Maruti Suzuki Swift achieved one star for adult and one star for child occupant protection; S-Presso and Ignis both scored only one star for adult occupant protection
Following Skoda Kushaq and Volkswagen Taigun receiving full marks in Global NCAP’s updated crash test protocols, the second round of tests saw Mahindra Scorpio N and Maruti Suzuki’s trio of models: Swift, S-Presso and Ignis put through the stringent test. While the Scorpio N came out with flying colours with an overall rating of five stars, the same cannot be said for the other three.
Under the #SaferCarsForIndia campaign today, the Maruti Suzuki Swift achieved one star for adult and one star for child occupant protection while the S-Presso and Ignis both scored only one star for adult occupant protection and zero stars for child occupant protection. They were tested in their basic safety specification with two frontal airbags and an anti-lock braking system.
The Maruti Suzuki Swift, S-Presso and Ignis do not provide ESC (Electronic Stability Control) or side curtain airbags as standard or as optional equipment. They demonstrated unstable structures during frontal crash testing. GNCAP’s revised protocols assess frontal and side impact protection for all tested models, Electronic Stability Control (ESC), pedestrian protection and side impact pole protection assessments.
Speaking of Maruti Suzuki’s results, Alejandro Furas, Secretary General of Global NCAP said,“…it is of great concern that the manufacturer with the largest market share in India, Maruti Suzuki, still offers such poorly performing models, which don’t even make some key safety systems available to consumers in India as optional equipment.”
In the case of Swift, the frontal impact test for adult occupant protection showed the driver’s and passenger’s head and neck to be good. However, the driver’s chest showed weak protection and the passenger’s chest showed adequate protection. The driver’s knees and the passenger’s right knee showed marginal protection as they can impact with dangerous structures behind the fascia, passenger’s left knee showed good protection.
The driver’s tibias showed adequate protection and the passenger’s tibias showed good protection. The footwell area was rated as unstable and the bodyshell was rated as unstable and will not be capable of withstanding further loadings. In the side impact, the head, abdomen and pelvis protection was good but chest protection was poor.
The side pole impact test was not performed as the car does not have side head protection even as optional. The 18-month-old CRS was installed with ISOFIX and top tether forward facing, which explains the loss of head points, showed poor protection for the head and chest. The recommended CRSs did not show incompatibility.