Having lost my elderly sister and two friends who all died at the scene when a ford focus hit their toyota aygo almost head on, even though they were travelling at only 30 mph, I do consider a Yaris sized car as a shopping trolley. And I do consider a larger car intrinsically safer, particularly when on busy high speed roads like a motorway. NCAP star ratings are seriously flawed in that respect.
While I am sorry for what happened to your sister and her friends, I'm afraid that is far too simplistic an attitude. Though it does seem to be quite common for folk who don't actually bother to find out what makes one car safer than another in an accident.
First, in terms of its design, the Aygo is an old car. They (the Aygo along with the C1 and 107) first appeared in 2005, and if you strip away the bells and whistles in the current version, underneath (structurally) it is essentially the same car. There have been three all new Yaris' in the same period, each utilising the latest advancements in crash protection (structurally, not just electronic aids).
Second, is the simple fact that despite your assertions that a bigger car is safer than a smaller one, you are contradicting this comparing the new Yaris directly with an Aygo despite it being 24% bigger going by its 'footprint'. The biggest of the trio being considered, the Sandero, has a footprint some 34% bigger than the Aygo. By contrast, a (2015) Skoda Superb has a footprint 21% bigger than the Sandero. Also, there have been plenty of well documented cases (again, for those who actually look into it rather than make assumptions) of big cars which have performed very poorly in crash tests (Chrysler Voyager springs to mind). Finally (and I know I have mentioned this more than once, but hey ho!), the TV programme 5th Gear crashed a (then new) Renault Modus into a Volvo 940 estate. You'd no doubt consider the Volvo intrinsically safer than the Renault by dint of its size, having a footprint 33% bigger along with that huge bonnet (the Modus is for all intents and purposes, a 'monobox' with virtually no bonnet to speak of). The offset (drivers side to drivers side) head on crash involved both vehicles doing 40mph, and the result the dummies showed was that while the Renault driver would have had some whiplash and possibly some minor lower leg injuries, he would have opened the door walked (or limped) away. The Volvo's driver?, well he would have survived, but there would have been extensive injuries (and he would have needed to be cut out of the car, so badly had the Volvo's structure deformed).
"NCAP star ratings are seriously flawed in that respect."
Aren't they relative to the class? When the Jag XF came out I think it was only NCAP 4 but still a better place to be in an accident than a 5 star small car, to me anyway.
Depends, if we are talking about one category down, I'd expect the 5 star car to be safer. Two categories down?, the bigger 4 star car would probably be equal or possibly slightly better.
|
