Crash Test results

[Europa]

A quick browse of the aforementioned NCAP website, specifically this link:

<a href="http://www.euroncap.com/partners.htm" target="_blank">http://www.euroncap.com/partners.htm</a>

Shows many european organisations supporting the tests.

Now I suppose you could look at this from the famous "giant conspiracy theory" point of view, which would mean that everyone is in "it" together (whatever "it" is) - in an effort to deliberatly mislead the public (ie. Europe) as to the relative safety of their cars.

..or you could simply say that the organisation test crashes two cars of each model, applies a balancing theory and publishes results.

It would appear from the small amount of research done on the topic that the NCAP figures are not wildly inaccurate.

It's a function of marketing to choose whether to highlight the results (Renault Laguna) or to hide the results (Alfa Romeo 147)

As a consumer you can choose to believe the results or not to believe the results.

I'm not sure where the line is drawn between "scientific" and "non-scientific" results.

 

[Stuey]

Dave, I agree with most of what you're saying, of course especially the stuff about the scientific validity of the testing. However, I do believe that the test has value, and with the limited funds available for testing, it's better than nothing. I don't ignore it, particularly as a manufacturer's general claims (or silence on the issue) are usually backed up by NCAP. That is, we expect a Daewoo cabin to crumple, and it does; we expect a Mercedes cabin to hold up and it does. To be honest, that's enough for me; I'm not looking for proof that a car is a dud, just an indicator.

Fair enough comments though - no argument.

Stu