vehicles. In trial of its response to such street clients, the framework performed enough, with impacts maintained a strategic distance from or

alleviated in many situations.

2020 Mercedes-Benz GLB SUV Crash tests video and test results

2020 Mercedes-Benz GLB SUV Crash tests video and test results

videos   11/13/2019 11:57:00 AM

The traveler compartment of the Mercedes-Benz GLB stayed stable in the frontal counterbalance test. Sham readings showed great insurance of the knees and femurs of both the driver and traveler.

Mercedes-Benz indicated that a comparative degree of insurance would be given to inhabitants of

various sizes and to those sitting in various positions. In the full-width unbending boundary test, insurance of all basic body districts was great or

sufficient except for the neck of the driver, for which sham readings of pliable powers demonstrated a negligible degree of insurance. In

the side hindrance test, security of all basic body regions was great and the GLB scored most extreme focuses. In the more serious side shaft test,

sham readings of rib pressure demonstrated minor assurance for the chest, with other basic parts of the body being very much secured.

Tests on the front seats and head restrictions exhibited great assurance against whiplash wounds in case of a backside impact. A

geometric appraisal of the back seats additionally showed great whiplash insurance. The standard-fit independent crisis braking (AEB)

framework performed well in trial of its usefulness at the low speeds, run of the mill of city driving at which numerous whiplash wounds happen.

In the frontal balance test, readings of elastic powers showed feeble insurance of the neck of the 10-year sham. Something else, assurance of

basic body zones was useful for the two fakers. In the side hindrance test, security of all basic body regions was great or satisfactory. The

front traveler airbag is consequently debilitated when a rearward-confronting kid limitation is placed in that seating position. Tests demonstrated that

the framework worked powerfully and the framework was remunerated. The entirety of the kid restriction types for which the GLB is structured could be appropriately

introduced and obliged.

The GLB has a functioning, deployable cap. Sensors in the guard recognize when a person on foot has been struck and actuators lift the hood

surface to give more prominent freedom to the hardened structures in the motor compartment. Mercedes-Benz indicated that the framework worked

vigorously for various person on foot statures and over a wide scope of velocities, so tests were performed with the cap in the raised

position. Assurance was great or sufficient at practically all test areas on the cap. The guard gave great insurance to people on foot's

legs at all test positions. Nonetheless, the security gave to the pelvis zone was poor and the GLB scored no focuses in this piece of the

appraisal. The AEB framework performed well in tests both of its walker location and its reaction to cyclists, with crashes maintained a strategic distance from in

almost all test situations.

2020 Opel Corsa Euro Ncap Crash tests video and test results

2020 Opel Corsa Euro Ncap Crash tests video and test results

videos   11/13/2019 10:44:00 AM

The supermini section has progressively gone under weight as of late from expanding natural and wellbeing necessities and an adjustment in buyer hunger. Opel/Vauxhall's new Corsa, be that as it may, accomplishes four stars

much the same as the past age vehicle did against the prerequisites in 2014. The Corsa shares a lot of its underpinnings with the most recent Peugeot 208, which was additionally appraised as four stars not long ago.

Performing over the five-star necessities in three of Euro NCAP's four territories of appraisal, the Corsa just missed the top rating by a solitary rate point in Safety Assist.

The traveler compartment of the Corsa stayed stable in the frontal balance test. Sham readings demonstrated great assurance of the legs

what's more, femurs of both the driver and traveler. Opel/Vauxhall exhibited that a comparative degree of insurance would be given to tenants

of various sizes and to those sitting in various positions. In the full-width unbending boundary test, insurance of all basic body regions was great or

sufficient for the driver and back traveler. In the side hindrance sway, assurance of all basic body zones was great and the Corsa scored

most extreme focuses. Indeed, even in the more extreme side post sway, security of the chest was satisfactory and that of other body zones was great.

Tests on the front seats and head restrictions exhibited a peripheral degree of assurance. A geometric evaluation of the back seats

demonstrated great assurance. In any case, the back seat push was ineligible for scoring in light of the fact that the inside seat isn't furnished with a head

limitation. The standard-fit self-ruling crisis braking (AEB) framework performed well in trial of its usefulness at the low speeds,

normal of city driving, at which numerous whiplash wounds happen. Notwithstanding, the focuses for this piece of the appraisal were not granted as a

vehicle must perform well in the dynamic trial of the situate and head limitations to be qualified for the extra AEB focuses.

2020 BMW 1 Series and 2020 BMW 3 Series Crash Tests

2020 BMW 1 Series and 2020 BMW 3 Series Crash Tests

Whiplash security   10/12/2019 01:28:00 PM

BMW's 1 Series, presently in its third era and, just because, a front-wheel drive vehicle, keeps up a five-star rating and proceeds with BMW's ongoing string of security victories. Its score in grown-up inhabitant insurance would have been higher were it not for its front seat barely missing a 'decent' appraising for Whiplash security

The traveler compartment of the BMW 1-series stayed stable in the frontal counterbalance test. Sham readings demonstrated great assurance of the

knees and femurs of both the driver and traveler. BMW demonstrated that a comparative degree of assurance would be given to tenants of

various sizes and to those sitting in various positions. In the full-width unbending hindrance test, insurance of the driver was great or satisfactory.

Security of the back traveler was great separated from the chest, for which sham readings of pressure demonstrated feeble insurance. The

vehicle scored most extreme focuses in both side effect tests, with great insurance of all basic body zones in both the hindrance sway and the more

serious post test. A geometric evaluation of the back seats and head limitations demonstrated great insurance against whiplash wounds in the

occasion of a backside impact. Tests on the front seats exhibited just minor whiplash insurance. The self-ruling crisis

stopping mechanism performed well in all trial of its usefulness at the low speeds regular of city driving. Notwithstanding, the focuses for AEB City were

not granted as great front head limitation execution is a pre-essential for the extra reward for dynamic security.

The traveler compartment of the BMW 3-series stayed stable in the frontal balance test. Sham readings demonstrated great insurance of the

knees and femurs of both the driver and traveler. BMW demonstrated that a comparable degree of assurance would be given to tenants of

various sizes and to those sitting in various positions. In the full-width unbending boundary test, assurance of the driver and back traveler was

great or sufficient for all basic body regions. The vehicle scored most extreme focuses in both side effect tests, with great assurance of all basic

body regions in both the boundary sway and the more extreme post test. Tests on the front seats and head limitations exhibited great

security against whiplash wounds in case of a backside crash. A geometric appraisal of the back seats additionally demonstrated great

whiplash security. The standard-fit self-ruling crisis braking (AEB) framework scored most extreme focuses in trial of its usefulness at

low, city-driving velocities, with impacts evaded in all test situations.

2019 SEAT Tarraco - Crash Tests and results *****

2019 SEAT Tarraco - Crash Tests and results *****

videos   2/27/2019 07:49:00 AM

New SEAT Tarraco shares Volkswagen's MQB platform with Škoda Kodiaq, which is rated five stars by Euro NCAP in 2017. Against the more rigorous protocols of 2019, Tarraco's five-star rating is more impressive, and in adults it is 97 percent. Passenger protection is one of the best cars in this category.

Euro NCAP organizes crash tests on new vehicles and provides automobile consumers with a realistic and independent assessment of the safety performance of some of the most popular cars sold in Europe.

Euro NCAP performs a series of crash tests on each model tested:
- a frontal impact test, the car impacts a rigid barrier
- an offset frontal impact test, 40% of the width of the car is striking a deformable barrier
- a pole test, the tested car is propelled sideways into a rigid pole
- a side impact test, a mobile deformable barrier impacts the driver's door.
A series of pedestrian tests are conducted with different impactors, adult and child head form, lower and upper leg form and whiplash tests are performed on a sled.
Active safety is tested based on the car’s equipment: autonomous emergency braking systems (car to car, with a pedestrian and a cyclist target), lane support and speed assist technologies and seatbelt reminders.

2019 Honda CR-V - Crash Tests - and results *****

2019 Honda CR-V - Crash Tests - and results *****

videos   2/27/2019 07:34:00 AM

The previous generation Honda CR-V was tested in 2013 as a diesel. As a sign of time, this latest version was tested in gasoline hybrid form, which is estimated to be the best-selling variable. The car performs well in all safety areas and has the highest safety rating.

Euro NCAP organizes crash tests on new vehicles and provides automobile consumers with a realistic and independent assessment of the safety performance of some of the most popular cars sold in Europe.

2016 Tesla Model S Luxury Car Crash Test Videos

2016 Tesla Model S Luxury Car Crash Test Videos

videos   2/03/2017 09:23:00 AM

Tesla Model S built after September 2016 40 mph small overlap IIHS crash test
Overall evaluation: Acceptable Tesla Model S built after October 2016 40 mph moderate overlap IIHS crash test Overall evaluation: Good Tesla Model S built after October 2016 31 mph side IIHS crash test
Overall evaluation: Good Recent crash tests reveal potential safety issues with Tesla Model S

The Insurance Institute for Highway Safety decided to put four all-electric and hybrid electric vehicles to the test for safety.

Compared with the 2017 Prius Prime and the 2017 Chevy Volt, the BMW i3 and the Tesla Model S weren't just safe enough to merit a "Top Pick +" by the IIHS.

"The IIHS is looking at a small overlap frontal crash, a moderate overlap frontal crash, side impact, roof strength, the head restraints, headlights and advanced front crash prevention," R&T Máté Petrány wrote.

The organization also assessed the vehicles' front-crash avoidance abilities; and their headlights.

The IIHS tested Model S vehicles built after October 2016 and according to its test results, the Model S fell short of the highest safety rating in a few key areas.

First, the driver's side seat belt didn't adequately restrain the occupant in a front overlap crash, causing the dummy's head to hit the steering wheel.

Secondly, the roof of the Model S P100D that was tested wasn't strong enough to ensure safety in a rollover, due to the car's weight. The Model S earned an "acceptable" rating in these two categories.

Lastly, the organization gave the 2017 Model S a poor rating for its headlights.

In a statement to Business Insider, a Tesla spokesperson said that the company is already working to fix the issues and that it's "committed to making the world's safest cars."

"We proactively develop updates and aggressively implement changes onto the production line in record time any time there is a substantial benefit to customer safety.

One of the improvements recently introduced in January 2017 specifically addresses the “Acceptable” (or second-highest) rating that the Model S achieved in the small overlap frontal crash test, and we expect new tests to yield the highest possible rating (“Good” rating) in the crashworthiness category," the spokesperson said.

It's worth noting that Tesla's Model S has received a 5-star safety rating from the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration, as well as the highest safety rating from the European New Car Assesment Program.

The BMW i3 also had a problem in the small frontal overlap crash scenario: the vehicles couldn't fully protect passengers in the rear seats.

The Chevy Volt and the Prius Prime plug-in both scored higher on the IIHS's tests.