|
Comments The Fiesta was awarded three stars for protection in the frontal- and side-impact tests. All the new frontal-impact criteria were met with the exception of the rearward movement of the steering wheel. In the frontal-impact crash test, the major problems were found to relate to intrusion, although the passenger compartment did remain stable. There were problems for the lower limbs and attention is required to the knee-impact areas. In the side-impact test, the greatest improvements could be expected from reducing the rib loading while controlling the loading on the pelvis.
Front impact
In the frontal-impact crash test, the Ford Fiesta's passenger compartment remained stable with moderate deformation and intrusion of the facia. Rearward movement of the steering wheel was 125mm. The driver's door buckled slightly, and needed moderate force in order to open it, but the passenger door could be opened normally following the impact. Deformation of the footwell was excessive.
The Fiesta driver's head protection would have been rated as good on the basis of the dummy instrumentation. However, the performance was downrated to adequate because of the degree of rearward intrusion of the steering wheel. Neck protection, however, was found to be good. Seat belt loading of the chest was measured as adequate but this score was downrated to a result of marginal because of the intrusion of the car's facia during the crash test. Protection of the upper leg area of knee/femur/pelvis would have been rated as adequate but was downrated to marginal because of the close proximity of hard components positioned behind the facia. During frontal-impact crash test, the dummy's left knee hit the steering column cover and also a stiff mounting bracket which was situated behind it. Further penetration into the passenger compartment of the car could have resulted in greater injury being sustained. The right knee glanced off the steering column cover and hit the fuse box cover, passing just below a stiff tube which supports the steering column. The right knee of a taller driver could well have hit this tube. Protection of the left lower leg was judged to be good, and that of the right lower leg was found to be adequate. The excessive intrusion of the footwell caused the Ford Fiesta's protection of feet and ankles to be rated as weak.
Protection of the passenger's head, neck, left knee/femur/pelvis, lower legs and feet and ankles was good. Seat belt loading resulted in the chest protection being rated as adequate, and so was the degree of protection offered to the passenger's right knee/femur/pelvis.
Side impact
The Fiesta was assessed as offering good protection for both the driver's head and abdomen. Chest protection in side-impact tests was found to be weak, reflecting the loading on the dummy's top and middle ribs that the impact caused. An instrumentation failure resulted in no data being available to assess the degree of pelvis protection under side impact crash tests. However, information supplied by the manufacturer indicated that the ratings would have been within the range adequate to weak. Within this range, the overall rating for the car would not vary.
Child-protection
A forward-facing Romer Peggy child seat was the child restraint recommended by Ford. During frontal-impact crash tests, the forward movement of the Fiesta's child restraint was found to be well controlled. However, there was insufficient restraint offered to the child's upper body and this, in turn, allowed a large forward movement of the dummy's head to take place. During the side-impact tests, the lateral movement of the child restraint was recorded as being poor, with the upper part of the restraint being allowed to move as far as the mid line of the car. The result of this was that the child's head was then allowed to move beyond the sides of the child restraint.
Pedestrian protection
Child head impact
Four of the six test points gave better-than-average protection. The two poorer results on the bonnet were above the front suspension turret and above the windscreen washer bottle.
Upper leg impact
All three test impacts at points along the bonnet's leading edge provided worse-than-average results. The test points were at the centre of the car at the bonnet latch, above the centre of the headlight and in line with the inside edge of the headlight.
Adult head impact
Two of the three test points gave better-than-average protection. The area of bonnet above the hinge provided poorer protection.
Leg impact
One test point gave better-than-average protection. The two poorer areas were in line with the towing eye mount and in line with the inside edge of the headlight.
|