Q7 Crash test video Audi Q7 against Fiat 500

[Bartek S.]

Crashtest Audi Q7 vs Fiat 500

To view this content we will need your consent to set third party cookies.
For more detailed information, see our cookies page.

Accept third party cookies

 

[Merc1]

Yikes. Another few inches and the Fiat 500 driver's head would be smacking the hood of the Q7. I guess that is to be excpected with such a small car. I think I'm going to cancel my Smart fortwo order.

M

 

[Euphoria]

eek! the fiat 500's driver airbag ripped!!!

that's not good...

but still a cute car

 

[Yperion]

The small 500 did well considering it crashed against a vehicle that is 2 times the weight and 4 times the size.

 

[BMW///MPower]

^that's true but I would rather be in the Q7 if I could choose. Big problem with these SUV's is that they are so heavy that in such a collision a huge amount of kinetic energy has to absorbed in some way and the bigger car is designed to do so, but the smaller ones aren't...so in fact the SUV's are safer for the drivers but a nightmare for people driving regular cars. Can't think of what would happen to me '89 mini if they did this test ...

 

[Yperion]

The German ADAC conducted a crash test that involved a large SUV, the Audi Q7 and a mini, the Fiat 500. The results of the test say that, even if the small car has a very good safety rating, there are very little chances of survival for the passengers of the small car.

Even if the EuroNCAP results for the Fiat 500 were confirmed, ADAC measured very high stresses on the passenger during the crash. The head and knee airbags were overwhelmed. The airbag for the driver can cause an impact with the A-pillar and it doesn't offer protection for the chest impact. This is due to the fact the it fires too late to prevent injury. In the case of this crash, if there were two children in the back of the Fiat 500, they wouldn't have survived.

On the other hand, the risk for the passengers in the Audi Q7 are very low.

Audi Q7 vs Fiat 500 Crash Test

 

[Merc1]

Youch!

M

 

[Monster]

This test confirms it, even if a small car achieved a 5 star safety rating in ENCAP testing, in the real world you are still better off in a bigger car. However clever the crash structure design is the most important thing is the length of the crumple zone. The crumple zone of the Fiat was used up, and it wasn't enough to fully absorb the energy. The front passengers in the Fiat looked absolutely hammered, while the front passengers in the Q7 looked relatively comfortable.

 

[rev]

What I saw is that the Fiat 500 performed almost excellent in the crash test against a 2,3 ton vehicle. I don't understant why you guys are so sceptical about the 500's safety. Does a car have to be considered safe only if the passengers of it survive a crash against a Hummer? Is that the parameter to rate a car's safety? Imho the 500 is one of the safest city cars on the market.

 

[Monster]

What I saw is that the Fiat 500 performed almost excellent in the crash test against a 2,3 ton vehicle. I don't understant why you guys are so sceptical about the 500's safety. Does a car have to be considered safe only if the passengers of it survive a crash against a Hummer? Is that the parameter to rate a car's safety? Imho the 500 is one of the safest city cars on the market.

Na, we an't sceptical about the 500's safety level, what we are saying is that the size of the car does matter in a crash.

 

[Yperion]

Τhe 5 star rating is worth only when a vehicle crashes against one of the same class (=similar weight).

When dwarf like 500 crashes against a giant like Q7 then the 5 stars become zero.

 

[Sunny]

This test confirms it, even if a small car achieved a 5 star safety rating in ENCAP testing, in the real world you are still better off in a bigger car. However clever the crash structure design is the most important thing is the length of the crumple zone. The crumple zone of the Fiat was used up, and it wasn't enough to fully absorb the energy. The front passengers in the Fiat looked absolutely hammered, while the front passengers in the Q7 looked relatively comfortable.

Yeah, very true. The key is to have regulations that make the bigger cars absorbs proportionally more energy by making it more "crumbly". But I doubt that will happen anytime soon.

 

[coolraoul]

Thing is, a smart first gen. mastered a crash against a W220 S-Class, without too much harm for the passengers...

To view this content we will need your consent to set third party cookies.
For more detailed information, see our cookies page.

Accept third party cookies

Maybe it Fiat 500 is more designed for EuroNCAP than for "real-life" crashes and doesn't perform that well id the crash is not exactly following EuroNCAP conditions... I'm very surprised by the deformation of the structure of the car, and by the airbag who seems to broke...

 

[Monster]

Thing is, a smart first gen. mastered a crash against a W220 S-Class, without too much harm for the passengers...

Maybe it Fiat 500 is more designed for EuroNCAP than for "real-life" crashes and doesn't perform that well id the crash is not exactly following EuroNCAP conditions... I'm very surprised by the deformation of the structure of the car, and by the airbag who seems to broke...

The difference between the smart vs S-class crash and this Fiat vs Q7 crash is that the the bumpers on the Smart and the S-class is at a similar level, so the Smart car's crumple zone actually performed as the engineers intended for it to do so. In the Fiat vs Q7 crash, the Fiat's bumper is much lower than the Q7's, so the Fiat's crumple zone were not able to perform to its maximum potential, and the crumple zone didn't absorb as much energy as it would have if the other car has a lower bumper.

 

[Monster]

Yeah, very true. The key is to have regulations that make the bigger cars absorbs proportionally more energy by making it more "crumbly". But I doubt that will happen anytime soon.

I think the better solution is to make bigger cars lighter, that way the force of the impact won't be as much.

 

[coolraoul]

Yeah, very true. The key is to have regulations that make the bigger cars absorbs proportionally more energy by making it more "crumbly". But I doubt that will happen anytime soon.

Those regulations exist in EuropeAFAIK.

One of the first cars to have a "small-cars compatibility" with a crumble zone designed to take most of the energy of the crash (of course the crumble zone was increasingly hard so that against a heavy vehicle it also gave a very high safety for the passengers) was the W210 E-Class.

In the case of the smart, it has a small crumble-zone, however if you enter the car you'll see the dash is very far from the seat. In case of crash, the crumble zone takes a part of the energy (against a car it's a bit harder so that it enters the crumble-sone of the adversary car). Given the fact that no motor is on the front, all the crumble-zone can be used with no risk that the motor would enter the passenger-cell.

But thing is, in a smart, the passenger-cell is very strong, but the steering wheel retracts and then the seats will move forwards, to reduce the deceleration of the passengers! Thus the car has a way better safety that you can think by looking at it.

The safety concept of the Fiat looks very much EuroNCAP-oriented...

 

[coolraoul]

The difference between the smart vs S-class crash and this Fiat vs Q7 crash is that the the bumpers on the Smart and the S-class is at a similar level, so the Smart car's crumple zone actually performed as the engineers intended for it to do so. In the Fiat vs Q7 crash, the Fiat's bumper is much lower than the Q7's, so the Fiat's crumple zone were not able to perform to its maximum potential, and the crumple zone didn't absorb as much energy as it would have if the other car has a lower bumper.

It's not completely true. In case of the Q7, you certainly have a big steel-piece on the bottom of the bumper who acts as the real bumper, so that the impact-height is not much higher than in a normal car. Don't let the height of the car abuse you, in fact most (European, modern) SUVs are quite "crash-compatible" with lower vehicles.

 

[Sunny]

It's not completely true. In case of the Q7, you certainly have a big steel-piece on the bottom of the bumper who acts as the real bumper, so that the impact-height is not much higher than in a normal car. Don't let the height of the car abuse you, in fact most (European, modern) SUVs are quite "crash-compatible" with lower vehicles.

Not really. The real crash absorbing structure in the Q7 is behind the bar across the grill and that hits the Fiat at the level of the headlights above its bumpers.

 

[Monster]

It's not completely true. In case of the Q7, you certainly have a big steel-piece on the bottom of the bumper who acts as the real bumper, so that the impact-height is not much higher than in a normal car. Don't let the height of the car abuse you, in fact most (European, modern) SUVs are quite "crash-compatible" with lower vehicles.

I am not sure about the Q7 but I know the Volvo XC90 has something like that. I guess we need to have a look at some technical drawings to find out.