[alias_neo]

Since we're on safety ratings; the Duster gets a 3/5 from Euro NCAP.

Many of Dacia's newer models get 1/5, some 2/5, and only the Sandero gets 4/5, their highest score (in this market).

In the UK, a Duster starts at £20k for the base model , while something equivalent with a 5 star rating like a Nissan Qashqai or Kia Sportage starts at £30k.

[ponector]

But they compare with Lada Niva. Does it have any stars in EuroNCAP?

[neoromantique]

Lada Niva has a benefit of making sure you don't suffer for long in case of a crash.

[vasco]

The Ladas break down before you get in a crash. Can't get injured if it was parked at the mechanics.

[torginus]

Aren't modern Ladas based on Renault tech (so essentially the same as Dacias)

[vbezhenar]

Only Lada Largus which is based on Dacia Logan MCV. There was also Lada Xray based on Dacia Sandero, but it's not produced anymore.

Lada Niva is essentially ancient car from 1977 which changed very little since then. It's awesome cheap car with extreme offroad capabilities, -1 star safety and poor reliability. Interesting and unique combination of properties in modern world.

There's also Lada Niva Travel which was developed in 1998 with a bit different market orientation.

Lada Vesta is most modern Lada development and it's not directly based on Renault tech. Lada Granta is a bit older Lada which is in-house development as well. Those are not 4x4, though.

I have no idea whether those cars are sold in Europe. Probably not.

[assusdan]

Nivas (both classic/4x4/Legend niva and travel/chevrolet niva) are not based on Renault tech, they've been developed inhouse (with GM help on Travel one)

[Nux]

Yes, but if you look at the euroncap the low score is not for essential safety stuff, it's more because it doesn't have lane assist and other highly optional whistles and bells (in my opinion).

[alias_neo]

I mean it's not terrible if the price is a concern, even something I'd consider "simple", like a Ford Focus is £30k these days. 70% for the driver is pretty bad though, you'd want much higher safety for the seat that's going to be occupied for 100% of the car's use, and if like myself you have young children you'll want that 5* rating for their safety (even if that includes bells and whistles like lane-exit alerts etc; they can matter when they need to).

For the sake of £10k I'd take a 5* safety rated car, likely with a better finish and quality overall, over a 3*, and as much as I'd like to be understanding about budgets, there's plenty of reliable, high-quality, safe cars on the used market for much less than their new-price.

Is there any _good_ reason to buy a mediocre car new for £20k, over a £40k+ car with a few years on it for £20k? I'm asking genuinely because I don't know, I'd buy the used car every time.

EDIT: Typos

[Nux]

Agreed. If you're just non-milionaire regular Joe a second hand great car can be cheaper than a new mediocre one.

[hulitu]

> and if like myself you have young children you'll want that 5* rating for their safety

But don't forget to put the children in child seats appropiate for their age. Else the 5* will become 0*.

[alias_neo]

100%. Don't cheap out on the car seats either, isofix, top tether, correct sizing, all the padding and side impact support, good 5-point harnesses.

[GuestFAUniverse]

https://www.euroncap.com/en/results/dacia/duster/51909

Adult Occupant: 70%

It's crap.

[Nux]

Not great, not terrible.

Better than the likes of Suzuki Swift, Ford Turneo etc.