im Axle Specialists

General Panda gets 0* in Euro NCAP!

Currently reading:
General Panda gets 0* in Euro NCAP!

murphyv310 said:
Hi.
I do agree with what you say up to a point. The screen is yes an integral part of the full structure. Also the frontal area has to deform and absorb the inertia from impact. The screen can crack or break if the bonnet or other parts cause damage. A laminated screen is made up of a sandwich of at least two parts glass and one of a plastic sheet holding the sandwich together. Laminated screens are strong. Ideally the passenger cell should not deform on NCAP tests as the frontal area should absorb inertia. My issue is if the screen breaks in these tests would mean the structure is not stiff enough.
Click to expand...

Jaguar iPace one of the newest and safest 5 star cars you can buy from a high end manufacturer

Screen breaks in both front impact and the Pole tests, I don't see that being marked down because the windscreen broke.

Comments from NCAP "The passenger compartment of the I-PACE remained stable in the frontal offset test."

it seems its your assumption that if the screen breaks that a bad thing, but if you look at the construction of many cars the screen overlaps a long way at the bottom, out in front of the safety cell for things like rain water run off into the scuttle.

In an accident the bonnet can push into the glass, components inside the engine bay can be pushed back making contact with the bottom of the glass. and as it is tempered glass it doesn't take a lot to cause the whole screen to shatter, hit a small area on a corner and the whole thing will go.

Safety Cells are not indestructible boxes, they have to dissipate any energy that the front crumple zones cannot and therefore are designed to flex and bend. If they didn't they would not dissipate the energy and it would just be transferred to the occupants. which means you can get a huge transfer of energy around the occupants. That shockwave travels through the windscreen and can easily shatter it.

For reference
 
murphyv310 said:
Ah the Up........ loaded with diver "aids" so its HIV positive, "Highly Inept Vehicle" in my view. Lots of bare metal inside, jack it up and see the body flex, side impact deforms worse than the Panda, just look at the clips and also look how far the front wheels intrude into the the sill area. The Panda windscreen remains intact on the frontal impact where the Up doesn't https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xYZ2ALnQqO4
Click to expand...



Did anybody else see the side airbag go out the bloody window? Balls up!

The Panda was tested in 2011, it’s rating expired January 2018...

The Screw Up! Was tested in 2011, it’s rating also expired January 2018.


I will be asking NCRAP (if it actually replies to me) what the date will be for the Mess Up!’s test ... as it LAGS behind the Panda / 500 overall in Europe as the next best selling city car ... surely whatever their reason, it’s next ...
 
AndyRKett said:
Jaguar iPace one of the newest and safest 5 star cars you can buy from a high end manufacturer

Screen breaks in both front impact and the Pole tests, I don't see that being marked down because the windscreen broke.

Comments from NCAP "The passenger compartment of the I-PACE remained stable in the frontal offset test."

it seems its your assumption that if the screen breaks that a bad thing, but if you look at the construction of many cars the screen overlaps a long way at the bottom, out in front of the safety cell for things like rain water run off into the scuttle.

In an accident the bonnet can push into the glass, components inside the engine bay can be pushed back making contact with the bottom of the glass. and as it is tempered glass it doesn't take a lot to cause the whole screen to shatter, hit a small area on a corner and the whole thing will go.

Safety Cells are not indestructible boxes, they have to dissipate any energy that the front crumple zones cannot and therefore are designed to flex and bend. If they didn't they would not dissipate the energy and it would just be transferred to the occupants. which means you can get a huge transfer of energy around the occupants. That shockwave travels through the windscreen and can easily shatter it.

For reference
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1cxn3TfziE0
Click to expand...
Hi.
Thanks for the info, I do understand what you say which makes perfect sense.
How things have changed since I passed my test in 1971 and the zero safety of my first few cars.
My first was a 1960 VW 1200 type 1 fuel tank in the front boot, no safety belts, then a 64 Mini with yet again an exposed fuel tank in the rear boot and no other safety aspects, by 1975 I had a Ford Thames 6cwt can, Commer Imp van and a Skoda 1000mb. All had drum brakes all round, no servo, no power steering and only the Skoda had seat belts. Not only that they all had vulnerable fuel tanks. The top speed of them all though was around the 70mph mark. Rust was also an issue with these cars no doubt weakening the structure, how things have improved thank goodness.
 
oyumurtaci said:
I think it (the Jimny) also lost a few points for the roof deformation in frontal offset impact, making opening the door difficult, but still received more points overall due to the fact that the trim tested had city braking (but no lane keep assist, which isn't available on any trim level).

I still really like the new Jimny though, and would definitely consider one if they ever did a diesel (which apparently they have no plans to do).
Click to expand...

I would consider a Jimny too, just waiting to get a drive in one! You're partly right about its test results, front offset test was marginally lower than the Panda. But, overall, it significantly outscored the Panda and most comprehensively in rear occupancy tests. I uploaded the Euro NCAP scoring matrix earlier in this thread which shows how the stars are achieved. The Jimny didn't get more stars because of its driver aids, it was limited to 3 stars because of them.
 
Just on a slightly different note, what do people think will be the likely outcome of the panda’s result?

Do we think sales will be adversely affected?

What about resale values?

Could insurance premiums be affected?

What does the future hold for Fiat, especially in the UK?

Could Fiat do anything to the existing car to improve the result?

The reason I ask is, recently signed up to a 4 year pcp deal on a pop. I’ve got no real concerns about the safety of the car myself but we know all know the effect on the brainwashed masses who wilfully accept what’s being put in front of them. I don’t want to regret the decision, or be out of pocket. I was hoping to pay the car off in the near future and possibly keep it like I did with the previous generation model. It seems Fiats reputation has taken a hammering recently. It’s time to test all the other older and newer A-segment cars to the newer more “stringent” NCAP rules.
 
Hi.
I personally think it will effect resale and trade in values. I've been down this road before with pre VW Skodas any excuse and the dealers offer you peanuts.
Whether the existing model Panda could get a better score is debatable. Who knows what Fiat will do, it's unlikely to be pulled on mainland Europe but it could be in the UK, hard times for Fiat and customers I imagine.
 
murphyv310 said:
Whether the existing model Panda could get a better score is debatable.
Click to expand...

What NCAP are doing is taking brand new cars but have not seen an update for many years. This crash test is of the most current model panda, so to that end, it is the existing panda model they tested. I suppose with some electronic gadgets added on it might gets a star or two, however Like the Punto they tested last year, i think Fiat might now kill the Panda brand as the reputation will be that Panda's are unsafe.

I think it will significantly affect future sales values as again word of mouth will be "you don't want to buy a panda they're a death trap"

It's a shame I like the panda and I don't believe that in an accident you would come out of it too badly, but the problem is what you hit and not what you hit it in. Picking a fight with something like a big brand new model SUV and the Panda wouldn't fair very well at all in that situation.

I think in this case NCAP are Punishing Fiat to some degree for not updating models, they seem to have picked on Fiat with the Punto and the Panda, I do think they were right to with the Punto as it was ancient and fiat where doing nothing to improve it. The Panda however is not that old in the grand scheme of things (compared to fiats usual model life) and watching the videos it doesn't look like it performs badly, my only concern is the dummy hitting the back of its head on the B-pillar and that alone could be enough to kill someone, but NCAP don't seem to have paid any attention to that. So it makes you wonder if they are interpreting the results how they want to give the car a Zero rating but not to cause mass panic and risk being sued by Fiat.
 
AndyRKett said:
What NCAP are doing is taking brand new cars but have not seen an update for many years. This crash test is of the most current model panda, so to that end, it is the existing panda model they tested. I suppose with some electronic gadgets added on it might gets a star or two, however Like the Punto they tested last year, i think Fiat might now kill the Panda brand as the reputation will be that Panda's are unsafe.

I think it will significantly affect future sales values as again word of mouth will be "you don't want to buy a panda they're a death trap"

It's a shame I like the panda and I don't believe that in an accident you would come out of it too badly, but the problem is what you hit and not what you hit it in. Picking a fight with something like a big brand new model SUV and the Panda wouldn't fair very well at all in that situation.

I think in this case NCAP are Punishing Fiat to some degree for not updating models, they seem to have picked on Fiat with the Punto and the Panda, I do think they were right to with the Punto as it was ancient and fiat where doing nothing to improve it. The Panda however is not that old in the grand scheme of things (compared to fiats usual model life) and watching the videos it doesn't look like it performs badly, my only concern is the dummy hitting the back of its head on the B-pillar and that alone could be enough to kill someone, but NCAP don't seem to have paid any attention to that. So it makes you wonder if they are interpreting the results how they want to give the car a Zero rating but not to cause mass panic and risk being sued by Fiat.
Click to expand...
I think the normal 500 will not do any beter then de Panda in a new EuroNCAP test.
 
gazz_bee said:
I would consider a Jimny too, just waiting to get a drive in one! You're partly right about its test results, front offset test was marginally lower than the Panda. But, overall, it significantly outscored the Panda and most comprehensively in rear occupancy tests. I uploaded the Euro NCAP scoring matrix earlier in this thread which shows how the stars are achieved. The Jimny didn't get more stars because of its driver aids, it was limited to 3 stars because of them.
Click to expand...

Yes, the Jimny did generally better, but then you can probably only fit children in the rear of the Jimny and then you can't carry any belongings because there's no room left. The rear of the Jimny is a catch-22 in that, yes, it has rear seats but no, you can't realistically use them for any extended period of time.
 
The Panda could have easily got 3 stars, if it was fitted with some Car Safety Features like:

Forward-collision warning (FCW)
Forward-collision warning uses cameras, radar or laser (or some combination thereof) to scan for cars ahead and alert the driver if they are approaching a vehicle in their lane too fast and a crash is imminent.
Most systems alert the driver with some sort of visual and or audible signal to a potential crash, allowing time for you to react.

Automatic emergency braking (AEB)
These systems add to the benefits of forward-collision warning. AEB will sense a potential collision and if you don’t react in time, the car will initiate automatic braking.

Blind-spot warning (BSW)
Using radar or cameras, this system illuminates a light or icon in or adjacent to the outside mirrors to warn that another vehicle is lurking in the lane beside, possibly hidden in your car's blind spot.
Many systems also sound an audible warning if you attempt to move over anyway or operate your turn signal indicating that you’re going to.
More advances systems can also brake or steer the vehicle back towards the center of the lane.
Also effective are outside mirrors with a small convex section for a wide-angle rearward view.

Lane-departure warning (LDW)
This alerts you if you steer your car out of its lane without the turn signals activated.
Using a camera or lasers to monitor lane markers, the LDW may sound a chime, blink a dashboard telltale, and/or vibrate the steering wheel or seat.

Lane-keeping assist (LKA)
In addition to sensing when you leave your lane, this technology will introduce a mild steering input to put you back into your lane.

Not having these systems cost "STARS" with EuroNCAP test.
 
AndyRKett said:
watching the videos it doesn't look like it performs badly, my only concern is the dummy hitting the back of its head on the B-pillar and that alone could be enough to kill someone, but NCAP don't seem to have paid any attention to that. So it makes you wonder if they are interpreting the results how they want to give the car a Zero rating but not to cause mass panic and risk being sued by Fiat.
Click to expand...

I don't think there is anything malicious about these results. However as noted the car bounced to the side far more than the test assumes and the passengers, especially the rear, were really thrown about. The engineers do apply educated judgement, but the dummy readings are a matter of fact. As an aside I have been in several bigger cars where my head hit hard trim going round corners, never an issue in a Panda.... Curtain airbags have all sorts geometry issues often introduced by the overall shape, would forgive the Panda for not having any, for example.
 
Last edited:
andydiver said:
I don't think there is anything malicious about these results. However as noted the car bounced to the side far more than the test assumes and the passengers, especially the rear, were really thrown about. The engineers do apply educated judgement, but the dummy readings are a matter of fact. As an aside I have been in several bigger cars where my head hit hard trim going round corners, never an issue in a Panda.... Curtain airbags have all sorts geometry issues often introduced by the overall shape, would forgive the Panda for not having any, for example.
Click to expand...

My Panda Lounge have certain airbags.
 
The Pretender said:
The Panda could have easily got 3 stars, if it was fitted with some Car Safety Features like: ...........[/b]
Click to expand...

That's not the case though. I like the Panda but it hasn't been developed in its lifespan and the increasing demands of the test shouldn't have been a surprise to FCA. The new Jeep Wrangler test shows a similar intransigence to car development. The breakdown of scores for the Panda's 2018 test are:-

1. Adult Occupant 45% = 1 star
2. Child Occupant 16% = 0 star
3. Vulnerable User 47% = 3 star
4. Safety Assist 7% = 0 star

The NCAP rating is the lowest star in any one of the areas, so to move to a 3 star rating, Fiat would need to improve areas 1, 2 and 4 above. Some of this can be done by raiding the parts bin from the 500 and Cross models which get more standard kit but there will be a ceiling of what's possible economically by bolting on tech to an old platform.
 
The Pretender said:
I highly doubt that the 3-door 500 will end up with a better score then the panda.
Click to expand...

The 500 was re-tested in 2017..............

https://www.euroncap.com/en/results/fiat/500/26307

As far as I can gather there is no difference in testing between 2017 and 2018 but the scoring matrix is now more challenging for 2018. The 500 starts from a significantly higher datum than the Panda which is why I said some gains can be made for the Panda by raiding the parts bin.
 
The new Jeep Wrangler has just got one star. Truly appalling. With a few more electronic aids it may get two stars, equally appalling. It’s not a small car either.

It looks like Fiat/Chrysler isn’t trying hard enough, and Ford too is pulling out of the saloon car market worldwide, keeping only the Mustang, the new version of which got a two star rating in the Euro NCAP test, not because of the lack of electronic aids particularly, but because the body deformed badly, just as the new Jeep did when the transverse brace across the dash parted company from the door frame.

So perhaps the terrible results from the old Fiats isn’t so terrible when you consider they have no electronic aids.
 
Last edited:
murphyv310 said:
What about those quadricycles like the Renault Twizy, surely one of the most vulnerable vehicles on the road.
Click to expand...

As well as the Morgan 3-Wheeler, I also have a Twizy, so you can probably tell how much I am bothered by low NCAP scores - passive safety is all well and good, but proactive driver training and experience have far more of an influence on the likelihood of making it to your destination in one piece.

Taken to its logical conclusion, if you want EVERYONE to survive any RTCs, then set a max speed of 25mph nationwide and you'd have fixed the road death toll in an instant. But that's not practical and would sink any Government that introduced it. So from there on in it's all down to balance of Risk v's Reward, as I said earlier. Let NCAP stars influence decisions by all means, but I won't be ruled by them - maybe that's the difference between someone whose passion is all things driving v's someone who has no other choice but to have to use a car....

I don't really know why this story has annoyed me so much, but I suspect it is because it further fuels the desire for the great unwashed to buy pointlessly big and heavy Ego Panzers, which is a topic that is making me increasingly and irrationally angry.... must be an age thing!
 

Attachments

  • hg 004.JPG
    hg 004.JPG
    538.2 KB · Views: 30
  • uh 021.JPG
    uh 021.JPG
    901.9 KB · Views: 36
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

P
General Fiat Panda V Range Rover in Snow
Replies
6
Views
418
Herts Hillhopper
Herts Hillhopper
T
General Panda Trekking 0.9
Replies
1
Views
205
varesecrazy
V
Steven
General Back in a Panda
Replies
2
Views
549
Steven
Steven
JoleePando
General My next Panda
Replies
0
Views
80
JoleePando
JoleePando
S
  • Question
General Disappointed in my 2020 1.2 Panda city cross is not able to tow
Replies
9
Views
400
Sobby2711
S
Back
Top