BMW Crash Test 3 Compact E36 1994 - 2000 Hatchback

BMW Crash Test 3 Compact Series 1995, 1996, 1997, 1998, 1999, 2000: Labotor Safety Assessment of the Car: Ranking on points, test report (photo and video crash test)
10%
Driver and passengers

Protection of the driver and passenger

driver Damage at Lobby Shoot
Frosting, driver
passenger Damage at Lobby
Front Punch, Passenger
driver damage with lateral impact
Side blow, driver
Fine - Fine
Good - Good
Satisfactorily - Satisfactorily
Badly - Badly
Very bad - Very bad

Children's holding devices

Child up to 18 months No information
Child older than 3 years No information

Safety pedestrians

the result of the crash test is excellent - Fine
the result of the crash test is good - Good
the result of the crash test is satisfactory - Satisfactorily

Comments:

With a frontal blow, the passenger interior of the BMW 3-series has lost integrity, and the driver risked to get a life-threatening chest injury. The degree of displacement of the steering wheel even more increased the risk of injury, and solid elements at the bottom of the front panel threatened the knees, hips and the pelvic area of \u200b\u200bthe driver. If you hit the side of the driver's protection, the driver's abdominal cavity did not comply with the requirements of 1998.

Front punch:

With a frontal impact, an excessive displacement of the windshield stand was noted. The passenger salon was significantly deformed, the door was also very damaged, and the supporting beam in the front panel was almost completely separated from the car body. After hitting the driver's door, there was a significant effort. The passenger door opened normally. The steering wheel shifted back by 223 mm and up 14 mm. Also, the collision led to a significant deformation of the niche for the legs, and the brake pedal shifted back by 321 mm. The airbag worked late and could not fulfill its function properly. This, as well as a strong shift of the steering wheel, has raised the likelihood of serious injury by drivers. The neck was protected well. A large load from the safety belt was affected on the chest of a driver, and he did not escape a strike of a steering wheel with force sufficient to get injured. Inside the front panel and the deformation of the passenger compartment increased even more risk for drivers of various components, therefore, the assessment for the protection of the chest was reduced. With several other circumstances, the degree of displacement of the front panel could be higher. The left knee of the driver hit the bottom of the front panel to the left of the steering column. Right knee resigned to the panel to the right of the steering column. The adjustment lever of the steering column or front panel bracket can cause knee injury. Significant deformation of the leg niches represents a serious danger to the feet and ankles. After impact, the experts found that the left feet of clamped between the refractory screen and the floor of the car. Protecting the passenger, in general, was good, although the load from the seat belt can lead to damage to the chest.

Security of passenger children:

The seat belt lock does not fulfill its functions and may allow the children's armchair forward. The mannequins were very shone forward, although their heads did not get to the backs of the front armchairs, the younger sensors noted the high risk of getting serious injuries. Instructions for installing seats did not comply with EURO NCAP.

Side strike:

When hitting the head and the head of the driver, the driver was well protected, but the level of breast protection was recognized as weak, and the pelvic department is poor.

Pedestrian safety:

Child's head protection. Three of the six checkpoints corresponded to the requirements (above the support of the hood, above the throttle drive body and on the hood bend line). Two points showed the result above average, and one, above the battery, below. Protection of the top of the legs. None of three points corresponded to the requirements. Places in the center of the front edge of the hood, over the inner edge of the headlights and above its center were worse than medium. Adult head protection. One point corresponded to the requirements: above the nozzle of the windshield washer. The place above the brake fluid tank showed the result close to the standard, four points - better than the average, and one - above the hood loop - worse. Protection of legs. None of the three points corresponded to the requirements, the result of all was below average.

General information about the car

Roelf location On right
Tested model BMW 316I.
Body type 4-door sedan
Year of data publishing 1997
Curb weight 1225

Safety systems:

Pretensels of front seat belts No
Front Belts Load Loaders There is
Driver Front Airbag There is
Passenger Front Airbag No
Side airbags No
Side Head Airbags No
Driver's knees and feet airbag No

Photo crash test