[McLaren_P1]

Originally Posted by Hayek

Finally, asking for the Bolero or Ambassador to be tested is a joke - these are old platforms, and clearly won’t meet modern standards. If Maruti were still selling the 800, I don’t think anyone would expect it to meet crash standards - it is the failure of brand new cars which is a cause for concern.

In my understanding of what Global NCAP has tested in the past globally, they have also selected aged platforms or vehicles we don’t expect to perform well for testing.

For example, check the Cherry QQ3 0-star rating in Africa, Tata Nano 0-star in India.

So not sure what their selection criteria are for their random testing.

Also interestingly, seems Global NCAP testing is less comprehensive compared to other major NCAPs (for example, Euro NCAP tests full frontal impact, frontal offset impact and side pole impact; global NCAP tests front offset impact).

[fiat_tarun]

This variant selection point keeps coming up in all the many threads where NCAP topics are being discussed and has been explained by so many members. Request everyone to read through what has already been shared and also look up the GNCAP website to understand the protocol first !

Originally Posted by ArTigor

...
At least use the same variant, probably base variant for every vehicle tested.
Higher variant can be an added option, but testing the base variant should be a must!
I really do not like their biased way of narrating the outcome.
....

In the old protocol from 2014 - mid 2022, it was the base model or an equivalent model that had the same standard features as the base model. Have you come across any test where this has not been followed ?

The new protocol has points & rating criteria for optional equipment like side airbags and ESP and hence the variant that has these features will also be tested. You can be sure that no car will pass a side pole impact test without side and curtain airbags, so there's no point doing this test on the base variant !

Originally Posted by Nithesh_M

Laid out protocol they keep changing by the year and modify rating methods. Not to forget switching from independent testing of base model cars to now colluding with manufacturers to test top variant cars ....

The India protocol did not change from 2014 - 2022. It should have been changed / updated a few year back in 2019 once equipment like ABS & front airbags become mandatory.

Also which OEM are you referring to that has 'colluded' to test their higher variant cars ? All tests are as per the published protocol so it'll be the same for all - voluntary submissions or random selections.

Originally Posted by McLaren_P1

What is strange is how for some models, the rating is based on base variant test results, for others it’s mid/top spec.

Global NCAP should consistently pick the base variant for all tests, so customers know that (a) regardless of which variant they pick they get the stated safety rating and (b) buyers can compare models in an apples-to-apples manner.

Originally Posted by PrideRed

...
What doesnot seem reliable or rather unethical is NCAP's ways of picking cars, selecting variants, showcasing results etc...

Again, please read through the protocol to understand it better. All tests follow the same protocol, the old one till July 2022 and the new one now till 2025.

Originally Posted by McLaren_P1

...
Also interestingly, seems Global NCAP testing is less comprehensive compared to other major NCAPs (for example, Euro NCAP tests full frontal impact, frontal offset impact and side pole impact; global NCAP tests front offset impact).

The 'Safer Cars for India' program was started to highlight how the same level of safety is not offered world over even on the same models and hence the program started with the most basic tests.

Take a look at the updated 2022 protocol under which the Kushaq/ Taigun, Scorpio N, etc. have been tested. Side impact, pole impact, ESP are all part of the protocol now whereas other NCAP's globally have moved on to focus on ADAS and accident avoidance.

[PrideRed]

Originally Posted by fiat_tarun

In the old protocol from 2014 - mid 2022, it was the base model or an equivalent model that had the same standard features as the base model. Have you come across any test where this has not been followed ?

The new protocol has points & rating criteria for optional equipment like side airbags and ESP and hence the variant that has these features will also be tested. You can be sure that no car will pass a side pole impact test without side and curtain airbags, so there's no point doing this test on the base variant !

In the old protocol SPresso/Swift did not have ESP but current AMT variants do get these. Instead of using old results shouldn't they have picked these variants? Again would not have made world of difference but to keep things transparent they could have picked these. If there is no point in doing side pole impact test on car having no side airbags, why spend money to test cars which had no structural improvements/side airbags?

[fiat_tarun]

Originally Posted by PrideRed

In the old protocol SPresso/Swift did not have ESP but current AMT variants do get these. Instead of using old results shouldn't they have picked these variants? ...

If you look at the 2022 protocol you will see that ESP becomes relevant only from 3 stars and above and does not carry any points. It is a qualifier to achieve a 3 star rating and above wherein a fitment rate is defined for 3,4 & 5 stars which the OEM has to already have or committ to follow.

ESP will have no impact on the crash scores and there will be a standard 'Sine with dwell' test to check if ESP functions properly, so if the Swift had qualified for a 3 star rating and above, the ESP variant would have been tested as per the above test (requirement for 3 star is optional ESP on atleast 1 variant).

[kaushikduttajsr]

Voted unsure (Can't say for sure, but glad people are not believing them blindly)

I'm a skeptic. GNCAP is a brilliant concept, but nobody should really say "I trust them". Why? Because there is no 3rd party audit. I run a race alone, I always come 1st

For GNCAP to become universally accepted they need to do 2 things -

1. Implement a maker-checker audit model where NCAP peers collaborate and create standards like Autosar/BIS/CAN

2. Test and publish reports for a wider variety of cars. Right now, it's biased. I'll believe they are unbiased the day they test the Harrier twins.

[clement.lloyd]

Unable to cast my vote on this.

I vote - Can't say for sure, but glad people are not believing them blindly.

Reliability - Is a broad term. For me to trust an organisation, I would start with some of the basic questions:

• Why/When was the organisation formed ?
• What type of organisation it is - private/public ?
• What were/is its vision, goals ?
• How does this organisation sustain itself ?

The answers to these basic question would help me gain some basic level of trust in any organisation.

After a basic level of research, it appears that the New Car Assessment Programme was already in place in the US under the administration of the then president, Jimmy Carter. However, it was in 1979 where the testing programme really went to a new level, when they introduced more stringent standards. So obviously it was initially a government initiated programme. Global NCAP appears to have been founded and joined the UN safety collaboration in 2011. The below article also speaks about the organisation joining hands with UN (because their goals were aligned to UN’s road safety vision and that it was also a means to to sustain the organisation’s development and research activities) - https://www.globalncap.org/news/glob...-collaboration.

Given that it is a private organisation, I see that as a good sign because at least there are no known entities funding this organisation or owning stake in this organisation that is made aware to the public. Their goals appear to be well defined for each country and their vision clear and well aligned with the UNs. Remember that UN is funded by most of its members and India is one of them.

The above information makes me trust GNCAP and believe in what it does. I also believe that there is and always will be that perceived gap between what GNCAP does and what as a consumer we think GNCAP does because it is a private organisation and is not entitled to answer anyone. IMO It just has one job - to set and align its goals towards global road safety, try to implement them(the hurdles are the government/polices/OEM manufacturers) and put everything in front of the consumers, and it has done its job pretty well in our country, special thanks to our honourable minister, Mr. Nitin Gadkari.

Having said that, in any work environment, things can go wrong and I don’t believe GNCAP is an exception. I still do not rely on anything published by any private organisations, they are not set in stone, however to me the results are definitely a guideline. They would help a common buyer like me (for whom safety is a top priority) decide between a Virtus/City/Slavia and a Ciaz.

[supertinu]

Originally Posted by Hayek

Find this thread and the general carping about GNCAP ratings that many do quite strange.

GNCAP follows a clearly laid out protocol while testing cars. That is true for both cars they test independently (such as the Marutis) and cars they test when a manufacturer requests for the same (such as the Tatas). If their testing process was inadequate, you could be sure Maruti and Hyundai would be suing the pants off them. So the rating you get for any car that is tested is certain to be correct. In fact, you can also bet that the ratings are NOT a surprise to any manufacturer- these cars are designed and tested extensively, and the manufacturer surely knows what level of crash protection they are aiming for. For players like Suzuki and Hyundai who sell cars elsewhere and “value engineer” the same for India, they know what level of risk they are introducing and probably can also calculate how many people will die because of the changes they are introducing relative to selling their global product here.

Completely agree with your point and exactly my thoughts. The NCAP testing of the car in itself is very objective and well documented process. There is no point in trying to doubt the outcome of those results. Car manufacturers themselves will be the first ones to dispute if there were gaps. The testing criteria is fixed and common across all cars/brands and it gives us an apples to apples comparison.

However the only caveat is that NCAP is not testing 100% of the cars or variants, but that doesn't mean it is not giving me info about which cars are safe and which aren't. And as a consumer I feel that data point is also enough to make a informed decision during a purchase. Since NCAP is bound by budgets etc there will also be some skew towards a particular brand for the amount of cars being tested, but doesnt mean they are publishing wrong data for testing they do. I would obviously expect manufacturers to voluntarily get more cars tested if they were to pass with 5 stars, but they choose not to knowing their own inability.

[Maverick_4662]

Voted Yes. I see consumers today (not enthusiasts) actively demanding safer cars (safe structure not number of airbags) and GNCAP does deserve some credit for it IMHO.

It is quite clear that GNCAP is biased against Maruti Suzuki and does bash it quite clearly. This may be an unpopular opinion but I feel that MS deserves it by all means. Maruti sells unsafe cars by CHOICE. Indian manufacturers are able to sell 4/5 star rated cars for cheaper or equivalent price so why can't Maruti? I would add Hyundai to this list as well. These manufacturers are actively prioritising a fatter bottom line over the lives of Indians and for that, they deserve all the hate and bad press possible IMHO.

I apologize for the rant and mean no offence to MS owners. I have a total of 3 Maruti products in my immediate family FYI.

[chipsnchops]

It is interesting to see how everything is put under the scanner and checked minutely. Forget how reliable the GNCAP rating is. We all can see the video of the crash test right?

You can see how Scorpio N performed, and how the Maruti cars just crumbled just by seeing the video. For me personally, that itself is proof that the Mahindra vehicles are much safER than the Maruti ones.

Also, we all know how big Maruti is in the Indian market. Do you really think they will sit quietly and take any crap from a 3rd party, that too when it comes to safety and especially when another car got five stars where they didn't get even one star for certain models?

It is good that these ratings are getting a lot of publicity. People are getting more and more aware of these ratings and will become a part of their decision-making for sure. In India, we would never compromise on the safety of our family/kids. It is also good that the Govt is now insisting on having six airbags as a standard accessory.

Overall, I feel these ratings will only help and contribute to making better and safer cars in India, doesn't matter how accurate these ratings are.

Personally, I think we are moving in the right direction

[Ton Ami]

I think the poll title is misleading
"Do you think GNCAP Ratings are trustworthy?"
I will say YES.

Instead, the title should have been "Do you think GNCAP has double standards?"
For this poll, I will say YES.

Coming to the point, we need to trust some agencies even if their Operations aren't fully transparent. Its always better to have some references than nothing at all.

Moving further, I feel GNCAP should always select the base version for testing and make it a point to retest when there is an updated version launched for the same model.

This will prevent car companies from selling base versions while mentioning ratings of their top end vehicles in their advertisements.

[Mortis]

I'll keep it simple. I trust that the crash test data they are posting is accurate for sure i.e. the one star Swift is not actually a 5 star car and vice versa for the Nexon. I think we can all agree on this much.

As for which cars are and aren't tested, that's not my concern and not up to me or in my control. The crash test rating is an extra data point if I am shopping from the list of cars tested by NCAP and a well rated car is something I hope to buy obviously.

It has already been mentioned in other threads that car manufacturers are at liberty to sponsor and send their cars for testing and can do so for each and every one of their models especially if as it's being hinted at that supposedly a sponsored test ensures a favourable outcome apparently. The cost to a manufacturer will not be much at all I'm sure.

The fact that the manufacturers themselves don't do this speaks volumes on how much faith they have in the safety of their vehicles and do not want to paint their cars in a poor light in any way. We can take Tata for example, sponsoring and testing all their cars except the Harrier/Safari which they have their doubts on. Still atleast the rest of Tatas cars have scored well and they had enough self assurance to get them tested. The other manufacturers have pretty much sent NONE of their cars which tells you a lot about where frugal engineering is taking place.

[epiccross]

Originally Posted by chipsnchops

You can see how Scorpio N performed, and how the Maruti cars just crumbled just by seeing the video. For me personally, that itself is proof that the Mahindra vehicles are much safER than the Maruti ones.

I'm sorry, I don't understand this. How can you "see" and understand anything? Take the crash test of Ignis, which is like several segments below Scorpio N. Just through the visuals, you can't deduce anything. Only with their impact chart and observations do we understand how well/poorly they have performed. Plus we're talking about a proper SUV vs a budget hatchback. Not exactly apples to apples comparison.

Mahindra vehicles may or may not be safer than Maruti ones (although you really can't generalize this across segments), but I don't think you can understand how well they have protected the occupants here, which is the only thing that matters IMO.

[epiccross]

Originally Posted by Mortis

I'll keep it simple. I trust that the crash test data they are posting is accurate for sure i.e. the one star Swift is not actually a 5 star car and vice versa for the Nexon. I think we can all agree on this much.

I agree that it's pretty much common sense that Swift is clearly weaker than Nexon. But we're talking about "stars" here. Take the Ignis, for instance. It scored 3 earlier, now it's down to one. How much would Nexon score now? Would that make the "five starrer" suddenly an "unsafe car" now? Because that's one of their biggest selling points.

And I'm still not sold on the variant selection, I had raised this issue in the other threads. It is not just about changed norms, they have always been wildly inconsistent with variant selection (see: Polo getting zero stars and why the base variant was chosen, etc)

See: https://www.team-bhp.com/forum/road-...ml#post5462030 (Global NCAP safety ratings shouldn’t be reduced to Sir Boastalot)

Our member @ron178 has posted some nuanced takes on this. I would urge everyone to read the same. Being pissed off at Maruti is one thing, but I'm not really sold on GNCAP as their testing is really not standardaized enough for my liking.

[sridhar-v]

GNCAP ratings are just a basic guideline to judging how safe a car is.
There are too many variables and scenarios for us to get a perfect prediction of performance.

I primarily check if the mechanical shell is stable and the driver and passenger injury color results are green or one step below.

[neeravnaik]

World is grey and not Black and White. Nothing will be perfect so you should not fully trust anything as they can be wrong sometimes. Similarly you should also not reject a good idea because you find one or two inconsistencies.

Personally I would say 70% yes on trusting GNCAP. Like any decision one should not totally base it on single criteria. Car buying like any decision is combination of many factors. Even safety one should try to consider various parameters.

In my experience the GNCAP ratings seem to be broadly consistent with how some of these vehicles I have experienced first hand. So I use it as a guideline but not something set in stone. Best to dig a bit into the data and not get too hung up on specific ratings. Directionally it gives a good idea and it exposes some obvious double standards like differences between global and indian variants.

They will definitely have their biases and flaws. Unless we have multiple credible alternatives it would be difficult to understand how good their results are.

Arguments remind me of debates around vaccines. There have been numerous studies done for these vaccines and on the whole personally for me probability says that you are better off taking vaccines. Those opposed to vaccines always seem to be coming up with non-scientific or heuristic based evidences. They do not seem to be based on large scale studies and on evaluating both sides I find pro-vaccine results more credible. Again this does not mean that some vaccines have not been rushed to production or big pharma are not greedy and aim to maximize profits. Both things can be true at the same time.