Report by Zhang Ruichen

Editor: Wu Xianzhi

On November 4th, the China Automotive Technology Research Center of the China Insurance Institute held an event in Beijing to announce the results of the China Insurance Automobile Safety Index evaluation. The test results of a total of 14 vehicles, including 9 sedans and 5 SUVs, were released.

Today, we will take a closer look at three new forces in the domestic new energy vehicles market: the Ideal L9, XPeng P5, and Seres W5.

The China Insurance Institute evaluated the vehicles’ crashworthiness and repair economy, interior and exterior safety of occupants and pedestrians, and vehicle auxiliary safety from four dimensions, and scored the test results into four levels: excellent (G), good (A), fair (M), and poor (P).

Crashworthiness and repair economy: Ideal L9 and Seres W5 (M)>(greater than) XPeng P5; the three aspects of interior and exterior safety of occupants and pedestrians and vehicle auxiliary safety all received excellent scores.

First, let’s talk about the performance of the Ideal L9 in this China Insurance Institute crash test.

The Ideal L9 claims to be the “best SUV under 5 million RMB”, and apart from the crashworthiness and repair economy index receiving a fair (M) score, all other test scores were excellent (G). This performance can be said to be outstanding in this China Insurance Institute crash test.

Through the 25% offset crash replay, we can see that the A-pillar and sill of the Ideal L9 are almost completely undamaged. The impact force inside the cabin is not great, the passenger compartment structure is very intact, and the safety dummy inside the vehicle is safe and sound. It can be seen that the safety airbag firmly supported the dummy.

However, compared to the Ideal ONE, the first car the company produced, the Ideal L9 has been downgraded by removing the knee airbag.

It is worth mentioning that in this China Insurance Institute crash test, the Ideal L9 also applied for participation in the 25% offset crash for the passenger seat. It adopts a similar design to Volvo’s wheel-throw protection, and the structure is intact. It can be seen that Ideal is very confident in this China Insurance Institute crash test.## Let’s Take a Look at the Performance of XPeng P5 Again

Overall, XPeng P5 received a rating of G (excellent) on the safety of occupants in vehicle collisions, pedestrian safety outside the vehicle, and vehicle safety features closely related to passenger safety. Only the maintenance economy index was rated P (poor).

In this year’s China-NCAP crash test of 14 vehicle models, two vehicles received an A (excellent) rating for maintenance economy, 5 vehicles received an M (average) rating, and the remaining 7 vehicles received a P (poor) rating. It seems that the performance of XPeng P5 in this aspect is consistent with most of the other vehicle models.

In August of this year, a XPeng P5 and a Nissan sedan collided at an intersection, with the front left side of the XPeng P5 colliding with the wheel of the Nissan vehicle. The damage was minor, but the repair list showed that the price of a laser radar alone was 8,916 yuan, bringing the total cost to 19,022 yuan.

Will poor maintenance economy lead to a decline in sales in the future? I don’t think so. The reason for the high repair costs is that XPeng P5 is equipped with a large number of sensors, radars, cameras, and other components all around the vehicle, meeting the standards for new energy vehicles known for their intelligence and technology.

However, even a slight road collision can easily damage these components, which are generally expensive to replace.

Poor maintenance economy may become a trend. As new energy vehicles continue to develop, more and more technologies such as advanced driver assistance and intelligent configuration will be added to cars. But with them, there inevitably comes a rise in maintenance costs.

Finally, Let’s Talk About the Most Controversial Aito Wanjie M7

In the most representative 25% off-center collision video, the “A-pillar of the Aito Wanjie M7 test vehicle appears to have been deformed”, attracting a lot of attention from the industry.

In this test, the AITO Wanjie M7 received a good (A) evaluation only in the “upper occupant compartment intrusion” item of the vehicle structure, while the rest of the evaluation results were G.

Some industry insiders have questioned the safety of AITO Wanjie M7, saying, “With a starting price of as high as 3.198 million yuan, more efforts should be made in terms of vehicle body strength.”

There are also opinions that overall, the vehicle’s safety is guaranteed since AITO Wanjie M7 has achieved excellent scores of G in the other three safety tests.

On the evening of October 9th, the Weibo blogger “Huawei Intelligent Car Solution Engineer” @PengeShitou explained, “Front 25% offset collision does not equal poor safety even if the A-pillar is deformed. Deformation does not equal fracture. Fracture and deformation are two completely different concepts.”

Although many people question the reversal of right and wrong in this statement, the fact is that the hardness of the A-pillar does not necessarily mean safety. From the perspective of evaluation criteria, driver injury evaluation is the key evaluation item, which has the largest proportion and the greatest influence on the overall rating. In a real collision scene where the driver compartment is not invaded by external forces, the intact space ensures the driver’s safety. In addition, timely and correct deployment of safety airbags and side curtains further improve safety.

However, from another perspective, A-pillar deformation can indeed cause the door to be unable to open, which may bring certain difficulties for the owner’s self-rescue at critical moments.

Conclusion

The collision test results of China Insurance Research Institute do not represent everything. The excellent performance of a model does not mean that the car is definitely good, safe, and has high sales. As for models like Wanjie, although they indeed need to be improved, they should not be dismissed outright.

This article is a translation by ChatGPT of a Chinese report from 42HOW. If you have any questions about it, please email bd@42how.com.