Auto door locking - maybe this is the reason we don’t have it?

[Corollanutter]

Just seen this crash test on You Tube of a Corolla vs a VW Jetta. On thing of real note post-crash is the inability to open the locked doors of the Corolla from the outside. From my past experience, any locked doors should be automatically unlocked when a severe collision is detected. This doesn’t seem to be the case in this test. I’m therefore wondering if this is one of the reasons we (strangely) don’t have auto-locking available on the Corolla, whereas it is a standard feature on many other cars - and could very easily be implemented in software.  However Toyota are most unlikely to state this as the reason as it is a potential “failing” in the vehicle. Any thoughts?

 

[RzrAzr]

The doors are jammed after the impact not because they are locked. 

[Guest]

All cars with auto locking (or that the driver manually locks) are designed to release upon impact where the airbags are triggered. 

But if they are deformed and jammed in any case or car, then whether the locks are on on or off, nobody will be able to escape. 
 

I wasn’t a big fan of that video test. When car reviewers talk about the country of origin as some kind of quality mark, there’s usually a funny smell of bs in the air 🤷‍♂️ 

[Stopeter44]

If the impact is enough to trigger the airbags, I don't think there's much chance that someone will be able to open the doors.

[Corollanutter]

6 minutes ago, Stopeter44 said:

If the impact is enough to trigger the airbags, I don't think there's much chance that someone will be able to open the doors.

That's not right. Depending on the severity of the crash, the passenger compartment integrity should allow the doors to be opened even if the airbags have been deployed. Sure, if it is a very severe crash then the doors may well get jammed, however the airbags will still deploy at a much lower severity than that.

[Corollanutter]

2 hours ago, RzrAzr said:

The doors are jammed after the impact not because they are locked. 

I heard on the commentary that "the doors were locked up and did not unlock after the crash - and could only be unlocked from the inside". Maybe the commentary is wrong. Whatever the reason, I'm still trying to understand why we don't have (in the UK) the auto locking feature on such a modern, high tech car - and I thought this may have something to do with it. 

[Stopeter44]

1 hour ago, Chris Nutt said:

I'm still trying to understand why we don't have (in the UK) the auto locking feature on such a modern, high tech car - and I thought this may have something to do with it. 

It's a Toyota EU thing, IIRC only the RAV4 has the auto locking in the EU (and the UK), I was really surprised to discover this. I keep forgetting to press the lock button when leaving home. I programmed my last two cars to auto lock. Carjacking & Bag snatching are a risk in the big city.

[TonyHSD]

I think both cars did performed exceptionally well, both remained structurally intact with Corolla has suffered more damage however this also might be easier to the human bodies inside., high impact force absorbing, this can only be proof by the sensors and other tech monitoring the forces. Btw German cars has always been the strongest body vehicles, wish they were reliable too. I still gonna have the Corolla over the Jetta no matter the Jetta won the test as told by the commenter. 

[RzrAzr]

3 hours ago, Chris Nutt said:

I heard on the commentary that "the doors were locked up and did not unlock after the crash - and could only be unlocked from the inside". Maybe the commentary is wrong. Whatever the reason, I'm still trying to understand why we don't have (in the UK) the auto locking feature on such a modern, high tech car - and I thought this may have something to do with it. 

I am certain that this is a translation error. Looks like one of those channels that creates “content” by only translating someone else’s videos. Look at how there’s no gap between the front and rear door, the front wheel and fender are also pushed in. 

11 minutes ago, TonyHSD said:

I think both cars did performed exceptionally well, both remained structurally intact with Corolla has suffered more damage however this also might be easier to the human bodies inside., high impact force absorbing, this can only be proof by the sensors and other tech monitoring the forces. Btw German cars has always been the strongest body vehicles, wish they were reliable too. I still gonna have the Corolla over the Jetta no matter the Jetta won the test as told by the commenter. 

That’s the thing, in todays world it is the matter of manufacturers concentrating on passenger safety, not which car gets less damage and can be repaired with a  couple of hammer knocks and be on its way.  So I don’t really see the Jetta as a winner, both will be written off anyways. They don’t seem to share data from the dummies in this video which has more importance as opposed to whether A pillar bends or not. 

[FROSTYBALLS]

Safety standards vary - for instance US safety standards are less stringent than European safety standards (which is an issue with a possible UK/US trade deal and the import of some US made cars). From the labelling on the cars, this looks like a video from an Asian country.

Cars are often built for the market they are due to sell in - whether that is the US, South America, Europe or Asia. One example from years ago was the VW Fox, which was a version of the VW Gol, both of which were built in Brazil, and had increased safety standards over the Gol, which continued in production as it was.

Some Toyota models built in Asia for that market aren't built to satisfy the higher safety standards of the European market.

[frizzbee30]

19 hours ago, FROSTYBALLS said:

Safety standards vary - for instance US safety standards are less stringent than European safety standards (which is an issue with a possible UK/US trade deal and the import of some US made cars). From the labelling on the cars, this looks like a video from an Asian country.

Cars are often built for the market they are due to sell in - whether that is the US, South America, Europe or Asia. One example from years ago was the VW Fox, which was a version of the VW Gol, both of which were built in Brazil, and had increased safety standards over the Gol, which continued in production as it was.

Some Toyota models built in Asia for that market aren't built to satisfy the higher safety standards of the European market.

Absolutely!

[Guest]

21 hours ago, TonyHSD said:

I think both cars did performed exceptionally well, both remained structurally intact with Corolla has suffered more damage however this also might be easier to the human bodies inside., high impact force absorbing, this can only be proof by the sensors and other tech monitoring the forces. Btw German cars has always been the strongest body vehicles, wish they were reliable too. I still gonna have the Corolla over the Jetta no matter the Jetta won the test as told by the commenter. 

I agree with the unreliable bit. But I don't think they're the strongest body vehicles at all, and haven't ever seen any evidence to support that, they certainly feel more solid as a driver, but I'd put that down to the padding inside the doors and sound insulation, maybe sound insulated glass.. but it's all just the perception of premium.  I've seen many a rust bucket 2000s Golf and we had an 16 year old VW Bora have the rear end fall through from rot and have to be held together with a strap until the lorry came to scrap it. I don't see anything exceptional about how they build their bodies over any other brand tbh.

20 hours ago, FROSTYBALLS said:

Safety standards vary - for instance US safety standards are less stringent than European safety standards (which is an issue with a possible UK/US trade deal and the import of some US made cars). From the labelling on the cars, this looks like a video from an Asian country.

I know we have pretty high standards in our part of the world, but I've seen some of the US crash tests and they look a lot more difficult than Euro NCAP. The cars seem to fall apart a lot more often / much easier.  Tbh, I lost faith in NCAP after they awarded the Fiat Panda zero stars... which was in conjunction with their change to penalise cars that either didn't come with active electronic safety warning systems as options or standard. What that has to do with safety is beyond me, as we all know those systems are debatably dangerous with the false sense of security they give you avergage driver 😕 

No harm in having them imo, but to penalise cars that don't have them as unsafe, I think they have lost a lot of credibility in doing this.

And of course, now this might be branching into conspiracy theories.. but my theory is that NCAP is in bed with the German manfuacturers and because they can't get a shade on the Europe wide sale of the Fiat small cars with their horrible appliance like Up! product (combined with its clones) that they had to try and damage sales of the Panda. Nothing better than totally eroding consumer confidence in its safety!  I'm sure it isn't the most solid or safe car a family could buy, but zero certainly conveys a lack of safety that is totally inapropriate and should be reserved for the likes of a Renault Twizy if it were capable of doign motorway speeds, or that video of the Ford Focus doing 120mph on Fifth Gear years ago where the whole thing was compounded into less than a metre!

Tl;dr - NCAP has no credibility with some of the things it does IMO.

[FROSTYBALLS]

When one compares the summaries of the 2018 Panda test and the 2017 Aygo (without safety pack) test, the Panda performed a lot more poorly than the Aygo. Areas of weakness have been highlighted in bold.   So it isn't just the additional safety measures that Fiat could have made available on the Panda, which were the reason for the poor result. Bear in mind that the current Panda is now in it's 11th year of production.

The Aygo when fitted with the safety pack then available, scored 4 stars.

Euro NCAP has it's faults, but it is the only indication of safety in crashes that Europe has. 

Incidentally Euro NCAP crash testing is voluntary so Fiat didn't have to submit the Panda for testing under the latest regime.

 

Fiat Panda - 2018 test 0 stars

The passenger compartment of the Panda remained stable in the frontal offset test. Dummy readings of driver chest compression indicated weak protection of this body area. Test results showed good protection of the knees and femurs of both the driver and passenger dummies. FIAT showed that a similar level of protection would be provided to occupants of different sizes and to those sitting in different positions. In the full-width rigid barrier test, dummy readings indicated weak protection of the head and neck. Protection of the chest was marginal. Dummy readings of rear passenger chest compression led to a low score for this body region, and this was further penalised because of high shoulder belt loads, leading to the protection being rated as poor. Protection of the passenger's neck was also weak. In the side barrier test, protection of the chest was rated as marginal, based on readings of rib compression, with other critical body regions being well protected. No pole test was conducted. Tests on the front seats and head restraints demonstrated marginal protection against whiplash injuries in the event of a rear-end collision. A geometric assessment of the rear seats indicated poor whiplash protection. The Panda is not equipped with an autonomous emergency braking system.

Toyota Aygo without safety pack - 2017 test 3 stars

The passenger compartment of the Aygo remained stable in the frontal offset test. Although dummy readings were good for the knees and femurs of both the driver and passenger, structures in the dashboard were thought to present a risk to occupants of different sizes and to those sat in different positions, so the protection provided to this part of the body was downgraded to marginal. In the full-width rigid barrier test, protection of the head, neck and chest of the rear passenger dummy was rated as poor and no points were scored for this dummy. Protection of the driver dummy in the same test was good or adequate. In both the side barrier impact and the more severe side pole test, protection of all critical parts of the body was good, and the Aygo scored maximum points. Tests on the front seats and head restraints demonstrated good whiplash protection in the event of a rear-end collision. A geometric assessment of the rear seats indicated marginal whiplash protection. The Aygo has an autonomous emergency braking system as part of an option pack, an assessment of which is not included in this rating.

[2badmice]

On 1/10/2022 at 11:07 AM, Chris Nutt said:

That's not right. Depending on the severity of the crash, the passenger compartment integrity should allow the doors to be opened even if the airbags have been deployed. Sure, if it is a very severe crash then the doors may well get jammed, however the airbags will still deploy at a much lower severity than that.

Not always, you'd be quite surprised at the state of damage of some cars where the airbags didn't deploy and it makes you wonder why they didn't.

 

As for the auto-lock function coming from owning VAG cars since 2008 it is a feature I miss.

 

I also miss the headlights turning on for my Corolla when I unlock it in the evening, a convenience factor, but ideal for me at work to remind me of where I have parked.

[Roy124]

2badmice, the answer is faulty sensors.  I had a smash with a Freelander avoiding a deer.  I didn't hit a tree but did hit the windscreen though only a light bump and I was able to drive off the bank and continue my journey. 

The front end needed a fair bit of repair but what held up the repair was the sensors that were u/s.