[RaviCar]

Originally Posted by SoumenD

No Surprises there. Anybody expecting any made in and for India Hyundai/Kia(sub20L) to have a 'stable bodyshell' is just going to get disappointed. And with the insane number of these on road the Koreans wont even bother to change this. Whatever gives them the best ROI

With all the made-in-india hyundai/kia test results I guess we can conclude:

Hyundai/Kia == Unstable bodyshell, period!!!

Just noticed under 20L Maruti has 1 car which scored respectable(Brezza), Hyundai has none. So who should get the official Tin-Can maker tag?

S cross Is 4-5* though India model is not tested. Outside India it's 5 star.

[JediKnight]

Originally Posted by ron178

The major reason for the Carens' loss of points still remains excessive movement of the pedals, much like the Ertiga for example, which can cause disabling injuries. In both cars parts of the body critical to life were reasonably well-protected, which is something to keep in mind before believing statements like 'x manufacturer is playing with the lives of Indians' (frequently seen on Twitter for example). Both cars have optional Electronic Stability Control not available on the Triber and Marazzo, which is a very important technology that can help avoid crashes. The Triber and new Ertiga have optional side body airbags, and the Carens even head airbags. Both of these are life-saving technologies, and not having them is probably a more serious problem that some pedal intrusion in the GNCAP's test.

No matter how many air bags you have or three letter acronyms you have a stable shell is the most important safety aspect of the car. ESC may save you from getting into a crash. What about getting into an accident because of someone else's fault . Which is more likely the case for an experienced and careful drivers like most Bhpians are.

Also one thing people ignore is the Karens and Xls/Ertiga are very light cars. With a kerb weight of around 1200 kgs. Marazzo is heavier by 450 kgs and the Xuv 700 by almost700 kgs. So if Mahindra is able to have less cabin intrusion with much heavier weights it speaks volumes about the structural strength of these cars as the forces created are much higher. The Mahindras would be much safer in real world than the GNCAP difference actually suggests.

[SoumenD]

Originally Posted by RaviCar

S cross Is 4-5* though India model is not tested. Outside India it's 5 star.

Well outside india even a Kia seltos is 5* but India model? Until and unless GNCAP tests india specific model we can’t be sure.

Yes S-Cross does feel solid but ‘feel’ counts for nothing as proven by the koreans

Btw wasn’t carens tested with honda jazz/city, magnite and kiger? Back then results were not published. So is it like Kia reworked on the safety aspect and then sent this for testing only to score a self goal though

[CommitTran]

Originally Posted by ron178

Both of these are life-saving technologies, and not having them is probably a more serious problem that some pedal intrusion in the GNCAP's test.

I am sorry Sir but I disagree. IMHO all the airbags in the world can't replace a stronger stiffer stable body structure. Putting 6-8 air bags in unsafe cars won't make much difference.
Intruding pedals can also be deadly, Imagine the blood loss they can cause which can result into fatality.
There should be no excuse for poor performance and mediocrity should never be supported/celebrated.
A car performing poorly whereas same platform based cars sold in so called developed countries scoring 5 star is appalling and basically exploiting the people due to lack of awareness.

[ron178]

Originally Posted by JediKnight

What about getting into an accident because of someone else's fault

Like a side impact with a large SUV, where curtain airbags could make a big difference.

Originally Posted by JediKnight

No matter how many air bags you have or three letter acronyms you have a stable shell is the most important safety aspect of the car.

Yes, it is a fair point that another car crashing into you could be a bigger problem, and that is why passive safety is also very important.

Yes, good structure is important. But the Carens' issues were more to do with pedal intrusion than the passenger compartment per se. When a passenger compartment becomes unstable in NCAPs' offset deformable barrier test it doesn't mean it has collapsed. You can read about it here. The Carens would still have been a three star car even with a stable passenger compartment.

The Carens' score comes mostly from the GNCAP giving a lot of importance to noncritical body regions like the feet. Not that that isn't important, who doesn't want to avoid being disabled for life? But manufacturers are making more important compromises than that, like removing life-saving safety tech including the so-called 'three-letter acronyms'.

You are correct in that heavier cars perform better in the real world, but can it offset something as important as missing electronic stability control? I don't know, I don't have data supporting or disproving it, without which this conversation could go on forever. But this is not about choosing between the Marazzo and Ertiga and Carens: this is about why both Mahindra and Kia are selling a product that is compromised either in crashworthiness or in the safety assist area, neither of which is desirable. In short, none of the options in the segment are up to the mark.

Originally Posted by SoumenD

Btw wasn’t carens tested with honda jazz/city, magnite and kiger?

No, much later. The City, Jazz, Kiger, Magnite and i20 and XUV700 were tested in October, the Creta and Urban Cruiser in November and the Carens in March 2022.

[Maverick1977]

Originally Posted by thiagust

I really was looking at carens as my next upgrade. Don't know what to do now

If your sole purpose of buying the Carens was to run your personal GNCAP (in short crash it) tests then you must stay away from it.

However, if you want to use it as a daily drive, enjoy the luxuries that the car offers, a DCT gearbox (which needs to be used correctly) which will bring a smile on your face, a 1.4L petrol engine which will pull well (don't expect to race a German though), 7 seats et al then please go ahead and book one and wait for your delivery.

Yes GNCAP ratings are important but they can't be so critical that you change your car buying decision. Let's all remember that a crash in a real-world scenario will not be the same in which the cars are tested. Real World test results will be very different. We have seen threads of people (unfortunately) losing lives in Mercedes S class also.

I personally know a case where a friend had fallen off his bike at 40 kmph and broke his arm whereas another friend in the same biking group crashed at double the speed and walked away with minor bruises. If you anticipate the impact, you will automatically be prepared for it. I have many more examples but right now let's focus on bashing Kia for this poor performance.

If Kia was a person, right now, it will be that poor kid who only managed to score 60% marks whereas the neighbours kid scored a 100%. Does this sound familiar yo anyone? Sure does to me. Typical Indian problem?

Godspeed, BB

[vijaysrk]

Originally Posted by JediKnight

No matter how many air bags you have or three letter acronyms you have a stable shell is the most important safety aspect of the car. ESC may save you from getting into a crash. What about getting into an accident because of someone else's fault . Which is more likely the case for an experienced and careful drivers like most Bhpians are.

Also one thing people ignore is the Karens and Xls/Ertiga are very light cars. With a kerb weight of around 1200 kgs. Marazzo is heavier by 450 kgs and the Xuv 700 by almost700 kgs. So if Mahindra is able to have less cabin intrusion with much heavier weights it speaks volumes about the structural strength of these cars as the forces created are much higher. The Mahindras would be much safer in real world than the GNCAP difference actually suggests.

I don't completely agree with your second point there.
A heavier car is inherently safer because of its weight, simply because of momentum. In a two car crash, the heavier car will be safer and have lesser cabin intrusion simply because it will suffer a smaller deceleration than the lighter car.

In the event it crashes into a tree or an embankment though, your point would be completely correct, and momentum has no part to play there.

[RaviCar]

Originally Posted by SoumenD

Well outside india even a Kia seltos is 5* but India model? Until and unless GNCAP tests india specific model we can’t be sure.

Yes S-Cross does feel solid but ‘feel’ counts for nothing as proven by the koreans

Btw wasn’t carens tested with honda jazz/city, magnite and kiger? Back then results were not published. So is it like Kia reworked on the safety aspect and then sent this for testing only to score a self goal though

I had an unfortunate strike to back of a breaking car at slow to moderate speed (airbags were out). Luckily or due to solid quality (50/50? May be you can judge), by God's grace I came out smiling.

This car "feels" Stable for most part of it. Solid I don't know.

[lordrayden]

Originally Posted by ron178

Kia sponsored this test!

Originally Posted by fiat_tarun

Wow, this is really surprising. Most OEM's have in house crash setups, so they would have very well known what score they would get. In spite of this to confidently send it to GNCAP is nothing but a self goal!

Originally Posted by lordrayden

Woah As far as I’ve read, most companies do internal tests before sending their cars to GNCAP voluntarily. Wondering what happened with Kia’s case. Were they over confident? Did they not do the internal tests properly? I’m really curious now.

The question of why they sponsored the test was still bugging me. One possibility is:

Kia knows that the protocols will change soon and become much stricter. If a particular car got X stars with the old protocol, it will get (X - 1) or (X - 2) stars with the new protocol. Since they know that the Carens is made out of aluminum foil wrap, they have two options:

1. Hope and pray that GNCAP don't select a Carens for testing after the new protocols kick in. But given the poor track record of Hyundai/Kia cars in India, GNCAP might be INCLINED to actually do so. And IF they do, the Carens will get an absolutely disastrous star rating under the new system, maybe 2 or 1?.

2. Voluntarily sponsor a test for the Kia Carens NOW and get whatever score they can with the old protocols! Knowing fully well that this would be the BEST star rating they can possibly achieve.

Like a game of chess, it was a strategic move to select Option-2. This way, the test is done, it gets a 3 star and that's what will stick in people's minds ... a 3 star rating with a better score than the Seltos.

[theAutomaniac]

Originally Posted by Maverick1977

If your sole purpose of buying the Carens was to run your personal GNCAP (in short crash it) tests then you must stay away from it.

No one really purchases a car just to crash it! Crashes are called accidents for a reason.
Also, the Carens is not a god gifted car that one has to put his safety into the bin just to buy one.
Honestly, I would never buy a car whose front door, windshield, A-pillar, running board and even the B-Pillar crumples in crash tests. These singlehandedly, are a reason to go for better rivals.

However, if you want to use it as a daily drive, enjoy the luxuries that the car offers.........ahead and book one and wait for your delivery.

No matter if it is a 1.4L Turbo or a 4.0L V8, the engine or the luxuries can never replace the need of safety. If the doors etc did not crumple like they did, I would've rated the Carens to be a good purchase. But as of what the case is now, the Marazzo, Ertiga-XL6, Base spec XUV7OO, Scorpio-N and even discontinued 7-seaters are much better despite lesser features.

Yes GNCAP ratings are important but they can't be so critical that you change your car buying decision......seen threads of people (unfortunately) losing lives in Mercedes S class also.

Definitely agreed to you on that. However, we need to remember that Global NCAP tests are a sample of how the car will fair in far worse crashes in real life. If a car crumples like the Carens did at 64kmph, you can imagine how worse it will be in real life.

If Kia was a person, right now, it will be that poor kid who only managed to score 60% marks whereas the neighbours kid scored a 100%. Does this sound familiar yo anyone? Sure does to me. Typical Indian problem?

Well, the kid scored 60% with much more facilities than another kid who scored 60%, but with much lesser facilities.
Also, the 60% score needs to be bashed because firstly the kid costs 20 lakhs (No excuse of cost cutting) and also, some innocent lives are at a higher risk due to his lower score!

[Maverick1977]

Originally Posted by lordrayden

The question of why they sponsored the test was still bugging me. One possibility is:
Kia knows that the protocols will change soon and become much stricter. If a particular car got X stars with the old protocol, it will get (X - 1) or (X - 2) stars with the new protocol.

Is the above analysis based on any facts or is a figment of one's imagination. I don't think GNCAP is some service centre where you just walk-in on any day, drop your car and expect them to crash it and give you the results in the evening.

This thread is now becoming loaded with more mis-information and an opportunity to just bash the brand. While GNCAP ratings are important, they cannot be the sole reason why one should buy/not buy a particular car. No one buys a car simply to crash it.

Godspeed, BB

[The Alchemist]

Originally Posted by Maverick1977

If your sole purpose of buying the Carens was to run your personal GNCAP (in short crash it) tests then you must stay away from it.

I don't think this is an appropriate way to put it. Nobody buys a car to crash it, but it could happen to anyone.

Originally Posted by Maverick1977

Yes GNCAP ratings are important but they can't be so critical that you change your car buying decision.

That is up to each and every individual I suppose. Safety ratings are of utmost importance to me personally. I wouldn't buy a car knowing that it is poorly rated.

Most of us take comprehensive insurance right. I'm sure none of us wish to end up in situations where we need to use various forms of insurance, but we take them anyway so that we are covered in case of an unfortunate incident.

It is up to each and every individual what sort of cover they need - Safety, Power or Features. There is nothing wrong with considering a low safety score as a deal-breaker.

Originally Posted by Maverick1977

If Kia was a person, right now, it will be that poor kid who only managed to score 60% marks whereas the neighbours kid scored a 100%. Does this sound familiar yo anyone? Sure does to me. Typical Indian problem?

Oh, Kia is not that poor kid by any yardstick! If anything, Kia can be compared to that cunning milkman who continuously sold adulterated milk to regular households thinking nobody cares and was caught red-handed one day. The irony is that he was selling high-quality unadulterated milk to the star hotel nearby knowing that they regularly do quality control tests.

Kia knows that crash testing ratings are more closely followed in developed countries, and builds strong platforms there. On the other hand, they intentionally re-engineer their platform to maximize profits by reducing platform strength. Remember that altering an existing platform needs money. They did that anyway because someone at Kia calculated that the cost of altering and more can easily be recovered by the profits of selling a cheaper platform.

[Stolidus500]

My cheeky take on this situation.

[thiagust]

Originally Posted by Maverick1977

If your sole purpose of buying the Carens was to run your personal GNCAP (in short crash it) tests then you must stay away from it.

However, if you want to use it as a daily drive, enjoy the luxuries that the car offers, a DCT gearbox (which needs to be used correctly) which will bring a smile on your face, a 1.4L petrol engine which will pull well (don't expect to race a German though), 7 seats et al then please go ahead and book one and wait for your delivery.

Yes GNCAP ratings are important but they can't be so critical that you change your car buying decision. Let's all remember that a crash in a real-world scenario will not be the same in which the cars are tested. Real World test results will be very different. We have seen threads of people (unfortunately) losing lives in Mercedes S class also.

I personally know a case where a friend had fallen off his bike at 40 kmph and broke his arm whereas another friend in the same biking group crashed at double the speed and walked away with minor bruises. If you anticipate the impact, you will automatically be prepared for it. I have many more examples but right now let's focus on bashing Kia for this poor performance.

If Kia was a person, right now, it will be that poor kid who only managed to score 60% marks whereas the neighbours kid scored a 100%. Does this sound familiar yo anyone? Sure does to me. Typical Indian problem?

Godspeed, BB

Nobody will want to crash their car intentionally !! and
for me Safety features plus Crash ratings are a key indicator as to how the manufacturer views the market as such. In one of the earlier posts , there was a quote from the report which mentioned Kia has cars with 5 star ratings in other markets but not in this specific case. Kia is taking the Indian market for Granted. In the crash test video , the impact on A pillar was too much, not sure how this can be overlooked.

[KPR]

Is Mahindra sleeping with Marazzo? Now is the time to reduce some price and make it take the diesel MUV stage that no one else can.