[johannskaria]

The global NCAP today confirmed that they will release the crash test results for the next set of Indian cars in about two weeks.

Wonder whether they'll put the current crop of crossovers to the test?



Source :- AutocarPro webinar

[volkman10]

Global safety watchdog Global New Car Assessment Programme (Global NCAP) has picked up another set of cars from India to crash test.

7 cars from India have been crash tested by Global NCAP- Results will be announced on May 17th.


http://www.autocarpro.in/news-nation...-results-17147

[LionX]

Seven cars selected by global safety watchdog Global NCAP, in third instalment of crash test series; results on May 17.

At an international webinar 'Towards a Safer India', hosted by sister publication Autocar Professional today, Alejandro Furas, technical director, Global New Car Assessment Programme stated, "Within two weeks, we will come out with the test results." He did not reveal much about the tests, but another industry source informed that seven cars from India have been tested. The results will be announced on May 17.

http://www.autocarindia.com/auto-new...in-401739.aspx

[balajisv]

The last time such tests results for Maruti Suzuki Swift were out, they had absolutely no impact on its sales! People continued to buy them like cakes !!

[Lalvaz]

It's a welcome move. It will be interesting to see how things have changed or remained the same since the first tests.

For those who think it has no impact on sales, well, I for one did not buy a Maruti car even though I'm in the market for a car. In fact, I've put my buy decision on hold until I get a certified crash test result that I'm comfortable with for my next car.

So a tiny drop in the ocean perhaps, but a drop nevertheless.

Will wait for May 17th crash test results.

[SchumiFan]

Unless I read the article wrong, it says nothing about them testing the ones they already did. So I think the title is a bit misleading.

There is a load of cars that deserves to be tested. Will start with the Kwid seeing as it is the popular kid of the block these days. And the Tiago/Zest/Bolt from Tata. Just to see if the increased weight of these cars have any effect on safety.

Hope they focus more on cars that cater to a large section of the population. The higher priced ones are usually better engineered. It is the budget ones that we need to look out for.

[mudhasir]

Hope majority of these are hatchbacks and compact SUVs. With cars like I20 (Elite & Active), I10 grand, Kwid, Baleno and Jazz adding close to 50k numbers together every month, it will be nice to know how safe they are on the road.

[S.MJet]

Originally Posted by LionX

Seven cars selected by global safety watchdog Global NCAP, in third instalment of crash test series; results on May 17.

At an international webinar 'Towards a Safer India' ...

Welcome move. Changing mindset of people towards safety will not be a easy task, it will need consistent efforts and can take a lot of time. This coupled with the Govt's vehicle safety norms from next year should go a long way to change the way we Indians think about road safety.

Originally Posted by SchumiFan

There is a load of cars that deserves to be tested. Will start with the Kwid seeing as it is the popular kid of the block these days. And the Tiago/Zest/Bolt from Tata. Just to see if the increased weight of these cars have any effect on safety.

They should simply pick seven top selling cars in India.

Originally Posted by mudhasir

Hope majority of these are hatchbacks and compact SUVs. With cars like I20 (Elite & Active), I10 grand, Kwid, Baleno and Jazz adding close to 50k numbers together every month, it will be nice to know how safe they are on the road.

Alto+Wagon-R together sells about 40K units monthly.

[mudhasir]

Originally Posted by S.MJet

Alto+Wagon-R together sells about 40K units monthly.

True. My focus was more on highway driven cars. Kwid may not be highway driven car but there is lot of customer attention towards this car and moreover, this car is projected as one of the stronger and better cars compared to its 800 cc or 1000 cc competitors. Personally, I would like to see Kwids NCAP results

[JonSnow]

Originally Posted by Lalvaz

For those who think it has no impact on sales, well, I for one did not buy a Maruti car even though I'm in the market for a car. In fact, I've put my buy decision on hold until I get a certified crash test result that I'm comfortable with for my next car.

So a tiny drop in the ocean perhaps, but a drop nevertheless.

Will wait for May 17th crash test results.

Another drop here. When the first set of crash results came out, I was not a team-bhp member, had zero knowledge of cars and wasn't thinking about safety features as an important factor for buying my first car. I was going to go with the flow and buy a Maruti since the conventional wisdom was that you can't go wrong with a Maruti. Then I heard about the NCAP results from my brother, got interested and read up more about safety, became a team-bhp member and learnt more about different aspects to consider for buying a car.

It may not have impacted sales, but definitely had an impact on how I looked at cars and also how I drive.

[AutoNoob]

Originally Posted by mudhasir

...My focus was more on highway driven cars...

This exactly where most customers get it wrong. They believe that since most of their travel is confined within city, they don't need safety features or cars with good structural integrity.

Cars travelling at low speeds, say 30km/h, don't seem dangerous to occupants. But, it is very important to understand that if a car travelling at 30km/h collides with an on-coming car, also travelling at 30km/h, the relative speed is 60km/h and the results are horrific. The impact may be head-on or 40% off-set as in crash tests, it is practically immaterial to the fate of the cars or their occupants.

Just as a reminder, the tests conducted by GNCAP are at speeds of 56km/h or 64km/h (depending whether they are using their standard test procedure or basic safety test as prescribed by the UN) against a static deformable barrier. So, the relative speeds are only 56km/h or 64km/h respectively. The results for these crashes are for everyone to see.

Now, increase the speed of the individual cars, in the example above, to 40km/h (again not so frightening speed), the relative speed increases to 80km/h and result of crash is disastrous.

[asr245]

Originally Posted by AutoNoob

...
Now, increase the speed of the individual cars, in the example above, to 40km/h (again not so frightening speed), the relative speed increases to 80km/h and result of crash is disastrous.

Actually that's incorrect. While relative speed is doubled, energy that needs to be dissipated by the crash structures of the car are about the same as a car travelling at 40kmph into an immovable, non-deforming object. Used to think the same till it was cleared up by mythbusters on Discovery (or was it NatGeo).

[antz.bin]

Originally Posted by asr245

Actually that's incorrect. While relative speed is doubled, energy that needs to be dissipated by the crash structures of the car are about the same as a car travelling at 40kmph into an immovable, non-deforming object. Used to think the same till it was cleared up by mythbusters on Discovery (or was it NatGeo).

I think this is what you were referring to:

[Lalvaz]

Originally Posted by AutoNoob

Cars travelling at low speeds, say 30km/h, don't seem dangerous to occupants. But, it is very important to understand that if a car travelling at 30km/h collides with an on-coming car, also travelling at 30km/h, the relative speed is 60km/h and the results are horrific. The impact may be head-on or 40% off-set as in crash tests, it is practically immaterial to the fate of the cars or their occupants.


Now, increase the speed of the individual cars, in the example above, to 40km/h (again not so frightening speed), the relative speed increases to 80km/h and result of crash is disastrous.

Totally wrong. That's a common mistake made by most folks, but its been conclusively proven that 2 cars at 30kmph colliding with each other does not mean a 60 kmph crash. It means a 30 kmph crash.

See the mythbuster video here

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=r8E5dUnLmh4

However, all said and done, Crash testing is required before selling a car. If the automobile companies can do it for the developed countries, they can just as well do it for India. For far too long have they treated us as inferior second rate consumers. Its time we stood up for our rights. Our family is important to us and the lives of our dear ones is not CHEAPER than those in developed countries.

[AutoNoob]

Originally Posted by asr245

Actually that's incorrect. While relative speed is doubled, energy that needs to be dissipated by the crash structures of the car are about the same as a car travelling at 40kmph into an immovable, non-deforming object. Used to think the same till it was cleared up by mythbusters on Discovery (or was it NatGeo).

Originally Posted by antz.bin

I think this is what you were referring to...

Originally Posted by Lalvaz

Totally wrong. That's a common mistake made by most folks, but its been conclusively proven that 2 cars at 30kmph colliding with each other does not mean a 60 kmph crash. It means a 30 kmph crash..

I am aware of this video and the Mythbusters have rightly busted the myth, but with a caveat "crashing of identical cars". Here the structures of the two cars almost equally share/ dissipate the crash energy. Somehow, I am not at all surprised to see the general inference that you all have derived; most people get caught in this over-simplified 'lab' test. I wish the real life scenarios are also similar and thus occupants face less danger.

However, they aren't. I too might have been over simplistic in my earlier comment while trying to relate it more to the real life scenarios and thought process of average customers (and leaving out the bits of additional physics). Please consider the following in a real life crashes :

The scenario of having crash between two vehicles with similar masses and structural integrity is possible, but probability is much less than that involving two different vehicles. This becomes significant in case the two vehicles have significant difference in weight & structural integrity (say a K-Segment car and a SUV). In such case, due to the high mass difference, the SUV acts as more like rigid barrier. And with the SUV as frame of reference, the smaller car approaches it at a speed equivalent to the actual relative speed between the two vehicles.

In such a unequal sized collision, the heavier vehicle experiences lesser change in its velocity than the lighter car. Thus, inline with law of conservation of momentum, the impulse (rate of change of momentum) experienced by the smaller car is much higher the bigger SUV. Therefore, the smaller (lighter) car suffers more damage. Also, in most Indian cars in mass segment the structural integrity is questionable, the occupants are at a higher risk, even though both vehicles were travelling at same speeds.

The relative speed is important when the structural deformability of one body is significantly different than the other. Just think if the damage will be similar (1) in a head-on crash between a car and a train travelling at speeds of 30km/h each (2) car crashing in a static train/ wall at 30km/h. I am not quoting the usual highway scenario of car-truck collision as the mechanism is totally different due to no/pseudo FUPDs/RUPDs.

This is my understanding, and I'll be happy if you can correct my errors. Thanks !!