Want to buy a Tata Safari but worried about lack of GNCAP safety rating

Being aware of oil filter intrusion issue and lack of GNCAP rating for Safari, I spoke to few insiders at the dealership and to my surprise, they accepted that this is a known issue on condition of maintaining anonymity for obvious reasons

BHPian Turbojet recently shared this with other enthusiasts.

Hi,

Last Saturday I took a test drive of Tata Safari at a NCR dealership with captain seats and instantly fell in love with the performance, comfort/ride quality and road presence of the car. Although it doesn’t represent the pedigree of previous safari but still its much better than all other rivals i have driven.

Being aware of oil filter intrusion issue and lack of GNCAP rating for Safari, i spoke to few insiders at the dealership and to my surprise, they accepted that this is a known issue on condition of maintaining anonymity for obvious reasons

I remember reading about it in Ram87pune’s post

I was told there are few changes being made to Safari for the scheduled GNCAP tests later this year. Now i am in a dilemma whether to spend 25+ lakhs on a vehicle which has this issue or to wait till end of this year when this issue has been resolved.

Any thoughts would help. XUV700 is not being considered due to insane waiting time.

Thanks

Here’s what GTO had to say on the matter:

Personally, I would wait for the updated GNCAP version (although my no.1 choice in the segment remains the XUV700). My source too indicated that some changes are being made to the Safari line-up. Here’s our dedicated thread on the same.

When cheaper Tata models have gotten 5-star safety ratings, there is no reason for the flagship Safari to score any less. Tata will go all out, especially now that arch rival Mahindra XUV700 got full marks in the test. Egos are big in the auto industry & such rivalry makes things better for us customers.

Here’s what BHPian ron178 had to say on the matter:

There might be under-the-skin changes to the Safari, I’m not quite sure – I wish ram87pune could throw some light on it – but you also have to remember the big changes happening at Global NCAP this year. You might also see a video presentation from Global NCAP in a while.

Personally, I think there’s a chance that Tata might be confident of doing well in the new protocols by offsetting the rumoured mediocre(?) frontal impact with other tests that were not performed earlier (side+pole impact, ESC, pedestrian impactor). The report also claims that the Harrier/Safari might be tested in the ‘later half of 2022’ (which is incidentally when the protocols come into force).

But you shouldn’t trust me on this. I could be very wrong. There is a good chance they might have made changes for frontal impact too, because no matter the protocol you just cannot get away with a frontal impact that’s as bad as ram87pune claimed.

As a parallel example, the RHD 2015 Kia Carnival tested in Australia by ANCAP had horrible footwell intrusion and rupture unlike the LHD car. In Australia, generally four stars = corporate disaster (individuals & fleets don’t buy, insurance companies pay out less for claims, etc). So Kia had to structurally update the 2016 Carnival’s footwell to score five stars, despite ANCAP also doing a lot more tests than just the frontal impact. Similarly, with Global NCAP, frontal impact will still form half of the total score and if the total front+side impact score isn’t good, paying for extra tests (ESC, pole, pedestrian) would be useless because they’re just requirements for higher stars but don’t add to the score.

Tata might have had similar pressure now, with them realising the marketing value of a good result and also the XUV700 scoring five stars (though under the older protocols). Even Tata has done it before with the Zest when the older one without airbags zeroed. The one with airbags had structural changes to the footwell too, and it was implemented in production much later than the test on the first car, which explains the huge difference between the publication dates of the no-airbag vs airbag Zest (it was tested with the Scorpio, Eeco etc and was intended to be published in the same round but was published much later, same applies to the Honda Mobilio).

If you are getting the Safari now, please get it with the optional side and curtain airbags. They could protect in multiple other types of crashes that Global NCAP did not previously test for, and more. Same applies if you decide to choose the XUV700 or any other rival.

Should you wait? It’s really your choice. Even if it turns out the current Safari has a bad frontal impact you will have size on your side. The NCAP ODB test is against a static deformable barrier and represents a car crashing into another car of the same weight, both moving at ~50km/h. You can use the rating as a tool to compare cars in the same segment, like a Safari with the XUV700 or a Punch with an Ignis. It’s still probably a lot better (for occupants) than a lot of other crash partners on the road, like a smaller car. And a five star rival is probably just as dangerous in a highway crash or an underride, but that’s not a valid excuse to neglect a better rated car because regardless of its size a car with good frontal impact performance is safer in a frontal off-centre car-to-car crash than a similar car with a weak frontal impact, which you might want to consider. You can’t decide what might, heaven forbid, crash into you.

Here’s what BHPian Kosfactor had to say on the matter:

As you open the driver`s door of the XUV7OO, the seat moves back and lowers itself for a comfortable egress. With a press of a button you are moved forward and up to a comfortable driving position with very good visibility.

Lets not pretend that an NCAP rating evens things out. It does not.

Keyword: Want to buy a Tata Safari but worried about lack of GNCAP safety rating