Criticism
Since the start of its Safer Cars for India project, Global NCAP has faced criticism similar to that faced by other NCAP programs in their early phases.
After publication of the second round of results for the project, long-time admirer of the Datsun GO, Bertel Schmitt, published an article in The Daily Kanban accusing the FIA of having vested interests in starting the project. [14] He accused Global NCAP of having double standards, questioning their use of a 64km/h test while C-NCAP (a Global NCAP member) still used a 50km/h test. It has since been noted that it is not possible to compare the two tests solely based on speed, because the 64km/h test uses an offset deformable barrier, while the 50km/h test is a full-width test into a rigid barrier, which is demanding on the vehicle's restraint systems.
The article also claimed that Global NCAP passed the basic version of the Ford Figo for the UN's Regulation 94 frontal crash test at 56km/h 'claiming it would have performed better if it had airbags'. However, Global NCAP had, in fact, conducted a full-scale R94 test on that model where dummy readings passed minimum UN limits because of the dummy narrowly failing to make contact with the steering wheel. [15]
After the first round of Safer Cars for India crash test results, Nissan executive Vice President, Dr Andy Palmer, said in a statement to Autocar, "I think the people who criticise these cars for not meeting US or European crash standards are living in a dream world." [16]
In 2014, after the Maruti Suzuki Swift in its basic safety specification received a zero-star crash test rating, Maruti Suzuki's Chairman, R. C. Bhargava, defended the result claiming that vehicle safety was not part of the safe systems approach and that the road fatalities in India were in no way linked to poor safety of the cars on sale in the market. [17]
Consumers have criticised Global NCAP for the limited nature of the tests which, until mid-2022, use 2013 Latin NCAP protocols which only cover offset frontal impact. Global NCAP confirmed in an interview that they are budget-constrained and would update their assessment protocols when it was possible. [18] Since mid-2022, the protocol is based on Latin NCAP 2016 with some technology updates. [19]
Consumers have raised doubts on the vehicle sponsorship procedure with worries that cars picked from early production before the market launch may not be representative of cars sold to consumers. Global NCAP confirmed with a note on their website that in case the cars are picked from early production, they are selected at random from the plant's distribution area (where cars are sent to dealers) and that the cars are hence representative of consumer cars. [20]
It has also been pointed out on popular consumer forums that there have been ambiguities in the technical reports published for consumers to view. [21]
Evidence suggests that the 64km/h frontal offset crash used by Global NCAP, that represents a car-to-car crash, covers a lower fraction of car-related collisions in India than it does in Europe, because of the higher frequency of car crashes in India with more aggressive crash partners like commercial vehicles or rigid, fixed objects. [22]
