[SAE40 in veins]

Originally Posted by AbhisheKulkarni

This is strange.

If they have an in-house crash test facility, why couldn't they simulate these tests during the design phase itself? They could have included these changes before the first unit made it out of the factory!

What's the point of investing in in-house crash test facilities if you need to be schooled by Global NCAP test-results!?

Also, what about existing Zest customers? Should they drive a car which they know is unsafe? Would Tata be doing retrofits of these changes to existing cars, I think not, because that'd amount to a recall! What a fiasco in my opinion!

We just took delivery of a Tiago. Is it also similarly structurally weak? Will Tata make changes to it after a Global NCAP test brings out weaknesses and destroy our peace of mind? I did not see anything about crash test results in any brochure or on the website, because wait for it, nobody bothers about these things in India.

I hope the NaMo government also looks at this area in the automotive industry and makes crash test compliance a mandatory pre-requisite for homologation as per internal regulations. And if they do focus, I'm sure they'd 'just-do-it'.

Pls see the pic in the first post, it clearly mentions 64 KMPH which is ODB 64 or 'Offset Deformable Barrier' 64 where the car is crashed at 64kmph. Different countries based on their average highway speeds have various speed limits for these tests based on the crash standards they have. If a car fails in ODB 64 (zero star)in Euro NCAP, it doesn't necessarily mean that the car is unsafe in Indian driving conditions but rather in European conditions where the highway speeds are much higher.
Cars are made to Indian standards (which are debatable) but this does not mean that a car failing ODB 64 is unsafe. Now UN norms stipulate frontal crash speeds of 56 kmph (zest is not yet tested at 56kmph) at which point the car may turn safer with a better rating. As for airbags, i for one believe that as long as the customer prefers a bare bones car with a big touchscreen and tin box construction squeezing out that last km per litre, there will be some manufacturer or the other offering those contraptions for us. Maruti had perfected the art of selling fuel efficient tin boxes for a long time now and we still keep lapping it up in big numbers. Kwid is another tinfoil with a touchscreen in the cockpit(Oh! wow i am impressed with a 7 inch screen ) The psychology of the Indian customer for anything 'bling' cannot be exploited better. Now barring the Zest, Etios and Polo, i do not know of any India made and India sold car which has hit 4 stars in Euro NCAP. Lets appreciate the efforts of Tatas, Toyota and VW India for giving us better vehicles than others.

PS : As for the Tiago, do not worry, it will be safer than the Celerio, Wagon R or the i10 against which the car competes. It may even be safer than the Indian Swift who knows! if i am to go by the kerb weight of all these cars as a standard for structural rigidity. Just as a recap, the Euro spec swift made in EU passed NCAP with 4 stars while the Indian made Swift failed miserably with 0 stars in one of the earlier tests by NCAP.

Originally Posted by Motard_Blr

The Baleno is currently the most ridiculed car for its light-weight build. The shell may be light and somewhat flimsy but it's strong where it counts..

If we look at the pics of Baleno accidents (mostly available in rushlane), one thing is certain. The roof collapses easily while overturning. This may be because the A pillars and B pillars may not be strong enough to take the impact. If the NCAP stipulates offset frontal, side and rear as the only parameters for crash safety of an automobile, smart manufacturers will thin out the Pillars and start using thin windshields(so that the thinner pillars will not be pushed beyond a point structurally). While the manufacturers will be legally on the right side as the country's rules did not mandate so, ethics takes a back seat which is where bigger and respected companies stand out. Toyota Crysta owners in this forum have complained of windshield cracks and the cause is attributed to thinner windshields. While it may not be possible to conclude that they have thinned out the pillars too, it does hazard a guess though.

[ksameer1234]

This is highly reassuring result. However, it would have been far more useful to see same versions being tested before and after improvement. An airbag variant is anyways going to score better compared to non-airbag variant. But it appears from the result that it is the improvement by Tata which resulted in better results.

From what I can see between the two tests, A pillar deformation is nearly same while the non-airbag suffers slightly more foot-well intrusion compared to airbag version. Apart from that there is nothing that seems to indicate difference in protection as indicated by difference in star ratings.

I don't know what to make of this.

[McLaren Rulez]

Rather confusingly, the Global NCAP report for the Zest with two airbags rates the bodyshell integrity as unstable. It also explicitly states that the bodyshell cannot withstand further loading. Please refer to the attachment below.

2016-Zest-2Airbags.pdf

Not all four star cars are equally safe. For example, the Zest has a seatbelt reminder which earns it points (neither the Liva nor the Polo have this) while the unstable body probably loses it points.

While the Zest has performed better than most cars in its segment, whatever fix Tata did to improve its structure is clearly not as effective as designing it correctly in the first place.

[teemus]

It's good that the Zest is rated 4 stars in GNCAP but the Body Shell was still termed as Unstable even for airbag version model. The saving grace could be that GNCAP is done at a higher speed of 64kmph than the usual 56kmph.

Here is an excerpt from the crash test report of 2 airbag model

ADULT OCCUPANT
The protection offered to the driver head was Adequate due to bottoming out of the driver airbag.
Driver chest protection as marginal. Passenger’s head and chest protection was good. The front passengers’ knees could impact with dangerous structures in the dashboard lie the Tran fascia tube. The bodyshell was rated as unstable and it was not capable of withstanding any further loadings. The car offers driver Seat Belt Reminder.

Please note that the car is heavy! The crash test weight of the airbag version car is 1395Kg. Perhaps it is heaviest in CS segments that have been tested; a little too heavy for it's own good maybe.

Originally Posted by CoolFire

Still, I am glad the way Tata scored in this test and am waiting eagerly for test results for Indian versions of Suzuki superhits Baleno and Vitara Brezza.

Though I would also like to view the crash test of Baleno but I have a feeling the less weight of the car would work in its favour. Less weight = Less energy to be absorbed.
IIRC Baleno in EuroNCAP scored a 4 star rating. Indeed the car tested was Euro spec model with a full safety pack; don't know how much would the results correlate for Indian spec model.

[CoolFire]

Originally Posted by Vigkey

Im afraid if the whole purpose of the #SaferCarsForIndia and the random tests by GNCAP is getting lost. With GNCAP allowing manufacturers to come back with "Structurally improved" cars for re-test, how can we customers be sure that we also get the improved car? How can we be sure that this is not just a temporary improvement made using which manufacturers are gaining a lot of marketing mileage??

Quite true. In these times as more and more skeletons are dropping out of auto companies global closets, how can we trust the Indian system, which has never been superior in customer care and business ethics?

Originally Posted by Vigkey

GNCAP should still randomly pick cars from the dealer based on the manufacturing date to confirm if the improvements have really been made to the production model.

That is the only way we can completely trust the ratings. Even the proposed Indian Crash tests should follow this model.

Still, I am glad the way Tata scored in this test and am waiting eagerly for test results for Indian versions of Suzuki superhits Baleno and Vitara Brezza. Any idea why GNCAP is not testing such popular cars and tests marginal volume sellers like Zest first? My simple logic would suggest going after the big volume players first Maybe the monthly Team BHP sales data should be the guide

[cingsman]

Originally Posted by McLaren Rulez

Rather confusingly, the Global NCAP report for the Zest with two airbags rates the bodyshell integrity as unstable. It also explicitly states that the bodyshell cannot withstand further loading. Please refer to the attachment below.

Attachment 1576149

Not all four star cars are equally safe. For example, the Zest has a seatbelt reminder which earns it points (neither the Liva nor the Polo have this) while the unstable body probably loses it points.

While the Zest has performed better than most cars in its segment, whatever fix Tata did to improve its structure is clearly not as effective as designing it correctly in the first place.

I think rather than nitpick into what has been said and not said, we need to stand up and applaud Tata's efforts to make the car increasingly safer rather than selling tinboards for eons like some of the OEMs we know! Loading further than ODB64?

Long story short - is the car safe for ODB64 - 4 stars! Most other cars even with airbags - 1-2 stars.

[McLaren Rulez]

Originally Posted by cingsman

I think rather than nitpick into what has been said and not said, we need to stand up and applaud Tata's efforts to make the car increasingly safer rather than selling tinboards for eons like some of the OEMs we know!

It's funny, the bar has been set so low by the others that Tata actually comes off looking good when selling a car with a patch solution for an unstable structure that gets rolled out to only part of the range. What's more, that "fix" still won't work if you crash it at speeds any higher than 64 kph.

This is Tata doing just enough to pass a specific test i.e. gaming a broken system. And they're not the first. Renault have pulled off a similar stunt off by only reinforcing the driver's side of the Kwid (because that's the side that gets crashed into in NCAP tests).

[teemus]

Originally Posted by McLaren Rulez

It's funny, the bar has been set so low by the others that Tata actually comes off looking good when selling a car with a patch solution for an unstable structure that gets rolled out to only part of the range. What's more, that "fix" still won't work if you crash it at speeds any higher than 64 kph.

This is Tata doing just enough to pass a specific test i.e. gaming a broken system. And they're not the first. Renault have pulled off a similar stunt off by only reinforcing the driver's side of the Kwid (because that's the side that gets crashed into in NCAP tests).

True, but others didn't even try so, did they? The structure is unstable but the occupant might still be able to survive the crash. Looking at the crash report, the drivers chest is marginally safe whereas worst areas are for Knees and thighs.

I am actually aghast with the chest data because the car comes with a pre-tensioner and load limiter for driver seat belt; the airbag version should have yeilded better results here.

[cingsman]

Originally Posted by McLaren Rulez

It's funny, the bar has been set so low by the others that Tata actually comes off looking good when selling a car with a patch solution for an unstable structure that gets rolled out to only part of the range. What's more, that "fix" still won't work if you crash it at speeds any higher than 64 kph.

This is Tata doing just enough to pass a specific test i.e. gaming a broken system. And they're not the first. Renault have pulled off a similar stunt off by only reinforcing the driver's side of the Kwid (because that's the side that gets crashed into in NCAP tests).

Trudat! Doing enough to pass the tests - who doesn't - and I'm talking about life as well.

And then you have the bestsellers from Maruti that reinforce ONLY the driver's side panels for ODB48, let alone ODB64. The co-passenger can go meet God.

But, if you know so much about ODB64, then you already know Tata has done a decent job of it. Gaming a broken system - yes, but I slightly disagree. ODB64 is not a regulation yet. To see the Zest going ahead of the curve is good for the customers.

The bar has been set low by us and the regulations are happy to be lobbied by influential carmakers to ensure customers get maximum FE. Isn't that the most important thing that one needs in a car <smirk>!

[rageshgr]

Great to see an Indian Manufacturer, not only scoring good points, but also taking the NCAP feedback and improving it further as well.

Shocking to see, how at 64 kph, the seat belt was almost rendered ineffective due to the forces, further re-inforcing how important Airbags are.

With Airbags about to become mandatory next year, all manufacturers should start providing Airbags by default now itself.

Anyways good to see safety and safety awareness in general, improving in India

[silverado]

TATA Zest surely is built better than MANZA or vista.
Kudos to TATA for getting such a result

Coming back to Baleno, it got 3 Star rating and this is how we read 3 starts in EuroNcap

3 stars safety: Average to good occupant protection but lacking crash avoidance technology

I am not sure how Global and Euro Ncap compare with each other.

[narayans80]

Interestingly why is the child safety rating so poor?

[silverado]

Originally Posted by narayans80

Interestingly why is the child safety rating so poor?

AFAIK, Zest is missing ISOFIX points which could be a Major factor.

[narayans80]

Originally Posted by silverado

AFAIK, Zest is missing ISOFIX points which could be a Major factor.

Yes, ISOFIX would have made the score better. But then its a rarity, Ecosport was the first to bring them in B or C segments. 2016 City and recently Platinum Etios twins followed suit.

However, Zest's cousin Vista did score a 3 star on child safety on the 2014 ASEAN NCAP though (team-bhp thread here). These were made in India, sold for Indonesia though. Not sure if a similar test result is available for the Made for India Vista though.

If you note, the driver head and thigh protection is also slightly better on the Vista test (that was rated 3 star for adult protection), compared to the Zest (that is 4 starred).

[GTO]

Guys,

Hold the celebrations. The Tata Zest on sale today - especially the non-airbag version - gets zero stars for safety. Tata hasn't provided a timeline as to when they'll update the Zest. I doubt it's going to be a priority with the Tiago's healthy sales, the Zest's poor sales, Cyrus Mistry's exit and the impending Hexa launch.

While I appreciate Tata for improving the car, this is akin to cheating. Give Maruti the chance and I'm sure they can reinforce the Maruti Baleno to get 5 stars in the NCAP. How come they weren't given the chance to go back and build a one-off car for the test? What makes Tata so special? A lot more than meets the eye here.

When Tata updates the production version Zest exactly as per the 4 star car, that's when they'll hear my applause.

Originally Posted by AbhisheKulkarni

What's the point of investing in in-house crash test facilities if you need to be schooled by Global NCAP test-results!?

Cost, cost, cost. If others are successfully selling unsafe cars, you'll lose cost competitiveness (and perhaps FE) by strengthening your car.

Originally Posted by jetsetgo08

For comparison, even the Etios and Polo have a 4-star safety rating.

Neither Toyota nor VW gave NCAP a one-off build for testing. So your comparison is flawed. You can walk into a Toyota showroom today and buy a 4-star car. You can't with the Zest.

Originally Posted by landcruiser123

Just shows that all companies have the technical know how to design cars which are safe, but they are reluctant until they are pushed to use those features.

Well said!

It's a strange things that cars that aren't very popular- Zest, Etios and Figo have the best crash ratings for any mass-market automobile sold in India.

Originally Posted by rdhawan15

Could someone enlighten me if the current models being sold in India are classified as structurally weak or strong?

Structurally weak.

Originally Posted by SAE40 in veins

where the car is crashed at 64kmph. Different countries based on their average highway speeds have various speed limits for these tests based on the crash standards they have. If a car fails in ODB 64 (zero star)in Euro NCAP, it doesn't necessarily mean that the car is unsafe in Indian driving conditions

Oh give me a break! Most highways in India are good enough for *at least* an average speed of 64 kmph.