The Kangoo’s cabin became unstable in the frontal impact. Although the restraint systems and air bags worked well, the driver risked chest injuries because of damage to the vehicle. Side-impact protection was affected, too, by the distance that the driver’s door pillar was pushed in. The 18-month-child used a seat with two-point ISOFIX mountings that provided good protection; but impact forces on the three-yearold’s chest in the frontal impact were a little high. Pedestrian protection was poor.
The restraint system is based on single-stage airbags combined with belts fitted with pre-tensioners and load limiters. These worked well. But loads on the occupants’ chests were a little high and because the Kangoo’s body became unstable, its driver risked chest injury. However, the driver and to a lesser extent the passenger also risked knee injuries from hard points behind the fascia. Finally, each rear seat has a three-point belt, which improves safety .
Side impact protection worked well without a side-impact airbag. However loads transferred unrealistically between the dummy’s back and his seat, reducing the forces measured by his chest instrumentation. His abdomen and pelvis risked injury from the intruding door trim.
The restraints used were Renault branded; Kiddy Easyfix for the 18-month-old (rear-facing) and a Britax Romer Duo for the three-year-old (forward-facing). Both prevented the children’s heads from hitting inside the car, but the older child experienced higher chest loading. Labelling on the restraints was permanent but lacked clarity particularly when used in the ISOFIX mode. Warnings against placing a rear-facing restraint on the front passenger seat were fixed to both sides of the passenger sun visor, but these lacked clarity and could be misunderstood with potentially serious consequences.
Only two small areas on the bonnet top provided any protection. The bumper and the leading edge of its bonnet offered no cushioning in an impact. A poor result.