Safety body introduces new testing including ‘compatibility’ impact test and tougher side impact test, while more active safety tech is included
20 May 2020

Euro NCAP has overhauled its testing regime for 2020, with the introduction of new methods to assess crash safety and active safety technology. 

Described as “the biggest change to Euro NCAP’s impact testing protocols in a decade” by Thatcham Research director and Euro NCAP board member Matthew Avery, the new regime will be introduced later this year.

The first key change is the adoption of a new “Mobile-offset Progressive Deformable Barrier”, meaning there are now two moving elements to a head-on collision test. Intrusion to both the vehicle and barrier will be measured. The idea, Avery says, is to “encourage makers of larger vehicles to share some of the burden of the impact with smaller vehicles. 

“Historically, SUVs and other big cars have offered very good protection to their occupants. However, the smaller vehicles they sometimes crash into can fare less well. In the new compatibility test, if the larger vehicle is too stiff for an impact scenario, it will be penalised accordingly.”

An advanced new crash test dummy, dubbed THOR, has also been introduced. It is said to more closely represent a human, and Avery describes it as “far more complex and sensitive and can record abdominal injuries”. 

Side impact testing will also now take into account the movements of all occupants, not just those closest to the impact, checking airbags installed in centre compartments.

Automatic emergency braking systems will also be further tested with a new 'Turn Across Path’ protocol, aimed at preventing accidents at junctions and crossings. Reverse parking incidents will also be taken into account, while driver monitoring systems will be assessed. 

Finally, Euro NCAP will consider post-crash safety, looking at which cars provide accurate information to emergency services in the event that the vehicle needs to be cut open to gain access. 

As with previous changes to the testing and marking protocol, Euro NCAP  cautions against comparing the newly tested cars with rivals that have undergone the older, theoretically easier tests.

READ MORE:

Euro NCAP on the future of road safety

Advertisement
Advertisement

Find an Autocar car review

Driven this week

Back to top

Join the debate

Comments
12

20 May 2020

About time. It is all too easy to build a 2.5 ton high riding tank that will destroy anyone (cyclist, pedestrian or city car) that gets in their way. Engineering one that is at least slightly more socially acceptible will be harder- given the physics.

20 May 2020
CWBROWN wrote:

About time. It is all too easy to build a 2.5 ton high riding tank that will destroy anyone (cyclist, pedestrian or city car) that gets in their way. Engineering one that is at least slightly more socially acceptible will be harder- given the physics.

 

Now time for you to clearly lay out what difference these newly certified vehicles will make to a cyclist, following a collision...are you also stating that the occupants of a city car are less protected than cyclists and pedestrians?. Explain the "physics" that prove your theory, or are you just using words, hoping that no one will question your random and unexplained post?.

22 May 2020
CWBROWN wrote:

About time. It is all too easy to build a 2.5 ton high riding tank that will destroy anyone (cyclist, pedestrian or city car) that gets in their way. Engineering one that is at least slightly more socially acceptible will be harder- given the physics.

The regulations have actually pushed manufacturers towards larger vehicles and these will be no different.

The costs of compliance is several hundred million per model which is obviously much easier to hide in the price of a premium SUV than in a cheap small car which also has a low margin due to its size.

The physics of a car hitting another vehicle and hitting a cyclist are also pretty much entirely unrelated. Plenty of somewhat pointy looking SUVs actually have very soft front ends which crumple when they hit a person, the Mazda CX-5 is a good example of this.

20 May 2020

Reverse parking incidents?

The manufacturers could play a big part in that by dropping some of the ridiculous rear three-quarter styling that results in vastly reduced visibility.

20 May 2020

New rule won't be based on just height (or just length)

20 May 2020
xxxx wrote:

New rule won't be based on just height (or just length)

Snoooooze...anaother random shower of words, clearly unfinished, with no point being clear...usual fare then from petey4x

20 May 2020

Good old EU moves the goal posts to off foot non EU manufacturers like the Chinese who were nearly up to speed on safety and will have to redo design & development. No doubt VAG were incorporating compliance in their designs ages ago.. nod, wink, the draft spec is in the buff envelope on the bench.. shhh!  

20 May 2020
The Apprentice wrote:

Good old EU moves the goal posts to off foot non EU manufacturers like the Chinese who were nearly up to speed on safety and will have to redo design & development. No doubt VAG were incorporating compliance in their designs ages ago.. nod, wink, the draft spec is in the buff envelope on the bench.. shhh!

What? ccp paying you to post pro party line propaganda '50 cent army' member? chinese cars have been corner cutting death traps since the test was introduced in the 90’s.. There is no anti china conspiracy here comrade. I would agree with you on the EU being in bed with ‘certain’ car companies moving goalposts for their own financial gain. One example is the emission standards change which is based off c02 which is BS because it puts lower revving turbo diesel at an unfair advantage. They pump out more poisonous pollutants and particulates than a petrol equivalent engine but pay less road taxes Europe-wide because ved rates are tied to c02 emissions and nothing else. This really harmed non-EU Japanese and US importers where they don’t drink the diesel coolaid in their native countries and had to rush and design derv engines to compete with EU makers putting them at a huge competitive disadvantage.

20 May 2020
nimmler wrote:

The Apprentice wrote:

Good old EU moves the goal posts to off foot non EU manufacturers like the Chinese who were nearly up to speed on safety and will have to redo design & development. No doubt VAG were incorporating compliance in their designs ages ago.. nod, wink, the draft spec is in the buff envelope on the bench.. shhh!

What? ccp paying you to post pro party line propaganda '50 cent army' member? chinese cars have been corner cutting death traps since the test was introduced in the 90’s.. There is no anti china conspiracy here comrade. I would agree with you on the EU being in bed with ‘certain’ car companies moving goalposts for their own financial gain. One example is the emission standards change which is based off c02 which is BS because it puts lower revving turbo diesel at an unfair advantage. They pump out more poisonous pollutants and particulates than a petrol equivalent engine but pay less road taxes Europe-wide because ved rates are tied to c02 emissions and nothing else. This really harmed non-EU Japanese and US importers where they don’t drink the diesel coolaid in their native countries and had to rush and design derv engines to compete with EU makers putting them at a huge competitive disadvantage.

Well I was partly tongue in cheek, I saw the (Chinese made) MG ZS EV had achieved a 5 star NCAP rating so using some european design input they are getting there as this is an NCAP rating not a manufacturer one. Now they 'know' how to do it other Chinese brands could soon be arriving at bargain prices with 5 stars. Considering the Korean market share now, knees might be trembling on the continent at the prospect of another one taking another chunk.What is the betting certain German brands sail through the new requirements? almost as if they were designed around their cars...hmmm

20 May 2020

It needs to be clear which generation of testing standards a car is rated by. It isn't currently.

Pages

Add your comment

Log in or register to post comments

Find an Autocar car review

Driven this week