ETAutolytics

News
News

Features
Features

IndustrySpeak
IndustrySpeak

Data & Analytics
Data & Analytics

Brand Solutions
Brand Solutions

View Site

Crash Test of Bajaj Qute & other quadricycles: That looks painful

Bajaj Qute recently got its Euro NCAP crash test results and it is not encouraging. The quadricycle managed to get only 1 star.

The following slideshow will show you the crash test and what remains post the safety test of not just Bajaj Qute, but a few other quadricycles from around the world.
According to the tests, Qute scored 4 out of 16 for frontal crash
The report of Qute's crash test said that the structure was judged to be unstable in the frontal test as many spot welds had released and deformation of the structure indicated that it could not have withstood a higher degree of loading
In the side crash test, Qute scored 6 out of 16
In the side impact, the door on the struck side became detached from the A-pillar as a result of the door structure detaching from the hinges.
The absence of airbag too increased the chances of serious or fatal injuries
Aixam Crossover GTR is categorised as a heavy quadricycle with a kerb weight of 440 kg.

Aixam Crossover managed to get 1 star rating.
Though in the frontal impact front got wrecked, , the structure of the vehicle stood up well to the impact forces and the passenger compartment remained stable.

In frontal crash, Crossover GTR got 2 points.
When the side impact vehicle was inspected after the crash, it was seen that a bolt in the rear suspension had hit the fuel tank, leaving a distinct indentation.

On the side crash test, the Crossover GTR did well securing 10 points
In a slightly more severe accident, or a slightly different configuration, the bolt could puncture the fuel tank and Euro NCAP has advised Aixam to redesign this part of the vehicle.
Chatenet CH30 is a two seater quadricycle which trips the scale at 390 kg and boasts of a top speed of 100 kmph.

Chartnet CH30 too got overall rating of 2 stars
According to the results, the body structure remained stable in the frontal test and the upper anchorage securing the seatbelt held firm. Rearward movement of the engine and transmission pushed the steering wheel of the CH30 rearwards and upwards.

The frontal crash test resutls stood at 6 pts
The result for the side crash test read, "In the side impact, protection for the head was rated as marginal. There is no side curtain airbag and the dummy’s head struck the aluminium roof rail, resulting in a high acceleration.
Chest lateral compression was also severe and readings indicated that considerable force had been taken by uninstrumented parts of the dummy. After adjusting for this, protection of the chest was rated as poor
Total force on the abdomen was also high and protection of this part of the body was rated as weak.

Even for side crash, CH30 got 6 points
Microcar M.Go Family didn't perform particularly well either. The 425 kg quadricycle, which hits a maximum speed of 95 kmph, was able to secure only 1 star rating .
Inspection of the vehicle after the frontal test revealed failures which indicated that the structure could not cope with a higher test speed or mass.

In frontal crash, the quadricycle got 4 points.
According to Global NCAP, the seatbelt anchorage at the bottom of the B-pillar broke during the test, severely compromising the restraint system’s ability to provide any protection.
The dummy’s chest struck the steering wheel and this, together with the unstable body structure, meant that chest protection was rated as poor. After the test, the dummy was found to have slipped under the lap portion of the belt as a result of the failed anchorage
In the side impact, the bottom of the B pillar became detached from the sill and three of the driver’s seat mounting points also failed.

The rating for the side impact was at 6 points.
The dummy’s head hit the unpadded side roof rail and a high acceleration was recorded, and protection was rated as marginal. Lateral compression of the chest indicated marginal protection.
Supported by: