[WRXXX]

Originally Posted by Waspune

First of all lets not compare Swift with Baleno as they belong to different segments. So, if Baleno performed better than Swift, its nothing great, after all you are putting more money to buy it. Baleno should be compared with its other fellow segment mates like i20, Jazz, Polo and Punto, where it lags behind by a good margin. Maruti should stop taking the Indian market for granted, which seems improbable, thanks to their sales' numbers.

Sorry, no offense here, but I think we are comparing which cars are safer and not which
segment they belong to. By safety standards even Maruti 800 can be compared to Merc S-class to show that how safe one is compared to other. There is nothing wrong. Building and testing how safe a car is should be segment neutral. Unless you are comparing trucks and cars which belong to different kind of transport segments. I think both Swift and Baleno are similar cars so can be compared. But I agree that some segments may have different standards based on its usage (for example:- Mini Van).

Also, when you say Baleno lags behind by good margin to i20, Jazz, Polo and Punto what do you mean? You have some data to prove that 2016 year ratings of these cars are much better than Baleno? Also, majority of the public are interested in knowing how close or how safe the Indian version is based indirect inferences, so you have any data to prove that Baleno is behind Indian Polo, i20, Jazz and Punto?

[The AG 6167]

Originally Posted by adimicra

I will keep it short and simple with Jazz as the example.
Indian Jazz with 2 airbags weigh around 1044 kgs. (source: Honda India site)
The base UK model weighs 1066 kgs which has a BIGGER Engine and different 6 speed gearbox plus 6 airbags, VSA and lots of other safety measures etc etc. (source: Honda UK wite)
So, your assumption that I20 or Jazz is using different metal or construction for India versus European models is baseless. They might or might not. We don't know.

OK, back to the Baleno.
There are 2 ways to look at the results -
1> A brand new car scoring less than older models like Swift and S-cross or some competitors is disappointing.
2> Baleno should be better than the Indian Swift as hopefully Maruti would have maintained the same quality as the export model. So, results are encouraging.

With all due respect!

firstly - its the weight mentioned in the Euro Ncap report that matters here and not what is mentioned on the honda uk website which is 1100 kgs.

secondly - the "BIGGER" engine that you are referring to is the new 1.3 litre DOHC i-vtec putting out 102 bhp from a 6 speed gearbox which is made of Aluminium as against a cast iron block of the 1.2 litre SOHC i-vtec on the indian version so the weight gained by the bigger engine is somewhat compensated by the use of lighter materials which doesnt explain the additional 66kg weight on the European version.

Thirdly - we are both at the same page that
1.The I20 & Jazz dont give us a clue as to how will they perform in a crash in india.
2.The Baleno scoring lower in Europe against the swift is a bad thing for Suzuki's reputation there.
3.The Baleno performing better than the Indian swift is encouraging.

[VRPAI]

[quote=The AG 6167;3957168]

To give a few examples of the European rivals you mentioned -

1. Honda Jazz - India (1044kgs), Europe (1100kgs)

2.I20 - India (1066kgs), Europe (1100kgs)

3.Polo - India (1033kgs), Europe (1035kgs)

QUOTE]
The European i20 is 4035mm .
If your talking about the diesel i20, then the kerb weight of the European i20 is at 1165kg, it has 6 airbags,abs with ebd and a lot more features. And the diesel i20 in India is about 1155(according to overdrive). So not really sure if the build is sacrificed on the diesel.
For the petrol they give a 1.25ltr engine in UK, again the length of the car is more, 6 airbags again, and more features too. So I am not realy sure if the build has been compromised. Again I have never sat in a European i20, all this opinion is from the data I've read.

Thanks

[veyron_head]

Wow! I thought 3 stars is a very mediocre rating. But I see so many posts 'congratulating' Maruti!

When I test drove the Baleno, I could clearly see that the build was very flimsy. True, the TECT body technology could be aimed at being both safer and lighter, but thats not what the crash tests show, isn't it?

[WRXXX]

2016 rating methods seems to have slight changes in how manufacturers can get an additional STAR, I am not saying that Baleno has faired well. Correct comparison would be when more cars are tested with the 2016 protocol and see how this fairs. For example in 2016 only two cars are tested, too early to comment if 3/4 STAR obtained by Baleno is decent OR not in comparison. This is a cat and mouse game, the standards can keep increasing and manufacturers can keep struggling to meet them, just like the emissions norms. I don't think the cars will be tested again and again every year, its called NCAP, so may be only when it is released. So, we might not see Jazz/i20/Polo tests again in 2016 to give Baleno a chance of real comparison. The 2016 rating system clearly indicates to achieve an extra STAR the manufacturer needs to provide additional safety feature via the safety pack.

euroncap site especially says

2016 assessment are significantly changed from previous years and star ratings should not be directly compared with earlier years.

[NiInJa]

I have a couple of questions :

Who gives these cars for testing ? the manufacturer (voluntarily) or some other entity ?

Wherever these tests are done, Why cant we expect all Indian spec cars tested at the same facility, specially from our government ? Doesn't it make more sense to get our cars tested at these facilities instead of building a crash test facility ourselves. (It is a good thing to have but why wait till its ready) ?

[volkman10]

Originally Posted by NiInJa

I have a couple of questions :

Who gives these cars for testing ? the manufacturer (voluntarily) or some other entity ?

Here is about Euro NCAP

Who Decided What Cars Are Tested ?

Every member organisation of Euro NCAP sponsors the assessment of at least one car model per year. They may choose a vehicle which is of relevance to their own domestic market or one which is particularly important in a certain market segment. In addition, vehicle manufacturers can sponsor their own cars. The process followed is exactly the same for both cases.

In case of Baleno,

What If Cars Are Not Yet On Sale ?

It is important to publish results as soon as possible in the life-cycle of a vehicle so that as many consumers as possible are able to make an informed choice. This means that Euro NCAP sometimes will test cars which are not yet available at dealers. In these circumstances, Euro NCAP selects cars from early production. Euro NCAP may visit the manufacturing plant to choose cars at random or VINs may be selected randomly from a list provided by the manufacturer. When the cars arrive at the test laboratory, they are checked to ensure they have the correct items of safety equipment. Under no circumstance Euro NCAP will test vehicles that are not fully type approved, are not from series production or not legally sellable to the general public. Any evidence found - before, during or after the tests - that casts doubt on the production status of the vehicles, will automatically lead to an invalid result and follow up investigations.

Where Does Euro NCAP Get the Cars for Testing ?

Up to 4 cars are needed for an assessment by Euro NCAP. If a car model is already on sale, Euro NCAP will generally buy cars from dealers, in the same way that consumers do. Cars are bought anonymously, either from a single dealer or from several. Once the cars are at the test laboratory, the manufacturer is informed of the vehicle identification numbers (VINs) and are asked to confirm the specification. If a production change has been made since the cars were produced, for example to an item of safety equipment, the manufacturer may ask for the current part to be fitted to the vehicle. This ensures that, when they are released, the results are representative of current production cars.

http://www.euroncap.com/en/about-eur...ion-explained/

[Speed Pujari]

As mentioned by someone in the thread that the euro ncap is performed in highly controlled environment, the real time scenario can be surprisingly different.
We are forgetting a crucial reason of fatalities - Rollover. Correct me if I am wrong, the euro ncap does not cover rollover testing.

Here is the link to comprehensive paper by NHTSA(National Highway Traffic Safety Administration, Washington DC) about the new rule for rollover.
http://www.nhtsa.gov/cars/rules/ruli...PRM-to-FR.html

Note that the paper is lengthy but is easy to comprehend.
Here are a few key information I could sum up by my 5 minutes reading.

Courtesy- NHTSA

" The standard requires that when a large steel test plate is forced down onto the roof of a vehicle, simulating contact with the ground in rollover crashes, the vehicle roof structure must withstand a force equivalent to 1.5 times the unloaded weight of the vehicle, without the test plate moving more than 127 mm (5 inches). Under S5 of the standard, the application of force is limited to 22,240 Newtons (5,000 pounds) for passenger cars."

Fatalitiy Estimates-



There had been numerous fatalities due to roof intrusions in India. One example is the teambhp thread below-
http://www.team-bhp.com/forum/street...ml#post2196843

Analytical estimate (though old) gives a much more clarity



"Observing only drivers in rollover crashes with vertical roof intrusion, the study concluded that 15 percent of drivers are injured by roof intrusion. It was also found that the roof itself was the most frequently reported source of roof injury and the head was the body part most frequently injured by these contacts. Further, 89 percent of roof-injured drivers received their most serious injuries from the roof."

The crumpled Baleno's accident in gharonda was a clear case of rollover safety concerns with Baleno.


There are surprising accidents where during rollover or during roof intrusion the passenger came out unscathed.
Link to thread

http://www.team-bhp.com/forum/street...ml#post3942090

[aaggoswami]

The score of Baleno, while not the best, cant be just considered as unsafe. The Elite i20's EU cousin scored 4/5 where as the earlier generation scored 5/5.
After looking at the crash test, the structure seems to be stable which is a positive point. If the structure is rated stable, the first step towards safety is well covered IMO. Airbags are absolutely essential, but they wont be of any help if structure is unstable.

I would also like to share the images of a crashed Etios, and remember, Etios is one car that's rated 4/5 in Latin NCAP and generally considered safe. There are various parameters involved as we all know, in case of a crash. Before concluding that Baleno's structure is unsafe, factor in the impact with truck after jumping the divider. 12-15 ton truck's momentum and energy are huge and any car would find it difficult to remain even remotely intact.

[Dr.Naren]

EURO NCAP star rating for 2016 is different. Swift, made in Europe got 5 stars in 2015 and Baleno(made in India) got 4 stars in 2016. Swift (India) crash test results were poor and body shell was rated unstable. Baleno which is crash tested weighs same as top of the line petrol Baleno on sale in India. So what I can understand is:
1. Swift (Europe) performed better than Baleno(Made in India for Europe)?? Star rating is different for 2016 and it is difficult to conclude.
2. Baleno performed better than Swift(India) - Yes, obviously! Body shell of baleno is rated stable compared to swift
3. There were lot of arguments/discussion regarding safety of baleno because of light Kerb weight. This crash test results prove again that weight is not the only safety parameter. A light weight car can also pass crash tests. 3-4/5 star rating for 890 kg kerb weight car is appreciable.
4. A crumpled baleno picture made news saying safety is compromised. I dont know what could be expected after crashing into a heavy truck. I can post pictures of even premium cars getting crumpled beyond recognition. Accident pics (without knowing the speeds, cause etc) are not something to conclude about safety of car.

[McLaren Rulez]

A point regarding kerb weights: Having the same kerb weight or nearly the same kerb weight as the European counterpart does not indicate that the construction is just as good.

A lot of expensive (and safer) components can be replaced with cheaper ones that weigh just as much but are not as strong.

Until they test the sold-in-India version, these results really aren't as meaningful as they're being made out to be.

[amolbh]

Did anyone else notice the driver's headrest flying off towards the passenger!?

[WRXXX]

People who are interested in more English translation of the 3/4 STAR that Baleno got,
ACP website has the following nifty details. This also tells the reasons why Baleno failed to score well, I suppose Suzuki engineers need to improve the design and shortcomings. This also tells clearly how the results are interpreted and what might not make sense to most of the cars here,
since they don't even offer curtain airbags. A complete datasheet is available here.

Euro NCAP comments on the standard-spec Baleno (3-stars)

Adult Occupant

“The passenger compartment remained stable in the frontal offset test. Dummy readings indicated good protection of the knees and femurs of both the driver and passenger. Suzuki showed that a similar level of protection would be provided to occupants of different sizes and to those sat in different positions.

In the full-width rigid barrier impact, protection of the driver was rated as good except for the chest, protection of which was adequate. Dummy readings of chest compression indicated marginal protection for this part of the body but good or adequate protection elsewhere. In the side barrier test, dummy numbers showed good protection but the score for the head was penalised as the side curtain airbag was deemed not to have deployed in the correct manner in the side pole test.

In the more severe side pole impact, dummy readings of lateral rib compression indicated weak chest protection and the head protection was downgraded to adequate as a result of the incorrect airbag deployment. The front seats and head restraints demonstrated good protection against whiplash in the event of a rear-end collision. A geometric assessment of the rear seats also indicated good protection. The optional 'Radar Brake Support' was not included in this assessment.

Child Occupant

In the frontal impact, both the 6 and the 10 year dummies were properly restrained and forward movement was not excessive. However, dummy readings revealed high values of neck tensile forces in the 10 year dummy and marginal protection of the neck and chest of the six year dummy. In the side impact, there was insufficient pressure in the side curtain airbag to prevent the head of the 10 year dummy striking the interior of the car, around the C-pillar. This contact led to very high decelerations and protection was rated as poor.

Dummy readings of chest deceleration also indicated poor protection of that part of the body. The side wing of the child restraint used for the six year dummy was found to be broken after the test. High-speed film revealed that the dummy's head was not properly contained during the impact, increasing the likelihood of head contact with parts of the car interior. The front passenger airbag can be disabled to allow a rearward-facing child restrain to be used in that seating position. Clear information is provided to the driver regarding the status of the airbag and the system was rewarded.

Pedestrian Protection

The bumper provided good protection to pedestrians' legs and the bonnet gave predominantly good or adequate results, with poor protection only on the stiff windscreen pillars. The protection provided to the pelvis region was mixed, with areas of good and poor protection. An autonomous braking system capable of detecting pedestrians is not available on the Baleno.” - See more at: http://www.autocarpro.in/news-nation....ti2VTNVo.dpuf

[AKTRACK]

Saleswise it is going to make a difference of just a 100 odd numbers plus or minus depending on how you see the stars. Baleno will sell the usual numbers irrespective of these tests or their outcomes. I will still be skeptical of what model they have used and will wait for the test of the Indian sold version.

These results are still statistics. Depending on how you present or see them, there is room for a lot of manipulation. Anyone remember Bajaj Qute crash test fiasco

[srh]

To put it mildly, these safety ratings for a brand new vehicle designed from scratch are disappointing. I think that everyone will agree that Suzuki is able to make cars which score better (are safer) than what the Baleno is. In this context, the fact that they prioritized weight/ fuel efficiency over safety does not bode well for the customers. While customers may clamor for better fuel efficiency, as a responsible global corporation and an Indian market leader, Suzuki would do better to educate customers about safety/ its impact on cost & fuel efficiency.