Three hundred Newton stage tests were completed, and three physical vehicles were broken: questions not answered in the new report V800 of the Observatoire

On the morning of 13 October, the Zhub vehicle disclosed to the owner and sales owner a third-party test note for the V800 brake pedal: the inspection component met industry requirements under the 1,500 Newton standard test and the sample of the maximum 3,000 Newton load was not visible in the eye. Five days ago, the Automobile Information Platform (VIF) learned that the Autodeer had just filmed three Zenit V800s in a series of emergency brake tests at 100 km/h, with the pedals fractured. The two outcomes appear to be mutually exclusive, and in practice the subject of the test, the way in which the test is conducted and the scope of responsibility are not identical. The news center is not “who won the Internet debate” anymore, but is it possible for Chinese consumers to know how much safety they have left when they face real emergency conditions in their own cars?

On 8 October, the master of the car conducted an emergency closed-site brake test on the upper limit of V800, which was the result of three different car purchases. The first, third, fourth and third emergency brakes broke down during the pedals. The master of the platform ' s vehicle security content, who took down the pedal, pointed to a similar fracture position in three vehicles; The third test vehicle recorded a peak of 1612 N.O. Testers suspect, on this basis, that the structure is not strong enough, but that a video is still not a complete validation report and cannot be determined separately as to which step in the material, retrofitting, assembly or test operation caused the lapse.

Are 14 samples eligible, equal to all current car safety?

The reporter of the Securities Times disclosed on 13 October that the tests were completed by the S.A. Testing Centre of the Chinese Institute of Automotive Engineering, Inc., and were based on QC/T 788-2018, " Performance Requirements for Car Pedition Devices and Test Method for Stations ". In the 1,500 N.P.L., the average pedal shift was 2.61 mm, below the 5 mm limit; The intensive tests raised the payload to a level of up to 3,000 Newtons, and the relevant visual inspection of the samples was not marked with cracks or damage. The summary published, which involved 14 pedals in total; Not all of the samples were tested at the 3,000 Newtons highest level, and specific sample groups had to cross-check with the original report.

More notably, the third-party institutions themselves have their own qualifications. The reporter of the Securities Times, who had consulted the CSACS archives by the report number, confirmed the existence of the report but indicated that it was only tested on samples sent by the enterprise and that there was no guarantee that the content of the report circulated online had been changed. (a) At least three unbridled lines: the delivery of new components and the testing of the same materials and structures as the interrupted fracture components; Whether slow-load laboratory stand-ups can be directly compared with the instant-driving stress; The sample is qualified to represent all the production batches that have been sold.

Static loading is not meaningless and it allows the test to be made whether the structure meets clear criteria under specified conditions; Nor can actual motorization tests directly be deemed illegal for production simply because of damage. If the two sets of tests differ, the correct treatment is not the selection of a brand or one of the media to stand in a team, but the review of the original material, the stress position, the curve of the force, the angle of the installation, the environmental conditions and the damage pattern. Consumers need experiments that can be repeated by other agencies, not just two conflicting short videos and long maps.

The manufacturer said that “standards are met” and “free upgrades”, which instead made the replacement programme a focus of responsibility

In its response of 8 October, the esteemed authorities stated that the actual delivery of vehicles had not yet occurred with similar known failures and that the media had taken extreme work, and remained committed to optimizing pedals and providing free upgrades to the owners of the vehicles delivered. The Daily Economic News interview with the Beijing Kungbing Marketing Centre on 9 October said that the in-house traffic had been affected and that new deliveries had been optimized, but that it was not possible to provide detailed structural or material descriptions for the change in the spare parts. Chen Quan, Professor of the University of Qinghua School of Vehicles and Transportation, stated that emergency brakes were a condition for car design and recommended that the parts suppliers, factory-exit tests and installation links be inspected; The expert opinion points to the direction of the investigation, not to the extent that the regulatory body has identified deficiencies.

The spread of events has also changed. On 9 October, several media reports learned that the King's test video had disappeared from some social platforms and that the relevant video page had been issued with a warning of irregularities. Whether the complaint, the Platform ' s rules or other factors have resulted in a sufficient public basis to determine whether the reasons for the deletion are identified as an administrative order. However, the sudden difficulty of access to security-related test evidence makes it more difficult for the public to independently review and highlights the importance of publicly preserving test data.

For the producers of the Gang-yeon automobiles, the Chinese and the department responsible for product regulation, it is now necessary to answer at least four questions: how are the actual parts loaded and the parts checked? How the serial numbers of the new and old batches and the updated parts are identified; How to communicate clearly to the owner the risks and the use restrictions before the replacement; The completion of the free upgrade requires the initiation of formal deficiency investigations and recall procedures. The report demonstrated that the samples were sent to meet the targets under specific shelf conditions, without automatic back-up of the fracture images of the three test vehicles and without the obligation to hold the enterprise responsible for the continued safety of thousands of consumers.

The safety of a car should not be put to a vote by fans. The dispute over V800 in the hierarchy could be turned from a saliva to a real vehicle safety error only if the complete test method for review by third parties, the manufacturer's disclosure of the change and maintenance coverage of the parts, and the regulatory body's clear response to any systemic deficiencies.