ANCAP has assessed the safety of the Mitsubishi Express and the results are not good. In fact, the zero-star award is the lowest rating ever given by ANCAP in its entire 28-year history.
The agency said in a statement that Express had shown “significant risk of serious injury to the driver’s chest” in three of the four devastating crash tests (frontal displacement, frontal and full-width oblique tests).
“A penalty was also imposed for potential hard-knee contact points for a driver in frontal collisions and close to the maximum penalty used for“ aggressiveness ”in frontal collisions with other vehicles.
“Further sanctions were applied to major deformations of the side doors of the load both in the side impact and in the column tests, which created openings through which partial ejection is possible.”
* Van safety tested, results are rough
* Road test overview: Mitsubishi Triton GLX-R 2WD
* Jeep’s new Wrangler crashes very poorly
* Updated Ford Mustang safer, but still only three stars
‘Aggressiveness’ means the risk of injury to the occupants of another vehicle in a collision.
The communication also states that a “high risk of neck injury” was noted during the neck test, with the risk of injury to the passenger’s neck likely being higher due to the basic design of the seat and head restraints fitted to the two front rows of passenger seats. “
Sol rani adds a lack of active safety features such as autonomous emergency braking and lane support systems, resulting in a 7% “safety assistance” rating. Other results were 55 percent for adult occupant protection, 40 percent for vulnerable road users, and N / A for child protection.
“Mitsubishi recently introduced Express to our market, but its specifications are not in line with today’s safety expectations,” said ANCAP CEO Carla Hoorweg.
“Unfortunately, we have seen adequate capacity below to protect passengers and vulnerable road users from the Express, and the results have been further reduced due to a fundamental lack of active safety systems.”
Things contacted Mitsubishi NZ, who said in a statement:
“The van was designed according to the 2015 NCAP protocols for‘ heavy vehicles ’. Since then, there has been a major shift in the use of driver assistance technologies, which is reflected in the new NCAP protocols under which this van was tested.
Express meets all Australian Design Rules (ADR) standards for vans, and the results of ANCAP crash tests indicate a good level of occupant protection.
Compared to competing peers of similar age, the vehicle has a competitive position according to the NCAP estimate. In Europe, it has a three-star rating (2015), ANCAP did not report an NCAP rating. “
Express will continue to be sold in New Zealand. Things he also got in touch with Renault, which sells almost the same Trafic here (only the mask and badge differ), and he was told the same.
The ANCAP test seems to have confused some feathers.
The Federal Chamber of Automotive Industry (FCAI) in Australia wondered if ANCAP had to evaluate Express at all.
The problem is that the Renault Trafic has been tested under the Euro NCAP safety program (used by ANCAP for non-locally tested vehicles) and has been awarded three stars.
“Euro NCAP and ANCAP claim to be actually harmonized, but this is not reflected in ANCAP actions,” said FCAI Executive Director Tony Weber.
“Why does ANCAP potentially spend up to $ 500,000, including taxpayer dollars, to test a six-year-old vehicle already evaluated in 2015 by its sister organization EuroNCAP?”
In defense, ANCAP CEO Carla Hoorweg said the Australian Express specifications were not in line with current safety expectations. She added that while ANCAP uses ratings solely based on EuroNCAP ratings, the three-star score for Trafic, which is used specifically for minivan versions, requires another test.
In addition, ANCAP does not transfer vehicle ratings to brands if a new vehicle is issued more than two years after the original assessment.