The passenger compartment of the MG 3 remained stable in the frontal offset test.  However, the right-side seat adjuster of the driver’s seat failed in the test, causing it to twist halfway through the impact.  This movement exacerbated the loads on the driver dummy’s right leg, and protection of that part of the body was rated as poor.  This, in turn, meant that MG was precluded from demonstrating the protection offered to occupants of different sizes and to those sitting in different positions.  Moreover, the driver’s head ‘bottomed out’ the airbag against the steering wheel, and protection was rated as adequate.  Since Euro NCAP assessed the car MG has taken action to address the seat failure. A modified seat mechanism was introduced to production soon after this rating was published and all existing cars are subject to a recall, to install components which will prevent such seat failure. Euro NCAP confirms the effectiveness of this retro-fit and encourages all owners to have their cars modified by MG when contacted. Analysis of the deceleration of the impact trolley during the test, and analysis of the deformable barrier after the test, revealed that the MG 3 would be a moderately benign impact partner in a frontal collision.  In the full-width rigid barrier test, forward movement of the head of the rear seat passenger exceeded Euro NCAP’s threshold and protection was rated as poor.  Chest protection of the rear passenger was marginal, based on dummy readings of compression.  However, protection was good for all critical body areas of the driver.  In the side barrier test, the MG 3 provided good protection to all critical body areas and scored maximum points.  In the more severe side pole impact, protection of the chest was rated as marginal, based on dummy readings of rib compression.  Control of excursion (the extent to which a body is thrown to the other side of the vehicle when it is hit from the far side) was found to be marginal.  The MG 3 has a countermeasure to mitigate against occupant-to-occupant injuries in such impacts.  The airbag performed well in Euro NCAP’s tests with dummy readings indicating good protection for both the driver and passenger.  Tests on the front seats and head restraints demonstrated good protection against whiplash injuries in the event of a rear-end collision.  A geometric analysis of the rear seats also indicated good whiplash protection.   The car has an advanced eCall system which alerts the emergency services in the event of a crash, and a  system to prevent secondary impacts after the car has been in a collision.  MG demonstrated that the doors would be openable to allow occupants to escape in the event of vehicle submergence.

In the side barrier impact, the 10 year dummy, sitting on the impacted side of the car, ‘bottomed out’ the airbag against the C-pillar, resulting in high injury values to the head and chest.  As a result, no points were scored for the 10 year dummy in the side impact.  Otherwise, child protection for different body regions ranged from marginal to good.  The front passenger airbag can be disabled to allow a rearward-facing child restraint to be used in that seating position.  Clear information is provided to the driver regarding the status of the airbag and the system was rewarded.  The MG 3 is not equipped with 'child presence detection' system, a system which issues a warning when it detects that a child or infant has been left in the car  All of the child restraint types for which the MG 3 is designed could be properly installed and accommodated in the car.

Protection of the head of a struck pedestrian or cyclist was largely adequate, with poor results recorded on the stiff windscreen pillars and at the base and top of the screen.  Protection of the pelvis and femur was mostly good, while that of the knee and tibia was good or adequate at all test locations.  The autonomous emergency braking system of the MG 3 responds to vulnerable road users such as pedestrians and cyclists, as well as to other vehicles.  In tests of its response to pedestrians, the system performed well, although the system does not respond to those to the rear of the car.  The system performed well in tests of its reaction to cyclists, but there is no protection against ‘dooring’, where a door is opened into the path of a cyclist approaching from behind.  The system’s response to motorcyclists was good.

Overall, the performance of the autonomous emergency braking (AEB) system was good in tests of its reaction to other vehicles.  A seatbelt reminder system is fitted as standard to the front and rear seats.    The car has a direct driver status monitoring system as standard, detecting driver fatigue but not distraction.    The lane support system gently corrects the vehicle’s path if it is drifting out of lane and also intervenes in some more critical situations.  The speed assistance system identifies the local speed limit.  The driver can choose to allow the limiter to be set automatically by the system.