[Staraptor]

Originally Posted by ron178

This is a very robust five star result for Kia. It was clear from the i-Size seats and passenger airbag switch that they were gunning for a comfortable result for child protection, but I am pleasantly surprised with the adult protection. I quite like the Syros and given that it is a five star car the price premium is a bit more digestible.

But disappointingly, only a C in Gobar NCRAP

Quite impressive for the structural integrity of the platform, though! That makes me wonder, what exactly is the advantage of the K2 over the reinforced K1 platform? The K1 platform is more space efficient, can even take the 1.5L diesel, has more modern electrical architecture and at its reinforced self is safer than the K2.

[gaurav_3000ad]

Kia seems to have addressed its Achilles heel!

The latest products from the Hyundai/Kia stable have been testing well in the safety ratings. This bodes well for the brand.

[BoredBonnet]

Newly launched Syros also has NCAP rating out. Sad that Kia Seltos facelift or the brother Creta facelift don't [rather won't] have NCAP ratings out.

[SuhasSalavathsa]

In my honest opinion, I have never seen a strong build from KIA in India. Most of there models like Sonet, Seltos, Carens, etc they pretty much lack a strong build. Majority of the Accidents seen so far the impact on the vehicle is pretty bad. I am not sure on what aspects the Bharat NCAP are declaring the crash test results.

[Xpresstrainfast]

A quick question: How is it possible that a safety-rating does not apply to a diesel-variant of a structurally identical car, but only to its gasoline-powered counterpart (There is no difference in safety kit either, apart from lower variants lacking ADAS, something irrelevant when discussing about gasoline vs diesel, as the Syros is available with a fully loaded diesel trim too.)? Does the design of the engine affect how the car behaves in a frontal collision, either practically or in the testing environment.

I distrust BNCAP though. They claim to have had 30+ cars for testing a long time ago, but release results at non-uniform rates, and also tested cars that were either already tested and even received a 5-star rating, or were from manufacturers with a reputation of safe cars (Citroen Basalt and this Kia being an exception). If BNCAP were really motivated by the initiative of safer cars for India, then they would have published the exciting results first (Dzire at G-NCAP with 5-stars is exciting, not a Hyundai Tucson). The tests, being voluntary submissions by the manufacturer, allows manufacturers to intentionally not send any of the cars that they themselves know is unsafe, since in the eyes of the common public, no safety rating is better than low safety rating.

[ToThePoint]

Originally Posted by Xpresstrainfast

A quick question: How is it possible that a safety-rating does not apply to a diesel-variant of a structurally identical car, but only to its gasoline-powered counterpart (There is no difference in safety kit either, apart from lower variants lacking ADAS, something irrelevant when discussing about gasoline vs diesel, as the Syros is available with a fully loaded diesel trim too.)? Does the design of the engine affect how the car behaves in a frontal collision, either practically or in the testing environment.

Yes, different engines with different layouts or component arrangement can result in different levels of intrusion into the passenger cell upon crash and hence ratings can be engine specific. This is true when you are shoehorning an existing engine into the car rather than designing the car for a specific set of engines. It all boils down to engineering at the end of the day.

[ron178]

Originally Posted by Xpresstrainfast

A quick question: How is it possible that a safety-rating does not apply to a diesel-variant of a structurally identical car, but only to its gasoline-powered counterpart (There is no difference in safety kit either, apart from lower variants lacking ADAS, something irrelevant when discussing about gasoline vs diesel, as the Syros is available with a fully loaded diesel trim too.)?

Haven't been able to figure this out (for the Tucson either), but for reference here are the latest Euro NCAP engine criteria for transferring results:

Originally Posted by Euro NCAP

For internal combustion (IC) engines, the same block size & configuration is allowed, irrespective of displacement, aspiration
and fuel. Extra components within the engine bay such as LPG convertors and turbo-chargers are acceptable provided that
footwell and pedal intrusion are well controlled in the tested vehicle (i.e. 4 points scored for driver's feet and there is no footwell
rupture).
Note that a 4-cylinder result cannot be used for a V6 result and a V6 result cannot be used for a V8, and vice versa, without
additional evidence (in-house or official Euro NCAP frontal ODB test).
For electric and hybrid vehicles (where a IC variant was originally tested), additional official Euro NCAP tests are needed for
frontal ODB and side pole tests.

I haven't checked AIS197, so not sure if BNCAP uses the same criteria. It could also be some other factor like kerb weight, for which Euro NCAP says:

Originally Posted by Euro NCAP

Variation up to ±10% of the mass of the ODB test vehicle is allowed, provided the car does not receive a modifier for bodyshell
instability. Further evidence may be required in cases where the modifier has not been applied but the stability is considered
marginal. For variants where the maximum kerb mass (i.e. including all options, safety-related or otherwise) is between 10 and
20 percent more or less than the mass of the ODB test vehicle, in-house data for the frontal ODB, side AE-MDB and side pole
tests should be provided. Where the maximum kerb mass is beyond 20 percent more or less than the mass of the ODB test
vehicle, the manufacturer must perform additional official frontal ODB, side AE-MDB and side pole tests at a Euro NCAP
laboratory

source

[Mortis]

Just checking, aren't the BNCAP tests conducted at 5X kmhr vs the 6X kmhr speed of GNCAP ?

Obviously it's still a level playing field when compared to other cars tested under BNCAP but I guess they won't fare as well if tested at higher speeds since higher momentum would result in higher impact forces

[ron178]

Originally Posted by Mortis

Just checking, aren't the BNCAP tests conducted at 5X kmhr vs the 6X kmhr speed of GNCAP ?

All 3 physical crash tests (front, side and pole) are common across both programmes and run at 64 km/h, 50 km/h and 29 km/h respectively. The 56km/h frontal impact I assume you are thinking of is not a consumer test but the Indian frontal offset crash regulation introduced in 2019, based on the equivalent UN standard.

Although the BNCAP and GNCAP protocols are similar on paper, there are some slightly subjective parts of the assessment that may differ across their laboratories, GNCAP’s secgen spoke about this in an interview earlier this year (Bharat NCAP has "certain flexibilities that have not been recommended": GNCAP secretary general).

[RaghuVis]

It's Kia's first Made in India Mass car to get a 5-star rating, and all we have is a 2-page thread with 25 replies? I haven't seen a 5-star crash rating thread discussed so little!

[ron178]

Originally Posted by RaghuVis

It's Kia's first Made in India Mass car to get a 5-star rating, and all we have is a 2-page thread with 25 replies? I haven't seen a 5-star crash rating thread discussed so little!

I suppose that reflects more on public trust in BNCAP than on Kia. They did very little to establish credibility, and that is despite being off to a bad start in the first place (in terms of public opinion) merely by virtue of being a government programme.