Mitsubishi Australia boss calls for global safety standards
Mitsubishi has called for independent crash-test standards in developing markets to match those in Australia and Europe – as it faces the possibility of no suitable five-star replacement for one of its top-selling models.
The boss of Mitsubishi Australia has called for one set of global safety rating standards – and a revision of Australia’s ANCAP test protocols – as it stares down the barrel of no replacement for the top-selling, 13-year-old ASX small SUV.
While many global crash-test authorities wear ‘NCAP’ branding – and advertise safety scores for similar vehicles as star ratings – the test protocols can differ vastly between countries and regions.
Since 2018 Australia and New Zealand safety organisation ANCAP has aligned its test standards with its European counterpart, Euro NCAP – but the standards used in Asia and Africa are much lower and not as stringent.
Mitsubishi Australia CEO Shaun Westcott told an Australian media briefing “there should be a discussion around … ANCAP’s role” after the end of local manufacturing six years ago.
It comes as Mitsubishi faces the possibility of having no replacement for the strong-selling ASX small SUV that can meet Australian safety standards before the current model reaches the end of the road.
Among the candidates is a new small SUV based on last year’s XFC concept, but it has been designed for South-East Asian markets with less stringent safety standards – and would require costly upgrades to earn five ANCAP stars in Australia.
“We’re in a world where we used to manufacture cars in Australia, and the cars needed to be tested by ANCAP. Today we live in a different world. We don’t manufacture cars in Australia. I believe there should be some kind of standardisation globally around NCAP requirements.
“The reality is Australia has [an annual new-car market] of one million vehicles, and within that one million there are 63 brands, and as you know some brands go from a couple of hundred, to a couple of thousand cars.
“If we took that XFC platform we would have to re-engineer the entire car for the Australian market, because the requirements of ANCAP are not requirements in the other markets where we will sell that vehicle.
“If you take the numbers – anything between 15,000 and 20,000 [annual sales for a new ASX] – and the tooling investment and re-engineering costs to redesign the car for ANCAP’s requirements will be many, many, many millions of dollars, to be able to sell 20,000 vehicles a year? The numbers just don’t stack up.”
He added: “We are not saying we should compromise safety in any way, not at all.
“What I’m advocating for is that there should be some kind of global standard around safety, because at the moment Europe has its own set of safety regulations, Australia has its own, America has its own. Everyone in the world is doing their own thing. You can buy a cell phone anywhere in the world, an Apple phone, and it’s standardised.”
Mr Westcott said designing vehicles to meet different safety regulations in each market “incrementally and significantly increases the costs” in showrooms.
“What that means is the consumer ultimately pays more, and it could also mean that ultimately consumers may have this choice where consumers are just denied certain models in certain markets because of a particular position [on requiring five-star safety].
“There is an opportunity for a global standardisation around safety and safety requirements.”
Independent crash-testing standards are distinct from the mandatory government regulations cars must meet to be sold in a country – which can differ widely depending on the country, and are not as strict as the independent tests.
ANCAP and Euro NCAP largely unified their standards in 2018 – with the exception of some child-seat requirements specific to Australia – which allows European ratings to be carried across to ANCAP with less Australia-specific testing than a regular ANCAP-run safety rating.
The standards used by JNCAP in Japan, and US government and independent safety organisations NHTSA and IIHS are different – while the protocols used by Global NCAP for Asia, Africa and Latin America are much lower than ANCAP or Euro NCAP.
Mitsubishi was subject to media attention for safety ratings two years ago when the Express – a rebadged version of the Renault Trafic – was hit with a zero-star ANCAP safety rating, the lowest score issued in the safety body’s history.
Although the Renault it was based on was introduced in 2014 – and earned a three-star safety score in Europe in 2015 – the Mitsubishi was unable to share the Trafic’s result as the rebadged model was not introduced within two years of the donor car – and as the Renault’s score was issued before European and Australian crash-test bodies aligned their test criteria.
The post Mitsubishi Australia boss calls for global safety standards appeared first on Drive.