Wednesday, November 23, 2005

Pontiac G2


GM sells a version of the Daewoo Matiz in Mexico as a Pontiac. The G2 Matiz.
It's kind of funny and cute to see the Pontiac badge on such a small car...



Less cute ( and not funny at all...) are the result from crash tests in Europe.

Over there the same car is known as the Chevrolet Matiz.
Out of 15 cars recently tested, the Matiz got the worse score. Even compared with other small cars.

Officials claim a "small chance of survival" in a moderate speed crash (!!!)

9 comments:

Anonymous said...

Officials claim a "small chance of survival" in a moderate speed crash (!!!)
That has to be one of the scariest things I've ever heard/read :sad:

Anonymous said...

GM better scrap that thing.

Anonymous said...

More proof that asian cars arn't all that.

Anonymous said...

In this car and age, that a car could be so unsafe is an absolute atrocity! Shame on GM/Daewoo.

Vince Burlapp said...

I was in Mexico las year for a few days, and got to drive a "local" Dodge Neon.
I noticed it had no passenger airbag. Just an empty space "to put stuff" instead...
So safety regulations there are very different than in the US. (The G2 is for Mexico).
I just don't understand how it can be sold in Europe...

Anonymous said...

I'd prefer a small car to a large one but sold my old Mazda Protegé and bought a Honda Accord (airbags all around) a couple of years ago because traffic is now mostly composed of monster trucks and SUVs.

A tiny thing like that Pontiac-badged POS would be a death trap on American roads with about half the vehicles as huge as they are now. No matter where that POS is driven it's likely to be the loser in a crash.

GM should drop or fix that car rather than develop a reputation for producing the least safe small car.

In any case, GM is a mess and needs new leadership.

Anonymous said...

What the Euro NCAP site (www.euroncap.com) actually says is 'Amongst the latest Euro NCAP results released today is a struck-through three-star rating for the Chevrolet Matiz for adult occupant protection. The strike-through indicates an unacceptably high risk of life-threatening injury in one aspect of the car’s performance, in this case chest protection in side impact.' and makes no mention of a 'small chance of survival in a crash'. The Matiz doesn't get results as good as the latest Punto or Yaris, but this is mostly because its a fairly old car (1998) which is being retested as a result of the Chevy rebranding. Overall ratings have improved a lot in the last ten years, mostly due to EuroNCAP's influence. Remember that a three star Euro NCAP test is still about equivilant to a 5-star US government rating, and the Matiz is no worse than any other small car its age. The Euro NCAP website also shows that its not the worst car in its class, just the worst in the latest batch of tests.
Check the facts a little more carefully next time please. (great blog otherwise though.)

Vince Burlapp said...

You are right about the Matiz being introduced in 1998. The old one.
The one just tested was redesigned and is a second generation. It came out in early 2005.

The source I had for the info did state" a small change of survival".
I guess it is pretty obvious when you see the picture of the crash, where the doors and roof are actually folding.
it is a matter of speech , but I think "unacceptably high risk of life-threatening injury", is pretty much the same as "small chance of survival" to me...

Anonymous said...

a new fascia and headlamps don't make it a new car, it's just a facelift on the same old car. also the picture shows what to me is a fairly reasonable performance - the passenger cell is intact, and the airbag prevents contact with the steering wheel. these are factors which would kill you in a frontal impact, and actually EuroNCAP don't question its performance on this test. the strike-through on the test result is only for the side impact result.
and yes it may be a question of semantics, but i don't see how you equate unacceptably 'high risk of life-threatening injury' with near-guaranteed instant death. i read this as 'there is a higher than normal risk that you may get an injury which may threaten your life in a side impact'.
the matiz may be behind the competition but to label it a deathtrap is wide of the mark.