Joined
·
547 Posts
Hafei Lobo crash tested in Russia. Speed was 56,5 km/h.
Here are some pictures:
![]()
![]()
![]()
![]()
Here are some pictures:
Hafei Lobo (Lubao)
1 - 20 of 55 Posts
Joined
·
561 Posts
looks like a good result, but i dont think thats the same crash as the one done with the QQ and landwind. i think the QQ and Landwind are both 60km/h and is a head on one. the crash with the lobo looks to be hit only on the drivers side. but hey for such a new company that looks pretty darn good. 
This 56km/h offset test is (looks like) a legislation specs test. If the car meets these requirements it's EU road legal.
The QQ and Landwind tests were done at 64km/h and are also offset. Those tests are EURO-NCAP spec. (the QQ did reasonably well, better than the chevy spark/daewoo matiz, but suffered from the lack of an airbag)
The extra 10km/h of the NCAP test makes quite a difference in crash energy, the Lobo wouldn't look so hot in one of those tests.
The 10km/h increase in speed results in 40% increase in crash energy!
Why do you ask, well the 'energy' of the crash is related to "speed squared":
0.5 * mass * speed squared...
So 20% extra speed = 40% extra energy.
The QQ and Landwind tests were done at 64km/h and are also offset. Those tests are EURO-NCAP spec. (the QQ did reasonably well, better than the chevy spark/daewoo matiz, but suffered from the lack of an airbag)
The extra 10km/h of the NCAP test makes quite a difference in crash energy, the Lobo wouldn't look so hot in one of those tests.
The 10km/h increase in speed results in 40% increase in crash energy!
Why do you ask, well the 'energy' of the crash is related to "speed squared":
0.5 * mass * speed squared...
So 20% extra speed = 40% extra energy.
Joined
·
561 Posts
lots of physics comming in here, hey oo4load are you talking about the kinetic energy= 0.5mvsquared? i dont think its that simple though, theres alot to do with the conservation of momentum and total mechanical energy, and lots of friction stuff when the car jumps back on its tires. if it was that simple cars would never fail crash test.
Of course it's not easy to design a crash proof car, but that 40% extra kinetic energy is a simple fact.
It simply illustrates that the 'small' difference in speed has a significantly reduced impact severity.
It looks like the safety of Chinese cars is improving rapidly though, more so than that of Chevrolet/Daewoo cars for sale in europe who haven't managed to improve the 1 star rating of the 1997 Daewoo Lanos by the 2006 Aveo
http://www.euroncap.com/images/results/small_family_cars/car_250_2006/Chevrolet Aveo Datasheet 3.pdf
It simply illustrates that the 'small' difference in speed has a significantly reduced impact severity.
It looks like the safety of Chinese cars is improving rapidly though, more so than that of Chevrolet/Daewoo cars for sale in europe who haven't managed to improve the 1 star rating of the 1997 Daewoo Lanos by the 2006 Aveo
http://www.euroncap.com/images/results/small_family_cars/car_250_2006/Chevrolet Aveo Datasheet 3.pdf
Joined
·
450 Posts
no wonder he crashed - driver had his eyes taped over!
For the legislation tests cars don't get a ranking. They either fail or pass.
This is obviously a pass, (unless the seatbelts didn't function) but keep in mind that the legislation tests are easy to pass compared to getting a decent EURO-NCAP score...
For a nice discussion on EU legislation rules and recommended improvements see:
http://www.etsc.be/oldsite/mvdesign.pdf (from page 25)
This is obviously a pass, (unless the seatbelts didn't function) but keep in mind that the legislation tests are easy to pass compared to getting a decent EURO-NCAP score...
For a nice discussion on EU legislation rules and recommended improvements see:
http://www.etsc.be/oldsite/mvdesign.pdf (from page 25)
Yes, I know that there isn't a ranking system for the legislation tests, so I was actually asking, if this had been the outcome of the EURO-NCAP test how would the car have ranked, and based on this test how do people think the actual car would perform, on the EURO-NCAP.
That's impossible to guess from this picture.
An in-crash picture of the vehicle (at 64km/h), showing deformation of the cabin can give a rough estimate. If the cabin is crushed, contact with the steering wheel is likely which is always bad news for the score.
The E-NCAP score is based on various aspects, mainly the dummy loading during front and side impact tests. Points can be deducted for things like excessive movement of a pillar/steering wheel and hard structures near the legs.
But seeing how Kia and Daewoo are doing I don't think a chinese car (not designed for the NCAP test) will be awarded more than 1 or 2 stars.
An in-crash picture of the vehicle (at 64km/h), showing deformation of the cabin can give a rough estimate. If the cabin is crushed, contact with the steering wheel is likely which is always bad news for the score.
The E-NCAP score is based on various aspects, mainly the dummy loading during front and side impact tests. Points can be deducted for things like excessive movement of a pillar/steering wheel and hard structures near the legs.
But seeing how Kia and Daewoo are doing I don't think a chinese car (not designed for the NCAP test) will be awarded more than 1 or 2 stars.
Joined
·
150 Posts
Joined
·
150 Posts
Joined
·
150 Posts
http://img58.imageshack.us/img58/2050/01230915491xu4.jpg
http://img58.imageshack.us/img58/5813/brio17030628ah8.jpg
http://img58.imageshack.us/img58/6355/dsc0026pj7.jpg
http://img58.imageshack.us/img58/4061/1086107872gz3.jpg
more at:
http://www.chinamobil.ru/hafei/brio/?view=photos
http://car.autohome.com.cn/pic/series/67.html
1 - 20 of 55 Posts
Join the discussion
