New Jeep Wrangler Gets 1 Star Crash Test Rating, Fiat Panda Scores 0
Remember how the Fiat Punto scored a dismal zero stars in a Euro NCAP test? It had the dubious honour of being the only car in the safety organisation’s history to end up with such a result.
Now though, it has another car to keep it company. Yep, another car has come away with no stars at all. And rather awkwardly, it’s another Fiat.
Like the Punto, the Panda is an older car in Fiat’s line-up which, and when tested under NCAP’s now more stringent parameters, it too came up short. It wasn’t able to score more than 50 per cent in any of the test categories, and most concerning of all, it managed just 16 per cent when it came to Child Occupant Protection.
Fiat Chrysler Automobiles also had a new car in the same round of Euro NCAP testing, in the form of the Jeep Wrangler. It fared better than the Punto, but barely, managing just one star out of five. In managed 50 per cent in the Adult Occupant category, and was marked down for a lack of autonomous emergency braking system.
There were issues with a deforming footwell, while “the make-up of the dashboard was seen to present a risk to occupants,” Thatcham Research director Matthew Avery said. The two results now mean that the three worst-scoring cars ever tested by Euro NCAP are all from FCA.
Responding to the results, an FCA UK spokesperson told Car Throttle: “Safety is of the utmost importance at FCA, and as such, our latest Jeep Wrangler and Fiat Panda comply with all safety legislation in every market in which they are sold.”
Growing up on a diet of World Rally Championship highlights and lengthy Gran Turismo 2 sessions, a life in cars was as good as inevitable for Matt.
Comments
sUv’s ArE sAFeR thAn sEDaNs
sELL oNLy sUVs
hAtCHbACKs arE uNSAfE
I’M So mUCh bEtTer oFf iN An sUV
It’s FCA..
What do you even expect?
I disagree with the way Euroncap rates the cars. There should be two categories, Active and Passive
Active being things like driver assists and how well they work
Passive being how well the car does in a crash.
This pretty much doesn’t mean anything. Just because the Panda has no tech doesn’t mean it’s inherently a bad car when in comes to crashes. You would be way better off in a panda than most other car that’s 15 years older.
The only reason the Panda scored 0 stars is the same as the Punto: it lacks modern safety systems such as autonomous braking
I’m probably the only one that thinks that these did good enough
Jeez is the Euro NCAP being paid by The Germans!?
The Jeep looked pretty okay for me.
I’d rather take my chances with that than a 10 year old BMW or Audi or whatever.
And just cause it doesn’t have Autonomus coffee machine adjusting propeller city bomb Park female Assistant doesn’t mean its unsafe.
I’m sorry the windshield stays intact and the A-pillar does not warp so much as a mm in any of the tests and that quantifies as 1 out of 5? Certainly is no Volvo but a 1 out of 5 impies it’s a deathtrap which it definitely is not.
Really don’t even like Jeeps but this is a silly rating system
These cars are being measured to today’s standards and in Europe, assists are gonna be mandatory.
That is why they have these lower scores.
If the cars were tested back when they were released with the, at the time, standards they would probably get better results.
But we are in 2018, not 2010.
First of all, a Jeep Wrangler has a different type of construction (ladder with cabin mounted on top vs. monocoque) which was designed to withstand rough terrain. Most modern vehicles including most Jeeps, including Trail Rated ons (Cherokee, Compass, etc.) , use the unibody construction, and different body/chassis constructions will deform differently depending on the crash type. Generally speaking, a ladder chassis has far greater strength and is less prone to body flexing, but since the cabin is mounted on top of that, the cabin will be significantly more affected, since in a collision they act as separate components, while in a unibody, everything deforms in harmony absorbing more effectively the collision.