Choose below to begin your search
Class:
Make:
Search:
|
|
|
Adult occupant protection  Frontal impact driver |  Frontal impact passenger |  |
|
|
|
Child restraints | 18 month old Child | Britax Roemer Baby-safe, rearward facing |
|---|
| 3 year old Child | Britax Roemer Duo, forward facing |
|---|
|
|
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 | LHD |
|---|
| Tested model | KIA Carnival/Sedona 2.9 D |
|---|
| Body type | MPV |
|---|
| Year of publication | 2003 |
|---|
| Kerb weight | 2220 |
|---|
| VIN from which rating applies | KNEUP751336471405 |
|---|
|
|
|
Comments KIA’s large MPV did badly in these tests. Its driver risked damage to his head, chest and legs while the front passenger risked chest injuries, too. The Carnival’s body was badly damaged in the frontal impact and became unstable. It did worse in the frontal test than in the others because the driver’s head and chest hit the steering wheel, the footwell ruptured and the pedals were pushed backwards by the impact. The child restraints did a good job, meeting Euro NCAP performance requirements. But protection for pedestrians was poor.
Front impact The passenger safety cell was overwhelmed by the impact. Structural damage to the fascia and lower body was so great that little if any protection was given to the driver’s chest, legs and feet. And the distance that the steering wheel was displaced meant that the driver’s airbag could not do its work properly. Hard points behind the fascia added to the injury risks for those in the front. Only a two-point centre rear belt was fitted, and this provides less protection than that given by a three-point belt.
Side impact For a car without side airbags, the Kia did reasonably, although the driver’s head hit the door pillar and his arm struck the side window, though not hard enough to break the glass. His body was also hit by the seat and door as the impact pushed it inwards.
Child-protection The restraints (forward-facing for the older child, rear-facing for the younger) worked well, meeting all Euro NCAP performance requirements. A permanent warning against putting a rear-facing restraint on a seat opposite an airbag was given on the back of the passenger’s sun visor. However, it was written in English and as such was inappropriate for the vehicle tested, which was intended for sale in Holland.
Pedestrian protection The parts of the vehicle’s front where a child’s head might hit offered some cushioning but other areas were unforgiving. Euro NCAP believes that KIA should take pedestrian protection more seriously if it is to offer realistic protection to this vulnerable group of road users.
|
|