NCAP is not simply a concrete block. It has some sort of crumple zone on the block - and the frontal collision is offset to one side (as that is actually more common and presumably higher risk).
It is fairly logical that a higher mass vehicle will stand a better chance in a collision with a lower mass vehicle. However - since anyone using an NCAP rating in a purchasing decision is likely to be considering vehicles in a similar class it is irrelevant.
Quote:
The Defender may not have crumple zones of it's own but it uses the other car as a giant crumple zone.
I have read of so many accidents where a Land Rover is in collision with a normal car - often the people in the LR have minor injuries whilst all the people in the other car are killed.
I saw an Army Land Rover go into the back of a Pug 306 at about 25mph. The Land Rover literally only had a dented bumper. If there had been anyone on the back seat of the Pug they would have been killed.
|
Now given that these "small" cars on the road have gone to fairly significant lengths to protect their occupants I find your "I own a defender so
I am safe" worrying. I realise you are a perfect driver and will never cause an accident. However I suspect no one kills someone else on the road (even if not their fault) and just shrugs their shoulders saying "they should have bought a better car".
NCAP is reviewed regularly in comparison to real crash data - and the general observation (e.g.
google found this) seems to be that higher NCAP rating = lower chance of fatality or serious injury.
