Sentences with phrase «excessive in the frontal impact»

Forward movement of the 3 year dummy, sat in a forward - facing restraint, was not excessive in the frontal impact, although neck tensile forces were marginally high.

Forward movement of the dummy's head was not excessive in the frontal impact and both the 3 year and 18 month dummies were properly contained by their respective child restraints in the side impact.

Not exact matches

In the frontal impact, forward movement of the 3 year dummy, sat in a forward facing restraint, was not excessivIn the frontal impact, forward movement of the 3 year dummy, sat in a forward facing restraint, was not excessivin a forward facing restraint, was not excessive.

The cars» structure suffered excessive footwell intrusion in the frontal impact and a disturbing B - pillar displacement in the side test.

Cause: In the event of passenger side frontal impact airbag deployment, excessive internal pressure could be generated due to a faulty Takata pressure regulator.

In the frontal impact, forward movement of the head of the 3 year dummy, sat in a forward - facing restraint, was not excessive and chest and neck loads were well controlleIn the frontal impact, forward movement of the head of the 3 year dummy, sat in a forward - facing restraint, was not excessive and chest and neck loads were well controllein a forward - facing restraint, was not excessive and chest and neck loads were well controlled.

In the frontal impact, both the 6 and the 10 year dummies were properly restrained and forward movement was not excessive.

In the frontal impact, forward movement of the 3 year dummy, sat in a forward - facing restraint, was not excessive and, in the side impact, both dummies were properly contained within the protective shells of the their restraints, minimising the likelihood of head contact with parts of the vehicle interioIn the frontal impact, forward movement of the 3 year dummy, sat in a forward - facing restraint, was not excessive and, in the side impact, both dummies were properly contained within the protective shells of the their restraints, minimising the likelihood of head contact with parts of the vehicle interioin a forward - facing restraint, was not excessive and, in the side impact, both dummies were properly contained within the protective shells of the their restraints, minimising the likelihood of head contact with parts of the vehicle interioin the side impact, both dummies were properly contained within the protective shells of the their restraints, minimising the likelihood of head contact with parts of the vehicle interior.

In the frontal impact, forward movement of the head of the 3 year dummy, sat in a forward - facing seat, was not excessivIn the frontal impact, forward movement of the head of the 3 year dummy, sat in a forward - facing seat, was not excessivin a forward - facing seat, was not excessive.

In the frontal impact, forward movement of the three year dummy, sat in a forward facing restraint, was not excessivIn the frontal impact, forward movement of the three year dummy, sat in a forward facing restraint, was not excessivin a forward facing restraint, was not excessive.

The car gets a 4 - star rating in frontal - impact testing, and in side - impact testing the NHTSA determined that elevated rear seat occupant injury risk exists due to excessive rear door intrusion into the passenger compartment.

In the frontal impact, forward movement of the 3 year dummy, sat in a forward - facing restraint, was not excessive although the neck recorded marginally elevated tensile forceIn the frontal impact, forward movement of the 3 year dummy, sat in a forward - facing restraint, was not excessive although the neck recorded marginally elevated tensile forcein a forward - facing restraint, was not excessive although the neck recorded marginally elevated tensile forces.

In the frontal test, forward movement of the 3 year dummy, sat in a forward - facing restraint, was not excessive and, in the side impact, both dummies were properly contained within the protective shells of their restraints, minimising the likelihood of head contact with parts of the vehicle interioIn the frontal test, forward movement of the 3 year dummy, sat in a forward - facing restraint, was not excessive and, in the side impact, both dummies were properly contained within the protective shells of their restraints, minimising the likelihood of head contact with parts of the vehicle interioin a forward - facing restraint, was not excessive and, in the side impact, both dummies were properly contained within the protective shells of their restraints, minimising the likelihood of head contact with parts of the vehicle interioin the side impact, both dummies were properly contained within the protective shells of their restraints, minimising the likelihood of head contact with parts of the vehicle interior.

In the frontal impact, forward movement of the 3 year dummy, sat in a forward - facing restraint, was not excessivIn the frontal impact, forward movement of the 3 year dummy, sat in a forward - facing restraint, was not excessivin a forward - facing restraint, was not excessive.