The all-new Tata Tigor EV has received a 4-star crash rating for both adult and child occupants, making it the first EV to be tested by Global NCAP. In terms of safety, the Tigor EV is on par with the combustion-engined Tigor facelift, which received a four-star rating from GNCAP last year.
For adult and child occupants, the Tigor EV receives a 4-star safety rating. Both the petrol and electric versions now have a 4-star rating for the bodyshell and footwell area.
It is the 8th Tata car and the 44th overall to be tested as part of the ‘Safer Cars for India’ program, which began in 2014.
GNCAP Safety Rating
The updated Tata Tigor EV was evaluated by Global NCAP in its most basic safety specification, which included two airbags as standard.
The EV received a 4-star rating thanks to a test score of 12 out of a possible 17 for adult occupants and 37.24 out of 49 for child occupants. The head and chest protection for adult and child passengers was rated as “good,” while the driver’s protection was rated as “adequate.” The Tigor EV’s bodyshell and footwell, on the other hand, were rated as “unstable.”
According to GNCAP, the Tigor could be improved even more by including standard features such as Electronic Stability Control (ESC), side-impact protection, 3 point belts in all seating positions, and ISOFIX connectors. “Tata has shown consistent safety improvements throughout its fleet range,” says Alejandro Furas, Secretary-General of Global NCAP. The Tigor demonstrates that EV models, which can pose a technical challenge due to the electric powertrain system, can also be improved.”
David Ward, President of the Towards Zero Foundation, praises Tata Motors for its “continuing commitment to safety” with new powertrain technologies in order to achieve broader environmental and sustainability goals, saying, “Safety and sustainability improvements are possible for all manufacturers operating in the Indian market,” and that “Global NCAP would encourage them to follow Tata’s lead.”
Crash Test Observations
Adult Occupant Protection: The driver’s head protection was good, and the passenger’s head protection was adequate. The necks of both front passengers appeared to be well protected. The driver’s chest was adequately protected, while the passenger’s chest was well protected. Because they could collide with dangerous structures behind the dashboard, the driver’s and passenger’s knees provided only marginal protection. The tibias of both the driver and the passenger provided adequate and effective protection. The bodyshell was deemed unstable, and it could not withstand additional loads. The footwell was deemed unstable. The car comes equipped with a standard Seat Belt Reminder (SBR) for both the driver and the passenger.
Child Occupant Protection: The 3-year-olds and 1.5-year-olds’ child seats were installed rearwards facing with the seatbelt on, preventing excessive forward movement during the impact. The chest and head protection were adequate. The marking for Child Restraint Systems (CRS) was permanent. Incompatibility was not found with the recommended CRS. In the rear-center position, the vehicle only had a lap belt and no ISOFIX anchorages. The 4-star rating for child occupants was explained by all of the above.