Volvo’s FM and FH Aero have been named as the safest trucks on the market by renowned automotive safety testing body Euro NCAP.
The first Truck Safe 2024 results for new heavy goods vehicles awarded the maximum 5-star rating to the two Volvo models. The Scania G-series and Renault TruckS T tractor units were awarded a 4-star rating, while the Mercedes-Benz Actros L, Scania R-series, MAN TGX and DAF XF were all given 3-star scores. The Iveco S-Way scored the lowest, with a 1-star rating.
Euro NCAP began addressing commercial vehicle safety in 2021 with the introduction of a Commercial Van Rating based on the standard equipment levels found in LCVs. Euro NCAP hopes the launch of new truck testing will help inform businesses and fleets about their purchases, while promoting greater levels of standard safety systems.
The introduction of the EU’s General Safety Regulation 2 (GSR2) has increased the amount of standard equipment commercial vehicle manufacturers are having to fit to their vehicles, but Euro NCAP’s more stringent testing goes further than minimum safety system requirements. As a result, two of the initial HGVs tested (Iveco’s S-Way and the Mercedes-Benz Actros) have under-performed as the manufacturers did not wish to participate by supplying the most up-to-date models.
The testing looks at both active and passive safety, with Euro NCAP currently rating the trucks in two main categories, with plans for further assessment classifications at a later date.
For now, testing criteria covers Safe Driving, looking at the systems and overall design that will prevent the risk of an accident, and Collision Avoidance, where safety systems intervene to prevent and accident. A third classification for post-accident Rescue, assessing how emergency services can gain access to or make a vehicle safe, has seen all vehicles scored the same but will evolve as more vehicles (including electric trucks) are tested.
All manufacturers were invited to submit their largest tractor units for testing, with Scania and Volvo opting for additional testing of their G-series and FM models, respectively.
“Euro NCAP is voluntary, and we are only celebrating those manufactures that go above and beyond,” explains Matthew Avery, Euro NCAP director of strategy development. “We’re recognising manufacturers that offer significantly enhanced safety from what is required by law. A lot of manufactures go above and beyond, vision is a good example of this. DAF, who’ve got excellent direct vision, are ahead of the regulations, and the regulations won’t go beyond what DAF currently do until 2029,” continues Avery.
The DAF XF scored the highest percentage score for a full-size cab in the Safe Driving category with a score of 85%, bettered only by the 87% achieved by the smaller and lower Volvo FM. Euro NCAP praised the XF for its vision performance, recognising it as having class leading sight lines with very deep windows, low belt lines, a lower door window and a camera monitoring system (CMS) replacing traditional mirrors. Unfortunately, it was let down by its Collision Avoidance score, registering only 35% with no lane support system, cyclist detection and only an adequate performance for its advance emergency braking (AEB) for vulnerable road users.
“It [DAF XF] is 3-stars with really good vision, securing a top Safe Driving score, however, their collision avoidance technology is only average. Generally, manufacturers have either put the emphasis in stage one [Safe Driving] or stage two [Collision Avoidance],” Avery says.
In addition to the overall star ratings, a number of vehicles were also given a City Safe Award to recognise the truck’s suitability in an urban delivery environment. As well as the DAF XF, the Volvo FH Aero, Volvo FM and Scania G-series were given City Safe status.
The Iveco S-Way has received a 1-star rating largely due to the fact that their own GSR2 compliant vehicles are in the process of being rolled out. Without adequate AEB systems and with no CMS, the S-Way tested by Euro NCAP managed only a 32% score for Safe Driving and just 19% for Collision Avoidance as it lacked Lane Support and protection systems for vulnerable road users and cyclists.
“The vision is quite poor – under the 9m threshold where the star ratings begin – and the collision avoidance systems tested are below average. The overall performance is a bit disappointing, but the model year 2025 vehicle would score better. However, I don’t think it would suddenly leap up the table, as the cab [design] hasn’t changed, so the performance will still remain on the low side,” Avery says.
MAN also struggled with the vision aspect of their TGX, which Avery says is inferior to the Iveco’s, however, their Safe Driving score of 56% is considerably higher due to very good indirect vision thanks to a CMS and very good driver monitoring. Their Collision Avoidance score of 60% is boosted by very good Lane Support, as well as AEB systems rated as good for Truck 2 Car and vulnerable road users.
“We have tested a GSR2 truck, and the performance in collision avoidance was very good. It also has very good lane support and AEB, but misses the turn across path that protects cyclists. That is a key crash situation we are trying to address and needs to be adopted for it to be a City Safe vehicle,” Avery says in relation to the MAN TGX.
The Mercedes-Benz Actros tested was also not GSR2 compliant but scored a very respectable 72% for Safe Driving and 51% for Collision Avoidance, due to an already high standard of equipment. A lack of Class V and Class VI cameras for the CMS also reduced its Safe Driving score.
Avery commented: “Although the model year 2024 Actros was not GSR2 compliant it does have very good equipment with very good some AEB functions. It is let down by its inferior vision and lane support, and might be higher were it a GSR2 vehicle.”
The Renault Trucks T managed a 4-star rating due to its high-quality Advanced Driver Assistance Systems (ADAS), recording above average scores in both Safe Driving and Collision Avoidance. Although direct vision is an issue (rated only as adequate), very good AEB, speed assistance systems and driver monitoring bolstered its evaluation.
Scania may feel slightly disappointed by their 3-star rating for the R-series although with scores of 64% and 62%, respectively for Safe Driving and Collision Avoidance it is a far from disappointing performance. While it struggled with direct and indirect vision, very good driver monitoring and AEB for cars and vulnerable road users lifted its score. The smaller cab of the G-series meant the R-series’ main faults were addressed, which lifts its rating to 4-stars thanks to a safer driving score of 71%.
Volvo, however, showed that it is possible to have both large and medium cabs achieve maximum star ratings. Both scored highly for Collision Avoidance with 89% but the FH Aero’s 80% for Safe Driving was surpassed by the FM’s lower cab with better vision, giving it a score of 87%.
Speaking about the 5-star ratings for both Volvo Trucks’ vehicles, Anna Wrige Berling, traffic and product safety director for Volvo Trucks, said: “Safety is a really strong value for us and something we continually work with to improve. This is proof from independent experts that what we are doing is correct. The trucks are not developed towards the Euro NCAP criteria, but we are all looking at the same areas for [safety] improvement. We’ve had most of the GSR2 systems available for a long time, like indirect driver monitoring, but we base our development on accident research and have had many of those functions well ahead of the requirements.”
She adds: “I do believe there is a lot of value for our customers, and our customer’s customers, to understand safety on the next level. This type of extensive testing will give more solid information to our safety conscious customers.
The next phase of Euro NCAP testing will see cabs similar to the FM and G-series tested, in order to assess vehicles more commonly found in urban environments as distribution tractor units or rigid vehicles.
Euro NCAP has also confirmed that from 2030 the testing process will also include passive safety crash testing, with a head-on collision test, and look at standard-fit equipment only.
Words by George Barrow