I appreciate the tests are becoming tougher.. and judged in a diffetent way.

But the GP.. then the Panda

Far from great.!!

It's not all that shocking though, it's a 8 year old design based on a moderately refreshed car from 2004.

It was never going to score well in a modern context. With the absolute lack of assist equipment, which they are very hot on now.

Think the only positive I saw is the structure seemed to remain pretty stable, doors looked like they'd open on the frontal tests.

This is what happens when you sell cars for long enough they come for retest. Pretty sure my current car would be a 1 or 2 star job now having been a 5 star when tested in 2009..but it'll never be retested as it went off sale 5 years ago.

Doesn't mean it'll now go full pretzel but if you don't invest in new models the old ones get tested against modern standards that they were not designed to meet.

So Fiat have made their own issue by underinvesting in the range, be interesting to watch the 500 fail miserably as well shortly, see if they spend money on that.

That .. the 500 was my next point.

I seem to recally tbe US Spec needed major mods..
Adding 200kg.. therefore a bigger motor..

And that was .. 7 years ago..

I was unaware the 500 had been tested under the latest regime when I posted. It did get redone in 2017 and scored 3 stars, which would suggest it's possible to get a panda to that level.

However there's less margin in a Panda so I wonder if they'll do the work or just kill it like the Grande. Looking at the report for the 500 they are very similar but the 500 gets additional side airbags and a speed limiter dragging the score up. Also lack of a knee airbag doesn't help the panda compared to 500.

When looking at the details, I don't get what has suddenly changed in the offset test? When it was 1st tested, they scored it very highly, yet now they're saying its crash protection is poor?! [emoji52]

Personally, I don't hold the rating in much importance these days. A car can offer good impact protection, yet get a very low star rating purely because it doesn't have any electronic nannies fitted as standard. If I was feeling particularly cynical, I'd say that with most cars doing well in the crash test, they felt the need to start adding all these other aspects a few years ago in order to justify their continued existence...

puntofan01 said:

Personally, I don't hold the rating in much importance these days. A car can offer good impact protection, yet get a very low star rating purely because it doesn't have any electronic nannies fitted as standard. If I was feeling particularly cynical, I'd say that with most cars doing well in the crash test, they felt the need to start adding all these other aspects a few years ago in order to justify their continued existence...

Click to expand...

A car that avoids having a crash in the first place will always be a safer car, no matter how good the other car performs in the event of an actual accident.

The world is changing and that’s why these things change.

puntofan01 said:

When looking at the details, I don't get what has suddenly changed in the offset test? When it was 1st tested, they scored it very highly, yet now they're saying its crash protection is poor?! [emoji52]

Click to expand...

If I remember correctly the offset is bigger now, so a smaller portion of the car takes the impact, this is meant to simulate having swerved away from the accident but failed. If you see something coming you don't tend to steer at it to get a nice even contact.

The failure of the panda is not the electronic nannies or lack of as the 500 does without as well and gets a more reasonable 3 though the report makes for pretty grim reading. It's that they omit features that get the 500 3 stars. It would never score 5 without active safety but zero wasn't inevitable.

StevenRB45 said:

So Fiat have made their own issue by underinvesting in the range, be interesting to watch the 500 fail miserably as well shortly, see if they spend money on that.

Click to expand...

Most manufacturers update their models every 5-6 years, this isn’t just for safety but keeps loyal customers coming back every few years to renew their PCP deal for a new version, golf, fiesta, etc

Fiat’s renewal cycle is somewhat more lax, they might do a facelift if there is a slump in sales but there is often no rhythm nor reason to when they actually do it. They then expect a model to last as long as it possibly can, usually well beyond 10 years with only minor improvements here or there.

The 500 is so overdue a new model it’s laughable, it amazes me people are still buying the 500, it’s not that it’s a terrible car but it’s the same car that fiat launched over 10 years ago!

StevenRB45 said:

If I remember correctly the offset is bigger now, so a smaller portion of the car takes the impact, this is meant to simulate having swerved away from the accident but failed. If you see something coming you don't tend to steer at it to get a nice even contact.

Click to expand...

When did they change that, out of interest?

In Italy most people keep their fiats for 10 or 20 years the Italians don't value a new reg on the drive every couple of years like the UK.

puntofan01 said:

When did they change that, out of interest?

Click to expand...

It was updated 2015 according to ncap, though I can't find anything that specifies the update..I may be it's now faster rather than a smaller overlap.

I read a lot of stuff...sometimes I mis-remember.

I did have a quick look on the YouTube videos, and the overlap looks the same. I remember seeing on their website that they made the side impact ram heavier last year.

sandeel999 said:

In Italy most people keep their fiats for 10 or 20 years the Italians don't value a new reg on the drive every couple of years like the UK.

Click to expand...

Wise people! We are very materialistic in the UK.

puntofan01 said:

Wise people! We are very materialistic in the UK.

Click to expand...

That and our cars don’t last as well on our cold salt covered icy winter roads, versus Italy’s hot summer and winter roads and no use of road salt.

That doesn't change the fact that we're very materialistic here, and not just when it comes to cars.

sandeel999 said:

In Italy most people keep their fiats for 10 or 20 years the Italians don't value a new reg on the drive every couple of years like the UK.

Click to expand...

puntofan01 said:

That doesn't change the fact that we're very materialistic here, and not just when it comes to cars.

Click to expand...

Yeeeeah ..... I looked into it and it seems Italians buy more new cars per capita than we do in the UK about 3% more new cars than us Brits

And yet there are old cars everywhere in italy

But won't Darwinian selection kill them all off with offset frontal impacts?

sandeel999 said:

And yet there are old cars everywhere in italy

Click to expand...

https://www.driving.co.uk/news/old-cars-britains-roads/

What this article really tells us is not that people are vein or materialistic, that really, new car purchases are driven by a whole host of other factors, running costs and taxes being a major part of that.

I'd love to keep my car until it's 25..

It'd have no floor by then or be a patchwork quilt of welding and be absolutely un-motable but to keep it for less time is materialistic..

I find it slightly strange that this discussion needs to be had on a forum where it's pretty common knowledge the rear beam on panda/500 is good for 8/12 years before rotting away. At which point it's pretty close to being an uneconomic repair.