Taking stock of the past 30 years of independent vehicle safety testing, ANCAP reflects on the vehicle models first rated when testing began in 1993.

Commonplace on Australia's roads at the time were the Ford Falcon, Mitsubishi Magna, Holden Commodore and Mazda 626 – just to name a few.  These, together with the Honda Accord, Subaru Liberty, Nissan Pintara, Toyota Camry and Volvo 940 all featured in the first round of safety ratings released in 1993, in an effort to inform consumers about the safety features, or lack of, that were fitted to their everyday drives.

Known then as the New Car Assessment Program, or NCAP, its aim - which continues today - was to make safety as important to car buyers as engine performance, paint colour and external styling, and comfort.  

Back then, a single full-width frontal crash test at a speed of 56km/h was the only test conducted, with just one of the nine models tested offering an airbag for the driver (Volvo 940¹). The dominant, and in most cases only significant safety feature present in these vehicles was the standard seatbelt.  Subsequently, the results of the initial round of testing were sobering.

In the early tests, the relative protection offered to front-seat occupants (driver and front passenger) was measured and performance published using a colour-code system representing the degree of injury risk:

• Red indicated serious injury (brain damage likely, chest compression >75mm, upper leg injury likely); 
• Amber indicated moderate injury risk (brain damage possible, chest compression 50-75mm, upper leg injury possible); 
• Green indicated minimal risk of injury (brain damage, chest injury and upper leg injury unlikely).  

Star ratings were not introduced until 1999.

The Nissan Pintara, Holden Commodore and Honda Accord carried the highest risk of driver head injury.  The Holden Commodore, Subaru Liberty and Mitsubishi Magna carried the highest risk of front passenger head injury.  The standout performer was the Volvo 940.  

Fast forward to today, a handful of the nine vehicle models that featured in ANCAP's inaugural 1993 ratings release and their current owners gathered at the Western Sydney crash test laboratory, Crashlab, last week – an opportunity to reflect on the significant progress seen in vehicle safety over the past three decades. 

The omission of the most basic safety features Australian motorists have come to expect 30 years on was then put into tangible focus with the 1993 Mitsubishi Magna (TR series) crashed live in the presence of current 1993 model owners.  The reality observed in their reactions.

"When I bought my car, I chose it because I thought it was bigger and stronger than a compact car.  But seeing the results of this crash have made me realise that size and shape are somewhat irrelevant.  What makes the difference are the safety improvements that have been introduced over time," said Charlie Munns, current owner of a 1993 EB Ford Falcon.

Current owner of a 1993 Volvo 940, Stefan Bos, agreed, "For me, safety has always been important.  While my car is now 30 years old, it was the safest of its kind in ANCAP's early testing, and its great to see the safety thread continue and improve, and expand across different makes and models."

Dummy injury measurements recorded during the live commemorative crash showed the driver of the 1993 Mitsubishi Magna – offering safety features and performance representative of most models available in Australia at that time – would face a high risk of serious or fatal skull fracture and brain injury resulting from hard contact on the steering wheel without the cushion of an airbag.  High injury measurements were also recorded for the driver's upper and lower legs and pelvis, with moderate injury risk for the chest. 

The rear passenger would also have sustained serious injuries – slipping beneath the lap portion of the seatbelt with crash forces transferred across the abdomen.  

"We've seen vehicle safety advance in leaps and bounds over the past 30 years as a result of ANCAP's persistence and ability to influence consumer-driven change," said ANCAP Chief Executive Officer, Carla Hoorweg. 

"Our founders were originally met with strong resistance from vehicle manufacturers, yet today, they're the ones bringing forward new and innovative ways to prevent road crashes."

"Back then, the cars we drove were just regular cars.  We didn't think twice about what safety they offered, or didn't offer.  Today, the Australian consumer is well-informed and empowered with the tools to make safer vehicle choices, and the age of your vehicle can make all the difference," said Ms Hoorweg.

ANCAP was established with the support of 10 founding member organisations – the NSW Roads & Traffic Authority, VicRoads, QLD Department of Transport, SA Department of Transport, RACV, NRMA, RACQ, RAA, RAC and RACT.  Today, ANCAP is supported by 21 member organisations from across Australia and New Zealand.

• A copy of the original test results published by ANCAP in 1993 are available here.
• Video footage of ANCAP's commemorative crash test of the 1993 Mitsubishi Magna can be viewed here.

¹ Volvo 940

# # #

FOR MEDIA:  Additional detail

• The safety features offered in the TR series Mitsubishi Magna were limited, with basic lap-sash seat belts fitted to the two front and two rear seating positions, and a lap-only seat belt fitted to the centre rear seating position.  Airbags and other core passive safety features we've come to expect in today's cars were not available.

• Dummy measurements obtained during the demonstration test indicated a high risk of skull fracture and brain injury for the driver, with hard contact on the steering wheel observed.  

• Forward movement of the driver dummy's head recorded an acceleration of 107g which is more than double the acceleration measurements we see in typical modern five-star vehicles – the difference between potential fatal injury and survivability.

• In a modern vehicle, head injury is reduced by the airbag, in conjunction with reduced intrusion of the steering column and advanced seatbelts that control movement of the occupant.

• The driver's chest recorded a moderate risk of injury, though it is likely that that impact between the chest and the steering wheel was limited by the force sustained by the legs – reducing excessive forward movement of the driver dummy.  

• The chest was the only body region to score points (if using current ANCAP assessment criteria), scoring 1.63 points out of a possible 4.00 points for this body region, however, under current assessment protocols the chest score would be capped to 0.00 due to the high head injury risk, with the overall score for this vehicle limited to 0.00 points out of a total 16.00 points.  

• High injury measurements were recorded for the driver's upper and lower legs and pelvis.

• The femur load on the driver dummy's left leg was recorded at 9.94kN which is approximately three times greater than the loads seen in current vehicle models. 

• There was a significant amount of intrusion in the driver's footwell, which led to high loading on the driver's left and right tibias (lower legs).

• For the rear passenger there was high loading of the chest from the seatbelt.  'Submarining' was also observed, with the lap portion of the belt slipping off the pelvis and into the abdomen.

• The injuries recorded for the rear passenger would be likely to be substantially lower in a modern vehicle.  A seatbelt with pre-tensioner and load limiter would better control the movement of the occupant, while reducing peak loads to the chest.  This in combination with improved seatbelt geometry would reduce the risk of submarining. 

• These results – either in isolation by body region, or in combination – are indicative of a very high risk of serious or fatal injuries.

• The results from this test are not specific to this model.  They are consistent with the results observed in early ANCAP tests across a range of new car models with similar basic safety features.