The Mitsubishi i-MiEV is the first ever plug-in electric vehicle to be tested by Euro NCAP and marks the start of a series of EV crash-tests planned for this year. Besides the i-MiEV, the European safety institute also rated five conventional models: the BMW X1, Hyundai ix20, Dacia Duster, Mitsubishi ASX and Nissan Juke.
The EV obtained an overall four star rating, the same score being awarded to the i-MiEV's sister models, the Citroen C-Zero and Peugeot iOn, which have the same design and safety equipment. The result was judged as "creditable" by the Euro NCAP.
"We recognize the efforts done by Mitsubishi to demonstrate that plug-in battery powered cars can be as safe as others. It shows that a future 5 star accolade for EVs is not unthinkable," said Dr. Michiel van Ratinge, Euro NCAP's secretary general.
The testing procedure was similar to the that for conventional cars, with special attention being given to the battery integrity after the crash and the functioning of the battery cut-off switch, which isolates the high-voltage battery in the event of a crash. Fortunately, no electrical or fire hazards were detected during the testing of the i-MiEV.
The other cars tested were all rated with five stars, with the exception of the Dacia Duster. The small off-roader achieved an overall rating of three stars, because of scoring only 28% in pedestrian protection and 29% for safety assist. However, protection offered to adult passengers was better in the Dacia than in the Mitsubishi i-MiEV (74% vs. 73%), while child protection was at the same level (78%).
"It is disappointing that a mother company like Renault does not give safety the same priority in Dacia cars as it does in cars sold under its own brand”, concludes the Euro NCAP press release.
By Dan Mihalascu
_______________________________GALLERY_______________________________
_______________________________________________________________________
_______________________________VIDEOS_______________________________
6 Comments:
That's a clever little car, and good to see it is rather safe, if you have to have a realistic electric car then this Mitsubishi is probably the best on offer
hah! had a lecture about this at uni 4 hours ago. Engineer from jaguar explained how skewed the ratings system is. In the event of a side impact, you will most likely die in this. but because it meets ALL basic criteria, 4 stars. Dacia duster on the other hand has MUCH better occupant protection but because its slightly below some of the legislation for pedestrian requirements, 3 stars. and the duster is MUCH MUCH safer for occupants...shows why we need a rethink of safety standards and a unified worldwide governing body, not the country-by-country testing rubbish we have now
All the above is more than likely true, I am however happier that a body like NCAP exists rather than doesn't.without it what would happen? Would each manufacturer go there own way, claiming how safe their vehicles are?
A car as titchy as this Mitsubishi by the laws of physics isn't going to be as safe as one double its weight, however it will protect occupants a hell of a lot better than a japaneese city car 10 years ago, and surely that's a good thing?
Dacia's Duster scores very well protecting its passengers, it fails on smashing into them, so if you see one heading your way pray.
well the current system isnt actually that different from what you describe. In the USA (only) carmakers merely have to claim they pass all requirements then the NHTSA chooses car models at random to test and see if they actually do. The new plan is to have a global testing authority with testing going on in various places worldwide but all cars meeting the same standards and legislation.
Also, pedestrian regulations are instantly skewed against cheap cars, as they rarely offer technology like auto-deploying bonnets and bumpers which can lessen the impact of hitting the hard engine/chassis components under the sheet metal.
a very interesting piece of information we were given was that if the crash of the current Mercedes ML class suv was analysed using the current rating system for europe (the tests are the same, just scoring has changed) the car would currently test as a two-star car, whereas on release it acheived a 5-star rating.
Jaguar actually screwd up with the XF also, because they didnt get it rated on release, but two years later, after two rating changes, so while in pure numbers it beat a lot of competitors who had scored as 5-star cars years earlier, the XF rated at only 4.
Another common example is the toyota urban cruiser, it got knocked down to 3-stars because testers were able to peel off two warning labels by had...not what most consumers would call a true safety concern.
As such it has been admitted by Euro NCAP the current system is skewed. While a wholeheartedly agree that NCAP needs to exist, the current plans to unify all crash testing standards and make them more fair with a "revision number" system will give consumers a much clearer view of how safe their car is.
for example, say 2013 is revision 1 hypothetically, you could compare a rating between it and a later (say 2020) "revision 3" grading etc... with a chart to extrapolate, eg: a rev1 5 star is worth a 3-star under rev3
"... "It is disappointing that a mother company like Renault does not give safety the same priority in Dacia cars as it does in cars sold under its own brand”, concludes the Euro NCAP press release.
By Dan Mihalascu ..."
I presume that Dan is of Romanian origin,
so I should like to congratulate him for giving space to the truly bad news concerning a brand of his homeland.
I woould only love to see this happen again and again with reporters of other countries; lets say the Britons, the Italians, the French, the Germans etc when they are talking about models and brands coming from their own respective country.
About Dacia now, Euroncap is absolutely right and this should give a lesson to everyone who was in a hurry to say that the Duster should be Euroncap 5-stars safe only because Dacia is a Renault's subsidiary.
Thank you anonymous 2, and that makes a lot of sense. I wasn't sure how the US system works.
A unification globally of safety tests has to be the answer, after all so many models end up, in one form or another every corner of the globe and it would give us, the consumer a little bit more reassurance, skewed as much as they might be it is a better indicator than marketing BS.
Post a Comment