ASEAN NCAP, the organization which assesses new models in the market (especially those made and sold in ASEAN), has released its report after testing the new Perodua Axia. The hatchback is the second generation of the Axia and will be officially launched on February 14. ASEAN NCAP was provided a unit for their assessment which included a crash test and after analyzing the results, the Axia received 4 stars (out of the maximum of 5 stars).
The first generation of the Axia tested by ASEAN NCAP in 2014 also received 4 stars then. According to Perodua engineers, the new Axia, with its new structure and increased safety features, should be able to score 5 stars if the same protocols are used as for model tested in 2014.
However, in 2023, the bar has been raised with new protocols that are more demanding. ASEAN NCAP periodically upgrades its assessment protocols, which the industry is informed of, and this serves to advance the safety standards that the industry should provide.
Crash tests have long been an important part of vehicle development. Apart from regulatory requirements which have become more stringent over the years, the carmakers themselves have also been improving the protection occupants are provided with as new technologies have become available.
Now, with the increasing number of electric vehicles (EVs), the manufacturers have also to take into consideration the presence of a high-voltage battery pack and many electrical systems. These too must be protected from damage in an accident.
China’s auto industry goes back many decades but it was only in the 1980s, as the country’s economy opened up, that the industry began to expand. Numerous new car companies were established, largely with government support to help them get going, and apart from joint-ventures with foreign carmakers, there were also many that developed on their own.
In the auto industry, the name of the game is numbers – to achieve the biggest volumes possible so that economies of scale can push production costs down. To build up to the critical levels, aspects like quality and safety may not be as high a priority as producing as many vehicles as possible. It’s a normal evolutionary process in the auto industry and once the critical annual volume is reached, then attention can be given to other areas as increasing profits provide the financial resources for more R&D.
So it’s not unusual that the early cars from Chinese companies had low quality and it should be remembered that the Japanese and Koreans also went through that phase. In the 1960s, when the Japanese cars started to sell in noticeable numbers in Malaysia, they were considered fragile and thought to be ‘made from Milo tin can materials’, which was really a myth. But in time, they improved quality and moved so far ahead as to lead the industry in that aspect.
For the Chinese carmakers, the 2000s were a time of rapid growth and getting into world markets. While their vehicles were selling well in China and there was then little emphasis on safety, the same was not the case in other countries. Safety standards were well established and independent organizations like Euro NCAP and Germany’s TUV and ADAC conducted assessments on new vehicles which included crashing them.
The severely damaged Landwind X6 tested by Germany’s ADAC in 2005 increased the negative perception of the passive safety of Chinese vehicles.
The early Chinese cars exported to Europe had poor ratings then, and a SUV model called the Landwind X6 showed a shocking result in Euro NCAP’s crash test in 2005 when it was so severely damaged that it got zero stars. Though testing by some other organizations suggested that it was not all that bad, the negative publicity became associated with cars from China.
The need for better engineered cars with better protection for occupants saw the establishment of safety standards by the China Automotive Technology Research Centre in 2006. This was the start of C-NCAP (China’s New Car Assessment Program) which would eventually adopt international standards typically led by Euro NCAP. There is now a Global NCAP organization which coordinates and assists national and regional organizations in this field.
NCAP tests are not required by law in any country, but their results are of interest to car-buyers who will be better informed of the level of safety a model offers. Manufacturers therefore aim to achieve the best result – 5 stars – for their new models. During development, they are made aware of the various requirements in the tests and engineer their vehicles to meet or even exceed those requirements.
Many new models nowadays can score the maximum of 5 stars but some get less either because of their design or because they may not have sufficient protective capability or features. In some cases, reduced equipment may also mean a lower score, but the vehicle will also cost less. So it is up to the buyers to decide whether they value their lives enough to pay the extra for better safety or settle for a less safe car and save money instead.
The NCAP requirements or protocols are constantly evolving and are periodically updated with tougher requirements as new technologies become available and also to push manufacturers to make their cars safer. Thus a model which may have scored well in 2003 might not achieve the same result today because the requirements have become tougher. For example, in 2008, Euro NCAP (and other NCAPs followed later) made it a requirement that Electronic Stability Control (ESC) must be present to be able to get 5 stars. If a model scored well in all areas but had no ESC, it would get only 4 stars. This basically forced the industry to make ESC a standard feature before long, providing motorists with better active safety.
Another example is the provision of airbags for both front occupants. This was promoted by ASEAN NCAP for models sold in the region and before long, manufacturers made dual front airbags standard across the range.
The upgrading of protocols is done in discussion with the industry to ensure that sufficient time is given for carmakers to improve their engineering or further develop technologies that will make it possible to meet new tests. There is also the cost factor as imposition of new technology too fast can make cars more expensive.
In the case of China, C-NCAP (which set standards) was behind the global NCAP standards at the start. However, by 2012, the protocols were upgraded to become close to what Euro NCAP had. For example, the main frontal offset impact speed was increased from 56 km/h to 64 km/h, and there was a general increase in the thresholds for injury scores of the dummies.
By 2018, the vehicles that were made in China and also the regulations set by the authorities were comparable to those in Europe. This meant that Chinese vehicles had safety standards that could be considered as world-class, with most of the models sold globally being able to match those from other makes.
A recent example of this achievement is with the latest HAVAL H6 from GWM (Great Wall Motors). The new SUV was given a 5-star rating by ANCAP, the NCAP organization for the Australasian region. Even more impressive was that the model had met ANCAP’s latest 2022 protocols which are tougher.
“This is GWM’s first new HAVAL SUV model to the Australasian market for a number of years. Delivering a 5-star vehicle to the market – against ANCAP’s latest 2022 protocols – demonstrates the brand has kept pace with the latest ANCAP safety standards and consumer safety expectations,” said ANCAP’s CEO, Carla Hoorweg.
The H6 achieved excellent results in 4 aspects – Adult Occupant Protection (AOP), Child Occupant Protection (COP), Safety Assist and Vulnerable Road-User Protection, with scores of 90%, 88%, 81% and 73%, respectively.
Details of the results showed that the H6 got a ‘GOOD’ grade in AOP. It has got a full score in tests such as side impact, oblique pole, whiplash protection, and rescue and extrication. In addition to the 70%+ high-strength steel vehicle frame, the vehicle is also equipped with an omnidirectional airbag that can effectively protect front and rear passengers from injury during a crash.
In terms of COP, the H6 also did very well. It received a full score in dynamic test (side) due to the lower ISOFIX anchorages and top tether anchorages installed in the rear seat. These further strengthen the connection between the childseat and the vehicle body, thus providing better safety protection for children.
Vulnerable Road User Protection is something which GWM would have given attention to earlier because C-NCAP had already been looking into it for some years now. The China In-Depth Accident Study (CIDAS) which was developed like Germany’s GIDAS identified that around 22% of serious crashes involved pedestrians. This led C-NCAP to also evaluate vehicles to rate how well pedestrians were protected in a collision.
The H6 also performed well in this aspect, thanks to features like an energy-absorbing space in the front bumper. Also, the Automatic Emergency Braking (AEB) system can detect pedestrians and cyclists ahead and automatically brake the car if the driver does not take action to prevent it.
Before Euro NCAP (New Car Assessment Programme) came into existence, the safety performance of cars was not known to the public. While carmakers conducted their own tests, they did not necessarily share the results with the public. Of course, as responsible companies, they constantly aimed to make their products safer and to provide the best possible protection for occupants during an accident.
But just how safe was a car? That was not known until EuroNCAP was established in 1996 and began to crash new cars to see how they performed. EuroNCAP’s findings were made public in a standardized form so that comparisons could be made for car-buyers to make informed decisions. Cars that scored better would usually have better safety features, which added cost, and it was up to buyers if they wanted to pay more for the extra protection.
Most new models tested by EuroNCAP can score the maximum of 5 stars.
EuroNCAP focussed on new models sold in the European markets and for many years, their results were also used by carmakers when marketing the same models in other regions. In time, it was realized that due to overseas production of certain models, there could be differences in the safety performance due to engineering differences in some areas. This led to the establishment of NCAP organizations in other regions which focussed on models which were made and sold in those regions.
ASEAN NCAP is one of them and has been evaluating new models sold in the region for the past 10 years. In fact, ASEAN NCAP can be credited for pushing carmakers to raise safety standards with the addition of certain safety systems and features which are required in order to score the maximum number of stars.
The existence of these NCAP organizations has brought about discoveries of the differences in performance of some models in different regions. There have been cases of a model sold in Europe offering much poorer protection when built for sale in South American markets. Likewise, a number of cars in India have been found to scored poorly when subjected to crash tests.
With such information made public, manufacturers have had no choice but to make improvements to make their vehicles safer and more in line with global standards. Although NCAP results are not referred to when vehicles are inspected by local authorities in various countries, they are still important as car-buyers refer to them. A high score would give more confidence to a customer who in interested in a particular model, so manufacturers work hard to achieve the best score which is typically 5 stars.
Many new models can now score maximum stars and carmakers like Toyota have been recognized for offering the most models with 5-star ratings in ASEAN. It may seem that in this day and age, most new vehicles will be able to get a few stars, so it is shocking to know that there are some models that fail to get even a single star!
This has been the case with the latest Hyundai Tucson which was tested by Latin NCAP which evaluates models sold in the Central and South American markets. The model was unable to be given even a single star which was disturbing because a Tucson tested by EuroNCAP a month earlier had been able to get 5 stars. The initial reaction of many people was that the model built for Latin American markets was not engineered differently or lacked too many safety features. However, it was learnt that the model tested by Latin NCAP was actually an older fourth generation one, whereas EuroNCAP had tested the latest fifth generation model.
The Tucson tested actually scored well in adult protection for frontal and side impacts, as well as in whiplash protection as it at least has two front airbags. However, with no side airbags and inadequate chest protection as well as poor child occupant protection, its overall score could not even rate one star, not to mention that it also did not have any form of electronic stability control.
“Latin NCAP is disappointed by Hyundai’s attitude to Latin American consumers’ health and safety. It is unbelievable that an SUV like the Tucson does not offer side impact protection and ESC as standard. The long delay in replacement parts delivery is also concerning. We make an urgent call to Hyundai for a dramatic change in basic safety strategy in LAC and level it to its policy in Europe, Australia and USA, among others,” said Alejandro Furas, Secretary General of Latin NCAP.
“Once again, thanks to Latin NCAP, we can know the risks that certain corporations, mostly Latin Americans, expose us to due to the sale of low safety vehicles. Hyundai gives us an unpleasant surprise to see that one of its most popular models in the region, the Hyundai Tucson, which has had significant sales in our countries, gets 0 stars safety. This is one more example of the discrimination in vehicle safety that the inhabitants of the region have to suffer from some car manufacturers that use our region as a sub-standard market to maximize their profits,” added Stephan Brodziak, Chairman of Latin NCAP.
Hyundai models sold in Malaysia, like the forthcoming Palisade SUV (above), are high-scorers in NCAP tests as Malaysian regulations require high safety standards.
A zero-star result would certainly discourage most buyers and fortunately, this is not the case with Hyundai models sold in Malaysia. The Tucson is not currently sold (but has been in previous generations) but for the models imported to Malaysia, Hyundai Sime Darby Motors has been taking models with specifications comparable to those sold in Europe due to the tougher requirements of Malaysian regulations.
But while models sold in Europe may lead in safety performance when tested by EuroNCAP, this is not the case with every model. In its most recent series of tests, EuroNCAP found that the latest Renault ZOE EV was poorer than before – so poor in crash-tests overall, poor in vulnerable road user protection and lacking meaningful crash avoidance technology, that it was disqualified from getting any stars.
It would seem that while giving attention to improvements for the battery pack, Renault had compromised on safety elements. EuroNCAP noted that the seat-mounted side airbag which previously protected head and thorax has been replaced by a less effective thorax-only airbag, representing a degradation in occupant protection.
“Renault was once synonymous with safety. The Laguna was the first car to get 5 stars, back in 2001. But these disappointing results for the ZOE and the Dacia Spring show that safety has now become collateral damage in the group’s transition to electric cars. Not only do these cars fail to offer any appreciable active safety as standard, but their occupant protection is also worse than any vehicle we have seen in many years. It is cynical to offer the consumer an affordable green car if it comes at the price of higher injury risk in the event of an accident,” said Michiel van Ratingen, Secretary-General of Euro NCAP.
Volvo Cars recently conducted its most extreme crash test ever, and it was not within the advanced Safety Centre but outdoors – with cars dropped from a crane! Ten Volvos, of different models, were dropped several times from a height of 30 metres.
Before the drop, Volvo Cars safety engineers made exact calculations about how much pressure and force each car needed to be exposed to, in order to reach the desired level of damage.
Simulating extreme accidents
The purpose: to help rescue services to prepare for any possible crash scenario and to simulate the forces that erupt in the most extreme crashes, beyond what can be simulated with ordinary crash testing.
This unusual approach helped create enough damage to adequately simulate the damage found in the most extreme crash scenarios. All findings from the crashes and the resulting extrication work will be collected in an extensive research report. This report will be made available free of use to rescue workers elsewhere, allowing them to benefit from the findings and further develop their life-saving procedures and capabilities
Similar extreme test in 1985
The crash test conducted recently was not really Volvo’s first extreme test: 35 years ago, its American subsidiary had a then-new 760 driven off a building and it fell 14 metres, hitting the ground nose-first. The impact was equivalent to a frontal collision at 50 km/h, the front end crumpling as it was ‘programmed’ to do so in order that the impact energy could be absorbed.
Back then, there was no GoPro and no drones for recording and conventional video equipment was used. Nevertheless, the resulting video – which was like a scene from an action movie – provided scary views from the seats through the windscreen as the ground rushed up.
At that time, the ‘crash’ was done not for helping rescue workers understand what a severely crashed car is like but more for promoting the safety of Volvos, and particularly the crucial value of using seatbelts.
Today’s cars are stronger
In the 1980s, the construction of most cars was fairly conventional with basically steel and plastic materials that could easily be cut. They were as safe as could be during that era, with Volvos being among the best in occupant protection. However, many of today’s cars use stronger materials, with the latest Volvos made of some of the hardest steel found in modern cars. They have more complex structural designs, and the presence of high-voltage electrical systems and battery packs in hybrid models must also be considered.
The XC90 structure has more extensive use of hot-formed boron steel, which is the strongest type of steel presently used in the car body industry.
Volvo therefore continuously crashes its cars, the recent one being an example, in order to get information on how the structure deforms. This will help rescuers who may use hydraulic rescue tools known in the industry as ‘jaws of life’. Extrication specialists often talk about the golden hour: the time-span they need to get injured occupants out and to the hospital for treatment.
Usually, rescue workers get their training vehicles from scrapyards. But these cars are often up to two decades old. And in terms of steel strength, safety cage construction and overall durability, there is a vast difference between modern cars and those built 15 to 20 years ago – like the 760 in the video.
Rescue worker using ‘jaws of life’ to cut body structure if the doors cannot be opened to get the occupants out.
This makes it crucial for rescue workers to constantly update their familiarity with newer car models and review their processes, in order to develop new extrication techniques. In other words, these training sessions can mean the difference between life and death. So at the request of the rescue services, Volvo Cars decided to step things up a notch.
“Normally we only crash cars in the laboratory, but this was the first time we dropped them from a crane,” said Hakan Gustafson, a senior investigator with the Volvo Cars Traffic Accident Research Team. “We knew we would see extreme deformations after the test, and we did this to give the rescue team a real challenge to work with.”
ASEAN NCAP, which runs the New Car Assessment Programme for Southeast Asian Countries, has released its assessment on the latest Honda City. This is the third assessment that ASEAN NCAP has performed on the model, the first two being in 2012 and 2014. In fact, the model was one of the very first to be crash-tested by ASEAN NCAP at its facility in Melaka. However, for the 2020 model, the testing was conducted by the Japan Automobile Research Institute (JARI), a partner of ASEAN NCAP.
The 2020 City (Thai market version) showed an outstanding result under the current 2017-2020 assessment. The sedan obtained an overall score of 86.54 points which qualified it for the maximum 5-Star ASEAN NCAP rating.
ASEAN NCAP’s assessment of Adult Occupant Protection at the front.
For each assessed category from this accumulated score, the City received 44.83 points for the Adult Occupant Protection (AOP) category, 22.82 points for Child Occupant Protection (COP) and 18.89 points for Safety Assist Technologies (SATs).
The new sedan has a standard fitment of 4 airbags, Seatbelt Reminder System (SBR) for both of its frontal occupants and Electronic Stability Control (ESC) across all its variants. An Emergency Stop Signal technology is also available in the current City variant that is launched and sold in the Thai market either as standard or optional fitment. Nevertheless, all the safety assist technologies assessed by ASEAN NCAP will be available either as standard or as an option in all the variants that will be available in several countries across South East Asia.
In addition, the City will have Blind Spot Visualization (BSV) technology in variants that are available in certain markets. The BSV is fitted on the passenger side of the vehicle.
“We are excited to have another 5-Star car in the line-up of ASEAN NCAP assessed vehicles. Although the City was assessed twice prior to this, we can see there have been significant improvements in the number of safety technologies that are equipped in this new model as a standard fitment. I am also pleased that, in addition to the existing safety assist technologies ASEAN NCAP is assessing which will be available in variants that will be launched soon, Honda has also added Emergency Stop Signal technology that consumers will benefit in mitigating any unwanted collision,” said MIROS Director-General and ASEAN NCAP Chairperson, Ts. Dr. Siti Zaharah Ishak.
“The Honda City has shown consistent 5-Star performances since it was assessed in 2012. The pre-requisite that ASEAN NCAP set in 2014 -2016 assessment in which variants that are fitted with ESC and SBR for both frontal occupants are eligible for 5-Star AOP rating, provided that the model scored within the 5-Star scoring range, was a significant impact towards the development of upcoming models. By having the pre-requisite, manufacturers are well prepared by including the ASEAN NCAP core criteria under the 2017-2020 assessment into some of the model’s variants,” explained ASEAN NCAP Secretary-General, Professor (Adjunct) Ir. Dr. Khairil Anwar Abu Kassim.
“Most importantly, manufacturers like Honda have now equipped these important passive and active safety technologies in their models as standard fitment in order to make their cars safer for the benefit of road users,” he added.
In 2012, the City was among the very first cars tested by ASEAN NCAP at its crash-test facility in Melaka.
The New Car Assessment Programmes (NCAPs) of various countries and regions are conducted by independent organisations and though the scores awarded are not required by authorities in any country for a vehicle to be homologated for sale (provided the vehicle meets regulations). However, consumers pay attention to NCAP scores so as to be better informed when they are considering a vehicle to buy.
Since the mid-1990s, Euro NCAP has been conducting such a programme which includes crash tests. Over the years, the organization has progressively raised its standards and the criteria has evolved, challenging carmakers to make their cars safer and safer. Achieving the maximum of 5 stars and high scores in the various categories of testing can help a model’s sales in the market where buyers are increasingly concerned about safety.
CX-30 has near-perfect score
In its latest series of tests on new models sold in Europe, Euro NCAP’s results show that the new Mazda CX-30, a subcompact crossover between the CX-3 and CX-5, achieved a near-perfect 99% score for Adult Occupant Protection (AOP), besides the maximum of 5 stars.
The model, which shares much of its DNA with the all-new Mazda 3, now tops the list for this part of the assessment against Euro NCAP’s 2018/2019 protocols. The highest ratings on record have been at the 98% level with the Alfa Romeo Giulia, Mazda3, Volvo XC60 and Volvo V40.
The CX-30’s impressive AOP score was gained by getting maximum points in the different impact tests (side, pole and barrier). Many vehicles don’t perform so well in the pole test where the vehicle is sent sideways smashing into a pole.
The report said the passenger compartment remained stable in the frontal offset test, with good protection of the knees and femurs of both the driver and passenger. A similar level of protection would be provided to occupants of different sizes and to those sitting in different positions.
The standard autonomous emergency braking system or ‘Smart Brake Support’ (SBS) performed well in tests of its functionality at the low speeds, typical of city driving, at which whiplash injuries often occur. With collisions avoided in all test scenarios, the CX-30 scored full points in this part of the assessment.
Reducing pedestrian injuries
The protection offered to the head of a struck pedestrian was good over almost all of the bonnet surface and adequate over much of the rest. Good protection was provided to pedestrians’ legs by the bumper and protection of the pelvis was also rated as good at all test locations.
The SBS can detect vulnerable road-users like pedestrians and cyclists, as well as other vehicles. In tests of its reaction to such road-users, the system performed adequately, with collisions avoided or mitigated in most scenarios.
CX-30 for Malaysia?
Bermaz Motor has confirmed that the CX-30 will be available for the Malaysian market but when it will be in showrooms is not known yet. Given the high demand for the new CX-5 (in Malaysia as well as other markets) which is assembled at the Mazda Malaysia plant in Kedah, it seems unlikely that the CX-30 will be assembled locally. This could mean it will be somewhat expensive with the high taxes imposed.
Visit www.mazda.com.my to know more about Mazda products and services available in Malaysia.
