在评估表的一般评语部分可以了解到更多信息
在评估表的评级有效性选项卡中可以了解到更多信息
-
了解详情
![]()
94% -
了解详情
![]()
84% -
了解详情
![]()
55% -
了解详情
![]()
86%
- 优秀
- 充分
- 边缘
- 弱
- 差
乘客
驾驶员
前排座椅
车碰
柱碰
- 优秀
- 充分
- 边缘
- 弱
- 差
乘客
外侧
中间
![]()
车辆标配![]()
试验车辆未安装但可选配![]()
未配备
试验车辆未安装但可选配In the dynamic tests, the CT200h scored well for its protetion of both the 3 year and 18 month dummies. The front passenger airbag can be disabled to allow a rearward-facing restraint to be used safely in that seating position. Information on the switch and in the dashboard provided clear indication to the driver about the status of the airbag and the system was rewarded by Euro NCAP.
- 优秀
- 充分
- 边缘
- 弱
- 差
头部碰撞 13.5 分
骨盆碰撞 0.2 分
腿部碰撞 6.0 分
The bumper provided good protection to pedestrians' legs, scoring maximum points in Euro NCAP's tests. However, the front edge of the bonnet was poor in nearly all of the areas tested. In most areas likely to be struck by the head of a child the bonnet offered a good level of protection but, while good in places, was rated as poor or marginal in most areas where an adult's head might strike.
- 优秀
- 充分
- 边缘
- 弱
- 差
| 性能 | ||
| 车辆偏航角速度 @ COS + 1.00 s | 1.742% | 符合 ECE 要求 |
| 车辆偏航角速度 @ COS + 1.75 s | 1.48% | 符合 ECE 要求 |
| 侧向位移 @ BOS + 1.07 s | 3.3 m | 符合 ECE 要求 |
| 适用于 | All seats | ||
| 警告 | 驾驶员座椅 | 前排乘客 | 后排乘客 |
| 视觉 | |
|
|
| 听觉 | |
|
|
|
|||
不合格Electronic Stability Control is standard equipment on the CT200h and met Euro NCAP's requirements. A seatbelt reminder system is provided as standard for the driver, front passenger and rear seats.
- 规格
- 安全设备
- 视频
- 评级有效性
规格
试验车型 Lexus CT200h, 1.8 petrol-hybrid 'Comfort' grade, RHD
车身式样 - 5 door hatchback
公布年份 2011
整备质量 1410kg
评级适用的 VIN - applies to all CT200h of the specification tested
级别 小型家用车
安全设备
注：车辆上可能会配备其他设备，但在试验年份未予考虑。
![]()
车辆标配![]()
车辆选配![]()
试验车辆未安装但可选配![]()
未配备![]()
不适用
车辆选配视频
评级有效性
在评估表的一般评语部分可以了解到更多信息
The passenger compartment of the CT200h remained stable in the frontal impact. Knee airbags for the driver and passenger provided good protection to the knees and femurs. Lexus were able to show that a similar level of protection would be provided to occupants of different sizes and to those sat in different seating positions. Maximum points were scored in the side barrier impact, with all body regions being well protected. In the more severe side pole impact, chest protection was rated as marginal, based on dummy readings of rib deflections. Protection against whiplash injuries in the event of a rear-end collision was rated as good.