Qoros becomes China’s first five-star car

[Wretched]

The Qoros 3 has become the first Chinese car to achieve the maximum five-star crash test rating from EuroNCAP.

The European crash test authority awarded the Qoros 3 the top score, describing it as “a significant step up from previous Chinese exports tested by EuroNCAP”.

It didn’t simply scrape through on a technicality, either. EuroNCAP says the Qoros scored the highest results of all models tested so far in 2013 - outdoing models such as the Mazda6, Lexus IS and Honda CR-V.

The Qoros scored 95 per cent for adult occupant protection, 87 per cent for child occupant protection, 77 per cent for pedestrian protection and 81 per cent for safety assist technologies such as electronic stability control and seatbelt reminders for front and rear occupants.
Advertisement

Qoros vice chairman Volker Steinwascher says safety is one of the brand’s key development goals.

“It’s a crucial demonstration that our customers are the most important consideration and it also says a great deal about the engineering integrity of the car as a whole,” he says.

“So, while we expected a very good result in the Euro NCAP test, we are naturally very happy with how the car performed. The Qoros engineering team invested an incredible amount of time and commitment in developing one of the safest vehicles ever assessed by EuroNCAP.”

The upmarket Qoros 3 sedan has been pitched as a premium model to take on the established European brands. The Mazda3-sized sedan went on sale earlier this year in Slovakia with a starting price of around 16,000 euro ($23,100).

Qoros has signalled its intent to set up shop in Australia, but it likely wouldn’t arrive until around 2016.

Qoros isn’t an entirely Chinese interest - the brand is the product of a joint venture between Chinese car maker Chery and the Israel Corporation.


Other results

Kia also secured a five-star crash rating for its Rondo compact seven-seater. That score comes despite the fact the model doesn’t offer airbag protection for its rearmost occupants.

http://theage.drive.com.au/motor-new...926-2ufhy.html

[Road_Warrior]

Israel Corporation

Who...?? Doesn't appear to be a company even remotely related to building cars, unless they have simply bankrolled the Qoros.

[DJR-351]

Originally Posted by Road_Warrior

Who...?? Doesn't appear to be a company even remotely related to building cars, unless they have simply bankrolled the Qoros.

Israel Corp has invested almost $500 million in Qoros to date......

[stace650]

I don't car if it scores 10 stars. It's horrible.

[mrghia]

don't know what car your looking at i think it looks good

[mad cow]

i don't mind the look of it at all. looks a cut above most other chinese offerings

[malazn mafia]

Originally Posted by mad cow

i don't mind the look of it at all. looks a cut above most other chinese offerings

Front quarter panel where it meets headlight is definitely BMW 3 series previous gen and some of the pics sport prev gen VW Toaureg / golf taillights .

[Nikked]

Fast learners...

[zilo]

I will wait quite a while before I buy a chinese car.

I just might never buy one in reality....too risky for my family.

[Nikked]

Originally Posted by zilo

I will wait quite a while before I buy a chinese car.

I just might never buy one in reality....too risky for my family.

Because 5-star NCAP rating is risky?

[malazn mafia]

Originally Posted by Nikked

Because 5-star NCAP rating is risky?

Maybe he thinks feeding the big troll that is Red China, could be a risky thing for his family's future enough things are made in china already , how long until our houses are made in china

[Franco Cozzo]

Well that didn't take long, and it even topped the big boys.

I'd consider a Chinese car if it got a 5 star safety rating.

They just need to start using decent engines, I noticed the Foton Tunland ute uses a 3L Cummins ISB and Dana diffs.

[Nikked]

Originally Posted by malazn mafia

enough things are made in china already , how long until our houses are made in china

Give it 5 years

[jpblue1000]

Define House! Most of the stuff in them, the steel used to construct them the plasterboard, etc...I think some houses could claim made in China, assembled in Australia already.
Chinese are quick learners especially in hiring the right people. So it survives a crash as well as anything else, but what are its dynamics like to help it avoid a crash?


JP

[mad cow]

you only need to look at how fast the Koreans have moved to see how the Chinese will go, only the Chinese will achieve the same result even faster. it wasn't that long ago that those funny little Japanese cars were under the microscope. how the world has changed.

[zilo]

Originally Posted by Nikked

Because 5-star NCAP rating is risky?

5 stars mean nothing to a tree or power pole.

[Crazy Dazz]

Really don't understand the purpose of a "5-star" rating when it is so easy to acheive?
A safety rating would be good, IF it actually RATED cars, but what is the point of a system that gives the same score to some Chinese POS as it does to a top of the line Volvo or Merc?

[Wretched]

Originally Posted by Crazy Dazz

Really don't understand the purpose of a "5-star" rating when it is so easy to acheive?
A safety rating would be good, IF it actually RATED cars, but what is the point of a system that gives the same score to some Chinese POS as it does to a top of the line Volvo or Merc?

Is it really that easy to achieve?
So you were involved within the engineering of the Qoros and know how it was built?
have you seen any of the EuroNCAP data to justify your "Chinese POS" generalisation?

Could we not also apply the same to "Aussie POS" cars?

[Nikked]

Originally Posted by zilo

5 stars mean nothing to a tree or power pole.

So a 5 star falcon...

[zilo]

Originally Posted by Nikked

So is a 5 star falcon...

5 star big car always beats 5 star small car when hitting anything whatsoever.

[2011G6E]

Hmm...who was it saying not long ago that Chinese cars and four wheel drives are all horrible, unsafe, low-star-rating deathtraps that shouldn't be allowed to be sold here...?

Oh that's right...nearly everyone. Well...everyone who wasn't around to see the rise and rise of the shoddy, cheaply built Korean crapbuckets into the giant they are today. Anyone with an eye on history would have known that it wouldn't be long before they started building cars of a standard that the west demands, and once they do, things will start to change big time.

Looks like that day is closer than we thought.

It wasn't all that long ago that no one cared about star ratings, and we all happily drove around in three star or less cars. They've even talked about making a different star rating, probably out of ten, and upping the requirements, as so many cars now easily make four or five stars.


That's actually a nice looking car too, at least in that colour with those wheels.

[Express]

Originally Posted by Crazy Dazz

Really don't understand the purpose of a "5-star" rating when it is so easy to acheive?
A safety rating would be good, IF it actually RATED cars, but what is the point of a system that gives the same score to some Chinese POS as it does to a top of the line Volvo or Merc?

There is some truth in this.

Mercedes-Benz have always said that the ANCAP/EuroNCAP is misleading and not a true representation of a car’s safety as it doesn’t give enough credit for passive safety systems built into vehicles (meaning theirs) that go all out to help the driver avoid the accident in the first place.

Mercedes, Volvo and any other manufacturer that have a multitude of passive systems don’t score or rate any higher than those that have very little.

They also say that no car will save you in a crash over 100kph.
At and over that speed you are in the hands of the Gods.
Having the vehicle maintain its structural integrity in an accident doesn’t mean a thing when your internal organs are turned to pulp from the sudden stop.

Not so many years ago the VE Commodore went from 4 star to 5 just by adding an indicator light for the passenger seat belt.

Still kudos to the Chinese for getting on with the job so quickly.



.

[2011G6E]

I think the speed is 80kph. I saw figures a few years back that said that at a speed over 80kph in an impact with a "solid immoveable object"...truck, big tree, bridge pylon, light pole...the accident is "basically unsurvivable". Your internals just can't take that big of a deceleration.

Oh sure, some people walk away from 100kph crashes with minor injuries...I know someone who did just that...but they are a fluke of statistics and can't really be used as an example.

[Crazy Dazz]

Originally Posted by Wretched

Is it really that easy to achieve?

Yes, as demonstrated by the number of models that get it.
My point is that I would rather see a rating system that accurately grades all vehicles so you can compare them, rather than a system where the majority of vehicles all get the same mark.

[Nikked]

So, as soon as a few too many cars get safe, the whole system needs to be overhauled so the cars appear less safe?

[Crazy Dazz]

Originally Posted by 2011G6E

I think the speed is 80kph. I saw figures a few years back that said that at a speed over 80kph in an impact with a "solid immoveable object"...truck, big tree, bridge pylon, light pole...the accident is "basically unsurvivable". Your internals just can't take that big of a deceleration.

Unfortunately that is really misleading.
The majority of accidents are NOT versus inflexible immovable objects, they are against other vehicles and other semi-moveable objects. The majority of serious single vehicle accidents are rollovers.
“Deceleration” is also slightly misleading because the WORST deceleration occurs when your body part hits the inside of the car. Better passenger protection, airbags, etc, help mitigate that.
In ANY accident, the heavier (& stronger) your car compared to the other, the lower will be your deceleration. This INCLUDES accidents against semi-movable objects such as light poles, etc.

[Crazy Dazz]

Originally Posted by Nikked

So, as soon as a few too many cars get safe, the whole system needs to be overhauled so the cars appear less safe?

Well obviously
Or do you think we should still be measuring against 1950's standards?

[Nikked]

Originally Posted by Crazy Dazz

Well obviously
Or do you think we should still be measuring against 1950's standards?

Even though NCAP was started in the late 90's and criteria and test's have been added/improved since then?

[RANGEREST]

Originally Posted by crazy dazz

well obviously
or do you think we should still be measuring against 1950's standards?

genius!

[zilo]

Originally Posted by 2011G6E

I think the speed is 80kph. I saw figures a few years back that said that at a speed over 80kph in an impact with a "solid immoveable object"...truck, big tree, bridge pylon, light pole...the accident is "basically unsurvivable". Your internals just can't take that big of a deceleration.

Oh sure, some people walk away from 100kph crashes with minor injuries...I know someone who did just that...but they are a fluke of statistics and can't really be used as an example.

Actually 80km/h is survivable,

The determinant in surviving is, as you pointed out, the decelerative forces on the human body.

The forces are a direct correlation to the amount of time taken to achieve zero velocity.

In a nutshell, in a forward collision if you double the length of the bonnet you halve the forces on the body, (since decelleration starts at the first point of contact)...mathematically speaking.

Theoretically falcon will present half the forces on a human body that a Yaris will at the same velocity.

So find a car with a longer bonnet....or drive from the back seat


By the way Qoros is the rebranded name of "Chery"...