Ulteriori informazioni nella sezione Commenti generali della valutazione
Ulteriori informazioni nella scheda Validità della valutazione
-
See More
![]()
84% -
See More
![]()
90% -
See More
![]()
48% -
See More
![]()
71%
- Buona
- Adeguata
- Marginale
- Scarsa
- Insufficiente
Passeggero
Conducente
Sedile anteriore
Vettura
Palo
- Buona
- Adeguata
- Marginale
- Scarsa
- Insufficiente
Passeggero
laterale
Centro
![]()
Montato di serie sul veicolo![]()
Non montato sul veicolo di prova, ma disponibile come opzione![]()
Non disponibile
Non montato sul veicolo di prova, ma disponibile come opzioneBased on dummy results in the frontal and side impacts, the Transit Custom scored maximum points for its protection of both the 18 month and 3 year infants. In the frontal impact, forward movement of the 3 year dummy, sat in a forward-facing restraint, was not excessive and, in the side impact, both dummies were properly contained within the protective shells of their restraints, minimising the likelihood of head contact with parts of the vehicle interior. 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 about the status of the airbag and the system was rewarded. The dangers of using a rearward-facing restraint in that seat without first disabling the airbag are clearly labelled on the vehicle interior.
- Buona
- Adeguata
- Marginale
- Scarsa
- Insufficiente
Impatto testa 12,0 Pt
Impatto bacino 0,0 Pt
Impatto gambe 2,3 Pt
The bumper provided mixed protection to pedestrians' legs with good protection in some areas and poor or marginal protection in others. Similarly, in those areas likely to be struck by the head of a child or that of an adult, protection was mostly poor or marginal but was good in some areas. Assessment of the front edge of the bonnet was not appropriate owing to the shape and height of the vehicle.
- Buona
- Adeguata
- Marginale
- Scarsa
- Insufficiente
| Prestazioni | ||
| Imbardata veicolo @ COS + 1.00 s | 211200% | conforme ai requisiti ECE |
| Imbardata veicolo @ COS + 1.75 s | 333400% | conforme ai requisiti ECE |
| Spostamento laterale @ BOS + 1.07 s | 2.577 m | conforme ai requisiti ECE |
| Si applica a | Driver's seat | ||
| Attenzione | Sedile conducente | passeggero(i) anteriore(i) | passeggero(i) posteriore(i) |
| Visivo | |
 |
|
| Acustico | |
|
|
|
|||
Non superatoThe Transit Custom has electronic stability control as standard equipment on passenger-carrying and commercial variants. A seatbelt reminder for the driver is also standard equipment. A driver-set speed limitation device is not fitted to all variants but is standard equipment in more than half of vehicles sold and met Euro NCAP's requirements for fitment and functionality.
- Specifiche
- Dotazione di sicurezza
- Video
- Premi Advanced
- Validità della valutazione
Specifiche
Modello testato Ford Transit Custom, 2.2 diesel 'Trend' Kombi, LHD
Tipo carrozzeria - 8/9 seater van
Anno di costruzione 2012
Peso a vuoto 2091kg
VIN a cui si riferisce la valutazione - all Transit and Tourneo Customs, including PHEV, with the safety specification tested
Classe Grande monovolume
Dotazione di sicurezza
Nota: altre dotazioni possono essere disponibili sul veicolo ma non sono state considerate nell'anno del test.
![]()
Montato di serie sul veicolo![]()
Montato sul veicolo come opzione![]()
Non montato sul veicolo di prova, ma disponibile come opzione![]()
Non disponibile![]()
Non applicabile
Montato sul veicolo come opzioneVideo
Premi Advanced
Validità della valutazione
Ulteriori informazioni nella sezione Commenti generali della valutazione
Condividi
The passenger compartment remained stable in the frontal impact test. Dummy readings indicated good protection of the knees and femurs of the driver and passenger dummies. However, structures in the dashboard were thought to present a risk to occupants of different sizes or those sat in different positions. The Transit Custom scored maximum points in the side barrier test with good protection of all body regions. In the more severe side pole impact, protection of the chest and abdomen was adequate while that of the head and pelvis was good. Whiplash protection was assessed by analysing the geometry of front and rear seats and head restraints. The assessment revealed marginal protection against whiplash in the event of a rear-end collision.