Masha - ЗАЗ Таврiя (ZAZ Tavria) - Слава Україні (#SlavaUkraini) - let's get legal! (Then decide).

[St.Jude]

31 minutes ago, Fumbler said:

What an intriguingly weird and dangerous bit of design

Soviet air bag comrade.

[Tadhg Tiogar]

Er....yeah....

 

[Jim Bell]

Is that the best colour? 

Pretty sure that's the best colour. 

It could be likened to a hearing aid or an early design prosthetic foot. 

 

Sky blue would be a step down on my score card. 

[Zelandeth]

It's a simple fact - beige cars are made of win.

Really rewarding colour to polish up actually I found.

Having long had a fascination with cars from that corner of the world and having had a string of Ladas (1x Niva, 2x Rivas and a Samara) and Skodas (130GL, 135RiC, 120LX) over the years I'll definitely be following this with interest.

[High Jetter]

If Sam bought it, has to be good. Well saved.

[Spurious]

It looks like a Russian Citroen Visa. Which makes it already sound interesting. I love seeing former Eastern bloc and Soviet cars when I'm out in Poland. 

Watching with interest 🙂

[Rod/b]

7 hours ago, Tadhg Tiogar said:

Er....yeah....

 

That synth “man in the mirror” ripoff 😂

[Talbot]

13 hours ago, Fumbler said:

That spare was the most rigid thing in that engine bay in that crash test. Rammed the steering wheel and dash straight into the driver's face. Nice.

What an intriguingly weird and dangerous bit of design.

The nose-hinged bonnet staying firmly attached to the front of the car and the trailing edge punching through the windscreen aperture was quite a feature too.

[Fumbler]

48 minutes ago, Talbot said:

The nose-hinged bonnet staying firmly attached to the front of the car and the trailing edge punching through the windscreen aperture was quite a feature too.

I didn't notice that the first time. They've thought of everything, haven't they?

[St.Jude]

11 minutes ago, Fumbler said:

I didn't notice that the first time. They've thought of everything, haven't they?

To be fair, if you're in a car that's going to crumple like that, do you want to be alive long enough to see your head smash the wall?

The air bag and bonnet edge are there to put you out of any misery you may experience. 

[Bear]

15 hours ago, dollywobbler said:

That looks very odd indeed! Floating MacPherson struts.

No, just blackish underseal - I will take better pictures this weekend. The struts are very inboard though, reminds me of a current Honda Civic.

[Lacquer Peel]

Is it much worse than crash tests of dated capitalist cars of the 90s? See Rover 100, Vauxhall Sintra, Chrysler Voyager and more.

[Leyland Worldmaster]

2 minutes ago, Lacquer Peel said:

Is it much worse than crash tests of dated capitalist cars of the 90s? See Rover 100, Vauxhall Sintra, Chrysler Voyager and more.

I was thinking similar thoughts! 😱

Loving the beigeness though! A thoroughly fascinating car! 👍 👍 👍 😎 😎 😎 

[Fumbler]

7 minutes ago, St.Jude said:

To be fair, if you're in a car that's going to crumple like that, do you want to be alive long enough to see your head smash the wall?

The air bag and bonnet edge are there to put you out of any misery you may experience. 

Agreed, it's a vehicle you weren't supposed to crash at any cost.

 

5 minutes ago, Lacquer Peel said:

Is it much worse than crash tests of dated capitalist cars of the 90s? See Rover 100, Vauxhall Sintra, Chrysler Voyager and more.

Yes in some respects, Western cars from this era crashed into a solid wall performed a bit better, the Metro/100 definitely so. However, the Tavria and all 3 you've mentioned failed horribly on the front offset crash. It just wasn't a part of their design.
That's all aside from other "features" the ZAZ has, like the bonnet-turned-spear and structural spare wheel.

[Bear]

The bonnet spike is quite the flourish even against those.

The Voyager never performed as badly IRL as those tests and some have suggested the Rover 100 was rather poorly made so broke more than expected.

Which obviously won’t be a factor in a fine ZAZ.

[horriblemercedes]

11 hours ago, Tadhg Tiogar said:

Er....yeah....

 

I feel like they were actively aiming for more shite points when they chose a rip off of Michael Jackson's Man in the Mirror as background music 

[Lacquer Peel]

The Tavria in that test is clearly secondhand. 

Why would a new Rover 100 presented for a crash test be "poorly"?

I have a 1997 Volvo and its NCAP crash test looks grim compared to newer cars. I suppose we just shouldn't crash our old cars into NCAP walls or offsets. 

 

[Fumbler]

16 minutes ago, Lacquer Peel said:

The Tavria in that test is clearly secondhand. 

Why would a new Rover 100 presented for a crash test be "poorly"?

I'm wondering if it was actually new. Besides, that wouldn't have mattered much as it was designed in the later 70's to be crashed into a solid, straight wall. Not any of this offset nonsense(!). The vehicle itself may not have been built to exceptional standards, either, but again that needn't really matter as it's a test on the structure of the car. The tooling used for making the shells was 18 years old, however, so perhaps it could have got old and tired over the years. I knew some superminis they did all their tests back then weren't new at the time of testing- they had 5 K11 Nissan Micras tested in 1997, whereas the Micras they were using hasn't been in production since 1995.

16 minutes ago, Lacquer Peel said:

I have a 1997 Volvo and its NCAP crash test looks grim compared to newer cars. I suppose we just shouldn't crash our old cars into NCAP walls or offsets. 

 

Nearly every car from back then isn't going to hold up well to these tests because the tests present a worst case scenario to the vehicle, something which wasn't in their design. If you were to crash, you would rely on the car's ability to decelerate and for the seatbelts, collapsible column and/or airbags to help stop the occupants from rocketing into the dash. Realistically, cars back then relied on the driver's wits to prevent the car from crashing, used good braking and suspension systems to help minimise the loss of control. The main aim of the car was to drive it, not crash it.

[Supernaut]

[Talbot]

37 minutes ago, Lacquer Peel said:

Is it much worse than crash tests of dated capitalist cars of the 90s?

Not really:

I don't think I'd like to be any any one of these in any kind of crash TBH.  They don't look any better than the Tavria.  the Metro in particular has all the structural rigidity of wet toilet paper.

[motorpunk]

Great thread. I love commie rubbish. I have an urge to come over and polish the thing, and I hate cleaning cars normally.

Good luck! 

[Zelandeth]

In the interests of representing that corner where safety was concerned... here's my evidence of how the Czech offering handled a very real world frontal offset crash test.  At significantly more than 30mph.

A lot better than anyone would have expected I think - even keeping in mind that it was rear engined.

[St.Jude]

3 hours ago, Fumbler said:

I'm wondering if it was actually new. Besides, that wouldn't have mattered much as it was designed in the later 70's to be crashed into a solid, straight wall. Not any of this offset nonsense(!). The vehicle itself may not have been built to exceptional standards, either, but again that needn't really matter as it's a test on the structure of the car. The tooling used for making the shells was 18 years old, however, so perhaps it could have got old and tired over the years. I knew some superminis they did all their tests back then weren't new at the time of testing- they had 5 K11 Nissan Micras tested in 1997, whereas the Micras they were using hasn't been in production since 1995.

Nearly every car from back then isn't going to hold up well to these tests because the tests present a worst case scenario to the vehicle, something which wasn't in their design. If you were to crash, you would rely on the car's ability to decelerate and for the seatbelts, collapsible column and/or airbags to help stop the occupants from rocketing into the dash. Realistically, cars back then relied on the driver's wits to prevent the car from crashing, used good braking and suspension systems to help minimise the loss of control. The main aim of the car was to drive it, not crash it.

I mentioned this in another thread about car safety, but it's worth mentioning here again.

The NCAP rating changes over the years, and it isn't just how the structure of the car holds up. Things like air bags, pre-emptive braking, make a difference to the scores. My Peugeot 107, when I bought it new in 2010, had a 4 star NCAP. That was reduced to 3 stars in 2013, because it didn't have side air bag curtains or traction control (something like that). The rest of it was fine.

Plus you're right, the main aim of the car is for it to be driven, not crashed.

[Fumbler]

1 minute ago, St.Jude said:

I mentioned this in another thread about car safety, but it's worth mentioning here again.

The NCAP rating changes over the years, and it isn't just how the structure of the car holds up. Things like air bags, pre-emptive braking, make a difference to the scores. My Peugeot 107, when I bought it new in 2010, had a 4 star NCAP. That was reduced to 3 stars in 2013, because it didn't have side air bag curtains or traction control (something like that). The rest of it was fine.

Plus you're right, the main aim of the car is for it to be driven, not crashed.

Well said.

[martc]

Here's an advert for one of the Travia's older relatives, the 968. Nobody thought of straightening the rear view mirror first.

[bezzabsa]

4 hours ago, Zelandeth said:

In the interests of representing that corner where safety was concerned... here's my evidence of how the Czech offering handled a very real world frontal offset crash test.  At significantly more than 30mph.

A lot better than anyone would have expected I think - even keeping in mind that it was rear engined.

You've made me realise how much I loved my 2 skoda's...105 & a 130se..surprising fun to drive, even more so on an empty roundabout

[Pieman]

4 hours ago, Zelandeth said:

In the interests of representing that corner where safety was concerned... here's my evidence of how the Czech offering handled a very real world frontal offset crash test.  At significantly more than 30mph.

A lot better than anyone would have expected I think - even keeping in mind that it was rear engined.

If I remember correctly, didn't a tanker lorry belt you in the front wheel at a crossroads?

[Zelandeth]

5 minutes ago, Pieman said:

If I remember correctly, didn't a tanker lorry belt you in the front wheel at a crossroads?

Yep, minor road crossing a major 60mph one - he failed to give way at the crossroads so I ploughed straight into the nearside corner of his cab at 60 minus the 0.2mph or so I had time to scrub off when I realised they weren't stopping.

[Bear]

No exciting updates yet - bank holiday weekend interrupted by bad medical news for a friend so we focused on that, but I've ordered new boot gas struts, found a couple of options for Ukrainian or Russian show plates (I could probably get away with a Ukrainian-Euro front plate with the UK number on too, but they don't have yellow rear plates).

Added fuel and moved it around, started eagerly, first time, found reverse first time. I keep treating it like it's make of origami and I suspect it's far more robust than that. Downloaded a service book and I think the trick to getting tyres and wheel balancing is to obtain a front wheel hub unbolted from the disc (the front brakes on this are a thing of wonder, as in, you wonder WTF they were thinking). Let it get up to temp, heater is working well.

[Bear]

On 4/30/2021 at 1:52 PM, St.Jude said:

I mentioned this in another thread about car safety, but it's worth mentioning here again.

The NCAP rating changes over the years, and it isn't just how the structure of the car holds up. Things like air bags, pre-emptive braking, make a difference to the scores. My Peugeot 107, when I bought it new in 2010, had a 4 star NCAP. That was reduced to 3 stars in 2013, because it didn't have side air bag curtains or traction control (something like that). The rest of it was fine.

Plus you're right, the main aim of the car is for it to be driven, not crashed.

I write a fair bit about this; it really annoys me that the Sandero now gets the Daily Mail-style KILLER CAR attitude because it got two stars.

It performs pretty well in the MUCH tougher 2021 crash tests (I double check when writing, but the benchmarks for crash protection were heavily revised in 2017/8 - the pressures for marginal/good protection on chest area, etc.) and mostly loses stars because it won't spot a pedestrian and brake for you or steer for you.

That, to me, really isn't a safety rating. That's a 'can it do your job for you rating'. When Euro NCAP moved to that model, rather than five stars for CRASH performance, and five stars for convenience/assistance, I lost all faith in it as anything more than a marketing exercise.

OTOH, have you noticed cars are getting lighter again after the horrors of Renaults' five-start megabarge bloat and Modus that could drive through a Volvo? Maybe a Tavria would get three stars if I fitted it with driver assistance, Isofix points and city-safe braking...