Find more information in the General Comments section of the assessment
Find more information in the Rating Validity tab of the assessment
- See More
- See More
- See More
- See More
- Good
- Adequate
- Marginal
- Weak
- Poor
![](https://cdn.euroncap.com/media/45352/frontalimpactpassengerimage.png)
![](https://cdn.euroncap.com/media/45351/frontalimpactdriverimage.png)
![](https://cdn.euroncap.com/media/45353/whiplashfrontimage.png)
![](https://cdn.euroncap.com/media/45354/sideimpactcarimage.png)
![](https://cdn.euroncap.com/media/45355/sideimpactpoleimage.png)
- Good
- Adequate
- Marginal
- Weak
- Poor
![](/photo/dummies/dummie-child-front-152x152.png)
![](/photo/dummies/dummie-child-back-152x152.png)
Passenger
outboard
center
Fitted to the vehicle as standard
Not fitted to the test vehicle but available as option
Not Available
In the frontal impact, forward movement of the 3 year dummy was not excessive although the vertical acceleration measured in the dummy's chest was higher than recommended values. Both dummies were properly contained by the protective shells of their restraints in the side impact. The passenger airbag can be deactivated to allow a rearward facing child restraint to be used in that seating position. However, information provided to the driver about the status of the airbag is not sufficiently clear. The label warning of the dangers of using a rearward facing restraint in the passenger seat without first disabling the airbag was unclear and poorly positioned.
- Good
- Adequate
- Marginal
- Weak
- Poor
![VRU Impact Protection](https://cdn.euroncap.com/media/45356/pedestriancrashimage.png)
Head Impact 11.0 Pts
Pelvis Impact 0.0 Pts
Leg Impact 6.0 Pts
The bumper offered good protection to pedestrians' legs and scored full points but the front edge of the bonnet offered poor protection. The bonnet was predominantly good in those areas likely to be struck by an adult's head but was poor in most areas where a child's head might strike.
- Good
- Adequate
- Marginal
- Weak
- Poor
System Name | ESP | |
Performance |
Applies To | Front seats | ||
Warning | Driver Seat | Front Passenger(s) | Rear Passenger(s) |
Visual | |||
Audible | |||
|
Electronic stability control is standard equipment on all variants and there is a seatbelt reminder for the driver's seat.
- Specifications
- Safety Equipment
- Videos
- Rating Validity
Specifications
Tested Model VW Amarok 2.0 diesel, LHD
Body Type - 4 door pickup
Year Of Publication 2010
Kerb Weight 1985kg
VIN From Which Rating Applies - applies to all Amaroks of the specification tested
Class Pickup Truck
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 option
Not fitted to the test vehicle but available as option
Not Available
Not Applicable
Videos
Rating Validity
![](/gfx/stars4-148x36.png)
![](/gfx/icon-yes36x36.png)
![](/gfx/stars4-148x36.png)
![](/gfx/icon-yes36x36.png)
![](/gfx/stars4-148x36.png)
![](/gfx/icon-not36x36.png)
Find more information in the General Comments section of the assessment
![](/gfx/share20x20.png)
The passenger compartment remained stable during the frontal impact. Dummy readings indicated good protection of the knees and femurs for the front seat occupants. Volkswagen were able to demonstrate that the car would offer similar protection to occupants of different sizes and to those sat in different positions. Maximum points were scored in the side barrier test. In the more severe side pole impact, high compression of the test dummy's ribs indicated weak protection of the driver's chest. The car was also penalised for transferring forces into the dummy in a way which could not be done with a human body, resulting in no points being awarded for chest protection. Protection of the neck in a rear impact was rated as marginal.