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 | RHD |
|---|
| Tested model | Fiat Brava 1.4 S |
|---|
| Body type | 5-door hatchback |
|---|
| Year of publication | 1998 |
|---|
| Kerb weight | 1077 |
|---|
| VIN from which rating applies | 4726000 |
|---|
|
|
|
Comments The Brava was awarded two stars for frontal- and side-impact protection but, with only a small improvement, it would have been awarded a third star. The car's structure became overloaded in the frontal impact and there were significant intrusion problems. However, even without a side airbag, the car meets side-impact legislation to take effect across Europe for new models from October. Finally, the bonnet's leading edge provided better than average pedestrian protection.
Front impact The passenger compartment became unstable in the impact. The driver's door lost its strength and its aperture's stability was compromised by damage at the bottom of the front pillar. Head contact with the airbag remained stable and there was limited displacement of the steering. An energy absorbing block in the steering column shroud should prevent local damage to the knees. Footwell intrusion was excessive and the footwell joint split slightly, although this did not present an additional hazard.
Side impact The driver's top rib was struck by the door, while his middle and lower ribs were hit by the door and the centre pillar. The lower rib received the greatest loading but protection remained above standards required for new models from next October. The driver's abdomen was loaded by the protruding armrest which contained a stiff plastic support. His pelvis was loaded by the centre pillar but protection still rated as adequate.
Child-protection The recommended restraints were forward-facing and compatible with the car belts. In the frontal impact, the restraints provided control over forward movement of the children's heads. However, the older child's head was not contained by the restraint during the side impact.
Pedestrian protection Half of the pedestrian head impact areas met the proposed legislative requirement and gave fair protection but most of the adult sites rated as poor. The bonnet's leading edge gave better-than-average protection but this was not carried through to the bumper areas, which mostly gave poor protection.
|
|