In December 2016, which was organized and held by the automotive publication "AvtoReview". Then the results, if we consider them in comparison with testing seven years ago, pleasantly surprised the experts. Progress was visible to the naked eye. However, with a more detailed study, it turned out that it’s still the same to rejoice, by modern standards, the SUV looks faded and inexpressive, displacements and overloads during an accident are still extremely high. The percentage of fatal traffic accidents will decrease, but injuries to the driver and passengers may be significant.

Perhaps in order to be rehabilitated in the eyes of the public, the manufacturer domestic SUVs from Ulyanovsk, asked the publication to cancel the results of the testing and recognize them as incorrect due to the mistakes made, according to specialists from, in the preparation of the crash test. In particular, the manufacturer complained that certain deviations were made in the placement of the deformable barrier on the base plate, because of which the car received much stronger structural loads.

The first ARCAP crash test conducted by AutoReview

UAZ representatives also referred to the tests that were carried out in Germany, at the Takata test site. According to the results of tests conducted abroad, he received from 8 to 10 points.

The auto-edition went to meet the manufacturer and agreed to conduct a second crash test. Changes were taken into account when installing a deformable barrier, which received a low base plate.

Repeated acceleration to 64 km / h, and brand new, shiny unscratched paintwork UAZ rushes to the meeting point with an obstacle. A blow with a 40% overlap of the crushed obstacle and visually the picture practically does not change.

The second ARCAP crash test conducted by AutoReview

During the study broken car it turned out that as a result of a stronger blow to the lower part of the car, the side member that took the hit, in our case, the left one, received a stronger displacement. Because of this, the floor of the car was deformed, the left seat left. But worst of all, the fact that the steering wheel has shifted up more, and this has a direct impact on driver safety. The airbag in such a situation may not perform its function, and the soaring steering wheel can cause significant injury to the driver.

Despite this, the test score was 5.3 points, in the first test "Auto Review" awarded Russian SUV only 4.4 points.

At the first crash test, the new steering column With telescopic fork also went up, which, according to experts, can easily break the neck of the driver, and left wheel flew into the cabin, tearing the floor.

Previously conducted UAZ Patriot crash tests of past years and real ones traffic accidents showed that due to an outdated frame design with an insufficient number of impact absorption zones, the body could continue uncontrollably further movement forward. The consequences were often unpredictable.

Recall that ARCAP (Russian independent rating passive safety, which is carried out by the automobile newspaper AutoReview) lies.

An updated version of the Ulyanovsk SUV was subjected to two independent and one factory crash tests using the ARCAP method.

A crash test according to the Russian ARCAP methodology is a frontal impact of a car at a speed of 64 km / h into a deformable barrier made of aluminum honeycombs, imitating the front of a passenger car. Since oncoming collisions rarely occur head-on, during the crash test, the test car crashes only with part of the front end - the overlap is 40%.

According to Autoreview, to improve passive safety, the Ulyanovsk Automobile Plant has significantly improved the design of the Patriot. Second “mini-spars” appeared under the seats, the left A-pillar was tightened with bolts, the number of body attachment points was increased.

Inside, there is a new safety front panel mounted on a powerful cross member, a new steering column that can compensate for up to 140 mm of steering movement, as well as belts equipped with pretensioners and force limiters, plus driver and passenger airbags.

According to the ARCAP methodology, the researchers had to conduct a couple of crash tests at once instead of one. The first - at a speed of 64.9 km / h, when the "Patriot" earned 4.4 points and one star. Although the UAZ people expected that the updated SUV would score eight to ten points out of 16 possible.

UAZ proposed to “recognize the crash test conditions as incorrect and cancel its results”, since the base plate to which the deformable barrier is attached rises 200 mm above it, and the requirements of the Euro NCAP methodology, on the basis of which the ARCAP rating was developed, state that the plate should be no more than 75 mm higher

As a result of the deviations from the methodology, the UAZ “Patriot” received a strong hard blow to the hood line and elements of the upper structure of the body mudguards, after which an unpredictable redistribution of loads occurred on the base of the wind strut, fastening the steering column cross member, which, in turn, led to increased movements steering wheel that affected the criteria for neck injury

The difference is the following. The first impact (with a high barrier) "can be considered a collision with a crossover or SUV of a similar mass", and the second (with a low barrier) is, for example, an accident with an S-class Mercedes.

According to the results of the second crash test, the updated "Patriot" received 5.3 points, one star and one "cross" on the driver circuit - for a high risk to life. important organs. Thus, the SUV took 21st place out of 38.

A similar result was shown Lada Kalina sample 2005 (without airbags), which earned 5.6 points, and Chinese hatchback Chery QQ rated 4.9: Both cars also "killed" their drivers. True, in the event of an accident, the owner of the Patriot can rely on a considerable - almost 2 tons - mass.

It is important that the broken "UAZ" were on 18-inch wheels. And Takata (a supplier of safety equipment) conducted debugging tests on 16-inch ones. And it seems that two inches of difference "dramatically increased the extent of destruction."

P.S. UAZ, having conducted its own crash test of "16-inch cars" using a similar methodology, stated that the "Patriot" received 11 points. Truth, independent experts alerted that the pillows during the "signature" impact fired eight milliseconds earlier.

The automotive publication AutoReview conducted a crash test of the UAZ Patriot SUV according to the EuroNCAP rule (see issue 12 of 2010). A car at a speed of 64 km / h was crashed into a cube with 40% overlap. The results were depressing, for several years after the replacement of Simbir with Patriot, nothing has changed in terms of security!

The body was again torn off the frame due to poor-quality fasteners, the steering wheel fired again and the dummy hit it with its head (overload 93g at an allowable threshold of 88g), and at the legs it came apart at the seams and the gas tank was pierced ... The passenger is unlikely to come out alive after a crushing blow on the handrail on front panel (HIC = 1788 at threshold 1000). Moreover, according to the publication, his salvation could be an airbag, but there is no such option even for the driver (and he, by the way, is not unnecessary with such a steering shift).

After recalculating the scores, it turned out that new Patriot no better than Simbir, who failed the crash test in 2003, the same 2.7 points and no hope for the future ... The reason is prosaic for fine-tuning security, no one wants to allocate money, people will buy such a car. But you don’t need so much, for example, a frame with crushable zones, to increase the number of points of attachment of the body to the frame and pillows in the cabin. It is more profitable to spend on plastic body kits and new body colors.

According to Autoreview, fine-tuning Japanese pickup truck Nissan Navara failed crash test with a score of 1.6 points was carried out in a short time and a recall was announced, after fine-tuning the car achieved a result of 6.9 points. It is also worth noting that the recently broken in Australia Chinese Great wall hover performed much better than Patriot - 9.48 points out of 16.

But, there is one caveat. The crash test is partly relative. To turn the Patriot into a weapon for killing riders, you need an opponent of at least an equal weight category, that is, in a collision with the same Priora, an SUV from Ulyanovsk will have an advantage in the form of an oak frame.

There is another frame-by-frame review http://www.4x4info.ru/

shot 1 (frame - on approach to the target)

shot 2 (frame 10) - the target was hit, the hood and frame were deformed (what's with the frame ?!)

shot 3 (frame 11) - the most extreme point of the car moving forward, actually stopping the car - flying away from the concrete will go further - the moment of the greatest overloads in the cabin, the gearbox and the engine went down, the steering column went up

shot 4 (frame 15) - active departure from the concrete wall, reverse G-forces begin, the tailgate opens

shot 5 (frame 17) - maximum rebound, mannequins are pressed into the backs and headrests

shot 6 (frame 97) - stopping the car after it flew off, jumped on ,

Now for the results

1. liked

1.1 Crinkling of the hood along the programmed trajectory

1.2 the steering column goes up and not into the driver

1.3 waving mirrors in a funny way - and the mirrors remain intact

2. liked it very much

2.1 the body does not break off the frame (holmes, but, damn it, HOW?!!!)
after all, the following scheme is traditional for the UAZ:

the body is torn off the pillows and it, including its contents, rushes towards everything that sticks into it - the driver, along with the seat and belt, comes to the steering wheel, and here it was possible to keep a very difficult body with a good margin of inertia (well, offhand, um 700 kg, ve 64 km / h - I get about 12 tons of shock load - but I must have been mistaken - I’m not trained in physics and arithmetic) on several bolts oh I don’t understand how it was done and why it didn’t work out like that before

2.2 the engine with the gearbox falls down and does not go to the salon (it’s also incredible - the bridge is in the same place, but the fact remains - it’s perfectly visible right from the second photo how the units fall down)

2.3 the body around the cabin is not deformed - the safety cage around the driver and passengers (doors, roof, it seems that the floor) is intact last photo looks very good I would say excellent result

2.4 The driver’s head does not crash into the middle pillar when flying back (I tried to cut it so that it would be visible in frames 4 and 5) - but it passes strictly into the headrest, it’s also unclear - the body flies to the right, the head goes back - there is a non-zero probability of meeting with the middle pillar — usually on this pierced. Here somehow it was possible to avoid - by accident or not - it is not clear - you need to look for shooting with a high-speed camera, otherwise the whole crash literally fit in two frames - a lot of incomprehensibility remains

3 did not like

3.1 tailgate opened (shouldn't)

3.2 the windshield cracked from the bottom and flew out - that means the lower part of the windshield frame went deformed - and there the interior is close to the instrument panel and the driver's knees

3.3, the driver flies headlong into the steering wheel, and the passenger into the handrail - you can see it especially well in the third photo. but this, in general, is treated not so much with pillows and pretensioners, but with readiness for impact and hands on the steering wheel - in life, if the driver holds the steering wheel, he often heads into the glass - his hands, like levers-rocker arms, work purely kinematically so, nevertheless, it looks fuuu , the passenger is quite possibly worse than the driver - the handrail will be much stronger than the steering wheel

3.4 cargo from the trunk flies into the passenger compartment (this is not an eurocap - the second method, sorry but lazy to cut - take my word for it - a suitcase or a jack from the trunk turns out to be strictly in place of the head rear passengers- in the same place the tail throws up and the load flies forward - very ugly)

4. really disliked

4.1 there are no detailed photos of the car after - what's with the doors - are they jammed or open, with pedals - where and how did they leave, with the bottom of the cabin - intact or gone or even torn

4.2 there is no information about dummies overloads, than they knocked with what force

4.3 is not at all clear - who beat him and for what, where are the results, at the first and at the second and even at the third glance the result is not bad - who and what is hushing up?

Summarizing

An unexpectedly good (if not excellent) result is not clear what the authors of the crash test are hiding.

And now for the doubters there are good pictures on the Drive:

On March 10, 2012, an accident occurred on the M10 Moscow-St. Petersburg highway involving 12 cars, including the UAZ Patriot.

The car withstood several strong blows in various places and at various angles of attack, including from a multi-ton truck.

Wherein EVERYONE WHO WAS IN THE PATRIOT IS ALIVE! only bruises and abrasions. And this is taking into account the fact that the Patriot is not equipped with airbags, belt pretensioners, etc.

I don’t write a lot of words, judge the scale and strength of the blows from the video and photos.

Some photos:

Who will say now that the UAZ Patriot is NOT a SAFE CAR?!
The Patriot saved the lives and health of his owner and passengers in this hellish mess!

Take care of yourself and your loved ones, be careful while driving!

The UAZ Patriot SUV has a wide popularity in operation among the population of Russia and not only. After all, if the early SUVs of the Ulyanovsk Automobile Plant were only mechanical units, now the modern UAZ Patriot is equipped with a large number of electronic assistants, which not only simplify the driver's part in driving a vehicle, but also increase traffic safety. Indeed, at present, the flow of cars on the road is so great that the creation of emergency at any time interval.

If the emergency cannot be avoided, then important role the car itself plays a role in ensuring safety for the driver and passengers. Many believe that the SUV is absolutely safe and in a collision is due to a minimal risk of development. fatality. But even the presence of a frame and high ground clearance cannot provide complete security for the driver and passengers of this SUV. Actually, in order to find out how safe the UAZ Patriot SUV is and how it behaves in an accident, special tests are carried out, which are called crash tests. It is about how the UAZ Patriot crash test passes that this material will tell.

UAZ Patriot is absolutely updated car UAZ-469, although some characteristics after all, the Patriot took over from his ancestor. These features include the frame, the pedal assembly, which has an offset to the left side, as well as the location of the transmission levers in the area of ​​​​the central tunnel. On this basis, it should be noted that the safety of the Patriot is not much higher than that of its ancestor, and there is still work to be done.

Also, the presence of the engine in front of the driver softens the blow, but cannot indicate that the driver and passengers will remain unharmed in a collision. But according to design features cars, the location of the engine in the front is an integral part of the structure of modern cars.

A crash test or an artificial accident is currently a very popular and mandatory procedure, since every buyer wants to know what he is buying and how expensive his safety is. It is important to note such a feature that the narrow-minded predecessor of the Patriot UAZ Simbir was not at all famous for its security features, as a result of which it never gained wide popularity and trust among the population. What security systems are available on the UAZ Patriot SUV, we will find out further.

Safety on UAZ Patriot

Even today it cannot be said that modern cars security systems meet all parameters. To make sure that the car is safe, crash tests or artificial accidents are carried out. A crash test is a specially created accident in which there are no casualties, and only the test car itself with a human dummy inside suffers. Each new one produced in given time, the car must be subject to a crash test, on the basis of which a safety assessment is established. The car is checked when the appropriate conditions are created:

1. The speed of the vehicle must not be lower than 50 km/h (usually 64 km/h), at which the off-road vehicle performs frontal collision with a barrier of 40% overlap.
2. The car is checked in a side collision, on the basis of which the possibility of damage to the SUV from the side is determined. The impact is made at a speed of 50 km / h.
3. A passing collision is also carried out at an obstacle speed of 36 km / h, thereby simulating a collision in front of pedestrian crossing or a traffic light.

Checking cars for safety by creating an artificial accident is carried out according to the system European standard, characterized as an authoritative and demanding factor.

Security systems of any vehicle are divided into two types:

• passive;
• active.

Depending on the number of components included in the list of the security system, one can judge the potential safety of the vehicle and passengers. Cars such as Mercedes are characterized by a list with 30 positions, which increases the safety rating, but the 2014 UAZ Patriot has only 5 positions. Actually, we can say that the safety on the UAZ Patriot SUV is not as high as many car owners think.

Crash test and its components

A crash test or an artificial accident is not only a direct collision with an obstacle of the vehicle being tested, but also a host of other types of tests. We will learn about all types of crash tests of the UAZ Patriot SUV using the EURONCAP system.

1. Safety of children during their transportation by UAZ Patriot. The evaluation criteria include fasteners for the installation of special child seats, as well as the direct safety of children aged 1.5 to 3 years.
2. Checking the safety of the driver and passenger for front seat. These criteria are tested in a collision in three variations: frontal, side and pole.
3. Safety of pedestrians. AT this case a check is carried out on the number of injuries of a pedestrian who is hit by an UAZ Patriot SUV.

In 2010, a crash test was carried out, on the basis of which results were obtained that characterize the safety of an SUV. For the crash test, special conditions were created on the basis of which the test was carried out. These conditions include:

Auto after test hit

• the speed of the UAZ Patriot SUV is 64 km/h;
• collision with an obstacle that is 40% overlapping the frontal part.

As a result of the final results, the following conclusions were made that the Patriot scored 2.7 points out of 16. The result, of course, is deplorable, because the following types of violations were found:

• the steering wheel has shifted by 20 cm;
• the front pillar has also shifted towards the passenger compartment by 2.5 cm;
• the clutch pedal has shifted by 23.5 cm and the brake pedal by 27.2 cm.

What threatens such violations of the security system for the driver and passengers?

1. A passenger sitting in the front seat risks getting a chest fracture on the handle located on the front panel. In addition, it is known that there are no airbags on an SUV, which is a huge minus for such a vehicle.
2. The driver risks injury to the femur, because the load on it was 4.5 kN.
3. A torn off steering wheel, which the driver will surely hit with his head and thereby cause fatal injury to himself. After all, the impact force is 93 q, instead of the permissible 88 q.
4. Parts of the body, such as the lower leg and feet, will also suffer. After all, the load on these parts of the body exceeds double permissible value. Soft plastics in the cabin can damage soft tissues by causing cuts. Indeed, during an artificial accident, it was revealed that there was a violation of the integrity of the plastic.
5. Not only passengers and the driver will suffer, but also the gas tank, which bursts during a collision and causes a fuel leak. Therefore, ignition of the fuel is not excluded, which will lead to an explosion.
6. popping out seat glass, but during the test it was not damaged, and did not cause damage to the driver and passengers.

the only positive moment SUV UAZ Patriot during an artificial accident is the fact that the geometry of the body was practically not affected, but this, unfortunately, will not save the driver and passenger in the front seat. If you are reading these lines, then you have an interest in doing something yourself in the car and really save because you already know that:

• Service stations break a lot of money for a simple computer diagnostics
• To find out the mistake you need to go to specialists
• Simple wrenches work in the services, but you can’t find a good specialist

And of course you are tired of throwing money down the drain, and it’s out of the question to ride around the service station all the time, then you need a simple ELM327 AUTO SCANNER that connects to any car and through a regular smartphone you will always find a problem, pay off the CHECK and save a lot! !!

It didn't break! The body of the Patriot was not torn off the frame, the pillows worked properly, pasted windshield cracked, but remained in the opening ... But the steering wheel soared up, and the 18-inch wheel tore the floor!

We have just conducted our 38th crash test as part of our This is the first impact in a series of new crash tests, and we have chosen the pioneer upgraded UAZ Patriot. Recall that during the Patriot, the body was torn off the frame, the driver hit his head with force on the steering wheel, and the passenger on the handrail on the front panel. The result is zero stars, 2.7 points and one of the last places in our rating.

But, it has a completely new telescopic steering column, the left front pillar is reinforced and there are new attachment points for the body to the frame. Although the first results are so far only based on visual inspection— turned out not to be as rosy as we expected.

The pre-impact speed was 64.9 km/h, slightly faster than the standard 64 km/h, but within the +/-- 1 km/h tolerance of the Euro NCAP procedure. The steering wheel has shifted less than six years ago, but it still looks at the ceiling, the pedals stand upright, and below, in the area of ​​​​the pedals, is a continuous mess of torn metal.

From the colored markers at the contact points and from the high-speed video footage, it is already clear that the driver's airbag took the brunt of the blow and reduced the G-forces that act on the driver's head. But the steering column, alas, did not develop enough: according to preliminary estimates, the magnitude of the bending moment that acts on the neck of the dummy exceeded the critical threshold, that is, with a high degree of probability, even now it can be argued that the driver of a real Patriot with such an impact faces a neck fracture.

Already on Monday, look for a video report about this blow on our YouTube channel, and we will publish the full report, detailed analysis and the final rating of the Patriot on our website at the end of January and in the printed issue of Auto Review No. 2, which will be released on January 23, 2017.

In the meantime, we remind you that our website is open. There you can learn in detail about how the pre-reform Patriot and its predecessor UAZ Simbir performed in our tests, what are the ratings of an independent assessment of passive safety and how they differ from each other, why Euro NCAP stars are sometimes invalid in Russia - and much more .

And one more important news. We at Autoreview have been conducting crash tests for 20 years already - and still did them alone, although all over the world any independent rating of passive safety exists with the support of partners and sponsors. In the Old World, Euro NCAP conducts crash tests with the money of European taxpayers, funds for tests in Latin America are given to the Latin NCAP committee by the Inter-American Development Bank - and so on.

Finally, we also have a partner: we still pay for crash tests ourselves, but cars “for slaughter”, including this Patriot, from now on help us to purchase Insurance Company RESO-Guarantee. And there is mutual benefit in this. After all, our crash tests force automakers to release more safe cars- the death rate and injuries in road accidents are reduced, and with them the payments of insurers.

With the advent of a partner, we have not yet changed our crash test methodology and the ARCAP rating calculation scheme: they are based on the 2008 Euro NCAP committee frontal impact protocol (speed 64 km/h, 40% overlap, deformable barrier). The difference is in the nuances. For example, we evaluate head injuries according to the HIC integral criterion, even if there was no hard contact with interior elements.

Stay with us!