The Logo has the basis for a good performance: its bodyshell remained stable and there was little damage to the door aperture in the frontal test. However, this was marred by injury risks for occupants’ knees, footwell intrusion as the impact drove the pedals back, and child restraints that performed poorly. The outer rear seat belts locked to improve the performance of the child restraints, but the centre rear belt was of a static two-point type that could cause severe spinal and abdominal injuries.
The steering wheel moved only within allowable limits and head and neck protection was good. The restraint system put reasonably high loads on the chests of the driver and passenger. However, it was the lower body areas which were most at risk. The driver’s right upper leg was subjected to great force, producing a high risk of pelvic injury. Protection for his knees was poor and the pedals were forced back, endangering his feet.
Unusually, the driver’s head struck the door waist rail, which may have been the result of a high force transmitted by a pelvis pusher in the door trim. This block of expanded polystyrene foam also loaded the abdomen from below the armrest, which was also fractured in the impact.
The rear outboard seat belts could be locked to fix child restraints more securely. A good four-language label explained how they worked. After the test, the three-year-old’s seat was found to be incompatible with the adult belt buckles. This was probably caused by the inboard anchorage plate becoming distorted. The seats were unable to stop the child’s head from moving forward and hitting its knees very hard. Also the seats had very hard side wings which were unable to contain the three-year-old’s head in the side impact. The adult belts also slipped through the lock-off mechanism. A poor performance in most respects.
Nearly all the pedestrian protection score comes from the two head-impact sites. The front of the car is very stiff and unfriendly.