[blackwasp]

After securing a poor rating in one of the crash tests, Nissan has not only upgraded the model, but also started a service campaign to fix existing cars.

The previous Rogue rated “Good” across the board with IIHS, except for the small overlap front: passenger-side test, where it still earned an “Acceptable” rating. The National Highway Traffic Safety Administration’s New Car Assessment Program gave the last gen Rogue four out of five stars overall on front and rollover crashes, and five stars in side impacts.

While the 2021 Nissan Rogue scored another overall four out of five stars with NHTSA back in January, the front passenger crash test earned the automaker a measly two out of five stars. That’s...not good, especially for such a huge volume seller like the Rogue. The CUV makes up a little less than half of Nissan’s SUV and truck sales in the U.S. In 2019 Nissan sold 350,447 Rogues in the states. In other words, Nissan really needs to get this Rogue right.

Now Nissan says it has applied an (untested by federal regulators) fix for cars built after Jan. 28, 2021, and will recall cars built before that date to apply the fix.

Source



Here's what Nissan said in a press release:

Nissan is committed to vehicle safety and is pleased with the 2021 Nissan Rogue’s overall 4-star NCAP safety rating. All 2021 Rogue vehicles fully comply with federal safety standards.

Nissan is aware of the two-star NCAP rating for front-passenger safety for 2021 Rogue vehicles assembled at Nissan’s Kyushu, Japan, manufacturing facility prior to Jan. 28, 2021. Nissan applied an update to the front passenger restraint system on all 2021 Rogue vehicles assembled at Nissan’s Smyrna, Tennessee plant, and all vehicles produced after Jan. 28 at the Kyushu plant. Therefore the two-star front-passenger safety rating only applies to the vehicles produced at the Kyushu plant prior to Jan. 28.

To ensure customer confidence and satisfaction, Nissan will soon launch a service campaign to update 2021 Rogue vehicles produced in Kyushu prior to January 28, 2021. Owners will receive notification as to when to bring their vehicle in for updates.

The front-passenger safety systems in the vehicles that received the update have yet to be tested by NHTSA. An additional test of the 2021 Rogue is scheduled with results expected in May.

[vishy76]

This won't be possible in India. I think the reason for the 2 star rating is most probably due to a flawed design in the seatbelt pretensioner system, something which is easily rectifiable.

In stark contrast, most unsafe cars in India possess fundamentally flawed structures which can never be "fixed" under recall and neither can they be altered easily to achieve a better rating (provided that the manufacturer even has such intentions). Taking the example of the Seltos, Kia can't do anything to fix the Seltos' sold over the past 2-3 years since the basic structure lacks crucial components altogether or has them built from lower grade steel as compared to international counterparts.

Tata did manage to upgrade the Nexon to 5 stars, but again, it was anyways a 4 star car to start with and had done fairly well for itself at the first attempt. And neither were older 4 star rated cars recalled to be upgraded to 5 stars since I am sure structural changes (however minor) were made.

To conclude, this is a one off case of a car which most probably has a design defect that is easily fixable and is not related at all to structural integrity of the bodyshell. This explains why Nissan is so confident about upgrading older cars from 2 to 4 stars simply by making minor changes to the pretensioner design.

[SideView]

Originally Posted by blackwasp

After securing a poor rating in one of the crash tests, Nissan has not only upgraded the model, but also started a service campaign to fix existing cars.

<rant>

Why? Because there are no rules to take manufacturers(not only Nissan) to task.

N number of issues reported by many customers (Eg 110ps injector failure) and no recalls, nothing.

Why would manufacturers bother, they are not in the business of charity, until Government forces them they will not put a dime until it is critical/taken to court.

</rant>

[GTO]

Good topic. If manufacturers can launch facelifts, major new features (e.g. panoramic sunroof), new engines & automatic transmissions as the product matures, I don't know why a "safer" version cannot follow.

Kia is perhaps the best subject for this exercise. If they remove all the cost-cutting from the Seltos and make it a 5-star rating car, it will earn a lot of goodwill as a manufacturer that took feedback seriously. Of course, that move will infuriate existing Seltos owners, but that's a small price to pay if we have to look forward, not backward.

[Hayek]

Originally Posted by GTO

Kia is perhaps the best subject for this exercise. If they remove all the cost-cutting from the Seltos and make it a 5-star rating car, it will earn a lot of goodwill

Agree fully with that. Had more or less decided on the Seltos for my Vento replacement. My test drive experience was fantastic as well. But after debating this for a long time, decided that I didn’t want to buy a structurally unstable car. Will post on what I am buying separately.

May be customers like me are few and far between - but Kia, if you are reading this, your nickel and dimeing on safety cost you a sale.

[justwheels]

I guess manufacturers are more concerned about developed markets like USA because, one, their rules are more stringent and second, due to class action law suits that can rob them of millions of dollars if lost. It's better to be prepared rather expect that loss.
In India, we neither have laws to nail the manufacturers nor any sort of class action suit maturity. And hence manufacturers will ensure they can earn every last penny till laws/ environment permits them.
In perspective, Tata has done so much in area of safety now, but none of their models are top sellers still. While Maruti with enough tin can memes and negative publicity (read espresso results) still manages to sell by the thousands. The customers (tbhpians aside) still don't value safety at the first priority. Let's be honest, we still are a developing economy with cars still being aspirational. People want maximum bang for bucks.

[vb-saan]

For mass manufacturers profit driven from volume is what matters and they will squeeze in every bit to increase that margin. That’s why in India you can see cars that cost above 15 lakhs still pass on a lap belt for the rear middle passenger; an example below – rear seat of Seltos in India (top) v/s Singapore (bottom). I believe the one we get here is manufactured in India, but that's how local market v/s export-quality works!

[ashis89]

One reason - people don't care. Neither does the Govt.

Just one look at the month on month sales numbers of cars which have fared poorly in crash tests will give an idea.

On top of it, crash tests are not mandated in India and hence, a majority of cars not tested at all.

Finally, there's lack of transparency on the crash tests and their results. There are different agencies conducting such tests (GNCAP, ASEAN and what not) and they have different benchmarks. The origin of the car, which was crash tested, becomes important as OEMs are going the extra length to design variants which are India-specific, ASIA-specific, China-specific, Euro-spec and so on! All of it ties back to points #1&2 above.

Unfortunate but true.

Originally Posted by GTO

Kia is perhaps the best subject for this exercise. If they remove all the cost-cutting from the Seltos and make it a 5-star rating car, it will earn a lot of goodwill as a manufacturer that took feedback seriously. Of course, that move will infuriate existing Seltos owners, but that's a small price to pay if we have to look forward, not backward.

I would blame the Govt. here for not mandating a crash test. Ideally, each new car should be tested before launch and the results be available right when the car is available for sale. Something like the star rating on electrical appliances.

Let the consumer take a look at the ratings and then make an informed decision which car they want to buy.

[RJK]

Originally Posted by Hayek

Agree fully with that. Had more or less decided on the Seltos for my Vento replacement. My test drive experience was fantastic as well. But after debating this for a long time, decided that I didn’t want to buy a structurally unstable car. Will post on what I am buying separately.

May be customers like me are few and far between - but Kia, if you are reading this, your nickel and dimeing on safety cost you a sale.

Applaud your correct approach
However, if M-O-M sales are anything to go by (I don't know numbers, haven't verified) purely on the basis of new Seltos' on the road, we as a group of people, have proven to KIA where are our priorities are i.e sunroof, touchscreen, android car play etc. Safety optional; especially because the safety ratings have been out for a while. And the subsequent justification, "Oh, I'm going to drive it only in the city" etc. With this attitude of people & absence of any govt. regulation on safety standards (not sure if 3rd high mounted stop light is that critical ), I see no reason why Kia is going to change. I hate to say but Kia wouldn't care a hoot about loss of your or my sale (if I was looking in that segment).

Cheers

[ron178]

Originally Posted by vishy76

In stark contrast, most unsafe cars in India possess fundamentally flawed structures which can never be "fixed" under recall and neither can they be altered easily to achieve a better rating (provided that the manufacturer even has such intentions).

In the first recall of its kind, Honda had recalled the Fit in the North American market for a bumper redesign, which improved the structural rating in the IIHS' small overlap crash test. While this may be different from the scenario in India because structural instability for Indian cars may be because of intentional removal of members rather than bumper design, I doubt manufacturers in India would even bother with such recalls/redesigns. Keep in mind that the IIHS' tests are not even regulatory tests. (On a side note, even Renault updated the Kwid's structure when it catastrophically failed Global NCAP's frontal offset barrier test, though it didn't do much better even afterward.)

(Source: IIHS) The Honda Fit was redesigned for the 2015 model year. (The 2014 model year was skipped except for a limited number of plug-in battery-electric variants.) Two small overlap front tests of the Fit were conducted. In the first test, the bumper beam, a steel bar located behind the plastic bumper cover, broke free of the frame rail on the passenger side of the car early in the crash. This caused much more of the crash energy to be absorbed by the driver side than Honda intended, resulting in extensive intrusion into the driver survival space and excessive upward movement of the steering column.

As a result, Honda improved the strength of the bumper beam welds for all Fits built after June 2014 and has announced a "product update" to replace the beams free of charge on cars built before the change was made on the assembly line (note: information about when a specific vehicle was manufactured is on the certification label typically affixed to the car on or near the driver door). In the second test of a car built with the improved bumper beam, intrusion was considerably reduced and the steering column remained much more stable during the crash.

Originally Posted by vishy76

Tata did manage to upgrade the Nexon to 5 stars, but again, it was anyways a 4 star car to start with and had done fairly well for itself at the first attempt. And neither were older 4 star rated cars recalled to be upgraded to 5 stars since I am sure structural changes (however minor) were made.

If you watch the videos of both crash tests of the Nexon, you'll observe that the frontal test was never carried out again (although knee protection ratings in the second report have mysteriously improved). However, since the car qualified with the minimum frontal test points to be eligible for 5 stars, Tata proactively added the remaining five star requirements including a side impact test and seatbelt reminders. What matters most is the manufacturer's attitude towards safety.

[ASP007]

Originally Posted by GTO

Good topic. If manufacturers can launch facelifts, major new features (e.g. panoramic sunroof), new engines & automatic transmissions as the product matures, I don't know why a "safer" version cannot follow.

Couldn't agree more. I believe the days are not far for us to see safer iterations of models which are currently selling. Eventhough the pace is slow, government is also stepping up the safety standards for private vehicles.

[IP_Man]

Originally Posted by GTO

Good topic. If manufacturers can launch facelifts, major new features (e.g. panoramic sunroof), new engines & automatic transmissions as the product matures, I don't know why a "safer" version cannot follow.

Well said.

A safer disc brake is more important than sunroof but manufacturers are busy in providing popular features than making a safer version of the car.

Ideally manufacturer should provide a safer version of the car but Tata had done reverse of that. Tata launched 'LX' version of the Safari Storme with disc brakes (AFAIK) but later converted it to drum brakes for the cost cutting. This is a classic example how manufacturer skim on safety features to increase profit margin.

[JagMan]

Originally Posted by vishy76

Tata did manage to upgrade the Nexon to 5 stars, but again, it was anyways a 4 star car to start with and had done fairly well for itself at the first attempt. And neither were older 4 star rated cars recalled to be upgraded to 5 stars since I am sure structural changes (however minor) were made.

Tata also manged to upgrade the Zest to a 4 star with a structural change after crash tests gave it zero stars. They upgraded it and sent in an updated car to be tested again. They certainly didn't recall older cars and apply the fix though.

The standard non-airbag version resulted in a disappointing zero star score for adult occupant protection and one star for child occupant protection. As has been the case with other manufacturers, Global NCAP offered Tata the opportunity to test another version of the Zest with more safety features. Accepting the opportunity, Tata introduced a structural improvement to the entire Zest range while Global NCAP tested the new version with optional airbags.

http://www.globalncap.org/tata-zest-...sult-in-india/

[Raghu M]

This is (won't be) possible in India unless there are strong laws. For us, a new model/facelift means additional DRLs, sunroof, wireless charging etc. No one cares if a car has been made safer. I can think of only the Nexon which got better with the crash ratings.
Most of the much talked about launches never even have a GNCAP rating on their cars and yet they are sold like hot cakes with waiting periods of up to 6 months.

[gururajrv]

1) Indian Law for consumers - I don’t have to talk much here. Everyone knows nothings going to change anytime soon.

2) Consumers i.e. our own selves have to be blamed for this blatant distinction created by manufacturers solely because of our preference towards economy vs safety. It has been the norm for decades now - cost per kilometer matters over safety offered per kilometer. Tide is slowly changing now but it’ll take time to see any changes to immediately show explicitly. It is more like planting a seed and you’d see it turning into a big tree after years. Let’s hope things change.

3) Manufacturers, excluding Tata & Mahindra as they’re now setting the norm for safety. They score 5 stars from my side. But, let’s talk big guns who are so discriminating like MS, Hyundai, Nissan, Kia, Honda. I am not naming Toyota as they build safer cars compared to these guys. The ones that I’ve currently mentioned are focused on gaining market share by selling cars with features, price competitive, economy oriented but care almost zero towards consumers safety. Sad, but true.

Let’s change ourselves, only then the perception of these manufacturers towards India will slowly change.

Regards,

RV.