Shockingly bad NCAP score for the Zoe

[Evanivitch]

The Rotrex Kid said:

I actually posted my thoughts on your comments on page 1, post 7, feel free to refer to that.

Confirming your comprehension skills are inadequate to support a reasonable discussion.

[The Rotrex Kid]

Evanivitch said:

The Rotrex Kid said:

I actually posted my thoughts on your comments on page 1, post 7, feel free to refer to that.

Confirming your comprehension skills are inadequate to support a reasonable discussion.

Unfortunately I've not got the time to debate people who can't realise that a score from 2013 is not comparable to a test conducted in 2021. They have completely different test protocols and scoring mechanisms. It's pretty simple.

Removing an airbag does not equal a car that is suddenly a deathtrap and will cause untold numbers of deaths. Manufacturers build cars to meet regulations not to score on NCAP tests.

Some of the comments I've read online about the dummys arm coming off have been comical, surpised Welshbeef hasn't banged that drum.

[Evanivitch]

The Rotrex Kid said:

Unfortunately I've not got the time to debate people who can't realise that a score from 2013 is not comparable to a test conducted in 2021. They have completely different test protocols and scoring mechanisms. It's pretty simple.

Removing an airbag does not equal a car that is suddenly a deathtrap and will cause untold numbers of deaths. Manufacturers build cars to meet regulations not to score on NCAP tests.

Some of the comments I've read online about the dummys arm coming off have been comical, surpised Welshbeef hasn't banged that drum.

Everyone in the thread has acknowledged that the tests have evolved. Everyone has also pointed out that part of the issue is Renault, a company previously keen to trump their NCAP scores, has failed to update the car but has also removed safety equipment from the car in the process.

I wouldn't say the car is dangerous. I would certainly say it is 'less-safe' that the previous Zoe. Not just because of the material factors, but also the surrounding circumstances that see taller, crossover vehicles being significantly more common than 2013, which further highlights issues like side-impact head-protection.

[saaby93]

Evanivitch said:

sjg said:

Easy to say that it's all about electronic aids now, but the core crash testing keeps getting refined too.

Edited by sjg on Friday 10th December 11:28

The MG ZS petrol.got 3 stars, but the EV had 5 stars with all the extra tech. Certainly helps the score, but Zoe has much wider issues.

-
https://www.autoexpress.co.uk/news/356245/mg-zs-ev...



What says 'buy me' about the MG?

Edited by saaby93 on Saturday 11th December 16:14

[The Rotrex Kid]

Evanivitch said:

Everyone in the thread has acknowledged that the tests have evolved. .

Welshbeef hasn't

Evanivitch said:

I wouldn't say the car is dangerous.

But Welshbeef would.

Welshbeef said:

Such a dangerous car - surely this model needs to be pulled from sale and EV buyers should look elsewhere rather than buying this death trap.

Hence the

[Fast Bug]

I take my kids out in my 996, does that make me a bad parent? The car obviously needs to be scrapped as it must be a death trap

[ajprice]

They should split the tech score for crash avoidance from the score for what happens in a crash.

[Welshbeef]

Fast Bug said:

I take my kids out in my 996, does that make me a bad parent? The car obviously needs to be scrapped as it must be a death trap

I don’t follow.

Did you buy a Zoe and then the new one which has had safety equipment removed and then Sunday drive in a 996 Porsche?


If your comparing the safety of the 996 to the 992 every safety aspect has improved - as you’d expect and materially. However the point of this thread is and can be changed to suit 911’s which safety equipment has been removed from the 992 making that element less safe than a 996? I’d wager none hence my post on this page can anyone name a car that has been made less safe ie removal of certain airbags?

[kambites]

Welshbeef said:

I think a point is if you had an older Zoe and we’re upgrading to a new Zoe you’d be expecting safety to be the same or improved - actually given launch in 2013 and now 2021 you’d expect it to be safer.

Would you? I certainly wouldn't make any such assumption if it was me! I do think it's a big rubbish they've made it worse, but it wouldn't put me off buying one if I was in that market.

[kambites]

ajprice said:

They should split the tech score for crash avoidance from the score for what happens in a crash.

For about the 15th time, they already do! The Zoe was rubbish in both.

[Welshbeef]

kambites said:

Welshbeef said:

I think a point is if you had an older Zoe and we’re upgrading to a new Zoe you’d be expecting safety to be the same or improved - actually given launch in 2013 and now 2021 you’d expect it to be safer.

Would you? I certainly wouldn't make any such assumption if it was me! I do think it's a big rubbish they've made it worse, but it wouldn't put me off buying one if I was in that market.

What bit of the NCAP video didn’t you see with head smashing against the body of the car vs the airbag?

I know any sane person would rather have head into an airbag vs body of a car in an accident.

[kambites]

Welshbeef said:

What bit of the NCAP video didn’t you see with head smashing against the body of the car vs the airbag?

I know any sane person would rather have head into an airbag vs body of a car in an accident.

I don't understand your point? I didn't try to claim they haven't made it worse; I said making a blind assumption that they haven't would be idiotic.

[wyson]

The Rotrex Kid said:

…not to score on NCAP tests.

Yes they do. Look at the history. Many manufacturers make immediate modifications to their cars following an unsatisfactory NCAP test with the promise to change their production models, which are then tested again.

Quite recently when the IIHS introduced the small overlap crash test, many manufacturers who scored badly scrambled to add crash structures to mitigate against this scenario to their cars. The IIHS then found many just added crash protection to the drivers side, as this was the side tested, leaving passengers exposed. So then there was a second scramble to add this protection to the passengers side because the IIHS told manufacturers they will crash both sides.

Apart from Volvo, I am skeptical manufacturers will add these structures to right hand drive cars, simply because they can save the expense and will likely get away with it.

ie. manufacturers develop for NCAP and their ilk.

Edited by wyson on Saturday 11th December 16:48

[saaby93]

wyson said:

ie. manufacturers develop for NCAP and their ilk.

There's some swedish insurance institute stats somewhere showing which cars are actually safest.
Also there was a police report once which said of all the crashes they were called out to which car was safest for the occupants - a type of landrover

[wyson]

saaby93 said:

here's some swedish insurance institute stats somewhere showing which cars are actually safest.
Also there was a police report once which said of all the crashes they were called out to which car was safest for the occupants - a type of landrover

The previous Volvo XC90 was the only car in the UK that didn’t have any fatalities recorded against it.

[Dingu]

saaby93 said:

-
https://www.autoexpress.co.uk/news/356245/mg-zs-ev...



What says 'buy me' about the MG?

Edited by saaby93 on Saturday 11th December 16:14

Odd comment. Depends on what someone is looking for obviously.

[Evanivitch]

saaby93 said:

-
https://www.autoexpress.co.uk/news/356245/mg-zs-ev...



What says 'buy me' about the MG?

Edited by saaby93 on Saturday 11th December 16:14

72 kWh battery, £28.5k for a family sized car. Some of the lease deals have been incredibly cheap.

Are we going to pretend the medium family SUV market is full of great looking cars?

[Mr Miata]

monthou said:

I wonder how many stars our mk1 Focus or 107 would get in today's test.
Actually I don't, I just drive them.

A friend of mine had a Triumph Spitfire. Nice looking car but the interior felt that if you hit a wall of cardboard boxes the car would implode.

I can see why the crash tests evolve over time. What was considered adequate back then probably is behind the technology curve today,

[saaby93]

Mr Miata said:

monthou said:

I wonder how many stars our mk1 Focus or 107 would get in today's test.
Actually I don't, I just drive them.

A friend of mine had a Triumph Spitfire. Nice looking car but the interior felt that if you hit a wall of cardboard boxes the car would implode.

I can see why the crash tests evolve over time. What was considered adequate back then probably is behind the technology curve today,

The coke bottle shaped chassis on a spitfire was supposed to be resilient - collapsible steering column too
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zNj1hQFlFkM

[Fast Bug]

Welshbeef said:

Fast Bug said:

I take my kids out in my 996, does that make me a bad parent? The car obviously needs to be scrapped as it must be a death trap

I don’t follow.

Did you buy a Zoe and then the new one which has had safety equipment removed and then Sunday drive in a 996 Porsche?


If your comparing the safety of the 996 to the 992 every safety aspect has improved - as you’d expect and materially. However the point of this thread is and can be changed to suit 911’s which safety equipment has been removed from the 992 making that element less safe than a 996? I’d wager none hence my post on this page can anyone name a car that has been made less safe ie removal of certain airbags?

The point is the Zoe isn't a death trap. If they've made changes or not, you're still safer in it than something that's older