Topico dos Crash-Tests ⚠️Euroncap- 10/10/2026

Segundo informações que consegui obter no site, esta 508 RXH será utilizada num crash test
https://www.imcdb.org/vehicle_1135833-Peugeot-508-RXH-2012.html

[h=2]2012 Peugeot 508 RXH in Crash Test Aglaé, Movie, 2017 [/h]

i001135833.jpg
 
LinoMarques disse:
Incrível ao que acontece a quem não leva cinto, sobretudo o passageiro de trás, que se julga sempre mais protegido e por vezes não usa o cinto:

Clique para expandir...

Esse teste foi feito a 49 mph que são 78.8 km/h.Mesmo com cinto não se safavam. Por exemplo na América, os carros têm que proteger os ocupantes com e sem cinto. A cabeça do passageiro fura o vidro pois, este já está estalado, caso contrário não consguia partir um vudrio laminado. Basta ver que as tampas dos airbags do passageiro, que tocam nos parabrisas com uma força superior, a cabeça do dummy apenas estalam o vidro. Num carro com airbag as lesões seriam mais baixas, contudo seriam sem dúvida superiores às que seria normal os ocupantes qque utilizassem cinto tivessem.

Por outro lado o Peugeot 106 não é o que se pode chamar, um carro com uma carroçaria estáve.Ve se que o volante tem airbag, mas desligaram-no. Alem disso a deformaçao da estrutura é demasiado elevada, contudo estamos a falar de um restyling de um carro de 93, e que na altura estava atrás do Corsa, e do Punto e penso que do Micra, em termos de segurança passiva.

Como se comportariam outros modelos a 78.8 km/h?
 
Última edição:
Globalncap-AS desgraças continuam

Great WallSteed 5
http://www.globalncap.org/wp-content/uploads/2020/12/SCfA-GreatWallSteed5-resultsheet.pdf

great-wall-steed-5-global-ncap-crash-test.jpg


The Steed 5 is tested in the basic version without airbags. Driver dummy readings showed a red head and brown chest and neck, which translates into poor protection for head and weak protection for neck and chest. Those body parts are considered critical body regions. The structure was considered as unstable as was the footwell area. The deformation in the passenger compartment and movement of the steering column questions if an airbag would be able to prevent serious injuries to the driver.

As the manufacturer decided not to recommend a Child Restraint System (CRS) for the test, zero points were awarded for the child occupant dynamic assessment score. The three year old dummy CRS broke during the impact due to the poor performance of the restrain system. The Steed 5 does not have ISOFIX anchorages for the child seats in the rear and lacks three point belts in all seating positions.
 
Globaln Ncap
Renault Kwid versão para venda em Àfrica

African-spec-Renault-Kwid-Global-NCAP-crash-test.jpg


http://www.globalncap.org/wp-content/uploads/2020/12/SCfA-RenaultKwid-resultsheet.pdf

Renault Kwid
The Renault Kwid was tested by Global NCAP when it was launched in India in 2016 and its structure has since been improved. A version manufactured in Brazil was later tested by Latin NCAP where it achieved 3 stars, with side body airbags added to frontal airbags and ABS.

In Africa the Kwid with the recent facelift offers 2 airbags as standard. The protection offered to the driver head was rated adequate and good for the passengers. Both necks show good protection but the driver chest showed weak protection. An unstable body structure, unstable footwell structure and pedal movement, explain the two stars for adult occupant protection. The child occupant protection showed poor performance as the head contacted the interior of the car. The lack of three point belts in all seating positions and lack of ISOFIX anchorages contribute to the 2 star rating for Child occupant protection.

http://www.globalncap.org/wp-content/uploads/2020/12/SCfA-RenaultKwid-resultsheet.pdf
 
Haval H1

http://www.globalncap.org/wp-content/uploads/2020/12/SCfA-HavalH1-resultsheet.pdf

482968193_1.jpg



The Haval H1 is part of the popular new vehicle segment of small SUVs. The H1 offers two airbags as standard. The injuries recorded in the driver and passenger head and neck showed good protection. Driver chest showed weak protection and passenger chest showed good protection. Feet showed poor protection, which together with the driver readings, unstable structure and unstable footwell area explain the two star rating for adult occupant protection.
Child occupant protection was negatively affected because the manufacturer refused to indicate a CRS for use in the test bringing dynamic points to zero. The CRS selected by Global NCAP used the ISOFIX anchorages available in the car. Both child dummies heads contacted the car during the test threatening the safety of the child occupants. Lack of proper ISOFIX markings and the lack of a passenger airbag disabling switch resulted in a two star child occupant protection rating for the H1.
 
Última edição:
Deve fazer início de sessão ou registar-se para responder aqui.
Voltar
Superior