Mitsubishi i-MiEV four-star ANCAP safety rating

Article
Gallery

By Tim Beissmann | December 17th, 2010

The all-electric Mitsubishi i-MiEV has been awarded a four-star safety rating by the Australasian New Car Assessment Program (ANCAP).

The first fully electric car to be tested for the Australian market, the i-MiEV scored a total of 28.35 out of 37 points.

In the offset crash test it scored 10.95 out of 16, while in the side impact test it managed 14.4 out of 16. Protection from serious chest and leg injury was marginal for the driver in the front test, and there was a moderate risk of serious chest injury to the driver in the side test.

While a four-star rating is a solid effort, ANCAP Chair Lauchlan McIntosh said many other light cars – including variants of the Ford Fiesta, Hyundai i20 and Volkswagen Polo to name just a few – achieved a five-star rating while also being fuel efficient.

“ANCAP supports and welcomes the push for greener vehicles, but we stress the need to ensure safety is built in to the vehicle,” Mr McIntosh said.

He commended Mitsubishi for equipping the i-MiEV with front, side and curtain airbags and electronic stability control as standard. The front seatbelt feature pretensioners and all seats have advanced seatbelt reminders.

The crash test was conducted under ANCAP standards in Japan last month in collaboration with crash test laboratory JARI and Japan NCAP.

So far there are 110 i-MiEVs in Australia, with many of those involved in government trials across a number of states.

Under the current system, i-MiEV customers lease the vehicles at $1740 per month for three years ($62,640 total) and return the cars at the end of the contract.

Mitsubishi Motors Australia’s Lenore Fletcher said the local arm was working towards making the i-MiEV readily available to private customers by the third quarter of 2011.

Ms Fletcher said the goal was to add the i-MiEv to the normal product line-up and ultimately offer consumers the option to purchase – rather than simply lease – the vehicle.

She said Mitsubishi Motors Australia hoped to receive a consistent supply of i-MiEVs in 2011 rather than the staggered influx of the vehicle in 2010.

Much of that availability will depend on MMA’s ability to negotiate with head office in Japan to secure more vehicles. Shortages of the i-MiEV’s lithium-ion battery packs are also limiting its availability globally.

JR

These ancap results are all BS , i’d be much happier to crash in a 4 star Camry than a 5 star Polo.

Richo

Ahh, the big = safe argument, you’ve obviously never considered that a Formula 1 car is probably the safest car on the plant to crash in, yet it has considerably smaller surface area than a VW Polo, or probably even an i-MiEV for that matter!

The size isn’t important, its the way its constructed.

Handsome Al

Dear Richo

Let’s have a car crash.. I will be in a 2 Star 10 Wheeler and you will be in a formula 1 car.. hows that sounds?

And most of the time is not how well constructed the car is, but it is all about the G force upon impact that matters.

Richo

Well lets see you survive an 80+G crash which Kenny Brack survived in an indycar a few years back in your 10 wheeler mate… Don’t tell me that the way the car is made isn’t important!

Jabba the Hutt

Mass is good if you’re hitting another vehicle. It becomes the opposite when you hit something solid. The truth is that crash safety will always come second to cost, like it or not.

You’re average commalcon with a 6 point cage and carbon fibre structure wouldn’t claim too many lives but who’d fork out the $200,000 to buy it? Not to mention I can’t see my partner being too happy when I tell her she needs to climb over the roll cage to get in.

Practicality still sits above safety.

Handsome Al let’s slam them both into a concrete wall at 45 degs at the same speed (say 150kph) and see how your 10 wheeler does! I’ll put my money on the F1 driver getting out and swearing for making a mistake before walking off shaking his head and the driver of the 10 wheeler being hosed away by the fire department. Mass is NOT always better.

JEKYL & HYDE

the price of 4 small cars,and you’ve got to give it back.what a wank.coucil’s are idiots(spending your rates money) if they lease these cars.can’t wait for the leaf.it would be a miracle if this car ever got 5 stars,its got no bonnet,nothing at the front,narda,nix….

Richo

It’s about developing new technologies in the real world, as well as proving the viability of such products to the mainstream.

Shak

Products such as this aren’t viable though. Products such as the Leaf and Volt make sense in todays world. The i-MiEV is too small, too expensive, too impractical with limited storage and range and is using outdated technology now.

Richo

The technology is not outdated, its just different. Mitsubishi use in wheel motors, which is actually a much more clever solution to electric cars, allowing Mitsubishi to create a much smaller electric car then what Toyota and Nissan have been able to create.

The Volt and Prius are the products that are unviable, because what they are is a very complex and reasonably expensive hybrid, which a suzuki alto is capacly of using less fuel then for 11k with simple simon technology.

Hybrids are not viable, if you want an electric car, it needs to be full electric to be viable, otherwise you can create petrol and diesel products that are capable of being just as good

Car Fanatic

JR, despite the Camry being larger, the Polo’s frame held up better affording the occupants greater safety. Both tests were held at the same speeds, hitting the same objects with very different results.

Size means jack, a stint in the military armoured Corp would teach you that. It’s not how thick the armour is, but the design and materials used. Face it, Toyota make an inferior car when it comes to safety.
mmmmmm

10.95 out of 16 for the offset test is a crap result in 2010.
how many corners did mitsubishi cut with this toy?
Car Fanatic

Probably why they are affectionately known as Bits are missing