Considering that the Q7 is nearly 3x bigger than the little Fiat, I would say that the 500 did pretty well. Although injury is quite evident, what is impressive is the overall structural integrity of the vehicle. In the slow-motion video, you can see that the Audi's advancing steel mass stops at the firewall section of the Fiat. It is obvious that a microcar would not fare well against a 7-seating SUV, but in the case of the 500, it is not as bad as one would think. Of course, leave it to the Germans to come up with such a crash-test…
but the pillar A got deflected completelly and the door steel also felxed this show an bad steel quality or poor carbon quantity on steel, those areas are vital for the survival of people also we have to have in mind the little gap that have the steel, the glass and the typical plastic inside.
Ok, but look at the sheer sdize of the SUV, and how the hood and front just badgers the Fiat. You can argue about steel all you want, logic prevails: a big SUV against a tiny car is going to make serious damage. The fact that the Fiat remained relatively intact for such an impact, is impressive. The Germans look pathetic at displaying their pride against such a tiny car. Put that shit against a Volvo of comparable size, and let's see what happens...
Alessio S In fact just YOU and your ilk can see the "hidden message in the mombo jombo". Learn proper German before saying gibberish nonsense. The expert on the video criticises the Audi Q7 for being ill-designed to protect smaller vehicles (eg the Fiat 500) from being crushed by its massive weight. But all you failed know-alls think that this is propaganda for Audi SUVs, while it is actually the other way round.
Gavichap You missed the hidden agenda - they criticize Audi for making strong cars. Muahahahaaa dumb sheeple would believe any piece of trash trown at them. If Audi had that point in mind, they would have crashed an Audi A2 you idiot!
this video is not about which of those two car's stronger or safer. it's about how to build the front of a car in general to increase the safety for all parties involved. so that there will be less fatalities even in crashes between big SUVs and small cars. they took the q7 and the 500 as an example, since both are on a high safety level in their respective class. if you don't speak german you will not get it.
Thank you so much for this video. I was strongly considering buying this car or a similar smaller car due to budget and the fact that I feel more comfortable handling smaller cars. This video confirmed my fears.
I think the topic is a different one: The deforming energy-absorbing structures should be at a standard height over ground for all cars. In this case the Q7 pushes very far into the Fiat, as both structures miss each other. But also the Q7 suffers from this, as the Fiat pushes against the wheel very hard leading to driver door not opening anymore.
Dave Leighton what they’re trying to say is that suvs can pose serious threats to people in small cars, it makes sense so autos makers can make big suvs more compatible with cars.
@Henry Discipline The same as this test. That a car with high mass and with high crash test rating against static barriers will be way safer than a light car with the same high crash test rating. Kinda bad for the actual small low emissions cars that we need, and also an explanation why Volvo manufactures now only heavy cars.
much primitive people in the comments.... if you dont understand the language, then you shouldn't say something wrong, like its an ad for audi, etc. The message of it is that SUV's can be very dangerous in crashes for people in smaller cars, and in fact of that, they (the ADAC) want to make SUV's more harmless for other people on the roads.
taking their HUGE difference in size and weight into concideration, the Fiat probably behaved better than the Q7 in this test... i find it inexcusable for the Q7 leg area to get deformed by crashing on such a small car. besides, Q7 had issues on the pedal area when it was first tested from EuroNcap. the firewall penetraded into the cabin and the pedals could cause injury, so they had to redesign it and re-test it to get a good rating...
SIMcityplayer2002 i dont disagree it is old, but it is also at least twice the weight of the 500, and has at least double the crumple zone. i know this is not an add
And another idiot. The crumblezones werent hit. Thats one of the main problems this test is meant to show. The 500 didnt do better, the occupants would have severe life threatening injuries, the Q7 guys could still walk.
In a few words, ADAC wanted to show just how safe are small cars and how safe are large cars. Specifically, when the 500 and Q7 were put to the test, the spokesman and mr.Ambos said that the Q7's crash structure penetrated the 500's passenger cell (''die Fahrgastzelle'') and shove all of the 500's available legroom (''Fußraum''), leading to the driver's deadly injury! And the 500's passenger cell and knee-airbag weren't able to handle this much speed and fury (56km/h or ''sechs-und-fünfzig km/h''! They also said that the forces the 500 received are more like 80km/h or ''achtzig km/h!''). So the 500's 5-star safety rating (''fünf Sterne!'') is simply a marketing trick! Also, mr.Ambos said that there should be a specific height (''height homogenization'' he said) to which crash structures should be designed for all cars. Not being up to each car's height just how safe they will be!
+MafiosoItaliano458 well actually "safety" includes how safe is a car for the others. Having the front of the car penetrating another car is bad for safety rating, not good. It's not about who kills who, it's about saving both ;) Huge cars are generally not considered safe because they can easily injure other people, that's all
I was going to buy a BRAND NEW car .. I had my choice down to TWO cars .. 1) Fiat 500 ..UK Price £10,000 GBP 2) Audi Q7 .. UK price £60,000 GBP I am pleased I watched this video ... I now know which one will be the safest in a crash... Because I was unsure before I watched this video which car would have been the safest in an accident... ERRRR Thank you for this information ... I would never have been able to work out which one was the safest without your help... Please keep up the good work..
That's why some smaller cars, such as the Smart ForTwo and the Renault Modus, have unbelievably strong bodywork which is designed to allow the force of the impact to resonate around and away from the occupants, meaning they are surprisingly safe, even in collisions with considerably larger vehicles. I am aware that the methods used to create such passenger compartments is a trade secret used by the vehicle manufacturers but, for the greater good, it needs to be revealed to other vehicle manufacturers and made the industry standard.
Trust me the smart car crash forces are not deflected because there's no crumple zone on a smart therefore more energy is directed towards the occupants. So while the car will stay intact the occupants will probably fair worse than in a bigger car
Actually, the test is emphasising how well engineered the 500's safety cell is, whereas the Q7 is outdated and poorly engineered. Also, since the 500 is a city car, the crash like this is highly unlikely.
I just wanna say Im Mexican American and I love my German Mercedes. Its my second one and the first was totaled in accident and I gotta say it was the smoothest crash I have ever been in. Very safe well engineered vehicle.
VW debería haber hecho esta prueba de choque con sus propios vehculos équivalentes (UP, FOX, POLO), excepto si FIAT quería probar su 500 contra un SUV.
the first saabs were really based on the platform shared with fiat croma, lancia thema alfa 164. very reliable and rust proof. the later vectras might have been a (little) bit safer but the pieces fell apart due to quality issues and rust
gianluca bruno I don't I have a 4000 lb solid crown Victoria P71 you wouldnt want to crash into me you would probably be dead, had a 2007 Mercedez benze crash into me and his car was totalled while all I had was a cracked signal lense my car is a fucking tank so I do what it takes to avoid hitting people or being hit, the only thing that can do serous damage to my car would be a truck or another boat car like mine.
It's not really a comparison. The ADAC gives some advise to the (SUV-)Manufacturers to make constructual changes, so it makes an impact less dangerous for drivers of smaller cars. They give advise to widen the longitudinal member (and add some more at different heights), so it doesn't miss the one of the opposing car. Because that's what happened when they crashed.
+Alessandro Zavattero comunque lo sai come sono fatti i tedeschi se la pigliano con il + debole secondo me quel bidone della munnezza audi se lo fanno sbattere vicino la 159 penso che l' audi fa una brutta fine
+Alessandro Zavattero, guarda che questo era un test per vedere gli effetti su macchine di stazza diversa, se capissi il tedesco sapresti che hanno "accusato" l'audi di non avere una barra abbastanza alta per dissipare l'impatto più omogeneamente. Infatti quella barra rossa ai 2:20 si è conficcata nell'abitacolo della 500, dopo di che hanno anche fatto notare che la portiera al minuto 2:54 si è danneggiata complicando l'apertura. Non era un video del tipo: "guardate che macchine di merda c'hanno gli italiani rispetto alle nostre". Tutt'altro, alla fine del video hanno fatto una sorta di appello all'Audi e ai legislatori per modificare la struttura delle barre e rendere i SUV più sicuri per le macchine piccole. In fin dei conti l'Audi ne è uscita peggio della 500 che ha subito un impatto pari a 80 kmh rispetto ai 50 dell'audi...
Che significa "che cazzo di test è"? È per vedere quanti danni subiscono le auto in caso di scontro. Stai dicendo che è impossibile che una 500 si scontri con un SUV? E poi, 500 contro un 737? Già.. perchè se ne vedono molti di 737 sulle strade..
@@Superciuppaful Purtroppo anch'io non capisco il tedesco quindi non discuto minimamente il contenuto del discorso del tecnico, ma se lo scopo era solo di testare auto piccola contro auto grande potevano farlo con una VW lupo ad esempio invece guarda caso la 500 che anche in Germania ha riscosso un discreto successo!!! Maaahhhh sarà il caso......
+Supcharged But trucks are meant to transport essential commodities and are fairly regulated on certain roads. Trucks have a speed limit. SUVs are meant for civil people (who can be transported in a small car as well) who basically don't give a flying fuck about burning more gas to reach the same destination with way more comfort for themselves and more danger to others!
YH- tbh, they really aren't, if I have to haul ppl but don't want a van, than SuV is the way to go. I would get an SUV over a van just so I don't have the reputation lol. Also SUVs are generally more luxurious than vans. Also most SUVs come with 4WD/AWD where only certain vans come with that.
To me the test is not to show that the Audi is stronger but rather to weigh the strength of the Fiat which to me did pretty well the A1 Audi may also not do any better when it crushes the Fiat Freemont
@JimTonic79 actually it does; the message is that despite the safety rating ( the safety rating is simply a measure of an individual vehicle's safety performance given its design) and features the outcome of a crash in a vehicle will ultimately be determined by its size and speed. this can be quantified by newtons second law of motion.
the test is to show the difference between those masses! i don´t know, do you understand what they are talking about on german? it´s not to show "a good german car" only to show a problem, like it could happen in real! they also talk about, how such big cars like the Q7 have to be changed to give a chance to such little cars! that´s the reason!
GIOVEBOY Well, no. They praise the fiat, and say it's one of the safest small cars. They critisise the Q7 for the way it's build and demand a new safety test category wich will verify the safety for other cars.
For everyone who is celebrating the "superior Audi": the German motorist club ADAC criticises, that the Audi is designed in such a way, that it may have ok safety for the own driver, but is devastatingly poorly designed with regards to "partner safety". The test's 56 km/h is a city speed. So in a city crash, the driver of the Fiat would have likely suffered fatal injuries. The ADAC is urging the government to introduce "partner crash safety" as a safety criteria, to make sure these SUVs are designed in a way to not f*ck up everyone else.
Sehr gut! Ich fahre seit Jahren SUVs und genau deswegen kaufe ich diese! So leid es mir tut aber man sollte mit einem italienischem Schuhkarton nicht auf die Strasse.
Perhaps you should read what i wrote again :> I implied the same as you, highlighting the construction issues of the bigger car; the only reason why the crash ended so badly for the Fiat, which has a 5 star NCAP rating - that is why the ADAC demands to make tests like these mandatory, so car makers dedicate resources to make their car safer even for other cars to crash into.
Audi Q7 - hideous monstrous pointless car driven by people who need their ego boosting. I laugh when I see women in these, especially when they try to justify it by saying things like "the commanding position gives me a much better view of the road". Does that mean that in the event of a crash in any other type of car, your excuse would be that you couldn't see the other traffic because you weren't high enough? LOL. Muppets.
Simon George You're right. The least you can do when buying a massive, antisocial offroader, is go for a Range Rover. Though you should simply buy the civilised and subtle Volvo XC90.
I have a Q7 and I use it when go fishing or hunting off-road as well as when go skiing. I have to say I am impressed, but on city roads its a bit of a feeling u are driving a real truck. The same goes to Merc GL and Volvo XC90....there's some 10-15cm difference in length between those SUVs. and the feeling is the same. I have tried them. Thats my personal opinion...Those cars are not pointless neither are made to be driven on city roads!
eNesto eNero The problem is, that the Q7 is fairly disappointing off-road, especially when compared to the Range Rover, which *doesn't* look like a disproportioned whale.
Guarda, sono contento che ci sia ancora qualcuno con mente e occhi aperti ed obbiettivi! Leggo articoli di elogi alla UPO! Poi la guardo e mi chiedo: "scusate ma dov'è il design? Dove l'originalità?". Riflettiamoci. La Lupo era più carina! Ciò detto mi vengono i brividi nel vedere questo ed altri crashes con auto di diverso segmento.
hatt the longitudinal members of the q7 is the fiat in the footwell was drilled in the case of serious or very serious injury and can lead to death. to avoid the vorderung the tester, the side rail level to distribute on multiple levels so that you, a more homogeneous strucktur get in the front car is also designed to be wider and the longitudinal members are not as stiff but will deform more hot absorb the energy.
@captainmel84 we understand perfectly what this video is a bout.... it is called economical criminality. The rest they say is just a pretest.... why didn't they used an audi A1???
I was once in a car hit (slightly) by a Q-something. The guy in the Audi had stopped at the stop sign before continuing on and hitting our car which was already in the intersection.
To all who don't understand German: This video is not about "winning" or "superiority". Rather they demand that SUVs like that Audi should be designed differently in their front area in order to be less dangerous for other cars (like that Fiat which btw they call a very safe car) when crashing. They want the Audi to be less stiff (therefore less safe). They call it "partner protection"...
The Germans are making a valid point in my opinion; no wonder ridiculously large cars such as the Range Rover and Audi Q series get 5 star NCAP safety ratings. Vehicles such as the Toyota iQ and Audi A1 with 5 star NCAP safety ratings are virtually nil when it comes to head-on collision with an Audi Q7 at speed...
Next time you can crash the Fiat500 to a tank. The weight difference of these cars is so big, that you cannot get any valid result about car brands and how well their cars are made. The only valid conclusion is “the bigger the better” rule, but you do not need an experiment for that! Next time Germans should compare safety VS cost of ownership. Or Alfaromeo Stelvio VS Q5 will make sense...
The point of this video is that car owners' club would like manufacturers of big cars to rework the front structure to provide larger contact area and impose less point damage to small cars, and is advocating law and regulation measures. The Fiat 500 was chosen for the test because of its high safety and structural stability, highest in the corresponding size and weight class, under assumption that future vehicles will match or better the 500.
I see what theyr advantage is above italian cars: example Volvo even the A pillars are covered by airbags and that is an impartant add to safety. in addition they all have pre collision protection and an airgab to protect a pedestrian in case of disaster :)
@pizzodiferro actually the q7 is as safe in the impact with the wall but it lost points in pedestrian. Atleast that what it said in a magazine that rewied this test.
The Fiat never stood a chance, which is what I thought. The salespeople at the Fiat dealership seem to think the 500's compartment doesn't get compromised like that ?
English is more like Latin and Greek roots with German structure. Some English words derive from French, but English is still closer to Spanish than it is to French, but other than that you're right.
frankly, i didn't read all the comments, but those few i read were sufficient to get how ignorant some people are. first of all: it's a demonstration about how much dangerous big cars like SUVs still are for the other crashed cars in an accident. second: they used on purpose a Q7 and a 500 'cause they are one of the safest of it's class! third: think logicly - it is a simulation of a common accident with random cars! in the most of the cases you wont crash with the same car class!
It seems that some of you don't understand the reason of crash test. It is not about how well one car destroys another, but how it absorbs energy. As we can see, audi is damaged equally with fiat, and both life-spaces remain untouched, therefore passengers would be safe.
Though Germanic languages such as English and German have a large amount of words deriving from Latin, the only true languages based in Latin are the five Romance languages: Spanish, French, Italian, Portuguese, and Romanian.
@counterclockwise123 This test doesn't prove anything we didn't know already. That is, the bigger the more momentum you have (and NOT the safer). Against a wall, the 500 is still safer than the Q7, as it deals better with its own momentum (as proven by EuroNCAP). If you really believe that bigger is safer, take a look at the Volvo 960 vs. Renault Modus test here on YT.
@Gavichap hai ragione la Nash 600 era del 1942 monoscocca. La prima monoscocca italiana la lancia Aurelia 1949 che mi faceva pensare che fosse nata la prima monoscocca. Sinche gli americani, Francesi ed i tedeschi hanno usato il chassis a traversa fin alla fine degli anni 70. I francesi a dirittura fino alla fine degli anni 80 con la loro 2cv ed Citroen Diane. Ed e' anche vero che la Fiat 600 degli anni 90 ed 2000 era una carozza del 89 fragilissima
In all fairness to the little thing it puts up a bloody good fight and the cockpit stands up to some pretty brutal punishment. I imagine all in the 500 bar the passenger would have perished though. Crumple zones are perhaps a little too soft for an impact like that.
@aluisious I've wrote that comment because tons of people here say that Fiat 500 is a shitty car in terms of security. But actually is one of the best rated cars on Euro NCAP, in his category.
@aluisious as an engineer of this department; if i would buy a supermini car, i would pick fiat 500. i usually hate fiat btw. fiat always made trash cars but 500 looks like a great progress. you have nearly nothing to do when a SUV hits a supermini size car head to head. its not good but better than its class.
Actually, if you listened to the commentary, you'd know that the commetator actually criticises the German car, not the Fiat. They are asking for better safetly systems in big cars to protect small ones. So it's nothing to do with pushing german makes at all, it's the opposite.
@blze0001 didn't say that the limit should be that fiat..the limit should be to 1500-1700 kg..I am sure you can fit a 5 member family in an audi a4 or a bmw 3 series..you think that's why they buy Q7??to fit their family??
I own a Fiat 500 TwinAir. It only has a 900cc 2 cyl motor but w/85HP (50 mpg) with a 5 star crash rating. But even a big gas guzzler SUV would stand up to a 18 wheeler! I hope I never have to find out if its really 5 stars :-)
everyone is looking at this as a comparison of the cars themselves... try to look at it as a demonstration of how much progress has been done over the years, which makes small cars like the 500 to perform so good against a huge suv. i have seen similar tests in early 90's with S-class and opel corsa, and the corsa was annihilated. again, it was not a comparison between cars.
There are two ways of looking at this: 1. Fiat owners buy bigger cars to "compete" OR 2. Q7 owners buy smaller cars to lessen the impact on others... one can dream:) Heck why not build a car from solid rock, imagine how safe you would be in collisions like this....
i stand corrected,well said ! probably about ?% of the weight of the audi im guessing about 980kg vs 2100. no need to answer just agreeing with your point and trying to justify why i said half ! ))
Considering that the Q7 is nearly 3x bigger than the little Fiat, I would say that the 500 did pretty well. Although injury is quite evident, what is impressive is the overall structural integrity of the vehicle. In the slow-motion video, you can see that the Audi's advancing steel mass stops at the firewall section of the Fiat.
It is obvious that a microcar would not fare well against a 7-seating SUV, but in the case of the 500, it is not as bad as one would think.
Of course, leave it to the Germans to come up with such a crash-test…
The airbag popped it's totally fine just another skull fracture
but the pillar A got deflected completelly and the door steel also felxed this show an bad steel quality or poor carbon quantity on steel, those areas are vital for the survival of people also we have to have in mind the little gap that have the steel, the glass and the typical plastic inside.
Teo P a
Ok, but look at the sheer sdize of the SUV, and how the hood and front just badgers the Fiat. You can argue about steel all you want, logic prevails: a big SUV against a tiny car is going to make serious damage. The fact that the Fiat remained relatively intact for such an impact, is impressive. The Germans look pathetic at displaying their pride against such a tiny car. Put that shit against a Volvo of comparable size, and let's see what happens...
Thank you for the video!!! I couldn't decide should I buy a Fiat 500 or an Audi Q7 but you helped me make my mind! Thanks again!
Jajajajaja
If that's you in your thumbnail, you wouldn't fit inside a 500 anyway. ;)
Luke Ramirez ahahahahaha
😂😂😂
Well, id buy a 500 tbh
Don't miss the next scheduled crash test: Fiat 500 Cabrio vs US Abrams Tank
lol
Marcello Mascheroni
Ahaahaahhahaha
I don't think you understand anything what they are saying or?
A US Abrams tank is not common on European streets. A Q7 is, unfortunately. Whoever needs such a piece of decadence and egoism.
Drive safe, buy a tank!
😂😂😂😂
Tanks are not safe too hard it would absorb no crash energy
Literally shut up
Buy A Volvo!
Better buy a brain instead
Next test, smart vs Scania truck
Smart is solid car
@@TraceLight Have you seen Smart crash tests? I think it is very good for a very light car
@@TraceLight Bruh the smart fortwo is a good safety car
@amelia the protogen yeah let me introduce you to g force.
@@EngiNetion we have coffins in Italy that are more strongest and biggest.
some people dont get the point of the video, it should show that a SUV can be a big DANGER for smaller cars like the fiat - its not an ad for Audi^^
get the fok out of here if you don't see the hidden message beyound this german mombo jombo.
hahaha whats mombo jombo??
Alessio S In fact just YOU and your ilk can see the "hidden message in the mombo jombo". Learn proper German before saying gibberish nonsense. The expert on the video criticises the Audi Q7 for being ill-designed to protect smaller vehicles (eg the Fiat 500) from being crushed by its massive weight. But all you failed know-alls think that this is propaganda for Audi SUVs, while it is actually the other way round.
Gavichap You missed the hidden agenda - they criticize Audi for making strong cars. Muahahahaaa dumb sheeple would believe any piece of trash trown at them. If Audi had that point in mind, they would have crashed an Audi A2 you idiot!
if they had crashed it against the A2 or A1 thee A would had been oblitterated. and that risk was not to take . bad pubblicity
this video is not about which of those two car's stronger or safer. it's about how to build the front of a car in general to increase the safety for all parties involved. so that there will be less fatalities even in crashes between big SUVs and small cars. they took the q7 and the 500 as an example, since both are on a high safety level in their respective class. if you don't speak german you will not get it.
this is how germany eliminates the competition and empoors the other EU members
@@215alessio In Germany we have many of both cars on our streets. The Fiat 500 is pretty popular here.
Thank you so much for this video. I was strongly considering buying this car or a similar smaller car due to budget and the fact that I feel more comfortable handling smaller cars. This video confirmed my fears.
I think the topic is a different one: The deforming energy-absorbing structures should be at a standard height over ground for all cars. In this case the Q7 pushes very far into the Fiat, as both structures miss each other. But also the Q7 suffers from this, as the Fiat pushes against the wheel very hard leading to driver door not opening anymore.
The 500 did better than golf vs XC90.
If you understand what they are saying. You will understand it didn’t.
I have a 500 and feel safe driving it. I do hope I never have to test it to this extreme.
Maybe a Q7 comes to test your 500, what then? It needn't be your fault.
How about crashing a Q7 into a Volvo truck and see which wins.
Haha yes
@Henry Discipline........ About as relevant as their test.
Dave Leighton what they’re trying to say is that suvs can pose serious threats to people in small cars, it makes sense so autos makers can make big suvs more compatible with cars.
@Henry Discipline The same as this test. That a car with high mass and with high crash test rating against static barriers will be way safer than a light car with the same high crash test rating.
Kinda bad for the actual small low emissions cars that we need, and also an explanation why Volvo manufactures now only heavy cars.
For those of you who do not speak German, allow me to translate:
"Big crash. Blue car go boom. Italians weak. Germany strong."
I like how they are comparing a 3 tons (or even more) car to a 1 ton car. Kek
🤣🤣😂👍🏻
Try a german smart against a q7 idiot
There is a substantial weight difference between the two vehicles comparing them as the same is silly
much primitive people in the comments.... if you dont understand the language, then you shouldn't say something wrong, like its an ad for audi, etc. The message of it is that SUV's can be very dangerous in crashes for people in smaller cars, and in fact of that, they (the ADAC) want to make SUV's more harmless for other people on the roads.
How are they going to do that if they can't even speak English?
next test iveco stralis vs audi
taking their HUGE difference in size and weight into concideration, the Fiat probably behaved better than the Q7 in this test...
i find it inexcusable for the Q7 leg area to get deformed by crashing on such a small car.
besides, Q7 had issues on the pedal area when it was first tested from EuroNcap. the firewall penetraded into the cabin and the pedals could cause injury, so they had to redesign it and re-test it to get a good rating...
The Q7 is old and this is not an add!
SIMcityplayer2002
i dont disagree it is old, but it is also at least twice the weight of the 500, and has at least double the crumple zone.
i know this is not an add
And another idiot. The crumblezones werent hit. Thats one of the main problems this test is meant to show. The 500 didnt do better, the occupants would have severe life threatening injuries, the Q7 guys could still walk.
next test fiat 500 vs mortar bombs?
+Marcello Ricco You won
+Marcello Ricco ahhaha fantastico XD
+andrea fornengo
..
I love my little fiat
tina williams saaaame
Same. I think it popped off 5 stars for adult passengers in Euro NCAP, which is very impressive.
DaliGuy 3 stars altogether though
Next Audi Q7 vs T-34 Please!
***** and T-14 vs Leopard 2,3 etc
Русский?
NOW we're cooking LOL
J'adore l'ancien générique de adac Il est tellement satisfaisant avec la guitare électrique
In a few words, ADAC wanted to show just how safe are small cars and how safe are large cars. Specifically, when the 500 and Q7 were put to the test, the spokesman and mr.Ambos said that the Q7's crash structure penetrated the 500's passenger cell (''die Fahrgastzelle'') and shove all of the 500's available legroom (''Fußraum''), leading to the driver's deadly injury! And the 500's passenger cell and knee-airbag weren't able to handle this much speed and fury (56km/h or ''sechs-und-fünfzig km/h''! They also said that the forces the 500 received are more like 80km/h or ''achtzig km/h!'').
So the 500's 5-star safety rating (''fünf Sterne!'') is simply a marketing trick!
Also, mr.Ambos said that there should be a specific height (''height homogenization'' he said) to which crash structures should be designed for all cars. Not being up to each car's height just how safe they will be!
+MafiosoItaliano458 well actually "safety" includes how safe is a car for the others. Having the front of the car penetrating another car is bad for safety rating, not good. It's not about who kills who, it's about saving both ;)
Huge cars are generally not considered safe because they can easily injure other people, that's all
kibuzoSonoIo That's what they said!!
because in the normal crash test they crash it with another 500 the same weight and size.
I was going to buy a BRAND NEW car .. I had my choice down to TWO cars ..
1) Fiat 500 ..UK Price £10,000 GBP
2) Audi Q7 .. UK price £60,000 GBP
I am pleased I watched this video ... I now know which one will be the safest in a crash... Because I was unsure before I watched this video which car would have been the safest in an accident... ERRRR Thank you for this information ... I would never have been able to work out which one was the safest without your help... Please keep up the good work..
The point is that the riches will survive, the poor won't. No matter whose fault it is.
Off roaders at like nuclear weapons. Once one person has one, everyone else needs one too.
That's why some smaller cars, such as the Smart ForTwo and the Renault Modus, have unbelievably strong bodywork which is designed to allow the force of the impact to resonate around and away from the occupants, meaning they are surprisingly safe, even in collisions with considerably larger vehicles. I am aware that the methods used to create such passenger compartments is a trade secret used by the vehicle manufacturers but, for the greater good, it needs to be revealed to other vehicle manufacturers and made the industry standard.
+MrSupercar55 Most car companies would reverse engineer the product anyways.
Trust me the smart car crash forces are not deflected because there's no crumple zone on a smart therefore more energy is directed towards the occupants. So while the car will stay intact the occupants will probably fair worse than in a bigger car
blabla62871 It at least allows you a survival area in which to hit the airbag and not get a lap full of steering column.
Anyone in 2018 watching this and gets hit by nostalgia?
Up next; Audi Q7 vs Leopard 2
Actually, the test is emphasising how well engineered the 500's safety cell is, whereas the Q7 is outdated and poorly engineered. Also, since the 500 is a city car, the crash like this is highly unlikely.
Not to people who act like their abarths are race cars...
How does that mean its less likely? Doesnt mean it will never leave the city lol
Literally watching this as I sit in my 500
Aaaah, thats too easy. Now try the same with a 18 wheeler into a Polski Fiat!
+mongolz1000 After 1 year a new idea: lets see Audi Q7 vs. IJN Yamato.
@@mongolz1000 you litterally replied to yourself...
@@arandomcanadian2948 no shit, that's why I wrote: "after 1 year a new ide:" ...
I just wanna say Im Mexican American and I love my German Mercedes. Its my second one and the first was totaled in accident and I gotta say it was the smoothest crash I have ever been in. Very safe well engineered vehicle.
VW debería haber hecho esta prueba de choque con sus propios vehculos équivalentes (UP, FOX, POLO), excepto si FIAT quería probar su 500 contra un SUV.
the first saabs were really based on the platform shared with fiat croma, lancia thema alfa 164.
very reliable and rust proof.
the later vectras might have been a (little) bit safer but the pieces fell apart due to quality issues and rust
I have a Fiat 500 :(
I also have one!
Stay away from pompous Q7 drivers who think they own the road and you should be ok. Enjoy your Fiat. Cute car.
gianluca bruno I don't I have a 4000 lb solid crown Victoria P71 you wouldnt want to crash into me you would probably be dead, had a 2007 Mercedez benze crash into me and his car was totalled while all I had was a cracked signal lense my car is a fucking tank so I do what it takes to avoid hitting people or being hit, the only thing that can do serous damage to my car would be a truck or another boat car like mine.
or a car rear ending your crown vic at high speed in thta case fuel tank explodes and will make a fireball
I have a Lincoln navigator
It's not really a comparison. The ADAC gives some advise to the (SUV-)Manufacturers to make constructual changes, so it makes an impact less dangerous for drivers of smaller cars. They give advise to widen the longitudinal member (and add some more at different heights), so it doesn't miss the one of the opposing car. Because that's what happened when they crashed.
cazzo di test è??? prossima volta fate Fiat 500 contro un jumbo jet 737 !!!!
+Alessandro Zavattero No fiat Panda contro un panzer XD
+Alessandro Zavattero comunque lo sai come sono fatti i tedeschi se la pigliano con il + debole secondo me quel bidone della munnezza audi se lo fanno sbattere vicino la 159 penso che l' audi fa una brutta fine
+Alessandro Zavattero, guarda che questo era un test per vedere gli effetti su macchine di stazza diversa, se capissi il tedesco sapresti che hanno "accusato" l'audi di non avere una barra abbastanza alta per dissipare l'impatto più omogeneamente. Infatti quella barra rossa ai 2:20 si è conficcata nell'abitacolo della 500, dopo di che hanno anche fatto notare che la portiera al minuto 2:54 si è danneggiata complicando l'apertura. Non era un video del tipo: "guardate che macchine di merda c'hanno gli italiani rispetto alle nostre". Tutt'altro, alla fine del video hanno fatto una sorta di appello all'Audi e ai legislatori per modificare la struttura delle barre e rendere i SUV più sicuri per le macchine piccole. In fin dei conti l'Audi ne è uscita peggio della 500 che ha subito un impatto pari a 80 kmh rispetto ai 50 dell'audi...
Che significa "che cazzo di test è"? È per vedere quanti danni subiscono le auto in caso di scontro. Stai dicendo che è impossibile che una 500 si scontri con un SUV?
E poi, 500 contro un 737? Già.. perchè se ne vedono molti di 737 sulle strade..
@@Superciuppaful Purtroppo anch'io non capisco il tedesco quindi non discuto minimamente il contenuto del discorso del tecnico, ma se lo scopo era solo di testare auto piccola contro auto grande potevano farlo con una VW lupo ad esempio invece guarda caso la 500 che anche in Germania ha riscosso un discreto successo!!! Maaahhhh sarà il caso......
Ahahahah
Complimenti per il test Adacccc
😆😆😆😆😆😆😆
How can we listen and watch this video in english.??
Thanks for the heads-up!
SUV's are the most sensless cars....
Trucks don't exist?
+Supcharged But trucks are meant to transport essential commodities and are fairly regulated on certain roads. Trucks have a speed limit. SUVs are meant for civil people (who can be transported in a small car as well) who basically don't give a flying fuck about burning more gas to reach the same destination with way more comfort for themselves and more danger to others!
YH- tbh, they really aren't, if I have to haul ppl but don't want a van, than SuV is the way to go. I would get an SUV over a van just so I don't have the reputation lol. Also SUVs are generally more luxurious than vans. Also most SUVs come with 4WD/AWD where only certain vans come with that.
To me the test is not to show that the Audi is stronger but rather to weigh the strength of the Fiat which to me did pretty well the A1 Audi may also not do any better when it crushes the Fiat Freemont
Maybe Fiat Ducato vs BMW Mini?
@JimTonic79 actually it does; the message is that despite the safety rating ( the safety rating is simply a measure of an individual vehicle's safety performance given its design) and features the outcome of a crash in a vehicle will ultimately be determined by its size and speed. this can be quantified by newtons second law of motion.
They cant compare those cars!!! Do a Audi Q7 vs Volvo XC90 Crash Test and then we will see if the Q7 is safe!
the test is to show the difference between those masses! i don´t know, do you understand what they are talking about on german?
it´s not to show "a good german car" only to show a problem, like it could happen in real! they also talk about, how such big cars like the Q7 have to be changed to give a chance to such little cars!
that´s the reason!
GIOVEBOY Obviously you haven't got a jota of the speech in the video and the only "simple" thing here is your ignorance.
GIOVEBOY Well, no. They praise the fiat, and say it's one of the safest small cars. They critisise the Q7 for the way it's build and demand a new safety test category wich will verify the safety for other cars.
Translation: the people in the small car are amputees. Those in the big car walked away. (Honestly, I have no idea what they said in this video.)
Wow, I'm long on this Platform
For everyone who is celebrating the "superior Audi": the German motorist club ADAC criticises, that the Audi is designed in such a way, that it may have ok safety for the own driver, but is devastatingly poorly designed with regards to "partner safety". The test's 56 km/h is a city speed. So in a city crash, the driver of the Fiat would have likely suffered fatal injuries. The ADAC is urging the government to introduce "partner crash safety" as a safety criteria, to make sure these SUVs are designed in a way to not f*ck up everyone else.
Sehr gut! Ich fahre seit Jahren SUVs und genau deswegen kaufe ich diese! So leid es mir tut aber man sollte mit einem italienischem Schuhkarton nicht auf die Strasse.
what the fuc what are what is that
seh ich auch so
Mr X wir fahren einen alten a6. Leergewicht 1790 kg der hat auch knautschzone
Perhaps you should read what i wrote again :>
I implied the same as you, highlighting the construction issues of the bigger car; the only reason why the crash ended so badly for the Fiat, which has a 5 star NCAP rating - that is why the ADAC demands to make tests like these mandatory, so car makers dedicate resources to make their car safer even for other cars to crash into.
Audi Q7 - hideous monstrous pointless car driven by people who need their ego boosting. I laugh when I see women in these, especially when they try to justify it by saying things like "the commanding position gives me a much better view of the road". Does that mean that in the event of a crash in any other type of car, your excuse would be that you couldn't see the other traffic because you weren't high enough? LOL. Muppets.
I hate those housewives, they never know the width of it and drive in the middle of the road. Also try and kill motorcyclists at ever chance.
Simon George You're right. The least you can do when buying a massive, antisocial offroader, is go for a Range Rover.
Though you should simply buy the civilised and subtle Volvo XC90.
I have a Q7 and I use it when go fishing or hunting off-road as well as when go skiing. I have to say I am impressed, but on city roads its a bit of a feeling u are driving a real truck. The same goes to Merc GL and Volvo XC90....there's some 10-15cm difference in length between those SUVs. and the feeling is the same. I have tried them. Thats my personal opinion...Those cars are not pointless neither are made to be driven on city roads!
eNesto eNero The problem is, that the Q7 is fairly disappointing off-road, especially when compared to the Range Rover, which *doesn't* look like a disproportioned whale.
I think the land rover discoveries are the worst, where i live it's just mums that pick their kid up from school with their stupid big sun glasses
Guarda, sono contento che ci sia ancora qualcuno con mente e occhi aperti ed obbiettivi! Leggo articoli di elogi alla UPO! Poi la guardo e mi chiedo: "scusate ma dov'è il design? Dove l'originalità?". Riflettiamoci. La Lupo era più carina! Ciò detto mi vengono i brividi nel vedere questo ed altri crashes con auto di diverso segmento.
now the iveco lynce against the q7
Moral of the story: if we all drive a 500 everyone is safe ;)
I didn't understand a word of this!
+Jacob Wilson You didn't undersand words like "crashtest" and "airbag"?
No, I didn't. I understand English and that's me finished!
Jacob Wilson There are some english words sprinkled in
Ohhhhhhhh nice Video! German quality win!
Now try the audi Q7 -VS- iveco Stralis !
VW Up vs Audi Q7?... LOL.
Gotta love that 50p quality
Fiat is stronger
hatt the longitudinal members of the q7 is the fiat in the footwell was drilled in the case of serious or very serious injury and can lead to death. to avoid the vorderung the tester, the side rail level to distribute on multiple levels so that you, a more homogeneous strucktur get in the front car is also designed to be wider and the longitudinal members are not as stiff but will deform more hot absorb the energy.
Just German quality...
@captainmel84 we understand perfectly what this video is a bout....
it is called economical criminality. The rest they say is just a pretest.... why didn't they used an audi A1???
I was once in a car hit (slightly) by a Q-something. The guy in the Audi had stopped at the stop sign before continuing on and hitting our car which was already in the intersection.
To all who don't understand German: This video is not about "winning" or "superiority". Rather they demand that SUVs like that Audi should be designed differently in their front area in order to be less dangerous for other cars (like that Fiat which btw they call a very safe car) when crashing. They want the Audi to be less stiff (therefore less safe). They call it "partner protection"...
The Germans are making a valid point in my opinion; no wonder ridiculously large cars such as the Range Rover and Audi Q series get 5 star NCAP safety ratings. Vehicles such as the Toyota iQ and Audi A1 with 5 star NCAP safety ratings are virtually nil when it comes to head-on collision with an Audi Q7 at speed...
Next time you can crash the Fiat500 to a tank. The weight difference of these cars is so big, that you cannot get any valid result about car brands and how well their cars are made. The only valid conclusion is “the bigger the better” rule, but you do not need an experiment for that! Next time Germans should compare safety VS cost of ownership. Or Alfaromeo Stelvio VS Q5 will make sense...
Don't miss the episode when Peter Drinklage squares up to Mike Tyson in the ring, and ADAC are there to judge the bout!
The point of this video is that car owners' club would like manufacturers of big cars to rework the front structure to provide larger contact area and impose less point damage to small cars, and is advocating law and regulation measures.
The Fiat 500 was chosen for the test because of its high safety and structural stability, highest in the corresponding size and weight class, under assumption that future vehicles will match or better the 500.
I see what theyr advantage is above italian cars: example Volvo even the A pillars are covered by airbags and that is an impartant add to safety.
in addition they all have pre collision protection and an airgab to protect a pedestrian in case of disaster :)
I was in suspense the whole time i had no idea of what would happen.
@pizzodiferro actually the q7 is as safe in the impact with the wall but it lost points in pedestrian. Atleast that what it said in a magazine that rewied this test.
Next,fiat 500 and Boeing 747 crash test
The Fiat never stood a chance, which is what I thought. The salespeople at the Fiat dealership seem to think the 500's compartment doesn't get compromised like that ?
English is more like Latin and Greek roots with German structure. Some English words derive from French, but English is still closer to Spanish than it is to French, but other than that you're right.
frankly, i didn't read all the comments, but those few i read were sufficient to get how ignorant some people are. first of all: it's a demonstration about how much dangerous big cars like SUVs still are for the other crashed cars in an accident. second: they used on purpose a Q7 and a 500 'cause they are one of the safest of it's class! third: think logicly - it is a simulation of a common accident with random cars! in the most of the cases you wont crash with the same car class!
It seems that some of you don't understand the reason of crash test. It is not about how well one car destroys another, but how it absorbs energy. As we can see, audi is damaged equally with fiat, and both life-spaces remain untouched, therefore passengers would be safe.
its funny....q7 is one of the best SUVs! 500 is a very small city car!
we love Fiat and of course we love Fiat 500
Though Germanic languages such as English and German have a large amount of words deriving from Latin, the only true languages based in Latin are the five Romance languages: Spanish, French, Italian, Portuguese, and Romanian.
@counterclockwise123 This test doesn't prove anything we didn't know already. That is, the bigger the more momentum you have (and NOT the safer). Against a wall, the 500 is still safer than the Q7, as it deals better with its own momentum (as proven by EuroNCAP). If you really believe that bigger is safer, take a look at the Volvo 960 vs. Renault Modus test here on YT.
@Gavichap hai ragione la Nash 600 era del 1942 monoscocca.
La prima monoscocca italiana la lancia Aurelia 1949 che mi faceva pensare che fosse nata la prima monoscocca. Sinche gli americani, Francesi ed i tedeschi hanno usato il chassis a traversa fin alla fine degli anni 70. I francesi a dirittura fino alla fine degli anni 80 con la loro 2cv ed Citroen Diane.
Ed e' anche vero che la Fiat 600 degli anni 90 ed 2000 era una carozza del 89 fragilissima
@Gavichap Adesso è tutto chiaro!Grazie della spiegazione.
In all fairness to the little thing it puts up a bloody good fight and the cockpit stands up to some pretty brutal punishment. I imagine all in the 500 bar the passenger would have perished though. Crumple zones are perhaps a little too soft for an impact like that.
I don't own an Excursion or any truck. I was just drawing a comparison since they put such a big car with such a little one.
I actually expected the 500 to be worse
Even after this, I still want one
You get what you pay for, safety is no different!
It's a 100% realistic possibility of a crash in the real world. That's all.
Noice..next comparision is the Q7 vs oncoming train.. and then oncoming train vs Cargo ship... so whe can see the thrut :) :)
@aluisious I've wrote that comment because tons of people here say that Fiat 500 is a shitty car in terms of security. But actually is one of the best rated cars on Euro NCAP, in his category.
@aluisious
as an engineer of this department; if i would buy a supermini car, i would pick fiat 500. i usually hate fiat btw. fiat always made trash cars but 500 looks like a great progress. you have nearly nothing to do when a SUV hits a supermini size car head to head.
its not good but better than its class.
Like in Holland, people with oversized cars pay taxes on the cerb weight of those cars ! A very nice idea to end this SUV rage
Actually, if you listened to the commentary, you'd know that the commetator actually criticises the German car, not the Fiat. They are asking for better safetly systems in big cars to protect small ones. So it's nothing to do with pushing german makes at all, it's the opposite.
About accidents, YOU ARE RIGHT, YOU CAN'T CHOOSE YOUR ACCIDENT CAR!!!
@blze0001 didn't say that the limit should be that fiat..the limit should be to 1500-1700 kg..I am sure you can fit a 5 member family in an audi a4 or a bmw 3 series..you think that's why they buy Q7??to fit their family??
LOL, such a fair test!
That's the same as crashing a mountain bike on a bus !
XC90 performed waaaaaay better against Golf than Q7 on a little F500 ...
I own a Fiat 500 TwinAir. It only has a 900cc 2 cyl motor but w/85HP (50 mpg) with a 5 star crash rating. But even a big gas guzzler SUV would stand up to a 18 wheeler! I hope I never have to find out if its really 5 stars :-)
I never think about car safety when I buy a car. I buy the car I like and then hope it is safe as well.
everyone is looking at this as a comparison of the cars themselves...
try to look at it as a demonstration of how much progress has been done over the years, which makes small cars like the 500 to perform so good against a huge suv.
i have seen similar tests in early 90's with S-class and opel corsa, and the corsa was annihilated. again, it was not a comparison between cars.
next video,fiat 500 vs a semi
There are two ways of looking at this:
1. Fiat owners buy bigger cars to "compete" OR
2. Q7 owners buy smaller cars to lessen the impact on others... one can dream:)
Heck why not build a car from solid rock, imagine how safe you would be in collisions like this....
i stand corrected,well said ! probably about ?% of the weight of the audi im guessing about 980kg vs 2100. no need to answer just agreeing with your point and trying to justify why i said half ! ))
“Good night forever” is all i heard