IIHS Safety Tests and Awards

It’s long been advisable to wear reflective clothing at night when walking or riding a bike. You are much more visible to drivers.

On the other hand, it might not be such a good idea. A study by the Insurance Institute for Highway Safety has uncovered a significant issue with automated crash prevention systems in vehicles, suggesting that clothing designed to enhance pedestrian visibility to human drivers may, paradoxically, render them invisible to these systems. 

This revelation has prompted calls for automakers to refine their pedestrian automatic emergency braking (AEB) systems.

IIHS President David Harkey emphasized the gravity of the findings, saying it is untenable that the clothes that pedestrians, cyclists, and roadway workers wear to be safe may make them harder for crash avoidance technology to recognize.

Daytime and nighttime yield different results

Historically, pedestrian AEB systems have been shown to reduce pedestrian crash rates by 27% during daylight. However, their effectiveness diminishes significantly on dark roads, where most fatal pedestrian accidents occur. Automakers are already working to address these shortcomings, especially as IIHS ratings now prioritize nighttime performance.

The study evaluated the impact of conspicuous clothing and enhanced roadway lighting on the pedestrian AEB systems of three 2023 vehicle models: the Honda CR-V, Mazda CX-5, and Subaru Forester. Prior to 2024, IIHS provided separate ratings for daytime and nighttime pedestrian crash prevention, with the Forester earning the highest nighttime rating of superior.

Researchers conducted trials using an adult-sized dummy dressed in various outfits, including a black sweatshirt and pants, a retroreflective jacket, and a white outfit. The tests were conducted at 25 mph under different lighting conditions, including no lighting, 10 lux, and the federally recommended 20 lux.

Concerning results

The results were concerning. The CR-V and CX-5 collided with the dummy in 84% and 88% of the tests, respectively, while the Forester avoided collisions in all but one scenario. The CR-V and CX-5 failed to slow down when the dummy wore clothing with reflective strips, which are typically used by roadway workers.

David Kidd, a senior research scientist at IIHS, said the placement and motion of reflective strips on the joints and limbs of pants and jackets allows drivers to quickly recognize the pattern of movement as a person but doesn’t have the same effect for the pedestrian AEB systems. 

IIHS said the study highlights a critical gap in the technology, particularly concerning the safety of roadway workers and emergency personnel who rely on reflective clothing.

The Insurance Institute for Highway Safety regularly tests vehicles for how they perform in a crash. Now, IIHS is measuring how well cars and trucks avoid crashes.

The analysis focuses on the significant strides automakers have made in enhancing automatic emergency braking (AEB) systems, following the introduction of a more rigorous front crash prevention evaluation in 2024. This advancement is expected to save lives by addressing the most dangerous types of front-to-rear crashes, according to IIHS President David Harkey.

The latest evaluation saw 22 out of 30 vehicles earn a good or acceptable rating, a notable improvement from April when only three of the first 10 small SUVs tested met this standard. Vehicles that excel in this new test are required to prevent or substantially mitigate crashes at higher speeds.

Among the vehicles receiving good ratings for their standard systems are:

• Acura ZDX

• BMW X5 and X6

• Cadillac Lyriq

• Chevrolet Blazer EV

• Genesis GV80

• Honda Prologue

• Hyundai Santa Fe

• Kia EV9

• Kia Sorento

• Lexus NX

• Subaru Forester

• Toyota Camry

• Toyota Crown Signia

• Toyota Tacoma. 

The Mercedes-Benz E-Class, with an optional system, also earned a good rating. 

Acceptable ratings

Acceptable ratings were given to the standard systems on the Genesis G80, Honda HR-V, Hyundai Sonata, Jeep Wagoneer, and Mazda CX-50, as well as an optional system on the Acura MDX.

The Ford Expedition received a marginal rating, while the Audi Q7, Audi Q8, Buick Envista, Chevrolet Tahoe, Chevrolet Trax, Kia Seltos, and Nissan Altima were rated poor.

The updated IIHS test includes trials at speeds of 31, 37, and 43 mph, and evaluates performance with a motorcycle target and a semitrailer, in addition to a passenger car. This reflects a broader range of real-world crash scenarios, including those resulting in serious injuries or fatalities. Annually, over 400 people die in rear-end crashes with semitrailers, and more than 200 motorcyclists are killed in rear impacts.

Good-rated systems provided timely forward collision warnings and stopped completely before impact in trials with passenger car targets. They also performed well in most motorcycle scenarios and issued timely warnings in semitrailer trials. However, some vehicles struggled to stop before hitting the motorcycle target, though they did slow significantly.

Acceptable-rated systems generally stopped before impact and issued timely warnings in most trials, but their performance was less effective at higher speeds, particularly with motorcycle targets. Poor-rated vehicles failed to prevent collisions with motorcycle targets even at the lowest test speeds and struggled with timely warnings.

Email Mark Huffman mhuffman@consumeraffairs.com

If safety is your top criterion in choosing a vehicle, you might want to skip over the midsize sedans. The Insurance Institute for Highway Safety (IIHS) reports that only three of the seven midsize cars it tested earned good or acceptable ratings when subjected to an updated side impact crash test.

The Subaru Outback was the only midsize car to emerge from the test with a good rating. The Hyundai Sonata and Volkswagen Jetta earned an acceptable rating but were pulled down by slightly higher levels of intrusion into the occupant compartment.

Midsize sedans’ unimpressive showing stands in contrast to the small and midsize SUVs that the IIHS had put to the test earlier. The organization says one reason for that is that the sedans sit lower to the ground.

"With vehicles that sit lower to the ground, the striking barrier hits higher on the door panel,” said IIHS President David Harkey. “That potentially puts sedans and wagons at a disadvantage in this evaluation but reflects what happens in a real-world crash when these vehicles are struck by a higher-riding pickup or SUV.”

Airbag improvements

The Outback, Sonata, and Jetta also performed well in the test because of the head-protecting airbags in the driver and rear passenger seats. The IIHS said that contributes to a low risk of head and neck injuries for occupants in both seating positions. 

However, injury measures were somewhat elevated for the driver’s pelvis and rear passenger’s torso in the Jetta and the rear passenger’s pelvis in the Sonata.

Honda, GM, Nissan, and Toyota may have some additional work to do. IIHS researchers said the Honda Accord managed only a marginal rating, while the Chevrolet Malibu, Nissan Altima, and Toyota Camry earned poor ratings.

In the Accord, the injury measures for the driver’s pelvis were slightly elevated. The test showed that the driver’s head moved down past the side curtain airbag to contact the windowsill during the crash.

Tests on the Altima and Malibu showed substantial intrusion into the occupant compartment, but researchers said the safety cage of the Camry held up well. Injury measures indicated a high risk of torso and pelvis injuries for the driver in the Altima.

There was only a moderate risk of torso and pelvis injuries for the driver and a high risk of pelvis injuries for the rear passenger in the Camry, and there was a high risk of head or neck injuries for the driver in the Malibu. 

Side-impact crashes are serious accidents

Side impact crashes, also called “T-bone accidents,” can have serious effects on the human body. According to JusticePays.com, side impact collisions kill more people each year than rear-end and head-on collisions combined. 

This new research led the IIHS to update its side impact test to hold vehicles to a higher standard of safety than before. The updated side crash test uses a heavier barrier traveling at a higher speed to simulate the striking vehicle.

Cars on U.S. highways are getting safer, and the Insurance Institute for Highway Safety (IIHS) is singling out 64 models for its 2020 top safety honors.

This year, vehicles must meet new criteria to qualify for TOP SAFETY PICK or TOP SAFETY PICK+ awards. They must have a “good” rating in each of IHSS’ six crashworthiness evaluations, and there’s also a new emphasis on protecting pedestrians in addition to vehicle occupants.

The “plus” is awarded to models that come exclusively with good or acceptable headlights, making it easier for consumers to find properly equipped vehicles. Of the 64 award winners, 23 qualify for TOP SAFETY PICK+.

“The headlight ratings that have been part of our awards criteria in recent years have pushed automakers to pay more attention to this essential equipment,” said IIHS President David Harkey. “However, finding vehicles with the right headlights can be a challenge for consumers. We wanted to reward automakers that have removed this obstacle.”

Headlights

Headlights get a strong emphasis since good visibility is critical to avoiding nighttime accidents. Six of the models that drove off with a “plus” designation  — the Genesis G70, Honda Insight, Hyundai Nexo, Lexus NX, Subaru Crosstrek Hybrid and Tesla Model 3 — aren’t sold with anything other than good-rated headlights. 

IIHS explains how it determines a vehicle’s overall safety rating in the video below.

Mazda and Hyundai stand out

In this year’s rankings, Mazda and Hyundai stand out. Mazda earned the most TOP SAFETY PICK+ awards with five — for the Mazda 3 sedan, Mazda 3 hatchback, Mazda 6, CX-3, and CX-5. The CX-9 collected a TOP SAFETY PICK award.

"We are proud to be the top 2020 IIHS TOP SAFETY PICK+ award recipient. It's a big accomplishment and stems from our commitment to our owners," said Mazda President Jeff Guyton. "Always keeping our customers in mind, Mazda is dedicated to providing the most advanced safety technologies, giving our customers a more enjoyable and confident driving experience."

Hyundai, meanwhile, collected the most overall winners since the company includes the Genesis and Kia brands in addition to Hyundai. Fourteen models earned a TOP SAFETY PICK award and three others collected a TOP SAFETY PICK+ designation.

"Hyundai and its engineering teams continue to make vehicles even safer by prioritizing cutting-edge safety,” said Andy Freels, president, Hyundai America Technical Center. 

Freels points to Hyundai safety features like is forward collision-avoidance assist and blind-spot collision warning as major steps in enhancing vehicle safety.

No minivans or pickups qualify for this year’s list. IIHS says that could change if automakers decide to make mid-year production changes and nominate the vehicle for testing.

The Insurance Institute for Highway Safety (IIHS) has named the Tesla Model 3 as one of its TOP SAFETY PICK+ choices for 2019, the brand’s first such recognition.

The Model 3 is the least expensive of Tesla’s three models. Its price starts at $35,000, while the Model X starts at around $81,000 and the Model S starts at around $75,000.

IIHS made a point of reviewing and testing vehicles with alternative power sources, including the Audi e-tron, the only other plug-in to earn a TOP SAFETY PICK+ designation. The electric Chevrolet Bolt missed the cut because the glare from its headlights subtracted too many points.

"Vehicles with alternative powertrains have come into their own," IIHS Chief Research Officer David Zuby says. "There's no need to trade away safety for a lower carbon footprint when choosing a vehicle."

Vehicles are put through a series of tests that judge their safety. To earn a TOP SAFETY PICK  designation, a car or truck must get at least a good rating in the driver-side small overlap front, moderate overlap front, side, roof strength, and head restraint tests, as well as a good or acceptable rating in the passenger-side small overlap test.

It must also feature an available front crash prevention system with an advanced or superior rating and good- or acceptable-rated headlights.

Top safety designation

The TOP SAFETY PICK+ award is the top available classification. To earn it, vehicles must get  good ratings in the passenger-side small overlap test and the headlight evaluation.

IIHS says the Model 3 got good ratings across the board for crashworthiness. The standard front crash prevention system was rated superior, avoiding collisions in both the 12 mph and 25 mph IIHS track tests. The headlights earned a good rating.

IIHS says the vehicle’s structure was impressive in the organization’s driver-side small overlap front test, which proves a challenge for many vehicles that are subjected to it.

The Chevy Bolt did well in IIHS’ crashworthiness tests. It picked up mostly good ratings, but it emerged from the passenger-side small overlap test with only an acceptable rating. The acceptable rating would not have prevented the Bolt from getting the top safety designation, but its headlights were judged to put off too much glare in the face of oncoming traffic.

The Hyundai Nexo has the distinction of being the first hydrogen fuel cell vehicle to earn an award from IIHS over the summer. Like the Model 3 and the e-tron, the Nexo, a midsize luxury SUV, qualified for TOP SAFETY PICK+ based on standard equipment.

Pickup trucks remain popular with consumers and big sellers for automakers, but new crash tests show most don’t do a good job of protecting front-seat passengers in a crash.

The Insurance Institute for Highway Safety (IIHS) put 11 current model pickups through front-side impact tests and only two -- the Ford F-150 and Nissan Titan --  earned a good rating.

The Honda Ridgeline, which was rated “acceptable” in the passenger-side test, was the only pickup to earn a 2019 Top Safety Pick award, bolstered by its good headlights and available front crash prevention.

The Toyota Tacoma also did well in the passenger-side test, earning an “acceptable” rating. However, the vehicle missed out on the Top Safety Pick award because of its headlights.

Toyota Tundra rated poor

In this latest round of tests, IIHS rated 11 crew cab pickups in the passenger-side test — four small and seven large. Among full-size pickups, the Toyota Tundra only managed a poor rating while five of the trucks were rated as marginal.

"We commend Ford, Nissan and Ram for providing state-of-the-art crash protection for both drivers and front passengers of their large pickup models," says David Zuby, IIHS chief research officer. "As a group, however, the pickup class still has a lot of work to do."

The video below graphically illustrates the damage that occurs to a pickup when it is struck from the front on the passenger’s side.

Working to improve

Automakers whose trucks lagged in the crash tests say they are constantly working to improve safety.

“We’ll continue to look for ways to improve in an effort to exceed customers’ expectations — particularly in new testing such as IIHS’ passenger-side front small overlap (tests) for pickup trucks,” a spokesman for Toyota told CNBC.

What IIHS calls a “small overlap crash” occurs when just the front corner of the vehicle strikes another vehicle or an object such as a tree. Two years ago, the organization developed the passenger-side test to ensure that occupants on both sides are protected in one of these crashes.

IIHS says it took longer for automakers to meet the tough safety guidelines in pickups, so it isn’t surprising that they’re behind on the passenger-side standard. The group says most pickups earn a “good” rating for protecting the driver side.

Honda’s small SUV, the HR-V, is the Insurance Institute for Highway Safety’s (IIHS) Top Safety Pick for 2019, with a few caveats. IIHS researchers specify that the car needs to be equipped with optional front crash prevention and specific headlights.

Honda has refreshed the HR-V model for 2019, and IIHS says those changes have been big improvements when it comes to keeping occupants safe. Updates to the vehicle’s structure improved frontal crash performance, as demonstrated in the IIHS' small and moderate front overlap tests.

Another safety feature, Honda Sensing, is now standard on EX and above trims. It includes Forward Collision Warning; Road Departure Mitigation (RDM) incorporating Lane Departure Warning (LDW); Lane Keeping Assist System (LKAS); and Adaptive Cruise Control (ACC).

Swept the crashworthiness tests

With these improvements, the HR-V won the highest possible rating of "Good" in all six crashworthiness tests and a "Superior" rating for its available Collision Mitigation Braking System (CMBS).

Kelley Blue Book’s (KBB) review of the Honda HR-V shows an MSRP range of between $21,515 and $29,535. The editor’s review calls it a small SUV that’s big on interior room, style, and safety.

“For those seeking compact-car dimensions, price, and fuel economy in a SUV-like form, the 2019 Honda HR-V pushes all the right buttons,” the reviewer writes. “Loaded with features and now with more trim choices and options, the HR-V offers more passenger volume than the Mazda CX-3, better fuel economy than the Chevy Trax or Jeep Renegade and, unlike the Nissan Kicks and Toyota C-HR, the option of all-wheel drive.”

Introduced in 2016 model year

Honda introduced the HR-V in the 2016 model year as an option for consumers looking for an entry-level SUV. It has a 1.8-liter I-4 rated at 141 hp engine under the hood. Front-wheel drive is standard and all-wheel drive is optional on all trim levels.

The 2019 HR-V was given an acceptable headlight rating for the LED reflector headlights on its Touring trim. However, the HR-V's base halogen headlight received a poor rating because IIHS said they provide inadequate visibility in multiple headlight test scenarios.

The HR-V made up for it with its showing in the driver-side small overlap front, moderate overlap front, side, roof strength, and head restraint tests, as well as a good or acceptable rating in the passenger-side small overlap front test.

IIHS said those are key elements to making it as the organization’s Top Safety Pick.

Consumers shopping for a minivan often have safety in mind since these vehicles are mostly used by young families.

With that in mind, the Insurance Institute for Highway Safety (IIHS) put three popular minivans through the paces and gave the Honda Odyssey and Chrysler Pacifica its Top Safety Pick rating, but the third vehicle, the Toyota Sienna, fell short of the rating's standard.

The Odyssey did best in the side overlap crash tests with what the judges called a "strong" performance. The Pacifica squeaked by with an "acceptable" rating. But the Sienna's performance was characterized as "marginal."

When just the front corner of a vehicle strikes another car or object, that's considered a small overlap crash. They're fairly common and were responsible for many deaths and serious injuries before automakers focused their efforts on making these parts of the vehicle more sturdy and secure.

The video below, produced by IIHS, illustrates it very well.

Significant improvements

IIHS has tested vehicles for how they protect front seat occupants since 2012 and says carmakers have made significant improvements. Getting at least an acceptable rating on overlap crash tests is a requirement for any vehicle to earn an IIHS Top Safety Pick rating.

"In our latest passenger-side tests, we didn't find any performance issues with safety belts or airbags like we did when we evaluated small and midsize SUVs earlier this year and midsize cars last year," said David Zuby, IIHS' chief research officer. "Instead, we saw some structural deficiencies on the right side that still need addressing."

IIHS says Toyota began making changes to the Sienna's structure in 2015, resulting in improved protection for the driver side. However, it didn't make the same modifications on the passenger side.

Problems on the passenger side

As a result, IIHS says the Sienna's structure rates poor in the passenger-side test.

"A safety cage must be strong enough to resist intrusion in a crash to protect the people inside, no matter where they sit in the vehicle," Zuby said.

In the case of the Sienna, the IIHS tests found objects hitting the passenger side intruded as much as 20 inches into the lower occupant compartment and more than 16 inches at the dashboard.

IIHS says the Pacifica also had issues on the front passenger side but that sensors from the crash dummies suggested a low risk of injury, helping to offset its less than perfect structural rating.

Cars with advanced safety technology such as driver-assist and active-lane keeping may give drivers added peace of mind, but a new report suggests some of that confidence may be misplaced.

The Insurance Institute for Highway Safety (IIHS) tested five systems in four cars -- Tesla, Mercedes, BMW, and Volvo -- and found variable performance in typical driving situations.

Situations included approaching stopped vehicles and negotiating hills and curves. It found that the current generation of these systems are not completely reliable substitutes for human drivers.

The researchers said they wanted to find out if these automated systems handled driving tasks the same way a human driver would. In many cases, they didn't.

Some of the discrepancies were minor, such as too-cautious braking. In some cases, however, they were dangerous. In one case, a vehicle veered sharply toward the shoulder when its sensors couldn't detect lanes.

Remain aware of their limitations

Some features work well, as long as drivers use them within their limitations. For example, adaptive cruise control (ACC) maintains a set speed and following distance from the vehicle in front you.

Researchers found it will slow the car if the car in front is slowing down, but it may not always react to a car that is stopped in the roadway. It also doesn't react to traffic signals or other traffic controls.

Active lane-keeping will steer the car to keep the vehicle within its lane, but drivers must continue to hold the wheel.

In a number of high-profile fatal accidents involving Tesla vehicles, investigators have found that the driver-assist feature was engaged but the drivers’ hands were not on the wheel.

The IIHS study found that these advanced features can be useful in helping with steering, speed control, and following distance, but the human behind the wheel must still drive the car at all times.

Areas of concern

"The new tests are an outgrowth of our research on Level 2 autonomy," said Jessica Jermakian, IIHS senior research engineer. "We zeroed in on situations our staff have identified as areas of concern during test drives with Level 2 systems, then used that feedback to develop road and track scenarios to compare vehicles."

It should be noted that most of the issues highlighted in the IIHS tests are noted in the vehicle owners’ manuals, which remind drivers that they must remain alert and in control of the vehicle at all times.

In one of the most recent accidents involving a Tesla, a Utah woman slammed into the back of a fire department vehicle while her Model S’ semi-autonomous Autopilot feature was engaged. The driver admitted to looking at her phone before the crash, despite the company’s mandate that customers remain alert while using Autopilot and not rely on the system entirely.

The IIHS data, meanwhile, may bolster the case of some consumer and safety groups that have urged Congress to slow down in its push to put fully-autonomous vehicles on America's highways.

Six of eight mid-size SUVs earned good or acceptable ratings in the latest round of crash tests, but the Ford Explorer and Jeep Grand Cherokee were cited for “major flaws.”

The Insurance Institute for Highway Safety's (IIHS) passenger-side small overlap test measures how well a vehicle performs when just the front corner of the vehicle strikes another vehicle or an object, such as a tree or utility pole.

IIHS has rated vehicles in driver-side small overlap crashes since 2012 and has noted vast safety improvements in this area in the years since. The organization launched the same test for the passenger side last year.

Risk to passengers

"Although some vehicles in this group offer very good protection, in other models, the airbags, safety belts and structure showed serious deficiencies," said David Zuby, IIHS' chief research officer. "In those SUVs, a front-seat passenger would be at risk of injuries to the head, hip or leg in a right-side small overlap front crash."

IIHS said the Ford Explorer earned a “poor” rating because the crash “seriously compromised” the vehicle's structure. Tests shows that intrusion reached 15 inches at the lower door hinge pillar and 13 inches at the upper door hinge pillar and the dashboard.

Following the test, the door sill was moved in six inches toward the crash dummy. Post-crash measures showed a passenger had a high likelihood of suffering injuries to the head and right hip.

IIHS says the Ford also showed poor structural performance on the driver side tests. It said the automaker is redesigning the Explorer and new models will have improved structural integrity on both the driver and passenger sides.

Jeep Grand Cherokee issues

As for the Jeep Grand Cherokee, the passenger-side test revealed a maximum intrusion of 10 inches at the lower door hinge pillar. More alarming, the group said, was the impact to the passenger dummy's head.

The impact caused it to hit the dashboard hard through the front airbag and then, because the side curtain airbag didn’t deploy and the door opened, it moved outside the vehicle during rebound.

“Measures from the dummy indicated that right leg injuries would be likely in a crash of this severity, and a head injury would be possible,” IIHS concluded.

The organization expressed some concern about possible head injuries to a passenger in the Honda Pilot, but overall, the vehicle had good structural performance. The GMC Acadia, Kia Sorento, and Volkswagen Atlas all earned “good” ratings. IIHS said the Acadia had maximum intrusion of just two inches on the right side of the toepan.

The tested vehicles were all 2018 models, except for the Sorento, which IIHS said had been redesigned for 2019 to improve safety performance in both driver and passenger impact tests.