http://paultan.org/wp-content/uploads/2006/02/cheryqq_cheryqq.jpg
http://paultan.org/wp-content/uploads/2006/02/cheryqq_13.jpg
http://paultan.org/wp-content/uploads/2006/02/cheryqq_11.jpg

http://paultan.org/wp-content/uploads/2006/02/cheryqq_10.jpg
http://paultan.org/wp-content/uploads/2006/02/cheryqq_1.jpg
http://paultan.org/wp-content/uploads/2006/02/cheryqq_2.jpg
http://paultan.org/wp-content/uploads/2006/02/cheryqq_3.jpg

http://paultan.org/wp-content/uploads/2006/02/cheryqq_4.jpg
http://paultan.org/wp-content/uploads/2006/02/cheryqq_6.jpg
http://paultan.org/wp-content/uploads/2006/02/cheryqq_6.jpg

http://paultan.org/wp-content/uploads/2006/02/cheryqq_7.jpg
http://paultan.org/wp-content/uploads/2006/02/cheryqq_8.jpg
http://paultan.org/wp-content/uploads/2006/02/cheryqq_9.jpg

sorry this is the purpose of posting some links...:lol:

:lol:

coz want to post some crash test video

i think u need 15-20 posts to post urls/images

:( what speed was the car test crashing at?

This is old stuff, can be found in one of the older topics (including a discussion).

I would like to note that:

-Test at 64km/h (EURONCAP test), the car wasn't designed for this.
-This car had no airbags, resulting in massive head&chest injury for the driver.
-the passenger score is actually quite a bit BETTER than that of the Daewoo Matiz.

With the optional bags the safety is comparable to the original Matiz.
Not that the current Matiz is any better, Daewoo/GM has a really bad safety trackrecord.

Well, it's not too bad... if you consider for its class. Well, even korean, they don't expect much about the saftey from Matiz. It's just daily commuter car you drive it to work or supermarket. It's easy to park and has a high FC under the stop and go traffic in the big city.

And QQ is safer than Matiz? Is there any proof?? :confused: Well, I'm not bashing a chinese car. But I belive, the qq was born by the previous daewoo engineer who traded tech of the car over their own good when Daewoo motor went into bankrupcy. I blame those engineer not chery. Even if Hyundai had a chance from toyota or honda engineer, I'm sure they'll take the chance (but doubt if they're going to sell the exactly copied car coz Japanese won't let it happen).

I heard this test was done in Russia and it looks those were tested in the same place. So, Matiz is safer? I don't think so. Anyway, you're going to be in a big trouble when you crashed with the bigger classfied car. Compare with Honda fit. I was quite impressed dispite of its class. Also, check out the new honda civic crash test. For me, Civic looks even more solid than sonata.

http://paultan.org/archives/2006/02/18/chery-qq-crash-test/

Honda fit

http://www.safercar.gov/movie/2007/07Fit-f.wmv

If your Info about the qq saftey is from the crash test in china, forget about that. I remember, the news from TV said hyundai sonata got a good result from the crash test, which is done by the goverment organization in somewhere middler of 90s. But look at the video in the below link. Especially, 1996 sonata..... You know what I mean.....:(

Tested by iihs (at 40 mph)

http://www.autobytel.com/content/research/channels/index.cfm/channel/cartv_video/action/showvideo/vid/cr_0051/make/Hyundai/vcat/Review/MAKE_VCH/Hyundai/MODEL_VCH/Sonata

I remember when the crash test was done by ADAC, many chinese were upset and suspected the test condition. And then, the test was done by TUV again. This time it passed the test. But, according following links, it doesn't look much different to me from the first test.
(Did jiangling really sue ADAC??)


Tested by ADAC

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sVwmuQqN46g

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=J9OlxjkInWg

Tested by TUV

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0bDsgz2Jmz8

(According to this link,this test was done at 54 Km/h, not 64, I'm not sure if this is true....)

http://paultan.org/archives/2005/10/08/jiangling-landwind-x6-crash-test-by-tuv/


I think a chinese car is not there yet, but not for long.
I agree with below link :thumb: And it's quite interesting to see the way they're growing up.... Perhaps, I would purchase one when it's proven by world.

http://www.automotivedigest.com/view_art.asp?articlesID=19704

.......I belive, the qq was born by the previous daewoo engineer who traded tech of the car over their own good when Daewoo motor went into bankrupcy. I blame those engineer not chery....

A bit off topic but I couldn't agree with you more Superidler. You summed it up well...

Yes, that Daewoo engineer had mouths to feed, just like the rest of us...and Chery was lucky enough to take advantage of it.

I like your objectivity and fairness on these topics...

And QQ is safer than Matiz? Is there any proof?? :confused:
If your Info about the qq saftey is from the crash test in china, forget about that.

If you look at the russian source of this info (see older topic) you can directly compare all the data between a Matiz crash and the QQ crash.
The Gs measured on the passenger dummy were much lower in the QQ. That's why it's green.
Why are Gs lower? Could be a better setup of the seatbelts. But it could also be that the QQs body is weaker causing less deceleration :) Good for the dummy crashing into a barrier, bad for you if you run into a tougher obstacle...


About the Landwind and Sonata: people often forget that US&EURO NCAP tests are quite different from the "government" (legislation) tests. Legislation tests are less strict, done at lower speeds. So when TUV says the car is 'safe enough to meet legislation standards' they mean it's good enough for 54km/h, but ADACs original NCAP spec test was at 64km/h. You can't compare the tests. Also, a small modification was made to the TUV vehicle.

It's all a matter of perspective. Crash test current cars at 74km/h and all will fail miserably. Does that make current cars unsafe?

um i think we all saw this before and had great debate about it, lets just forget the whole qq and chevy spark stuff and go on and look at the future.

I see gr8, I won't discuss it anymore. Just little bit to oo4load :D

I do have a different opinion with you :p
Especially this part "QQs body is weaker causing less deceleration"

First, watch this video clip (I think Most of these cars got a good mark for the saftey)

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zk5cp93zefk

As you can see, the front part is crushed in the most of car, but the body was remained its own shape. If the body structure is crushed, every piece of interiors in the car will be changed like a weapon to the passenger or driver.

And I think the most of top manufactures in the present offer the front side or the side curtin airbag and the active head restraint at the present, but even these sort of tech won't work when the body structure damaged badly like QQ(Matiz) or Landwind.

http://www.autosite.com/content/research/vir/index.cfm/Action/Media/media/video/MAKE_VCH/Honda/MODEL_VCH/Civic/?vid=cr_0040&s_prefs=h
)

For me, actually, the martiz looks slightly better regardless the air bag, but it won't make much different in the real world. However, I belive even in 74kmh, those cars in the above links will make the difference compared QQ(Matiz) or Landwind.

Also, as my english is not a really good, I didn't explain clearly why I mentioned the landwind. Actually, I mentioned the landwind to explain how you can be fooled by the media play of car manufacture. Whether the landwind passed the test or not, it's not my interest. My interest was how the car responded during those tests. And the test video show the result clearly no matter which test.

But, how did the manufacture response in the media about this test? :nono:

And personally, I take these tests as a good chance to the chinese cars. Why? They still have a time until they get into US. Which means the manufacture like Chery will be aware of this case and will work harder to improve this saftey aspect. But if this kind of result came out just before selling the car in US, I can guess what kind of things would happen......:)


ps Does anyone have the crash test video clip for the chinese cars rather than QQ and Landwind? Regardless the place where they perform the test....

i e-mail directly to EuroNCAP and they reply me saying they knew nothing about the test at all!!!

welcome to chinacarforums Chery :)

The test was done by a russian organisation with EURO-NCAP specs.

well, I don't actually care where it has been done. The point is those 2 cars were tested in same place under the same condition. And the result were quite similar as well (none of them are safe ^^)

In many ways GM's lawsuit on Chery for the QQ was a very smart move; it increased the world's awareness to the infant Chinese automotive industry and the first stage prototype cars that only serve as a training tool for workers and basic engineering. On the other hand the lawsuit portrays an image that GM is afraid of Chery, resulting in people looking at Chery’s current website, which I personally feel was never intended for viewing by the developed market, resulting in people looking down upon GM. Before arguing against or for me, we must always remember that the current will to export is a push by the Chinese government; whose highest priority is to save face for itself. If you where to compare the Chinese to Ford’s history, I feel that the QQ and Chery’s current lineup represents the original 1903 model A and the models that will be exported in the future will be equivalent to the Model T. Always remember that if it had not been for publicity by Bricklin or the lawsuit by GM, a good portion of the information on Chinese Automobiles would never have surfaced to the western world.

In many ways GM's lawsuit on Chery for the QQ was a very smart move; it increased the world's awareness to the infant Chinese automotive industry and the first stage prototype cars that only serve as a training tool for workers and basic engineering.
Chery=Auto Pirate outside of China. I wonder how Chery will ever shake the "auto pirate" reputation.

the current will to export is a push by the Chinese government;
Which is requiring an export license to weed out cheapo chinese cars.

Chery=Auto Pirate outside of China. I wonder how Chery will ever shake the "auto pirate" reputation.

The winner always writes the rules, if you want to know exactly what I mean just look into early automotive history from Gottlieb Daimler and Wilhelm Maybach's perspective. If I recall my history correctly the original vehicle schematics of Daimler’s vehicle had been published thought the world and Ford had been sued for copy right infringement over the Quadricycle, forcing him to buy the model back from its owner in order to prove his innocence.

Steel Wheel Automobile 1889
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/6/66/Zz-Daim-MayB-1889.jpg

1896 Ford Quadricycle
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/6/69/Henry_Ford_-_Quadricycle%2C_1905.jpg
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/a/aa/Ford-quadricycle-rc.jpg

Which is requiring an export license to weed out cheapo Chinese cars.

Here is the statement in proper context, I had a feeling you would give this reply so I addressed the comment beforehand.

Before arguing against or for me, we must always remember that the current will to export is a push by the Chinese government; whose highest priority is to save face for itself.

Hey, they might have copied (but again it was really the Korean engineers who sold the designs to Chery), but really what was the first Toyota but a copied Chrystler with a copied Chevrolet engine? Copied so well, parts could be swapped between them. Toyota also copied the Jeep and called it the Land Cruiser. It took Toyota 20 years to finally come out with a car of their own design. The first Hyundai's were basically Ford's (but licenced, not copied). This is the only way you catch up in this industry, you have to learn from the other manufactures.

The first Hyundai's were basically Ford's (but licenced, not copied). This is the only way you catch up in this industry, you have to learn from the other manufactures.
Well, the difference being that while licensed production is perfectly legal, what Chery is doing is perfectly illegal outside of China....

Yes, true, but Toyota was not legal...look what they have become. It Hyundai came out with it's first domestically designed car 25 years after there first car. It takes a long time. It seems Chery and Geely are moving much faster. Time will tell how successful they are though.

That's a fake test. Not official.

y do u say that?:confused:

Confused? Because you want to believe it. The fact is NCAP has never tested this car.

The test was executed by a russian motoring organisation, they used the (freely avaliable) EURO-NCAP specs for their test.

So although the test was not funded by EURO-NCAP, the result is comparable.



The entire test protocol is available for download:
http://www.euroncap.com/content/test_procedures/downloads.php?area_ID=3

These are detailed instructions on building the testing equipment, measuring and interpreting the results.

found a similar thread on a us forum:

http://www.cheersandgears.com/forums/index.php?showtopic=11034&hl=chery&st=20

one of their guys offered this rather amusing alternative safety solution:

http://www.fightingtorque.com/images/eject.jpg

they could really use that for a motorcycle

Agreed, I'd really like to see video of the Flagcloud.

http://youtube.com/watch?v=kNRPRolY6tc is a video of a Mk2 Golf, but I suspect something's screwy, because all of the pics of Mk2 wrecks I've seen, weren't NEARLY that bad. Heck, I was IN one (not head-on or offset, though, it was in the side of the nose) that was at 55 MPH, and it wasn't nearly that bad.

Hello everyone,

I was just browsing the web for some crash test for Chery QQ, and after a while I realised that something very suspicious might be happening !

I am not going to accuse anyone here, just give you the data I found and you get your own conclusions. Mine, you already know ! :confused:

---------------------------------------

First of all, you all might have seen this pictures somewhere from QQ's crash test:

http://images.paultan.org/uploads/2006/02/cheryqq_cheryqq.jpg

http://images.paultan.org/uploads/2006/02/cheryqq_1.jpg

Please note the stickers in Chery QQ's door and bumper: EuroNCAP.


I would like to remember you, that Chery and GM had some issues about the production of the QQ because of the design that was owned by Daewoo.

Now, the part that disturbs me. When people wrote to NCAP to know WHY THE RESULTS WERE NOT IN THEIR WEBSITE AND THE STAFF IS UNAWARE OF IT??:


Date: Sat, 1 Apr 2006 00:44:01 -0800 (PST)
From: "Ng Shi Nong" <sturmabeislung@yahoo.com>
Subject: Chery QQ
To: office@euroncap.com

Why did he crash test result for QQ is not published
in the EuroNCAP official website? i saw some photo of
QQ crash test at
http://paultan.org/archives/2006/02/18/chery-qq-crash-test/
, so is that test valid?

Sandrine Tordeur <Sandrine_Tordeur@euroncap.com>
wrote:

> Good Morning
>
>
>
> Thank you for your interest in Euro NCAP.
>
> We have not tested this car.
>
> All other results are available on our web site:
> www.euroncap.com
> <http://www.euroncap.com/>
>
>
>
> Best regards,
> Euro NCAP



Date: Thu, 6 Apr 2006 04:53:30 -0700 (PDT)
From: "Ng Shi Nong" <sturmabeislung@yahoo.com>
Subject: Re: Euro NCAP request
To: "Sandrine Tordeur" <Sandrine_Tordeur@euroncap.com>

Good Day,

I am sure u saw the link i posted to you, that
photo of Chery QQ clearly seen a sticker with "Chery
QQ EURONCAP" so, if you have not conducted the test,
where does there result and photo come from? i hope
that you can provide more information about it. Thank
You.


--- Sandrine Tordeur <Sandrine_Tordeur@euroncap.com>
wrote:

> Good afternoon,
>
> Could you please let me know where did you found
> this picture?
>
> Thanks and regards


Date: Sat, 8 Apr 2006 05:25:08 -0700 (PDT)
From: "Ng Shi Nong" <sturmabeislung@yahoo.com>
Subject: Re: FW: Euro NCAP request
To: "Sandrine Tordeur" <Sandrine_Tordeur@euroncap.com>

Good Morning

here is the web site, it is in Russian
http://www.autoreview.ru/new_site/year2006/n01/crash/1.htm

--- Sandrine Tordeur <Sandrine_Tordeur@euroncap.com>
wrote:

Good afternoon,

We thank you for the information.
We were unaware of the test but we are making enquiries.

Best regards,
Sandrine
Euro NCAP

What does that mean !?!? BUT here is the worse part !! CHEVROLET/GM has official comments about the crash test that "EVEN THE NCAP DIDN'T KNOW ABOUT !!"

Here is a official Chevrolet statement :

A Chevrolet spokesman told us: "The QQ results are horrific. China clearly isn't ready to sell cars in Europe." After complaining about copyright infringement, Chevy's parent firm GM made an out-of-court settlement with Chery which agreed not to sell the QQ outside China.

IF NCAP DIDN'T DO THE TEST, THEN WHO DID ?!WAS THAT A STRATEGY TO PREVENT THE QQ FROM BEING SOLD OUTSIDE CHINA BY MAKING A BAD IMPRESSION FOR EVERYONE ??


There are other crash tests around there that show other things, as you can see in the following picture and link:

http://images.paultan.org/uploads/2006/07/new_chery_qq_3.jpg



Crash Test Video (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EYn2Q4OGWYg)

I would like to invite you all to watch the 2006 documentary "Who Killed the Electric car". There, there are many descriptions of GM "methods" to solve their problems.


You all have a nice day !!

[QUOTE=I would like to remember you, that Chery and GM had some issues about the production of the QQ because of the design that was owned by Daihatsu.QUOTE]

Daihatsu??:nono: it was DAEWOO MATIZ copy:nod:

Sorry, I had somehow Daihatsu Charade in my mind. Already corrected :thumb:

MarkusRD_DianZi_Motors - I think that QQ tested by Russian car magazine bears EURONCAP sticker because that magazine performs crash tests according to standards set by EURONCAP organization (speed, angle). They have tested several Chinese and Russian cars so far.