Expert answer

Hi Peter,

We may not be comparing apples with apples here, as the Euro NCAP testing and scoring system is constantly evolving, and there were significant changes to it in 2020. I'd urge you to search the Euro NCAP site for information on what those changes were, because it's highly unlikely that BMW made a less-strong/safe car than its predecessor. 

A five-star Euro NCAP car of 2019 would be unlikely to get the same score today, for example, and not just because of changes relating to driver-assistance systems.

Expert answer

Hi Teresa,

There is certainly a move that way, though don't expect all models to change all at once. It would appear that the car makers (not just Volkswagen) have listened to buyers such as you and critics such as us on this, and there will be a gradual reintroduction of some physical switchgear. Organisations such as Euro NCAP and even the EU are closely monitoring this, too, so we have high hopes for a return to less reliance on touchscreens for basic tasks in a car.

Volkswagen's recent show cars that preview forthcoming production models - such as the ID.1 and ID.2 - have buttons as well as a touchscreen.

Expert answer

Hi Abala,

I'm afraid that the 2019 model is the same one as tested by EuroNCAP in 2017, at this link.

Expert answer

Hi Debbie,

The EcoSport got four stars out of five on the Euro NCAP tests, with a 93 per cent adult protection score, 77 per cent child, 58 per cent pedestrian and 55 per cent safety assist. That makes it safe in an accident, but lacking a bit in standard active safety equipment.  

Expert answer

Hi Sue,

Safety record? Not really. The XC90 was first crash tested back in 2003 when Euro NCAP only gave stars for overall performance and pedestrian impact. At the time, the XC got a full five-star rating (rare at the time). Since then its score has only been matched in the class by the Mercedes-Benz M-Class in 2008, the Volkswagen Touareg in 2004, the BMW X5 in 2003 and, in the past couple of years, the new Mercedes M-Class, the new Range Rover and the Hyundai Santa Fe. Out of those, only the X5 and the Santa Fe come with seven seats (optionally in the case of the X5) and neither can match the space or comfort of the Volvo.

Expert answer

Hi Shirley,

Not massively. It’s OK, but in spite of being made in Korea, we wouldn’t recommend it, not least because Euro NCAP found it to be one of the most unsafe cars it’s ever crash-tested. If you want the best in reliability, buy Japanese…

Expert answer

Hi Justin,

It's not surprising to hear that the car won't go off-road - few do!

In terms of safety, the 2005 Volvo trumps the Discovery with a better Euro NCAP crash test rating.

The Volvo has a marginally better reliability record too, though most Discovery problems (affecting electrics and software) seem to apply to individual cars. Saying that it's worth ensuring its air suspension is in perfect working order. On the XC90 the injectors can play up, and they're expensive to repair, so get suspicious if the car doesn't start quickly.

Evidence points to the Volvo having the lower running costs too, with slightly better fuel economy and of course lower annual road tax due to the smaller engine. Maintenance will be costly enough in both cases, as could be insurance.

In cold hard facts it looks like the Volvo wins this battle Justin, but we'd not be put off the Discovery so easily - it's a great all-rounder as well.

Let us know how you get on.

Expert answer

Hi Justin,

Let's break it down into chunks. First of all, safety. Here are the crash test results from Euro NCAP:

Skoda: five stars on new system

Saab: five stars on old system

Volvo: four stars on old system

Looks like the Volvo loses out there, though it's a safe car by most standards.

In terms of reliability, the Skoda has no reported issues. The Saab doesn't fare so well, with plenty of electrical issues and problems with the suspension. Check for uneven tyre wear and that all the switches are working - every single one. The Volvo is a little better, but has a few known problems, with random electrical gremlins and several recalls. If you're serious about that one get confirmation that the recall work has been completed. Also, it should have its timing belt, tensioners and pulleys changed every four years so best to check that it has been done.

Assuming you're looking at the 105hp Superb, then the combined cycle consumption was quoted at about 5.7 litres/100km (50mpg) and it is a frugal car. The 150hp Saab uses a fraction more fuel (5.8 litres/100km) on the combined cycle, while the 136hp Volvo also uses 5.7 litre/100km.

So in summary, for us it would be between the Skoda and the Volvo. They're both comfortable and spacious, though we'd trust the reliability of the Superb more given the data.

Hope that helps.

Expert answer

Hi Adi,

Our usual point of reference is the Euro NCAP safety tests, but the G-Wagen has not been subjected to them. Our second source of data would be the US NHTSA tests, but again it looks like the Merc was not tested by that organisation.

The latest version of the G-Wagen comes with plenty of electronic driving aids to help with stability and traction, plus airbags, but it's not at the cutting edge of safety in terms of construction.

Sorry to not be able to give a more definitive answer.

Expert answer

Hi Shane,

I have looked back through the record of Euro NCAP (www.euroncap.com) and there is no major difference between the safety of a third row of seats and the second row of seats.

The modern SUV often has curtain airbags that run the length of the car and these can protect the rear seat passengers in the event of a side collision. There is also a row of seats in front of the third row of seats and this provides extra protection for the third row seats. 

Obviously they are closer to the rear of the car in a rear-end collision, but there is very little information about this available.

If there is anything else specific you'd like to know, please do get back in touch.