The LEAST Safe New Cars to CRASH IN 

💀

Don‘t forget about Renault

Is Dacia and Renault one and the same?

@@chrismayer3919 Yes

I've never heard of them until now, now I know why 💀

I tend to agree. No noticeable cabin cell deformation like just a few years ago. So the basic construction seems quite solid. Some of the side impacts however worries me somewhat.

exactly. but 98% of people don t know this...sadly

The electronic assistant systems only value a 1/4 into the final result of a NCAP Crash test. German here, working for ADAC. And visual results can be deceiving. It is the impact absorption that counts, (which sensors record) Most damage is done by missing absorption. Also, these are the Latin American Versions. The built-quality tends to be worse in 2nd/3rd world countries. I. E. Compare a Suzuki Vitara (Brezza or Maruti from India) against a Vitara Maygar (Hungary) from Europe. Same goes with a Swift. Renault is also building safer cars in Europe, but bad ones in other countries. Non the less, Dacia (Renault in Latin America) isnt safe in any country no matter the year of testing.

Only the sandero stepway is kinda safe with the 70% occupant safety rating, the others are actually dangerous

Bro really 💀

The Rover 100 is even worse. Disintegrates

The Seicento was about before the crash test boom, as was the Cinq and Rover 100, they were bad in a crash, and not safe, but what about previous 5 star cars that are getting marked down, not because they are physically unsafe to be in, but because they didn't come with driver aids as standard? I know technology is ever evolving, but marking an actual cars safety cell as a death trap, because an option isn't ticked as standard boils my piss a bit.

@@fuzzy-daddy83 I agree. Renegade, was 5* on initial test. Gets three now because it doesn’t come standard with every single safety interference. The Ypsilon got one star!

​@@angrymuffinsbthe holden commodore!!! Is the worst

just need to put rollbars like sport car ( hidden behind plastic ) , race drivers don't die during crash nowadays

This is why I only drive VW they’ve always been using high strength steel

But they're wearing helmets and harnesses.@@stephen10.

@@keaujibaha2594 lol no they have not. VW were some of the biggest bullshitters when it came to safety in the late 90s to early 00s. Even before that VW pretended to care about safety when in fact they did not. It was only after all the NCAPs started that VW started to get series about safety unlike say Renault or Volvo who were already both very serious about the safety of there cars and were building the safest cars even back then.

Sometimes it's not your fault. Driver in the oncoming lane falls asleep and crosses the center line. Or a deer crossing the road and you crash into a tree trying to evade etc. Your own behaviour is very important but not in all cases.

Try 8 years ago. Every four years 5 stars becomes the minimum for 3 stars when they update the scoring.

The test for HRV in this video is made by IIHS, not Euroncap. For side crash test, IIHS use a cart that has around 3 tons, basically double than the cart form Euroncap wich has around 1.4 tons

IIHS uses a heavier "vehicle" to simulate the fact that big trucks are common in the USA

It's not "him saying it" it's the crash test score it received. The state of the windshield means nothing when your dead.

Technically a 0 Star rated car if Tested in Euro NCAP

the tiago has only 2 airbags it dosen t have 7 airbags like the suzuki s cross buy a car with 7 airbags

@@SmilodonHuntingDeer Tiago,a small car weighs almost 1000kgs.And I don't want a Maruti Tin Can even it has 11 Airbags! When structural rigidity is compromised, what's the use of Airbags? And you must tell me why Maruti refuses to send it's cars for testing by GNCAP????

@@wolffury5019 Don't talk about cars Tested in Global NCAP in a Euro NCAP Video. Tiago will Patheticly Fail in Side Impact, Side Pole, Small Overlap and Pedestrian Tests. Or maybe even Whisplash.

@@25StevyLovesDaddyTata All Tata cars will fail in pedestrian safety tests

FR!!!

the standards are incredibly high now

@@peaceonearth8693 and yet, perversely, in many states (and all of Canada where I now live), there are ZERO roadworthiness tests. In the UK, with very few exceptions, once a car reaches 36 months old, it must, by law, be comprehensively tested every 12 months thereafter by a certified, standardized, approved testing centre who will check all relevant safety systems including brake performance and wear, lightbulb operation and beam pattern, suspension condition and wear, exhaust emissions, seatbelt wear and operation, etc. Here in Canada, unless your car is showing blatantly visible signs of unroadworthiness (which, let’s face it, at 80kph with the overworked, underpaid police officer travelling in the opposite direction to get his lunch, are just about impossible to spot) your car can join the many thousands of other worn out shitheaps I see every day. From illegal brake light modifications, uncovered LED light bars, tyres protruding out beyond the bodywork, leaking exhaust systems, worn brake pedal rubbers, worn seatbelts, dazzling headlight pattern from the numerous front end impacts over the years, cracked windshields, worn tyres, rusty brake lines, cracked suspension bushes on these ancient beaters I see all the time, the neglected maintenance is shocking. The crazy prices of the second hand car market and the price and unavailability of new cars means that people hang on to their old 1980s golfs and Volvos long after the UK (and most of Europe) would have consigned them to the scrap heap or forced the owner to keep up with the basic maintenance items above. I have viewed used cars from just 5 years ago here that are riddled with issues that the current owners happily claim to have ignored because the repairs would be too expensive and there’s no real need to worry about broken fog lights, intermittent failure of windscreen washer jets, split wiper blades, tyres with barely any tread left, etc. There are plenty of shitboxes in the UK for sure, but at least you know that, with a new MOT before you buy, the major points have been addressed and there has been no period of more than 12 months in its life when the car wasn’t considered safe to be on the roads (except in unusual circumstances if the car has been withdrawn from the roads - which will clearly be on record). So I’d take a brand new Dacia over being surrounded by clapped-out bangers like I see every day. If you can’t afford to keep your car and other road users safe, you shouldn’t be driving.

They are very cheap, that’s why. Most people want cheap cars, they don’t care how safe the car really is

@@williambone for good reason as well

@@stefanvalentin9157 it’s not that people want cheap car, the problem is that most people can’t afford expensive cars! Do you even know how much new car costs?

Search for euro ncap results and you will be surprised

We need the safety of our fam not mileage and looks nice ?

No way! The Fiat Panda is an old design and a death trap compared to a Spring.

Thanks to effort made by NHTSA.

Na , dann erkläre mal den Grund , möchte das auch wissen !!

North americans doesn't use to buy the european and asiatcs shit, just the very weel made, and still, it remains under severe criticism for any suspicion of poor quality or lack of safety

Obscene import taxes to keep the US auto industry running is the reason.

The reason you don’t see these in USA isn’t just because they might be less safe than a lot of USA vehicles. It’s instead mostly because consumers in the USA vs Europe have different needs and wants, and different regulations. In general European vehicles are smaller and lighter (and sometimes cheaper) and that makes it harder to engineer them to be safe.

Dacia belongs to Renault, Dusters are badged Dacia in Europe , Renault in the rest of the world. Note that Dusters use different platforms in different countries.

Good question. Chinese cars are probably safer and cheaper, but they get all sorts of negative marketing unlike the EU made cars that are garbage but do not get the negative marketing.

they sell cars like that so they can build better cars (better materials better safety etc) without those cars we would not have new safe cars, sad truth.

Euro NCAP and IIHS are not government bodies. These vehicles do meet government standards for safety, but obviously those are minimal. Keep in mind that even the cars that do badly on these tests are much safer than any car that’s probably more than a decade old.

Do some research, structurally most low star cars are fine, it's the lack of useless driver aids that ruin scores. Eg base model car, no driver aids 2 stars. Top spec model, alarm warning you stay in a lane, let's give this puppy 5 stars. Ncap logic...

Jte jure 😭

The Dacia has 4 stars on passager security. It got bad evaluated because It do not install sensors to detect cyclist or pedestrians

😂 they even need to submit to the crash test something so obvious

And forgot to add the Chinese cars.

And...

@footballcoreano The safest car is Peugeot I love this ❤️❤️♥️♥️❤️❤️♥️♥️

@footballcoreano japanese cars are safe!!!

@clemathieu JT I was so dumb

Tests results disagree with you…