Protection of the driver and passenger
Frosting, driver |
Front punch, passenger |
Side blow, driver |
 | - | Fine |
 | - | Good |
 | - | Satisfactorily |
 | - | Badly |
 | - | Very bad |
|
Children's holding devices
| Child up to 18 months |
No information |
| Child older than 3 years |
Roemer King, face forward |
Pedestrian safety
 |
| - | Fine |
| - | Good |
| - | Satisfactorily |
|
Comments:
Two stars were put up for protection with the front and side blows of Micra, but it was not enough to third. With a frontal blow, new feet safety requirements were not complied with. With lateral impact, the requirements for the protection of the abdominal department are not fulfilled. On the other hand, the standards of displacement of the steering wheel are observed. The main problems with the frontal impact concerned the displacement to the salon of traumatic elements, especially in the field of knees and niches for the legs, although the passenger salon is not significantly deformed. Also need to improve the design of the car in the knee zone. With lateral impact, it is necessary to improve the protection of the abdominal region, although there was no exposure to high load on the pelvis and the chest.
Front punch:
With a frontal impact, a moderate deformation of the body occurred, and the passenger interior was not deformed significantly. An insignificant steering wheel displacement is noted - only 60 mm back - and, however, excessive damage to the leg niches. The driver's door suffered from impact, as a result of which there was a slight curvature of the doorway and the front panel displacement. The door also jammed, and for its discovery had to apply special tools. The passenger door opened normally. The driver's head defense is recognized as good, and its contact with the airbag is stable. Neck protection was also good. The load on the chest from the belt side is estimated as normal, but the evaluation is reduced due to the offset of the front panel. The left knee struck the coil of the steering column, brought the lever of its adjustment and then hit the column itself and the bracket. Right knee damaged the front panel and the mounting bracket of the steering column. In the zone of both knees, rigid elements are marked, which can lead to injury with a deeper displacement inside the front panel. Train safety will also increase with a small horizontal shift of the right knee. Based on the testimony of the sensors of the mannequin, the left knee protection has received a low estimate. Significant deformation of the leg deepening led to weak protection of the feet and ankle. Protection of the head, neck, legs and feet of the passenger was good. The load on the chest from the seat belt is recognized normal.
Security of passenger children:
The danger of placing the children's chair "against the direction of movement" at the front passenger's place is reported to the sign, despite the fact that the car does not equip the airbag for the passenger. In the rear seat, a children's chair Romer King "In the direction of movement", as recommended by the manufacturer. With a frontal impact, there was a significant displacement of the chair forward and insufficient fixation of the passenger's body, which led to a strong nick head forward. With lateral blows, the transverse movement of the chair is considered insignificant, its upper part moved almost parallel to the central line of the car. The child's head remained within the chair.
Side strike:
Protection against damage to the abdominal department is weak due to a significant load on the body.
Pedestrian safety:
Three of the six control points of a possible blow of a child-pedestrian head showed the result above average. The worst places are located under the battery, near the metal bracket of the air intake and under the hosted hood. Two points of probable foot impact also provided protection better than average. Worst places are located near the hood cover lock. Adult Head Protection: Only in one of the three control points is provided above the average. The worst zones are located in front of the windshield and above the hood loop. Foot area: Safety in two of three points complied with regulatory requirements (in the center of the bumper and near the inside edge of the headlight). The third point is the result worse than the average - it was on the bumper near the towing eye.
General information about the car
| Roelf location |
On right |
| Tested model |
Nissan Micra L 1.0 |
| Body type |
3-door hatchback |
| Year of publishing data |
1997 |
| Curb weight |
842 |
Installation Systems:
| Pretensels of front seat belts |
There is |
| Front Belts Load Loaders |
No |
| Driver Front Airbag |
There is |
| Passenger Front Airbag |
No |
| Side airbags |
No |
| Side Head Airbags |
No |
| Driver's knees and feet airbag |
No |
