In 26, China Automotive Technology and Research Center issued the first edition of China's new car evaluation regulations-C-NCAP. Since then, the models sold in the domestic market have a reference safety evaluation standard on the consumer side.

at the same time, when more and more ordinary consumers can buy cars, they pay more and more attention to the safety of cars in use. As for which cars are safe, before 218, C-NCAP should be the only one with an influential voice in China.

subsequently, this monopoly pattern began to be broken.

A company named Zhongbaoyan (Zhongbaoyan Automobile Technology Research Institute Co., Ltd.) appeared, which was initiated by insurance association of china in March 215. PICC P&C Insurance, Ping 'an P&C Insurance, China Life Insurance, China United, Dadi P&C Insurance, Sunshine P&C Insurance, Taiping P&C Insurance and other top eight property insurance companies in the industry were funded and established together with China Automotive Engineering Research Institute Co., Ltd. (with the same industry influence as China Automobile Technology Research Center).

In 218, China Insurance Research Institute began to issue another standard for evaluating automobile safety-C-IASI, which is different from the evaluation standard of C-NCAP, and contains an index that is likely to be related to auto insurance-crashworthiness and maintenance economy index; In addition, there are some differences in the setting of collision events, such as increasing the frontal offset collision by 25%.

Of course, as a latecomer, China Insurance Research did not seem to make a big splash in 218 until the end of 219. They released a latest evaluation result, which broke many people's belief and understanding of automobile consumption with unexpected evaluation.

why do you say it's faith? Because it is related to Volkswagen, Passat, the best-selling B-class star model from SAIC Volkswagen, received a P rating (poor) in the frontal 25% offset collision link. Previously, Tiguan L also received the same P rating in this evaluation link. According to the public information, the Passat tested and evaluated was obviously bent in the frontal 25% offset collision link. The steering wheel moves to the right, and the front airbag almost fails to protect the driver's head ...

At the same time, the safety performance of Toyota models is very outstanding in the evaluation results released by China Insurance Research Institute, and many models are rated as excellent.

subsequently, there was a heated debate. Is Volkswagen unsafe? Is the Japanese representative Toyota really so safe? Is China Insurance Research objective and fair? Was the evaluation of related models of C-NCAP reliable? Which of the two results is more credible?

perhaps it's useless to argue. let's go back to car safety.

first of all, regarding the safety of automobiles, the author thinks that safe driving should be the premise, and it is extremely dangerous for most vehicles to collide at high speed. In addition, please remember that the scene is very important for evaluating the safety of the car (please underline).

secondly, let's talk about automobile safety evaluation in combination with this debate.

as mentioned earlier, the evaluation criteria of C-IASI and C-NCAP are different. The former incorporates some auto insurance considerations, such as the aforementioned crashworthiness and maintenance economy index; There are also roof strength tests and frontal offset crash tests set at 25%(C-NCAP is a 4% offset deformable barrier crash test). In addition, there are some differences between the two test standards; Of course, both of them refer to some foreign standards (one is IISH and the other is E-NCAP).

for this reason, it seems difficult for us to see which safety evaluation standard is scientific or not, and which evaluation result is more credible.

For example, the crashworthiness and maintenance economy index of C-IASI can measure the repair cost of a car after being collided to a certain extent, so it will be more inclined to the C-end; But this is also because its sponsors have insurance units, so its rating may be more related to premiums and costs.

For example, as far as frontal offset collision is concerned, 4% or 25% is good. Compared with 1% frontal collision, it is a collision scene with high probability (determined by human instinct) in actual traffic accidents, so it has practical reference significance. As to which of these two scenarios is more likely to have a frontal offset collision, the author has asked professionals about it, and the answer is: the collision evaluation standard is based on the statistical analysis of traffic data and will be set with reference to the traffic scenarios with higher probability. Furthermore, based on the safety of one traffic scene evaluation, it may not be completely representative of another traffic scene strictly speaking.

so in fact, if we want to consider everything, maybe we should evaluate every scene, which is obviously impossible. What we trust should be the safety evaluation based on certain probability and representative traffic scenes.

Of course, just from the collision point of view, at the same speed, 25% of frontal offset collisions have smaller contact area, which may cause more damage to the situation when digesting kinetic energy, thus damaging the body structure; At the same time, it may also cause more obvious lateral displacement and further rotation of the car body.

going back to the evaluation results recently released by China Insurance Research Institute, Toyota cars are excellent in safety, but not all of them are so ideal in crashworthiness and maintenance economy evaluation (except Yize), while Passat got a (good) rating on this index. In fact, the balance between car body safety and crashworthiness maintenance is a very difficult job for car companies.

in addition, we can also see that Passat has also received a G (excellent) rating in terms of roof strength, seat headrest, auxiliary safety and pedestrian protection, which meets the needs of some traffic scenes.

Written at the end: Having said that, the controversy caused by the evaluation results recently released by China Insurance Research Institute may not be worthy of our divergent interpretation. However, behind the debate, it reveals a phenomenon: consumers are more and more concerned about automobile safety, and expect a more fair and objective third-party safety evaluation as a reference for their car selection and purchase. Whether it is a car company or an evaluation agency, it should always be consumer-oriented when it comes to car safety.

The Spring Festival is coming soon, so the author ends with a famous saying, "There are thousands of roads, safety comes first, driving is not standardized, and relatives cry for two lines". I wish you all a safe New Year.

pay attention to the car industry and talk about the car number, and the interaction will have a chance to win beautiful small gifts!

This article comes from the author of Chejia, car home, and does not represent car home's standpoint.