SEARCH:
GO

 THE OFFICIAL SITE OF THE EUROPEAN NEW CAR ASSESSMENT PROGRAMME

Suzuki Baleno

Rating
Score
ADULT OCCUPANT
*/
14
Front: 2
Side: 12
PEDESTRIAN
**
14
Pre 2002 rating


 
Adult occupant protection
Head: Poor, Neck: Weak, Chest: Poor, Upper leg right: Marginal, Upper leg left: Marginal, Lower leg right: Marginal, Lower leg left: Weak, Right foot: Poor, Left foot: Poor
Frontal impact driver
Head: Weak, Neck: Good, Chest: Marginal, Upper leg right: Good, Upper leg left: Good, Lower leg right: Good, Lower leg left: Good
Frontal impact passenger
Head: Good, Chest: Poor, Abdomen: Good, Pelvis: Good
Side impact driver

Child restraints
18 month old ChildNo information available
3 year old ChildNo 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 driveLHD
Tested modelSuzuki Baleno 1.6 GLX
Body type4 door saloon
Year of publication1998
Kerb weight960

Comments
The Baleno is not equipped with a driver airbag as standard in all EU markets, so Euro NCAP tested this car without one. In the frontal impact, its driver would have been likely to sustain a severe head injury. He would have also risked severe chest injury in the side impact so the second star is 'flagged' to indicate unacceptably high risk levels. The car would not meet forthcoming side-impact legislation for new models. Two of the three leg impact test sites on the bumper met proposed pedestrian protection requirements.

Front impact
The passenger compartment lost its integrity and the driver's door and sill became overloaded. The firewall and floor joint began to separate, the sill opened up at the base of the front pillar and the firewall began to tear. The driver's head struck the steering wheel despite the webbing lock fitted to his seat belt and his chest was also heavily loaded by the belt. Both impact areas for his knees contained stiff structures and there were fixtures which could also have caused localised damage if struck by his knees. The brake pedal was also displaced upwards where it could impale the driver's lower legs, and protection for his feet and ankles was poor. There was excessive footwell intrusion and the rupture in the firewall presented an additional risk.

Side impact
The dummy's head scuffed the central door pillar and the window frame but protection was good. All of his ribs were highly loaded resulting in poor chest protection. However, loads acting on the driver's abdomen and pelvis rated as 'low'.

Child occupant
The recommended forward-facing child restraints were compatible with the car's rear belts. But in the frontal impact, the three-year-old's head moved forward excessively and chest protection was just below the minimum limit. Neck protection was just adequate for the 18-month-old. In the side impact, neither child's head was contained by the restraints.

Pedestrian
Protection for a child pedestrian's head was generally good, although two bonnet areas were unforgiving. All adult head-impact sites gave poor protection, as did every site on the bonnet's front edge. However, two of the three sites on the bumper met proposed legislative requirements.

 DISCLAIMER  CONTACT