Technical 3 out of 5 on EuroNcap testing

Currently reading:
Technical 3 out of 5 on EuroNcap testing

Not very good for a new model to be honest. Be curious to see how it affects sales.

4* with the safety pack. Which just goes to show how little the basic safety structure is valued in the tests! AEB and lane safety system adds a star it seems - probably no knee airbag was the last star......

Actually it looks pretty good in the video, certainly in terms of where the occupants are sitting. (y)
 
Last edited:
When pretty much every other new car is getting 5* it looks more than a little poor though. I don't know how many people look at the ratings when considering a new car. I do.
 
4* with the safety pack. Which just goes to show how little the basic safety structure is valued in the tests! AEB and lane safety system adds a star it seems - probably no knee airbag was the last star......

Actually it looks pretty good in the video, certainly in terms of where the occupants are sitting. (y)

You can't tell just from the looks of a video. There is more to it that the lack of deformation to the safety cell. I personally disregard all of the active safety systems on the new crash ratings, when you do this you can almost compare to old ratings then, which means this is no better than a mk3 Panda, designed 13/14 years ago now :(
 
You can't tell just from the looks of a video. There is more to it that the lack of deformation to the safety cell. I personally disregard all of the active safety systems on the new crash ratings, when you do this you can almost compare to old ratings then, which means this is no better than a mk3 Panda, designed 13/14 years ago now :(

Well yes there's a lot more to it, but it was praised for that structure, so I wasn't just saying it looked good (though it did, and if you compare to a mk1 Punto it's very clear)!

It specifically states the 2015 results can't be directly compared to 2016, so you definitely can't compare old ones from 13 years ago. Obviously a budget car (which this is) does not have the same level of equipment standard across the range - any range with some as options gets marked down, which seems a little obscure - maybe they need a new set of marks for the passive safety of the vehicle, with additions for electronic features.

What would my 5* Abarth score in 2016 - no idea, but it wouldn't be 5, as it doesn't have some of the low speed collision equipment (anyway, I want it safe in a high speed accident if I'm unlucky enough to have one).

I think I'd rather crash a new Tipo than a 13 year old Panda - are you game, or not quite sure of the comparison? ;) :D
 
After seeing the NCAP result on a previous thread, I looked at the report, and having read that, I would definitely buy a Tipo: as mentioned by others on this thread, the actual crash test result was acceptably good.

Personally, I'd say NCAP are taking things too far these days. As mentioned, there seems to be as much emphasis on electronic driver aids as actual passive safety.

Something else I wonder is how relevant the NCAP test is in modern times, to a certain extent...
 
I saw someone comment about this on one of the car mags comments sections & initially thought 'ouch, not good' so took a look at the EuroNcap website & after that I concluded that if I'd intended to buy a Tipo, I would probably still would.

Take the Fiat 500L & 500X for example - the 500L gets a 5 star rating in an earlier NCAP test, the 500X gets 4 stars in the latest testing regime. Is the 500X less safe? Probably not, it's simply that NCAP began putting more emphasis on driver aids like Autonomous Braking & Lane Departure Warning Systems in its latest round of tests, neither of which (especially AEB) would I want on a car.

The structural and passive safety (airbags etc) is still very good, it's just that NCAP has moved on to try to encourage makers to fit more safety kit as standard. An honourable thing, but it doesn't make the standard car without the driver aids particularly 'unsafe', and doesn't mean that a 3 star Tipo is anywhere near as vulnerable in a crash as a 3 star car from the late 90s - early 2000s, like a Mk1 Punto or Alfa 147, for example :)
 
It's not just lower priced cars like the Tipo that aren't scoring top marks in NCAP these days: the new BMW Mini and Audi TT score 4 stars as well.
 
Tbh
look at this way
If Somebody is gonna crash into you HARD
regardless of the Safety Features / Strength and weak zones

A Loaded lorry or strong impact into a wall/barrier is gonna a simple case of physics
The energy HAS to go somewhere

Sure N-Cap's prove a point

But if a HGV runs head on into you - a 4* or 5* is gonna do jack ****e.... Your getting squished

Ziggy
 
But if a HGV runs head on into you - a 4* or 5* is gonna do jack ****e.... Your getting squished

Luckily the majority of accidents are what Ncap covers however, so I see your comment as being a little irrelevant tbh.

Its almost like saying all vehicles will look the same after going into a car shredder or compactor at their end of life.
 
Not intending to start arguments, but Ziggy does make a point...

Something I had been thinking was this: the NCAP test was designed to replicate 2 vehicles of similar size and weight crashing into each other. Whilst family hatchbacks are still very much popular, there's an awful lot of taller crossovers and SUVs on the roads these days, which does make me wonder about how a normal car would stand up to an impact with 1 of those.
 
Not intending to start arguments, but Ziggy does make a point...

Something I had been thinking was this: the NCAP test was designed to replicate 2 vehicles of similar size and weight crashing into each other. Whilst family hatchbacks are still very much popular, there's an awful lot of taller crossovers and SUVs on the roads these days, which does make me wonder about how a normal car would stand up to an impact with 1 of those.

It'll depend greatly upon mass.

Ncap is a bench mark. Its not designed to test every single possibility.
 
This is a pointless thread in (presumably) the wrong section.

Euro NCAP are a useless bunch of self-serving idiot bureocrats, making up rules and standards and recommendations just to protect their own status and self-importance, and randomly moving the goalposts just to keep subservient manufacturers on their toes making ridiculously large, heavy, over-complicated, expensive cars just to tick a few meaningless boxes.

The new Tipo is of course perfectly safe, as was the Bravo before it, and the Stilo, and the Multipla / Marea / Bravo / Brava before it, etc. etc. etc.

Just look at the abomination that is the (fairly) recent Qubo / Doblo revamp to see the results.. seriously who wants to produce such an ugly mutated car / van just to protect a few careless, moronic pedestrians / cyclists who won't be responsible for their own safety...
 
At the end of the day, a 5* safety rating means nothing if the driver of said car is a bellend. My feeling is that people feel invincible in their 5* rated boxes and drive like idiots because of it. I'd much rather drive around in my tinfoil Seicento and actually be concerned about the other traffic on the road as it makes me a better driver and more aware of what's going on around me.

Again, just my opinion.
 
It's not just lower priced cars like the Tipo that aren't scoring top marks in NCAP these days: the new BMW Mini and Audi TT score 4 stars as well.

TIPO - it's a budget car.. I tried to compare to the Dacia Sombrero..but couldn't find any Dacia results:confused:

I did find the Ligier review though.. actually has a really helpful comments section ,
explaining all of the failings in proper detail..

what an abysmal website, impossible to make real world comparisons..(n)
 
The Sandero was tested a few years ago, and scored 3 stars, then when they decided to sell it in mainland Europe, they made some improvements, and scored a 4 star rating.

There should be a drop down menu that allows you to search by make, category, or both.

With regards to owners of 5 star cars driving like idiots, we're not all like that, lol!
 
They keep upping the standards of the NCAP in recent years to try and bring them more in line with the very stringent American regulations.

As a result some manufacturers are missing the 5 star top spots and falling short with the odd 4 start rating.

A fair comparison for the tipo in this instance is all the other cars tested in 2016 under the same tests and standards. And in those instances it still doesn't perform well 3rd worst of all the cars tested under the 2016 standards.

NCAP is still very relevant to a lot of people as they are independent of the manufacturers making them more trustworthy then just taking the manufacturers word for it that their car is safer.

Safety costs money and a lot of points are awarded for safety devices and technology, a cheap car like the tipo is not going to be lavished with gadgets as proven by its score and the need to buy an extra package to up the safety rating by an extra star.

In essence you will get what you pay for and the tipo is cheap for its sector so I wouldn't expect it to score brilliantly.

People are prepared to sacrifice on safety just to buy an brand new car they can afford as the likes of Dacia have proven and fiat have cottoned on to with the tipo.

They have made the tipo available to the uk market but it was never really meant for us and in the market it was made for safety is not as high a priority.
 
Back
Top