Just like the exam in the school period, the real safety level of a model is the most powerful proof of the test results.
Yesterday, Zhongbao Research Institute just announced the test results of the latest round of models, including Tesla Model Y, Toyota CH-R, Tank 300, Buick GL8 and other 7 models.
The safety evaluation results of these seven test models are shown in the following figure.
Overall, the seven models performed well in Japanese and independent brand models, while the American cars, in addition to Tesla, were mostly at the bottom in several evaluations of the China Insurance Research Institute. Let's read them one by one.
Pure electric models still performed well
There are four major test contents of China Insurance Research Institute: crashworthiness and maintenance economy index evaluation, occupant safety index, pedestrian safety index, vehicle auxiliary safety index, and the evaluation latitude is from P (poor) to G (excellent) A total of four levels.
Tesla Model Y is the only pure electric model in this test, and its test results are all "G" excellent except for the crashworthiness and maintenance economy index.
In terms of safety, not only the overall big project score is excellent, tesla Model Y all subdivision test items score "G" excellent. It should be said that among all the EV models currently tested by China Insurance Research Institute, there is no one that has not performed badly in terms of safety.
Tesla Model Y only got two "P" poor evaluations in the four small tests of collision resistance and maintenance economy index, namely maintainability and maintenance economy, and structural collision resistance and collision compatibility scores were "M" average and "A" good.
In fact, the 2019 Tesla Model 3 was also tested in the China Insurance Research Institute, but the difference is that at that time, in addition to the "A" good score of the Model 3, its collision resistance and maintenance economy index evaluation structure was better than that of the Model Y, and the score was "M" good.
According to the 2017 edition of the evaluation rules of The China Insurance Research Institute, in the low-speed 15km/h collision environment, the Model 3 pre-collision vehicle maintenance economy scored 6 points.
Corresponding to the evaluation rules of the China Insurance Research Institute, (vehicle repair cost / manufacturer's new car sales guidance price) * 100 (X / %), the ratio of X is 11.5% ≤ X
The Tesla Model 3 rear-end vehicle maintenance economic score is 17 points, according to (vehicle repair cost / manufacturer's new car sales guidance price) * 100 (X / %), X ratio at 2.0% ≤ X
At that time, according to the test results, the rating given by China Insurance Research Institute to Tesla Model 3 was not the worst "P", but it was considered to be only average performance.
As for why Tesla Model Y got a poor "P" rating in the collision resistance and maintenance economy index test of China Insurance Research Institute? Is it because, as everyone suspects, model Y uses rear body integrated die casting, resulting in high maintenance costs?
In fact, due to the difference between the two test evaluation systems of the China Insurance Research Institute, especially because the latest 2020 version of the evaluation rules is very complicated in this evaluation, it has not yet found a calculation method that can reverse the maintenance price, so it is temporarily impossible to directly compare with the maintenance cost of the 2019 Model 3.
However, according to public data, Tesla Model Y has a total of 41.67 maintenance economic defect values (the larger the value, the worse the score), and in the same batch of test models, only one fuel vehicle performs worse than Tesla Model Y, that is, Buick Encore S maintenance economic defects total 58.33, and the rest of the performance is better than Tesla Model Y.
In addition, we compare other batches, the EV models that also use the new version of 2020, such as volkswagen ID4.X, Tesla Model Y and all of them are pure electric SUV models, but the Volkswagen ID4.X maintenance economic defect value is only 11.33 in total, which is very good.
So on the whole, it can only be said that although there is no direct evidence that Tesla Model Y is because of the high maintenance cost of the rear body integrated compression casting, but its maintenance economy after the low-speed collision, the lateral comparison with other models is indeed poor, which is beyond doubt.
In fuel vehicles, independent brands set a new record?
In addition to pure electric vehicles, among the other six fuel models in this batch, the Toyota CH-R and the Tank 300 performed best, followed by Nissan Qijun.
The Toyota CH-R and Tank 300 were the only models in this batch to receive a 3"G" 1 "A" rating, and Nissan X-Trail received a 3"G" 1 "M" rating.
First of all, in the main safety evaluation, Toyota CH-R, Tank 300, nissan X-Trail in all subdivision test items are all "G" excellent, very powerful.
There is also an interesting detail, as a hardcore off-road SUV tank 300 is not equipped with a roll cage, but in the roof pressure test, its roof strength load-to-mass ratio reached 7.25 times, the pressure peak of 151877N, that is to say, it can withstand more than 7 times the static pressure of its own vehicle weight (about 15.5 tons), this achievement has refreshed the test record of the China Insurance Research Institute over the years.
If you have seen the previous Volvo XC60 6 car top play, then the tank 300 can be said to play 7 car pressure roof is no problem, and because the zhongbao research test is only for the roof side, the difficulty is actually greater, and the whole car top is actually less difficult due to the large contact area.
▲Wrangler's roof pressure resistance score in the IIHS test
In addition, compared with other hardcore SUVs, IIHS's test of the Wrangler in 2020 is that the Wrangler roof strength load-to-mass ratio is 5.34, which means that it can withstand a static pressure of 5.34 times its own mass (about 10.485624 tons), and the roof strength of the tank 300 is still higher.
In addition to the main safety evaluation, Toyota CH-R and Tank 300 in the crash resistance and maintenance economy index, which is usually not scored in the evaluation of the China Insurance Research Institute, even can get the "A" evaluation, which does reflect the comprehensive strength of the two cars, not only high safety, but also low maintenance costs.
Nissan X-Trail scored slightly worse on the Crashworthiness and Maintenance Economy Index, only a "M" poor evaluation.
Crash resistance and maintenance economy index totals 4 sub-test items: structural impact resistance, serviceability, maintenance economy, collision compatibility.
Toyota CH-R has a total of A, G, A, A evaluation, translation is that Toyota CH-R in low-speed accidents will not easily damage the body structure, and some body cover parts are highly serviceable, and the maintenance cost is also low.
Tank 300 has been evaluated by G, M, G, A, first of all, the maintenance cost is relatively low, and secondly, because the tank 300 is a hard-core SUV with an independent girder structure, it is better in terms of crash resistance.
The main deduction is the poor serviceability of the tank 300, which stems from the fact that the outer bumpers of the tank 300 are all integrated plastic parts, and once damaged in low-speed accidents, there is almost no repair value.
The Nissan X-Trail received a 3 "M" 1 "G" evaluation, in addition to the low-speed collision resistance performance is good, maintenance costs, repairability and other performance are not good.
The worst performing models in the comprehensive test were one American and one French
After talking about the excellent students in the comprehensive test, let's talk about the poor student performance of this test of the China Insurance Research Institute.
Here is a grand invitation to buick GL8 to debut, combined with its glory in the domestic MPV market and its achievements in the Zhongbao Research Institute test.
The Buick GL8 can be described as a vivid interpretation of what is called "what is not available in the commotion, and those who are favored are fearless".
Buick GL8 has been tested twice before and after in Zhongbao Research Institute, but unfortunately each time the results are not good.
In 2018, the results of the Buick GL8 in the China Insurance Research Institute test were P, M, A, G, only the auxiliary safety performance was excellent, and the safety of passengers in the car even got the "M" general.
In the classic 25% bias collision, the Buick GL8's A-pillar performance is also very unsatisfactory, which is an MPV with multi-passenger ride needs...
And this time recently, the Buick GL8 Lu Zun who participated in the test of China Insurance Research Institute, the total scores were P, A, A, G, although the performance was at the bottom of the same batch of models, but compared with the previous test results, there was a slight improvement,
The occupant safety index in the car has been raised from the previous "M" to "A" good, and the A-pillar has also survived in a 25% bias collision, although the item that has received excellent evaluation of "G" is still only auxiliary safety.
In fact, the same batch of participants in the test is actually Buick Encore S, compared with the brand model, Buick Encore S still has a conscience.
Although Buick Encore S has a poor score in auxiliary safety, at least in the design of passive safety in the car occupant safety and pedestrian safety both scores are "G" excellent, it should be said that Buick Encore S is only slightly lower in configuration, but passive safety is fully qualified.
On the whole, it can be said that in the entire American car test, there is almost only one EV model, that is, the Tesla Model Y, which alone carries a piece of the sky.
In addition, there is also a Dongfeng Citroen Tianyi C5 AIRCROSS in this test, which has only received three evaluations of M, A and G, and the auxiliary safety index has been handed over in white.
The Citroën C5 AIRCROSS 1.6T top-mounted version, priced at 181,700, has no AEB active brakes, no FCW collision warning and no LSS lane assist system!
And the function configuration is low, even if the vehicle occupant safety index involving the passive safety of the body is not excellent, the performance is not excellent, if it is not the layman safety index to get a "G", then citroën C5 AIRCROSS is the model with worse results than the Buick GL8 Luzun in this test.