With relatively stricter test standards and evaluation systems, Sino-Insurance Research Institute crash test has a high reputation and authority in China, and has become an important reference for consumers to measure vehicle safety. At the beginning of this month, China Insurance Research Institute held a press conference on the evaluation results of China Insurance Automobile Safety Index in Beijing, and announced the latest round of test results of 7 models, including popular models such as Tank 300, Buick GL8 ES Luzun, Tesla Model Y and so on. How did their crash performance perform? Let's take a look.
Safety has improved, and car repairs are generally expensive
The China Insurance Auto Safety Index (C-IASI) is a set of automotive safety test and evaluation procedures led by the China Insurance Industry Association, the China Insurance Research Institute of Automotive Technology and the China Academy of Automotive Engineering, and its rules are almost copied from the IIHS in the United States. C-IASI's test programs are divided into four main items: crash resistance and maintenance economy, occupant safety inside the car, occupant safety outside the car, and vehicle auxiliary safety. Test scores are also divided into four grades: Good, Acceptable, Marginal, and Poor.
The models announced this time include 6 SUVs and 1 MPV, namely: Buick Encore S, Toyota C-HR, Dongfeng Citroen Tianyi C5 AIRCROSS, Weipai Tank 300, Dongfeng Nissan New Generation X-Trail, Buick GL8 ES Luzun, Tesla Model Y. From the overall performance point of view, the test model in the impact resistance and maintenance economy generally performance is not satisfactory, only two models are rated as good (A), the rest are general (M) or poor (P), the crash resistance and maintenance economy of the vehicle is still the focus of the car companies to improve.
In terms of occupants, pedestrians outside the car and auxiliary safety (test 6 models), the overall performance is relatively good, and the evaluation of good and above accounts for more than 80%. In addition, it is worth noting that the driver side front 25% bias collision was once a more serious project of the model's general loss of points, and 5 of the 7 models tested this time have received excellent (G) evaluations, which shows that manufacturers pay more attention to vehicle safety, and there are progress in this regard, but there are still two models that have performed poorly this time.
The results of the independent net red car are surprising
In this test, the only self-owned brand model tank 300 achieved outstanding results, giving people a certain surprise. The Tank 300 has achieved excellent (G) ratings in terms of occupant safety, pedestrian safety outside the vehicle, and vehicle assistance safety, and crash resistance and maintenance economy are also one of the two models with the best performance in the test.
Specifically, the tank 300 did not have serious deformation of the A pillar in the frontal 25% bias collision, and the airbag and the head side air curtain popped out in time, providing good protection for the driver. In addition, the vehicle performed well in side impacts, roof strength, seats/headrests, no obvious shortcomings, as an SUV with strong off-road attributes, the Tank 300 showed its due strength.
It is worth mentioning that the tank 300 is also outstanding in terms of auxiliary safety functions, and the vehicle's automatic emergency braking system AEB has achieved good results in the test of fixed vehicles and ghost probes, and the comprehensive score rate has reached more than 84. Safety-assisted configurations are not cosmetics and can be used at critical moments.
Toyota models played steadily, and The performance of The New Qijun was not bad
The Toyota C-HR is a model under the TNGA architecture and is as stable as ever. Looking at the previous test results of The China Insurance Research Institute, it is not difficult to find that toyota brand models have never made mistakes in the test of the China Insurance Research Institute in recent years, including the C-HR brother model Yize has also undergone the crash test of the China Insurance Research Institute, and the results of the C-HR test are the same.
Specifically, the 25% bias collision, side impact, roof strength, and headrest seat items on the driver's side and front were all evaluated as excellent (G), and the scoring rate in pedestrian protection and auxiliary safety was slightly lower than the tank 300, but it also reached an excellent level. At the same time, the Toyota C-HR's crash resistance and maintenance economy are also good, comparable to the tank 300.
Another Japanese model is the new generation of X-Trail, which is currently controversial, and although it has been questioned for its three-cylinder engine, it is still reliable enough in terms of quality from the results of this Zhongbao Research Institute test.
Specifically, the new X-Trail performed well in all aspects, the driver's side front 25% bias collision, side impact, roof strength and other pressure items evaluation is excellent (G), pedestrian protection and auxiliary safety scoring rate is better than Toyota C-HR, the only deficiency is the impact resistance and maintenance economy is slightly inferior, only got the general (M) evaluation.
Tesla in addition to repairing the car expensive, other things are fine
As the only pure electric vehicle model in this test, Model Y achieved excellent results in various crash tests with the high strength of the one-piece molded frame, and at the same time, it was not surprising that the auxiliary safety achieved excellent (G) evaluations, but the performance in the "ghost probe" test was not ideal.
However, as a luxury model, the model Y has slightly higher maintenance costs, and the impact resistance and maintenance economy are poorly evaluated (P). Specifically, the structural crash resistance of Model Y is general (M), the performance of low-speed structural collision and bumper dynamic collision before and after the body is not ideal, and the high maintenance cost is not unrelated to its integrated die casting technology.
Buick and Citroen finished at the bottom
A total of two models of the Buick brand participated in the test this time, and the results were not satisfactory. Although oncovi S has achieved excellent (G) evaluations in both occupant safety and pedestrian safety outside the car, the impact resistance and maintenance economy are poor, and the auxiliary safety also needs to be improved. The results of the Buick GL8 ES Lu Zun are directly at the bottom, and only the auxiliary safety one has achieved excellent (G) evaluation.
It is worth noting that as early as 2018, the Buick GL8 was tested by the Mid-Security Research Institute, and the model used at that time was the 2017 28T Comfort and flagship model, and in the "driver's side front 25% bias collision" project, due to the bend of the A-pillar nearly 90 degrees, the occupant performance in the car only received a general (M) evaluation. In this test, Buick GL8 ES Lu Zun achieved good (A) results in the driver's side frontal 25% bias collision, which is an improvement over the previous one, but it is still not ideal.
It can be seen from the collision video released by Zhongbao Research Institute that the Buick GL8 ES Lu Zun bent and broke the A pillar in the frontal 25% bias collision, and the side of the body was invaded in the side collision. Although the MPV is really unable to make the safety indicators as high as ordinary models because of the body structure, this should not be an excuse, even if the increase in high-strength steel will increase the cost, you can not joke about the safety of 6 people.
Another model with the lowest results is the Dongfeng Citroen Tianyi C5 AIRCROSS, which was not tested because the test model did not have an auxiliary safety configuration, and only the safety of laymen in other projects received excellent (G) evaluations. Tianyi has been in service for nearly 5 years in the current model on sale, and it is relatively backward in terms of body structure design and active safety configuration. As a result, it received only good (A) ratings in the 25% bias collision, side impact, and roof strength tests.
Judging from the details of the collision video, although the A column did not have serious bending and fracture in the frontal 25% bias collision, it also produced a certain deformation, and only got a good (A) evaluation, in addition, in the side collision, the impact intrusion was large, and the protection of the occupant's head was insufficient, so it only received a good (A) evaluation.
Summary: Judging from the evaluation results released this time, most car companies have increased their emphasis on vehicle safety today, especially in recent years, the newly launched popular models have performed well in occupant safety, and have not lost points in the harsh frontal 25% bias collision and side collision. At the same time, in addition to the Tianyi C5 AIRCROSS, which has not been replaced for five years, the rest of the models have performed well in auxiliary safety, which is also a manifestation of scientific and technological progress. However, the maintenance cost of vehicles is still generally high, which is where car companies need to continue to improve.