A few days ago, a video on the network about the lack of airbags in the Standard Tesla Model 3 triggered a fierce discussion. In the video, a Model 3 owner decided to disassemble his car because he saw that the overseas model was equipped with knee airbags to see if the Chinese version of the Model 3 also had knee airbags. It turns out that the Medium Model 3 is not equipped with knee airbags.
Then, the user also called Tesla's official hotline, the staff said that "knee air bags do not affect the safety of the whole vehicle", the new car has passed the C-NCAP test, still can ensure the safety of the owner.
In the face of the emptiness under the trim panels, the sound of "double standard reduction" has become the mainstream in the network. However, many times emotions do not represent facts. This time, Star Depot tried to objectively answer two questions, namely, "whether the Zhonggui Model 3 can guarantee safety without knee airbags" and "whether Tesla's operation is a double standard".
Let's answer the first question, the answer is "guaranteed, safe enough."
From a technical point of view, the knee airbag is not as effective as people think. For users, the Model 3 without knee airbags also provides nearly consistent safety and even in certain collision scenarios than the version with knee airbags.
The above passage sounds a bit counterintuitive, don't worry, let's make it clear in detail.
From the inherent perception, it is generally believed that knee air bags can reduce the leg injuries suffered by drivers in collisions. However, in practice, due to the limited leg space in the car, the industry has always been skeptical about the actual role of the knee air bags.
According to the research of Tongji University (based on the simulation analysis of the mainstream tool MADYMO in the academic community), under the premise of other conditions, the increase of knee air bags will reduce the head, chest and tibia correlation index of the dummy, but the change of synthetic acceleration is small; the thigh compression force and knee sliding displacement are lower than the high performance limits specified by C-NCAP, but the data increase by 34.93% and 38.80% respectively.
In the relevant experiments of China Automobile Research Institute to evaluate the effect of knee airbags on driver protection (based on the measured data of China Automobile Research Institute), the researchers calculated that the average weighted injury criterion WIC value of knee airbags can be reduced from 0.452 to 0.436, a decrease of 3.54%. (The WIC value is a combination of the injury indicators of each part of the body, and the lower the value, the smaller the overall damage) And in the test of some models, the phenomenon of knee airbag drop increasing the WIC value has also occurred.
In layman's terms, the current mainstream academic community believes that knee air bags can provide better protection for the driver's tibia, chest and head, but it will also increase the degree of injury to the thighs, knees and ankles. Considering the degree of comprehensive injury suffered by the human body, the protection of the knee airbag is relatively limited.
This view is also confirmed by a study by the authoritative iiHS (American Highway Safety Insurance Association). IIHS collision experiment data show that knee airbags have little effect on the amount of dummy recorded injury, reducing the risk of head injury in small area overlapping collisions, and to some extent increasing the risk of injury to the lower leg and right femur. At the same time, according to the analysis of real traffic accidents, IIHS believes that the knee airbag only reduces the overall risk of injury from 7.9% to 7.4%, a decrease of 0.5 percentage points, and the effect is not significant.
Seeing this, I believe many friends will wonder why the high cost of the knee airbag is small, and the Model 3 in North America will also carry this configuration? In fact, the reason is very simple, that is, "test-taking".
In the relevant regulations in North America, the "dummy test without seat belt" is a compulsory subject. Because it can play a certain role in fixing the driver, the knee air bag can effectively improve the test score of the vehicle in this subject. However, in the current traffic scene, the vast majority of drivers will wear seat belts according to the regulations, and the actual significance of the knee airbags has been dissolved a lot.
In addition, with the upgrading of technology in the field of seat belts, the degree of protection for drivers is constantly improving, and the role of knee air bags has been further weakened. Taking the Chinese version of the Tesla Model 3 as an example, the pre-tightened seat belt applied can actively constrain the occupants in the event of a collision, thereby reducing the impact on its upper body and improving safety.
In addition to technical analysis, the Standard Tesla Model 3 has also achieved good results in safety tests by professional institutions. Considering that the C-NCAP test quoted by Tesla's official staff is generally considered to be a loose standard, we will quote the relevant test results of China Insurance Research Institute here.
According to the official website of China Insurance Research Institute, in the key project "In-vehicle Member Safety Index", the Chinese version of Tesla Model 3 achieved the highest evaluation of four "G". At the same time, in one of the most challenging "frontal 25% bias collisions", Tesla also achieved a subdivision evaluation of almost all G results, ahead of the vast majority of models participating in the same test.
From this, it is not difficult to conclude that the impact of knee airbags on driver safety has advantages and disadvantages, and the impact is almost negligible under the premise that the driver wears the seat belt correctly. The Chinese version of the Tesla Model 3 is fully capable of providing users with sufficient security, and the tests of authoritative institutions have also confirmed this.
So, is Tesla's operation a double standard? On this second question, our answer is "not a 'double standard'".
The reason for putting quotation marks on the word double standard is to emphasize the fact that although Tesla has put different models in different markets, which constitutes a "configuration difference", such behavior is not a "double standard" with negative connotations in our cognition.
We have reason to believe that the reason why the Chinese version of the Tesla Model 3 is not equipped with knee airbags is not that Tesla ignores the safety of Chinese users, but because it believes that knee airbags cannot effectively protect users, and if equipped, it will increase the meaningless cost of the vehicle. As for Tesla's behavior of equipping the North American version of the model with knee airbags, it is completely for the purpose of test-taking, in vain to increase the cost and is not beneficial to users.
First of all, the Model 3 without knee airbags is not only the Medium version, tesla sales in the European market Model 3 is also not equipped with knee airbags.
As we all know, as a more mature automobile consumer market, the sensitivity of users in the European market to safety will not be weaker than that of Chinese users; the regulations on consumer rights protection in the EU are more sound, and the regulatory pressure on Tesla in the European market will not be weaker than that in China. More importantly, the European market has a crucial impact on Tesla's global sales performance. It is not cost-effective to offend the two major markets in Central Europe because of the knee air bags.
Second, Tesla has not equipped its more high-end models with knee airbags (except for the North American market). Taking the Model X as an example, as a model that costs nearly one million dollars, although it has increased the rear door airbags and a larger number of seat side airbags, it is still not equipped with knee airbags.
According to the general law, consumers of first-class models often have higher requirements for the safety of vehicles and are willing to exchange higher prices for higher safety. At the same time, in the face of the high price of luxury models, the cost ratio of knee airbags has also been significantly diluted, and adding or subtracting one knee airbag will not have a significant impact on the profit margin of bicycles. Offending high-end customers because of knee air bags is certainly not cost-effective.
Finally, looking back at Tesla's behavior patterns, it is not difficult to find that its characteristics are "straightforward and efficient". Although it seems a little impersonal, this approach is indeed an important reason for Tesla's success.
Because of the decline in vehicle costs, the domestically produced Model 3 can continuously reduce prices significantly in a short period of time, thereby rapidly increasing sales. Because the lidar solution is bloated, FSD will adopt a pure vision solution and use algorithms to quickly iterate to improve autonomous driving capabilities. Similarly, because the actual effectiveness is in doubt, Tesla will cancel the knee airbag, reducing vehicle costs and supply chain pressure.
Based on the above three logics, the view that Tesla is "double standard" is obviously somewhat untenable. After all, the business world is inherently profit-seeking, and Tesla, with a clear idea, will not "smash its own pot with its own bowl."
Of course, in the face of the difference in the configuration of the knee airbag, Tesla also has its neglected problems. When we opened tesla's official website to view the details page of the Model 3, it was not difficult to find that its promotional content in the security section was really inappropriate.
On the corresponding page, Tesla claimed that the Model 3 has an "NHTSA five-star comprehensive safety rating." However, the tests done by NHTSA (National Highway Traffic Safety Administration) are mainly for American models, which are equipped with knee airbags; Chinese official website for the Chinese market, the Chinese version does not have knee airbags. Regardless of whether the knee airbag has a practical effect, Tesla's behavior of using different models with airbag configurations for safety marketing without marking it on the page has certain legal risks.
Write at the end
After the technical analysis of the knee airbag and the logical analysis of Tesla, we can say that the accusations that Tesla suffered in this incident are more of a misunderstanding. As for the act of not equipping the standard model with knee airbags, it is only a scientific decision based on data support. However, regardless of the facts of the incident itself, the public opinion sentiment it reflects deserves the attention of many car companies, including Tesla. After all, consumers' hearts are no small matter, and in the face of intensified emotions, facts and logic are often vulnerable.