证券之星消息，8月6日汽车服务板块较上一交易日上涨1.34%，阿尔特领涨。当日上证指数报收于 3633.99，上涨0.45%。深证成指报收于11177.78，上涨0.64%。汽车服务板块个股涨跌见下表： 从资金流向上来看，当日汽车服务板块主力资金净流入3903.29万元，游资资金净流入809.61万元，散户 资金净流出4712.9万元。汽车服务板块个股资金流向见下表： | 代码 | 名称 | 收盘价 | 涨跌幅 | 成交量(手) | 成交额(元) | | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | | 300825 | 阿尔特 | 12.49 | 6.21% | 50.65万 | 6.18亿 | | 600676 | 交运股份 | 5.88 | 3.34% | 55.89万 | 3.23亿 | | 301215 | 中汽股份 | 6.41 | 1.91% | 14.23万 | 9052.12万 | | 000757 | 浩物股份 | 5.04 | 1.20% | 1 11.84万 | 5936.59万 | | 601965 | 中国汽研 | 19.67 | 1.03% | 6.28 ...

过去的一周，一段1分30秒的"小车撞8吨卡车"碰撞测试破圈而出。理想i8在发布会播放的撞击视频中， 并未给乘龙卡车方向盘车标打码，这也让乘龙卡车被推上浪尖。上述检测机构人士表示，按照惯例，碰 撞试验会将对比物LOGO打码处理，不打码播出的行为实属罕见。值得一提的是，理想汽车官方视频号 仍可观看碰撞视频，但乘龙卡车方向盘上的车标已打码处理。一位接近东风汽车的相关人士告诉记者， 事件出现后，东风第一时间与理想、中国汽研进行了沟通，但彼时两家公司态度强硬，认为自身也因测 试遭到了水军等攻击，拒绝删除测试视频。交谈无果后，乘龙才发出了侵权声明。"乘龙是被牵连推上 风口浪尖的，有关部门也注意到此事，现在我们提倡'反内卷'，不想再打口水仗。"上述人士表示。 （第一财经） ...

本次论坛的成功举办，是中国汽研践行央企使命、服务国家战略的重要体现，不仅为汽车产业高质量发 展指明了方向，更凝聚了行业共识，汇聚了创新力量。中国汽研将以此次论坛为契机，继续深化与产业 链各方的合作，聚焦智能驾驶、绿色制造等关键技术领域，推动创新成果转化和标准体系建设，助力中 国汽车品牌提升国际竞争力，为建设汽车强国作出新的更大贡献。 （文章来源：证券日报） 在多方协同方面，中国经济信息社、中国汽研签署框架合作协议，共建汽车产业经济信息研究平台，整 合权威数据与技术研究资源，为行业提供精准的市场研判、政策解读和趋势预测；中宣部宣传舆情研究 中心、中国汽研成立汽车行业舆情治理办公室，政策引导与舆情治理协同发力，强化"中国智造"正面叙 事，赋能汽车产业行稳致远；中国消费品质量安全促进会、中国汽研联合筹办汽车品牌专委会，旨在扩 大产业朋友圈，以标准体系赋能测试认证，共塑品牌竞争力。这些重要协同合作，构建起"信息支撑-舆 论护航-品牌赋能"的产业生态服务体系，为汽车产业行稳致远提供了坚实支撑。 在成果发布方面，论坛集中展示了25个汽车新质生产力优秀案例，涵盖了产品创新、技术突破、产业链 协同等多个维度，代表了当前中国汽 ...

Core Viewpoint - The collision test involving a 2.61-ton SUV and an 8-ton truck has raised significant concerns regarding the safety and design of the truck, particularly focusing on the locking mechanism of the truck's cabin and the test conditions [1][6][8]. Group 1: Collision Test Details - The collision test was conducted by Li Auto and China Automotive Research, but many details remain undisclosed, leading to skepticism about the validity of the test [1][4]. - The truck involved was a second-hand Dongfeng Liuqi M3, which had been modified for the test, including weight adjustments and the installation of an autonomous driving system [8][9]. - The test speed was noted to be higher than conventional standards, with the SUV traveling at 60±2 km/h and the truck at 40±2 km/h, resulting in a relative speed of 100 km/h [8][9]. Group 2: Technical Aspects of the Truck - The truck's cabin is designed with a locking mechanism that can be either mechanical or hydraulic, with the hydraulic system being more reliable but costlier [3][4]. - If the locking mechanism is not engaged properly before a collision, the cabin can detach from the chassis, which raises questions about the truck's structural integrity [4][5]. - The test's outcome, where the truck's cabin appeared to detach, suggests that the locking mechanism may not have been engaged, which is atypical for such vehicles [4][5]. Group 3: Industry Reactions and Implications - Dongfeng Liuqi, the manufacturer of the truck, has expressed concerns over the test's execution and the subsequent public perception, emphasizing the need for transparency in the testing process [1][13]. - Li Auto's recent statements indicate a desire to distance itself from the controversy, acknowledging the unintended consequences of the test on Dongfeng Liuqi's reputation [14]. - The incident highlights the ongoing challenges in the commercial vehicle sector regarding safety standards and public trust, especially in the context of competitive marketing strategies [12][14].

Group 1 - The article discusses the public relations responses from three parties involved in a collision test incident, focusing on their strategies and actions in managing the situation [2][11] - The three parties include Li Auto, Dongfeng Truck, and China Automotive Engineering Research Institute, each with significant industry backgrounds [4][6][8] - Li Auto launched its i8 electric SUV on July 29, showcasing a collision test video with a Dongfeng Truck, which sparked public debate and scrutiny [13][14] Group 2 - The collision test video showed significant damage to the truck while Li Auto's i8 remained structurally intact, leading to mixed public reactions regarding the validity of the test results [15][19] - Public sentiment was divided into three main perspectives: belief in the test results, skepticism about the authenticity, and interest in further testing [19][20][21] - Dongfeng Truck's official social media responses included dismissive comments about the test's credibility, indicating a defensive stance against Li Auto's claims [25][26][27] Group 3 - Li Auto's public relations strategy involved continued promotion of the i8, despite the controversy, and they emphasized the role of a third-party testing agency to validate their claims [41][42][124] - China Automotive Engineering Research Institute responded to the incident by asserting the integrity of their testing process, although they were vague about specific standards used [43][129] - Dongfeng Truck issued a formal statement accusing Li Auto of infringement and misrepresentation, highlighting the potential legal implications of the incident [55][60][64] Group 4 - The ongoing public discourse has led to increased visibility for both Li Auto and Dongfeng Truck, with both companies actively engaging in social media to address concerns and promote their products [68][75] - Dongfeng Truck's marketing efforts included live streams and promotional content emphasizing their safety features, aiming to counteract negative perceptions [69][81] - The incident has highlighted the competitive dynamics within the automotive industry, particularly in the electric vehicle and commercial truck sectors, as companies navigate public relations challenges [98][104]

Core Viewpoint - The collision test involving a 2.61-ton SUV and an 8-ton truck has raised significant concerns regarding the safety and quality of the truck, particularly questioning the locking mechanism of the truck's cab and the circumstances leading to the truck being lifted off the ground during the impact [1][2]. Group 1: Incident Details - A 1 minute and 30 seconds video of the collision test has gone viral, prompting responses from both Li Auto and China Automotive Research, yet they have not addressed the most controversial aspects of the test [1]. - The truck's cab reportedly collapsed during the collision, raising questions about whether the cab was properly locked [2]. - The truck, weighing 8 tons, was lifted off the ground by a collision with a much lighter SUV, which is a significant point of concern [1]. Group 2: Company Responses - Insiders close to the truck manufacturer, Dongfeng Liuzhou Motor, indicated that the company has not received detailed data from the collision test, which hampers their ability to assess the situation [2]. - The test was reportedly designed by Li Auto and executed by China Automotive Research, but many details remain undisclosed, leading to skepticism about the validity of the test [2]. - Li Auto stated that the test was conducted according to standards, but further details from China Automotive Research were not available at the time of reporting [2].

Core Viewpoint - The recent collision test involving a 2.61-ton SUV and an 8-ton truck has raised significant concerns regarding the safety and design of the truck, particularly focusing on the locking mechanism of the truck's cabin and the test conditions [1][6][7]. Group 1: Collision Test Details - The collision test was conducted by Li Auto and China Automotive Research, but many details remain undisclosed, leading to skepticism about the validity of the test [1][3]. - The truck involved was a second-hand Dongfeng Liuqi M3, which had undergone modifications, including weight adjustments and the installation of an autonomous driving system, potentially affecting the test results [7][8]. - The test speed was noted to be higher than conventional standards, with the SUV traveling at 60±2 km/h and the truck at 40±2 km/h, resulting in a relative speed of 100 km/h [7][8]. Group 2: Technical Aspects of the Truck - The truck's cabin is designed with a locking mechanism that can be either mechanical or hydraulic, with the hydraulic system being more reliable but costlier [3][4]. - If the locking mechanism is not engaged properly before a collision, it can lead to the cabin detaching from the chassis, which is a significant safety concern [4][5]. - The incident has raised questions about the structural integrity of the truck, as it is unusual for a truck cabin to detach from the chassis during a collision with a passenger vehicle [4][6]. Group 3: Industry Reactions and Implications - Dongfeng Liuqi, the manufacturer of the truck, has expressed concerns over the lack of detailed data from the collision test, which hampers their ability to assess the situation accurately [1][2]. - The incident has sparked a public relations challenge for both Li Auto and Dongfeng Liuqi, with the latter issuing a statement emphasizing its commitment to quality and safety [11]. - The automotive industry is witnessing a trend where collision tests are used as marketing tools, which may lead to misinterpretations of vehicle safety [10][11].

Core Viewpoint - The collision test involving a 2.61-ton SUV and an 8-ton truck has raised significant concerns regarding the safety and structural integrity of the truck, particularly focusing on the locking mechanism of the truck's cabin and the test conditions used [1][2][3]. Group 1: Collision Test Details - The collision test was conducted by Li Auto and China Automotive Research, but many details remain undisclosed, leading to skepticism about the validity of the test [1][3]. - The truck involved was a second-hand Dongfeng Liuqi M3, which may have had maintenance issues affecting the test results [5]. - The test speed was noted to be unusually high, with the SUV traveling at 60±2 km/h and the truck at 40±2 km/h, resulting in a relative speed of 100 km/h, exceeding conventional standards for commercial vehicle testing [5][6]. Group 2: Technical Aspects of the Truck - The truck's cabin is designed with a locking mechanism that can be either mechanical or hydraulic, with the hydraulic version being used in the M3 model [2][3]. - If the hydraulic lock is not properly engaged, even minor impacts can cause the cabin to detach from the chassis, which raises questions about the truck's design and safety features [3][4]. - The test's focus on extreme conditions is not standard for commercial vehicle safety assessments, which typically involve different parameters [6][7]. Group 3: Industry Implications - The incident has sparked a "trust crisis" for Dongfeng Liuqi, a well-established brand in the commercial vehicle sector, which has been in operation for nearly 35 years [1][9]. - The marketing strategies for commercial vehicles differ significantly from passenger vehicles, with less emphasis on dramatic safety tests, which may affect public perception [8][9]. - Li Auto's recent statements indicate a desire to distance itself from the controversy while acknowledging the impact on Dongfeng Liuqi's reputation [9].

Group 1 - The automotive service sector increased by 1.17% on August 5, with Jiaoyun Co. leading the gains [1] - The Shanghai Composite Index closed at 3617.6, up 0.96%, while the Shenzhen Component Index closed at 11106.96, up 0.59% [1] - Key stocks in the automotive service sector showed various performance metrics, with Jiaoyun Co. closing at 5.69, up 3.08% [1] Group 2 - The automotive service sector saw a net inflow of 8.83 million yuan from institutional investors, while retail investors contributed a net inflow of 8.39 million yuan [2] - The overall net outflow from speculative funds was 17.22 million yuan [2] - Detailed stock performance indicated that Xiamen Xinda had a significant net outflow from institutional investors of 37.26 million yuan [3]

Group 1 - The unconventional collision test of the newly launched Li Auto i8 has attracted significant public attention [2] - The test was conducted by the China Automotive Engineering Research Institute (CAERI) and aimed to verify the safety of the Li Auto i8, not to evaluate the safety of other brands [2] - During the test, the Li Auto i8 collided with a Dongfeng Liuzhou Motor truck at speeds of 60±2 km/h and 40±2 km/h respectively, resulting in the truck's cabin separating from its cargo area while the i8's passenger compartment remained intact [2] Group 2 - Dongfeng Liuzhou Motor issued statements questioning the validity of the test, highlighting discrepancies in vehicle conditions and testing scenarios that could mislead consumers [2] - Li Auto responded by clarifying that the test was designed to validate the safety of its "short front suspension structure" and emphasized that there was no intention to evaluate Dongfeng Liuzhou Motor's product quality [2][3] - Li Auto highlighted the innovative safety features of the i8, including multiple energy-absorbing structures and the integrity of safety components during the test, which demonstrated the vehicle's passive safety performance [3]