Jeep’s new Wrangler has scored just one out of a possible five stars for crash safety.
ANCAP (Australasian New Car Assessment Program) has revealed the iconic American off-roader scored of just 50 per cent for Adult Occupant Protection, 49 per cent for Vulnerable Road User Protection and 32 per cent for Safety Assist.
Wrangler did however score a redeeming 80 per cent for Child Occupant Protection.
ANCAP has described the results as “disappointing” and “concerning”.
“The safety performance of the Wrangler is limited, falling well shy of the expected standard in three of the four key areas of assessment,” ANCAP chairman James Goodwin said.
“Chest protection was a concern for the driver and rear passenger in each of the frontal crash tests; a number of penalties were applied for structural deformation and potential leg injury hazards; and base variants lack autonomous emergency braking altogether,” Mr Goodwin said.
It’s not the first time an American car has fallen short of the market.
Ford’s hero Mustang scored just two stars on its first attempt, then three stars after making some adjustments.
The JL Jeep Wrangler was introduced in Australia and New Zealand in April 2019.
ANCAP tested the four-door variant with a diesel engine was tested.
The safety performance of two door and petrol engine variants is not expected to be significantly different and the safety rating therefore applies to all Wrangler variants.
Dual frontal and combination side airbags which protect both the chest and head of front seat occupants are standard.
Head-protecting side airbags are not offered for rear seating positions.
Autonomous emergency braking (AEB) is not standard, and therefore was not tested — but is available on some variants.
A lane support system is not available.
Wrangler scored just 50 per cent for adult protection in the frontal impact test.
The passenger compartment of the Jeep Wrangler did not retain its structural integrity in the frontal offset test.
Connection between the A-pillar and the cross facia beam was compromised, as was the footwell structure, and penalties were applied.
Protection of the chest was WEAK for the driver and ADEQUATE for the front passenger.
Structures in the dashboard were a potential source of injury for both the driver and passenger and protection of the upper legs was rated MARGINAL.