Krash Test Volkswagen Polo Variant 2000 - 2001 station wagon

Protection of the driver and passenger

Frontal blow, driver

Loba blow, passenger

Side blow, driver

- Excellent - Good - Satisfactorily - Badly - Very bad

Children's holding devices

Child up to 18 months	Roemer Baby-Star, face back
A child over 3 years old	Bobsy G1 ISOFIX, facing forward

Safety of pedestrians

- Excellent - Good - Satisfactorily

Comments:

Polo turned out to be a strong car. Providing adult passengers comprehensive protection. During the frontal impact, the body did not deform significantly, and the driver's door could be opened without the use of tools. For a 3-year-old child, a special armchair with the ISOFIX system was used, but it could not hold the child’s head within its limits either with the frontal or lateral strikes.

Frontal blow:

The vertical offset of the steering wheel turned out to be too large, which could be dangerous for drivers, the growth of which is less than that of the mannequin. The front seat belts were equipped with pretense, limiting the degree of movement of the body forward during the frontal impact. The load limiters also protected the chest cells of the front riders. In the front panel, rigid elements were found that pose a danger to the knees and upper part of the driver's legs. The displacement of the brake pedal back also threatened the safety of the driver's feet. The central place of the back row of seats was equipped only with a simple two -point security belt, which can cause a back injury or abdominal department.

Safety of passenger children:

The front cushion of the passenger is included in the basic configuration. Therefore, it is necessary to take into account the risk of a life -threatening child’s injury in the chair established at this place “against the direction of movement”. Neither a icon, the essence of which is not clear, nor a sticker on the windshield, which easily breaks down, was warned of such a danger. A special chair was recommended for a 3-year passenger, but his result was disappointed, since his head was not safe with any blow. A chair for 18 months was installed “against the direction of movement” and recorded by a seat belt. His legs rested on the back of the car, so experts had doubts about the advisability of using the seats of this design in small cars. At the frontal blow, the head of the junior passenger could not resist the chair, and the labeling of the security belts can be confused, since there are two fastening options.

Side blow:

The lateral glass did not break, which is unusual, and the driver’s head hit him quite strongly, which could cause a serious injury. The remaining parts of the body were well protected, but the readings of the sensors in the chest were underestimated due to the loading load between the mannequin and the chair that cannot occur with the body of a real person for real conditions. The overall result was good.

Pedestrian safety:

The protection of pedestrians was bad, since the front of the car was very dangerous for the legs and pelvis. All points in this category were obtained at the expense of the places of impact of the head.

General information about the car

The location of the steering wheel	Left
Tested model	Volkswagen Polo 1.4
Type of body	3-door hatchback
Year of data publication	2000
Curb weight	940
The results are valid for VIN, starting with ...	WVWZZZ6NZYY000001

Safety system equipment:

Front seat belts	There is
Front seat belts load limiters	There is
Front Pillow of Safety of the driver	There is
Passenger front pillow	There is
Side airbags	Not
Side pillows of head safety pillows	Not
Knee -off pillow and legs of the driver	Not
ISOFIX SPARIT	There is