- 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
![]()
70% -
See More
![]()
72% -
See More
![]()
41% -
See More
![]()
42%
- 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 | Not available | |||
| Multi Collision Brake | Not available | |||
- Good
- Adequate
- Marginal
- Weak
- Poor
Passenger
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| Seat Position | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Front | 2nd row | |||
| Passenger | 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 the frontal offset test, protection of the chest and neck of the 10 year dummy was rated as weak, based on dummy readings during the impact. For the 6 year dummy, protection of the neck was marginal while that of the head and chest was adequate and good respectively. 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 restraints for which the car is designed could be properly installed and accommodated. One, a full sized rearward facing toddler restraint, could be fitted in the car with no problem but was deemed a fail because Dacia indicate in the user manual that the car cannot accommodate this (R3) category of restraint.
- Good
- Adequate
- Marginal
- Weak
- Poor
Head Impact 14.1 Pts
Pelvis Impact 2.3 Pts
Leg Impact 5.8 Pts
The protection provided by the bonnet to the head of a struck pedestrian was predominantly good or adequate with poor results recorded at the base of the windscreen and on the stiff windscreen pillars. The bumper provided good or adequate protection to pedestrians' legs at all test locations. However, protection of the pelvis was poor over much of the width of the car. The autonomous emergency braking (AEB) system does not detect vulnerable road users such as pedestrians and cyclists.
- Good
- Adequate
- Marginal
- Weak
- Poor
| System Name | Speed limiter |
| Speed Control Function | Manually set (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 | Active Emergency Braking | |||
| Type | Autonomous emergency braking and forward collision warning | |||
| Operational From | 7 km/h | |||
| Sensor Used | Radar only | |||
- 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
A seatbelt reminder system is standard for the front and rear seats. A driver-set speed limiter is also standard but there is no lane assistance. The AEB system performed well in tests of its response to other vehicles with accidents avoided or mitigated in many cases.
- Specifications
- Safety Equipment
- Videos
- Rating Validity
Specifications
Tested Model Dacia Sandero Stepway 1.0TCe, LHD
Body Type - 5 door hatchback
Year Of Publication 2021
Kerb Weight 1111kg
VIN From Which Rating Applies - all Logans
Class Small Family Car
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 & Transmission | Drivetrain | Rating Applies | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| LHD | RHD | |||
| 4 door saloon | 1.0 SCe petrol, manual | 4 x 2 |  |
- |
| 4 door saloon | 1.0 TCe petrol, manual | 4 x 2 | |
- |
| 4 door saloon | 1.0 TCe petrol, automatic | 4 x 2 | |
- |
| 4 door saloon | 1.0 LPG, manual | 4 x 2 | |
- |
Tested car: Dacia Sandero Stepway
Find more information in the General Comments section of the assessment
The Dacia Logan is structurally identical to the Sandero Stepway but has a different roof-line towards the rear. Based on some additional tests and data reviewed by Euro NCAP, the star rating of the Sandero Stepway can be applied also to the Dacia Logan.
Share
The passenger compartment remained stable in the frontal offset test. Dummy readings indicated protection that was at least adequate for the knees and femurs of the driver and passenger. However, structures in the dashboard presented a risk of injury to occupants of different sizes and to those sitting in different positions, and protection for this part of the body was downgraded to marginal. Chest protection was also rated as marginal for both front seat occupants, based on dummy readings of chest compression. Analysis of the deformable barrier after the test revealed that it would be a benign crash opponent. In the full-width rigid barrier test, protection of the front seat driver and rear seat passenger was at least adequate for all critical parts of the body. In the side barrier test, representing an impact by another vehicle, chest compression indicated a marginal level of protection. In the side pole test, protection of all critical body areas was rated as good or adequate. An assessment of the excursion of an occupant in a far-side impact showed poor protection and the car does not have a counter-measure, such as a centre airbag, for this accident type. Tests on the front seats and head restraints demonstrated good protection against whiplash injuries in the event of a rear-end collision. However, a geometric analysis of the rear seats indicated marginal whiplash protection.