Last time we introduced the appearance and interior of Haval H6, in fact, it is not bad especially the interior design and trim level, the overall cost-performance is higher than WEY VV7. Then what is the inner material of this Haval H6? Let’s take a look.
There is no bumper energy absorbers between the bumper and the crash beam after removing the front bumper, which is the same as WEY VV7, this problem always happens on such the “reverse developed” model, because its prototype did not have the design concept of pedestrian protection at that period.
Compared with the outgoing model, the size of crash beam on this Haval H6’s is much longer, the width of the left and right side has also increased, it looks more like a crash beam than a water tank protection frame when comparing the old model. In addition, like WEY VV7, we again saw the so-called “steel plate buffer” with thickness of only 0.6 mm.
Actually this steel plate buffer is not meaningful in safety protection of pedestrian collisions. To know that for a car, it is not only the passengers inside the car that need to be protected, but the protection of pedestrians is also very important.
Of course, such a design actually only appears on some old models. In that period, the protection of pedestrians was not taken seriously. The Golf 6 that we had previously reviewed had such a design, but it has been replaced by a foam bumper energy absorber on Golf 7.
However, compared to WEY VV7, the thickness of impact beam on this Haval H6 is really a surprise, it is only 1.3 mm! It should be the vehicle with the thinnest thickness of crash beam since we reviewed.
Despite this, the Haval H6’s crash beam structure is quite reasonable. The double-rolled structure compensates the shortcomings, at least it is thicker than 1.6 mm single-layer crash beam on WEY VV7. (Crash beam on WEY VV7 is single-layer, and some “users” said it is double-layer which means just the crash box behind the crash beam)
We have repeatedly stressed that the crash beam must be tough. The purpose is not to actually anti-collision, but to transmit the most impact force to the crash box, so the crash beam will not be bent or damaged before the crash box is crushed, causing the malfunction of the crash beam!
Although the crash box is well designed, the folds and the collapsed holes are complete, but there is no collapsing space between the crash beam and the water tank! The biggest function of the crash beam is to protect the water tank and equipment behind it, reducing the loss in low-speed collision. If the distance is too close and the crash beam is not tough enough, once the collision occurs, the crash beam will be bent, and the radiator of the water tank will be damaged, which will also cause the inability of the crash beam!
The thickness of rear crash beam is the same 1.3mm, but it is even single layer stamping steel.
The rear crash beam is fitted with two thick crash boxes. As a result, the rear crash beam has been collapsed, while the crash box is still intact.
However, for this Haval H6, what kind of rear crash beam installed does not matter too much, because it is not the crash beam that greets the collision first when the rear-end collision happens, but the trunk or the tailgate.
From the picture we can clearly see that the Haval H6 has the same problem as the Roewe RX5, that is, the trunk protrudes too much, so that the rear crash beam is unable to play its due role, so it is no matter if rear crash beam is available or not.
All in all, the front and rear crash beams on this Haval H6 barely function as they should, and the thickness of 1.3 mm crash beam is also the worse record we reviewed so far!
To be honest, everyone knows that Haval H6 is actually a replica of Honda C-RV (related post:Haval H6 Was Sued by Honda for Plagiarism, Honda Request GWM To Stop Selling Haval H6), but the question is the ripoff is rigid, it simply copied no matter whether it is right or wrong… there is no improvement at all.