[IshaanIan]

Originally Posted by dark.knight

yet the Beat/Spark scores very high in IIHS tests (with safety kit) and very low in ECAP tests (with no kit) and yet they don't put both the data together.

Why should they? To act as an advertising agency for GM and show people how much safer their car would be if they could scrape up some more cash to buy the top-end variant? If you read the report it clearly mentioned that the car has potential to score higher marks and that the passenger cell remained stable and interior intrusion in terms of the dashboard and foot well were negligible. That fact is, it is clearly mentioned that the same car is sold with 6 airbags in Europe for the same money as it is sold with no airbags in latin-america. If it costs the same, that is even more atrocious and such tests ought to serve toward urging manufacturers to offer better safety equipment as standard. Let's not make some controversial fears out of nothing. I still believe their agenda is quite respectable.

[hybridpetrol]

Originally Posted by dark.knight

6) If they are testing the lowest-equipped variant should they not also test the highest-equipped variant to show the contrasting safety difference? Since both are a matter of easy-availability with price being the only variable this is quite logical.

Very valid points. A lower version with missing safety equipment is bound to get less stars. As long as the local government allows, the manufacturers are going to sell such variants irrespective of the NCAP zeroes.
A difference in stars between two variants of the same car, would probably make more buyers to make an informed decision to select the variant with more safety features.
With improvement in technology, lot of new safety features are being introduced. How can one compare the safety rating of a car that is available in the market for the last 5 years (and got a rating 5 years ago) with the rating of a newly released car?