- With standard equipment
- With safety pack
Find more information in the General Comments section of the assessment
Find more information in the Rating Validity tab of the assessment
-
See More
93% -
See More
89% -
See More
73% -
See More
83%
- Good
- Adequate
- Marginal
- Weak
- Poor
-
Mobile Progressive Deformable Barrier
-
Full Width Rigid Barrier
-
Side Mobile Barrier
Side Pole
-
Far-Side Excursion
Occupant Interaction
Occupant Interaction
Rear Seat
Front Seat
| Rescue Sheet |
Available, ISO compliant
|
|||
| Advanced eCall | Available | |||
| Multi Collision Brake | Not available | |||
- Good
- Adequate
- Marginal
- Weak
- Poor
Passenger
outboard
outboard
center
Fitted to the vehicle as standard
Not fitted to the test vehicle but available as option
Not Available
Not fitted to the test vehicle but available as option-
i-Size CRS
-
ISOFIX CRS
-
Universal Belted CRS
- Easy
Difficult
Safety critical- Not allowed
Difficult
Safety critical| Seat Position | ||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Front | 2nd row | 3rd row | ||||
| Passenger | Left | Right | Left | center | Right | |
| Maxi Cosi 2way Pearl & 2wayFix (i-Size) |  |
|
|
|
|
|
| Maxi Cosi 2way Pearl & 2wayFix (i-Size) | |
|
|
|
|
|
| BeSafe iZi Kid X2 i-Size (i-Size) | |
|
|
|
|
|
| Britax Römer TriFix2 i-Size (i-Size) | |
|
|
|
|
|
| BeSafe iZi Flex FIX i-Size (i-Size) | |
|
|
|
|
|
| BeSafe iZi Combi X4 ISOfix (ISOFIX) | |
|
|
|
|
|
| Cybex Solution Z i-Fix (ISOFIX) | |
|
|
|
|
|
| Maxi Cosi Cabriofix (Belt) | |
|
|
|
|
|
| Maxi Cosi Cabriofix & EasyFix (Belt) | |
|
|
|
|
|
| Britax Römer King II LS (Belt) | |
|
|
|
|
|
| Cybex Solution Z i-Fix (Belt) | |
|
|
|
|
|
- Easy
- Difficult
- Safety critical
- Not allowed
In both the frontal offset test and the side barrier impact, protection of all critical body regions was good for both child dummies, and the MIFA 9 scored maximum points in this part of the assessment. The front passenger airbag can be disabled to allow a rearward-facing child restraint to be used in that seating position. Clear information is provided to the driver regarding the status of the airbag and the system was rewarded. All of the child restraint types for which the MIFA 9 is designed could be properly installed and accommodated in the car.
- Good
- Adequate
- Marginal
- Weak
- Poor
Head Impact 13.3 Pts
Pelvis Impact 4.6 Pts
Leg Impact 6.0 Pts
| System Name | Autonomous Warning Braking | ||
| Type | Auto-Brake with Forward Collision Warning | ||
| Operational From | 8 km/h | ||
| PERFORMANCE | | |||
- Day time
- Night time
Day time
-
Vehicle reversing into standing pedestrian
-
Pedestrian crossing a road into which a car is turning
-
Adult crossing the road
-
Child running from behind parked vehicles
-
Adult along the roadside
Night time
-
Adult crossing the road
-
Adult along the roadside
-
Cyclist from nearside, obstructed view
-
Approaching a crossing cyclist
-
Cyclist along the roadside
Protection of the head of a struck pedestrian was predominantly good or adequate over the bonnet surface but poor results were recorded at the base of the windscreen and on the stiff windscreen pillars. The bumper offered good or adequate protection to pedestrians’ legs but protection of the pelvis was mixed. The autonomous emergency braking (AEB) system of the Maxus can respond to vulnerable road users as well as to other vehicles. The system performed well in tests of its response to pedestrians and cyclists, with collisions avoided in most cases.
- Good
- Adequate
- Marginal
- Weak
- Poor
| System Name | Intelligent Speed Assist |
| Speed Limit Information Function | Camera based |
| Speed Control Function | System advised (accurate to 5km/h) |
| Applies To | Front and rear seats, including third row | ||
| Warning | Driver Seat | Front Passenger(s) | Rear Passenger(s) |
| Visual | |
|
|
| Audible | |
|
|
| Occupant Detection |  |
|
|
|
|||
| System Name | DMS (Driver Monitoring System) |
| Type | Lane position |
| Operational From | 30 km/h |
| System Name | Lane Keep Asistant |
| Operational From | 60 km/h |
| Performance | |
| Emergency Lane Keeping | |
| Lane Keep Assist | |
| Human Machine Interface | |
| System Name | Autonomous Warning Braking | |||
| Type | Autonomous emergency braking and forward collision warning | |||
| Operational From | 8 km/h | |||
| Sensor Used | camera and radar | |||
- Autobrake function only
- Driver reacts to warning
Autobrake function only
-
Car turning across the path of an oncoming car
-
Approaching a stationary car
-
Approaching a stationary car
-
Approaching a stationary car
-
Approaching a slower moving car
-
Approaching a slower moving car
-
Approaching a slower moving car
-
Approaching a braking car
Driver reacts to warning
-
Approaching a stationary car
-
Approaching a stationary car
-
Approaching a stationary car
-
Approaching a slower moving car
-
Approaching a slower moving car
-
Approaching a slower moving car
-
Approaching a braking car
The autonomous emergency braking (AEB) system of the MIFA 9 performed well in tests of its reaction to other vehicles. A seatbelt reminder system is fitted as standard to the front and rear seats and the car is equipped with a system to detect driver fatigue. The lane support system gently corrects the vehicle’s path if it is drifting out of lane, and also intervenes in some more critical situations. The speed assistance system identifies the local speed limit, and the driver can choose to let the car adjust the speed limiter accordingly. However, the speed limit recognition function did not meet Euro NCAP’s requirements and the car scored only for its speed limiter.
- Specifications
- Safety Equipment
- Videos
- Rating Validity
Specifications
Tested Model Maxus MIFA 9, LHD
Body Type - 5 door MPV
Year Of Publication 2022
Kerb Weight 2410kg
VIN From Which Rating Applies - all MIFA 9's
Class Large MPV
Safety Equipment
Note: Other equipment may be available on the vehicle but was not considered in the test year.
- Fitted to the vehicle as standard
Fitted to the vehicle as part of the safety pack- Not fitted to the test vehicle but available as option or as part of the safety pack
- Not available
- Not applicable
Fitted to the vehicle as part of the safety packVideos
Rating Validity
Variants of Model Range
| Body Type | Engine | Model Name | Drivetrain | Rating Applies | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| LHD | RHD | ||||
| 5 door MPV | Electric |
Elite Luxury * Ultimate |
4 x 2 |  |
|
* Tested variant
Find more information in the General Comments section of the assessment
Share
The passenger compartment of the Maxus MIFA 9 remained stable in the frontal offset test. Dummy readings indicated good protection of the knees and femurs of both the driver and passenger. Maxus demonstrated that a similar level of protection would be provided to occupants of different sizes and to those sitting in different positions. For the front passenger, good protection was provided to all critical body areas. Analysis of the deceleration of the impact trolley during the test, and analysis of the deformable barrier after the test, revealed that the car would be a benign impact partner in a frontal collision. In the full-width rigid barrier test, protection of all critical body regions was good for both the driver and rear passenger and the car scored maximum points in this part of the assessment. In the side barrier test, all critical parts of the body were well protected. In the more severe side pole test, dummy readings of rib compression indicated a marginal level of protection for the chest, with good protection of other critical areas. Control of excursion (the extent to which a body is thrown to the other side of the vehicle when it is hit from the far side) was found to be adequate. The MIFA 9 has a counter-measure to mitigate against occupant to occupant injuries in such impacts. The system performed well in Euro NCAP’s tests, with good protection of the occupants’ heads. Tests on the front seats and head restraints demonstrated good protection against whiplash injuries in the event of a rear-end collision. A geometric analysis of the rear seats also indicated good whiplash protection. The MIFA 9 has an advanced eCall system which alerts the emergency services in the event of a crash but it lacks a system to prevent secondary collisions.