The Insurance Institute for Highway Safety (IIHS) has introduced a more rigorous side-impact crash test, and the initial results for Small Suvs are raising concerns. Out of 20 small SUVs evaluated under this demanding new protocol, only one achieved a “good” rating, highlighting significant room for improvement in occupant protection during severe side collisions.
“We initiated this updated test because we suspected that existing safety standards could be elevated, and these findings validate that suspicion,” stated IIHS President David Harkey. “The ‘good’ performance of the Mazda CX-5 demonstrates that superior protection in a more forceful side-impact scenario is indeed attainable for small SUVs.”
Nine small SUVs managed to secure “acceptable” ratings in this challenging assessment. These vehicles include the Audi Q3, Buick Encore, Chevrolet Trax, Honda CR-V, Nissan Rogue, Subaru Forester, Toyota RAV4, Toyota Venza, and Volvo XC40.
However, a significant number of small SUVs received lower ratings. Eight models – the Chevrolet Equinox, Ford Escape, GMC Terrain, Hyundai Tucson, Jeep Compass, Jeep Renegade, Kia Sportage, and Lincoln Corsair – were categorized as “marginal”. Disturbingly, two small SUVs, the Honda HR-V and Mitsubishi Eclipse Cross, were designated as “poor” performers in the new side-impact test.
It’s noteworthy that almost all vehicles tested were 2021 models, with the exception of the 2020 Mitsubishi Eclipse Cross, as Mitsubishi skipped the 2021 model year for this vehicle. The ratings are applicable to 2022 models as well, excluding the Jeep Compass and Hyundai Tucson, which may have undergone design changes.
“While these outcomes are not ideal, they align with our expectations when implementing this more stringent evaluation,” explained IIHS Senior Research Engineer Becky Mueller, whose research was instrumental in developing the enhanced test protocol.
These ratings expose a considerable variation in safety performance among small SUVs, even those designed to excel in the previous, less demanding side-impact test. Notably, all 20 small SUVs had previously achieved “good” ratings in the original side-impact assessment. This widespread “good” rating was prevalent among most vehicles, but this wasn’t always the case. When the original side test was introduced in 2003, only approximately 20% of models earned a “good” rating.
This progress in side-impact safety over the years has undeniably saved lives. A 2011 study analyzing a decade of crash data revealed that drivers in vehicles with a “good” side-impact rating were 70% less likely to die in a left-side collision compared to drivers in vehicles with a “poor” rating. Despite this progress, side-impact crashes still accounted for a concerning 23% of passenger vehicle occupant fatalities in 2019.
To address these persistent fatalities, the updated side-impact test employs a heavier barrier traveling at a greater speed to simulate the striking vehicle more realistically. The new barrier weighs 4,200 pounds, approximating the weight of contemporary midsize SUVs, and impacts the test vehicle at 37 mph. This is a significant increase from the original test’s 3,300-pound barrier traveling at 31 mph. Collectively, these modifications result in an 82% increase in the energy involved in the crash test.
The honeycomb striking surface of the new barrier has also been redesigned to better mimic the impact characteristics of a real-world SUV or pickup truck colliding with another vehicle.
Similar to the original test, the updated side-impact rating is determined by assessing the structural integrity of the occupant compartment during the crash, injury measurements collected from crash test dummies positioned in both the driver and rear passenger seats, and an evaluation of how effectively airbags protect the heads of both dummies. The SID-IIs crash test dummy, representing a small woman or a 12-year-old child, is used in both seating positions.
The results of the new test revealed significant discrepancies in the level of protection small SUVs offer to the pelvis and chest regions. Only five vehicles achieved “good” or “acceptable” scores across all injury measures for these critical body areas.
A plausible explanation for these challenges lies in the new striking barrier’s tendency to bend around the B-pillar, the structural column situated between the front and rear doors. Mueller had previously observed this phenomenon with SUV and pickup truck fronts during vehicle-to-vehicle crash research. This behavior leads to indentations in the front and rear doors of the struck vehicle, potentially compromising occupant space even if the B-pillar itself withstands the higher-speed impact. To adapt to this more demanding test, manufacturers will likely need to reinforce horizontal door beams to minimize intrusion and refine their torso and pelvis-protecting airbags to enhance coverage and cushioning.
Real-world crash data confirms that stronger vehicle structures are associated with improved survival rates in side-impact collisions. While all 20 small SUVs received “good” structural ratings in the original test, only eight achieved “good” ratings for structural integrity in the new, higher-energy evaluation. The Honda HR-V, the poorest performer in terms of structural integrity, exhibited a B-pillar that began to detach from the frame, allowing the side of the vehicle to crush inward, almost reaching the center of the driver’s seat.
The small SUVs that received “marginal” or “poor” overall ratings in the updated test generally exhibited weaknesses in both structural performance and elevated chest and pelvis injury measurements for both dummies. For instance, the HR-V’s compromised B-pillar contributed to increased injury readings on the dummies. Similarly, a combination of structural deficiencies and inadequate seat-mounted torso-protecting airbags resulted in the Mitsubishi Eclipse Cross being the only vehicle to earn a “poor” rating for driver chest protection.
The Chevrolet Equinox and its twin, the GMC Terrain, were notable exceptions among the “marginal” and “poor” performers. The tested Equinox demonstrated robust structural performance but only achieved a “marginal” overall rating due to insufficient head protection and an elevated risk of head injury for the rear passenger, as well as elevated chest injury measures for the driver.
The nine small SUVs with “acceptable” ratings fell short of a “good” rating for diverse reasons rather than a single common flaw. These reasons included a “marginal” driver chest injury for the Buick Encore, inadequate head-protecting airbags for the Nissan Rogue, and heightened injury measures for the driver’s pelvis in the Toyota RAV4, among others.
“There isn’t one singular cause for the continued high fatality rates in side-impact crashes, but these test results offer a clear direction for specific improvements that can save lives,” Mueller concluded.
Expediting these improvements by manufacturers is crucial. For the time being, ratings for both the original and updated tests will be published concurrently for all evaluated vehicles. A “good” rating in the original side-impact test will remain a prerequisite for Top Safety Pick and Top Safety Pick+ awards until the award criteria are revised in 2023. At that point, the new, more stringent side-impact test will supersede the original test as the benchmark for safety evaluations.
Updated Side Impact Test Ratings for Small SUVs
| Driver injury measures | Rear passenger injury measures | |
|---|---|---|
| Overall rating | Structure & safety cage | Head & neck injury |
| 2021-22 Mazda CX-5 | G | G |
| 2021-22 Audi Q3 | A | A |
| 2021-22 Buick Encore | A | G |
| 2021-22 Chevrolet Trax | A | G |
| 2021-22 Honda CR-V | A | A |
| 2021-22 Nissan Rogue | A | G |
| 2021-22 Subaru Forester | A | A |
| 2021-22 Toyota RAV4 | A | G |
| 2021-22 Toyota Venza | A | G |
| 2021-22 Volvo XC40 | A | M |
| 2021-22 Chevrolet Equinox | M | G |
| 2021-22 Ford Escape | M | A |
| 2021-22 GMC Terrain | M | G |
| 2021 Hyundai Tucson | M | M |
| 2021 Jeep Compass | M | M |
| 2021-22 Jeep Renegade | M | M |
| 2021-22 Kia Sportage | M | M |
| 2021-22 Lincoln Corsair | M | A |
| 2021-22 Honda HR-V | P | P |
| 2020, 2022 Mitsubishi Eclipse Cross | P | M |
Key
- G: Good
- A: Acceptable
- M: Marginal
- P: Poor
