Choose below to begin your search
Class:
Make:
Search:
|
|
|
Adult occupant protection  Frontal impact driver |  Frontal impact passenger |  Side impact driver |  |
|
|
|
Child restraints | 18 month old Child | No information available |
|---|
| 3 year old Child | No information available |
|---|
|
|
Pedestrian protection No image car front available |
|
|
Safety equipment | Front seatbelt pretensioners |  |
|---|
| Front seatbelt load limiters |  |
|---|
| Driver frontal airbag |  |
|---|
| Front passenger frontal airbag |  |
|---|
| Side body airbags |  |
|---|
| Side head airbags |  |
|---|
| Driver knee airbag |  |
|---|
|
|
Car details | Hand of drive | all |
|---|
| Tested model | Daewoo Lanos 1.4 SE |
|---|
| Body type | 5-door hatchback |
|---|
| Year of publication | 1998 |
|---|
| Kerb weight | 1070 |
|---|
|
|
|
Comments The Lanos earned three stars for frontal and side impact protection but the last star is flagged to indicate that the driver faced an unacceptably high risk of chest injury in the side impact. The car would not meet new side-impact crash protection standards being introduced for new models across Europe from October. Pedestrian protection from the bonnet leading edge was poor but protection from the bumper was above average.
Front impact The passenger compartment remained stable in the impact and all intrusion levels were well controlled. The driver's head contact on the airbag was central and stable. Protection for the passenger's neck was weak, indicating a relatively high risk of neck sprain injury. Both impact areas for the driver's knees had stiff structures around the steering column which could injure the knee, upper leg and pelvis. The column shroud incorporated a deflector plate which should help to reduce injuries, although it would not eliminate all risk of harm.
Side impact The driver's head made a glancing contact with the door pillar but this was insufficient to cause internal injuries. The dummy's top and middle ribs were struck by the pillar and door trim and the lower rib came in contact with the door. All of the ribs were heavily loaded, resulting in poor chest protection. The abdomen and pelvis were both impacted by the door but the risk of injury was low.
Child-protection Both of the recommended forward-facing child restraints were compatible with the car's rear belts. Alternative belt routeing had to be used to fix the smaller child's restraint, though. In the frontal impact, the restraints provided good control over forward movement of the children's heads. In the side impact, the smaller child's head was contained within the wings of the restraint but the three-year-old's moved outside the restraint.
Pedestrian protection Head protection for adult impact sites needs to be improved but the child head protection was better. The bonnet's leading edge also gave poor protection, although the bumper area was slightly kinder.
|
|