Honda Civic coupe earns top award

ARLINGTON, Va. — The redesigned 2-door Honda Civic earns the Insurance Institute for Highway Safety's Top Safety Pick+ award when equipped with an available front crash prevention system, which earns a superior rating.

ARLINGTON, Va. — The redesigned 2-door Honda Civic earns the Insurance Institute for Highway Safety's Top Safety Pick+ award when equipped with an available front crash prevention system, which earns a superior rating.

Like the previous version of the small car, the 2016 model earns good ratings in the Institute's small overlap front, moderate overlap front, side, roof strength and head restraint evaluations.

A new feature is the optional front crash prevention system. In IIHS track tests at 12 mph and 25 mph, a two-door Civic equipped with the technology avoided collisions. The system also includes a forward collision warning system that meets National Highway Traffic Safety Administration criteria.

The 4-door Civic's Top Safety Pick+ award was announced earlier.

To qualify for the Institute's top award a vehicle must have good ratings in all five crashworthiness tests and an available front crash prevention system that earns an advanced or superior rating.

Read more: Honda Civic coupe earns top award

Audi A4 earns Top Safety Pick+

ARLINGTON, Va. — The redesigned Audi A4 secures a Top Safety Pick+ award from the Insurance Institute for Highway Safety by offering good protection in a small overlap front crash and a superior-rated, standard front crash prevention system.

ARLINGTON, Va. — The redesigned Audi A4 secures a Top Safety Pick+ award from the Insurance Institute for Highway Safety by offering good protection in a small overlap front crash and a superior-rated, standard front crash prevention system.

The previous generation of the luxury midsize car rated poor in the small overlap evaluation. In that test, the structure didn't hold up, with intrusion into the driver's space reaching 11 inches at the footwell and the instrument panel. The steering column moved toward the driver and to the right, and the dummy's head slipped off the left side of the airbag. The driver door opened, which would put the driver at risk of ejection in a real crash.

In contrast, the 2017 A4 had maximum intrusion of only 3 inches at the footrest. The dummy's head hit the front airbag and stayed there until rebound.

Like its predecessor, the 2017 model earns good ratings in the moderate overlap front, side, roof strength and head restraint tests.

The redesigned model has a superior-rated, standard front crash prevention system — a step up from the advanced-rated system that was only available as an option on earlier models. In the 12 mph IIHS track test, the vehicle avoided a collision. In the 25 mph track test, impact speed was reduced by an average of 22 mph. The system also has a forward collision warning component that meets National Highway Traffic Safety Administration criteria.

A different, optional front crash prevention system available on the A4 also earns a superior rating.

To qualify for Top Safety Pick+, a vehicle must have good ratings in all five crashworthiness tests and an available front crash prevention system that earns an advanced or superior rating.

The Institute's new headlight ratings aren't yet part of the awards criteria. When equipped with LED headlights and high-beam assist, a feature that automatically switches between high beams and low beams based on the presence of other vehicles, the A4 earns an acceptable rating for headlights. All other headlight combinations on the A4 earn a marginal rating.

Read more: Audi A4 earns Top Safety Pick+

STATUS REPORT: Volume 51, Number 5

Think "muscle car" performance, and images of speed and power are more likely to come to mind than crash tests and safety ratings. Because no one buys a sports car to drive in the slow lane, the best all-around occupant crash protection is crucial. IIHS recently put a trio of iconic sports coupes through their paces, and unlike more sedate sedans, none earns the scores needed to clinch a Top Safety Pick award.

IIHS evaluated 2016 models of the Chevrolet Camaro, Dodge Challenger and Ford Mustang in the full battery of crashworthiness evaluations. The Mustang comes closest to earning Top Safety Pick, while the Camaro falls short in one category and lacks an available front crash prevention system. The Challenger is most in need of improvement.

IIHS evaluated 2016 models of the Chevrolet Camaro, Dodge Challenger and Ford Mustang in the full battery of crashworthiness evaluations. The Mustang comes closest to earning Top Safety Pick, while the Camaro falls short in one category and lacks an available front crash prevention system. The Challenger is most in need of improvement.

To qualify for Top Safety Pick, vehicles must earn good ratings in the small overlap front, moderate overlap front, side, roof strength and head restraint evaluations and have a basic-rated front crash prevention system. To qualify for the Institute's highest award, Top Safety Pick+, vehicles must earn good ratings in the five crashworthiness tests and an advanced or superior rating for front crash prevention.

IIHS doesn't typically crash-test sports cars as they make up a small share of the consumer market. IIHS engineers decided to evaluate these models with optional V-8 engines because they are big sellers in their class, and consumers often ask how they would perform in crash tests.

Insurance data point to high losses for sports cars. As a group, they have the highest losses among passenger vehicles for crash damage repairs under collision coverage, data from the Highway Loss Data Institute show. Collision coverage insures against physical damage to the at-fault policyholder's vehicle in a crash.

"Given that sports cars have high crash rates, it's especially important that they offer the best occupant protection possible in a crash," says Adrian Lund, IIHS president.

The Camaro, Challenger and Mustang earn good ratings for occupant protection in a moderate overlap front crash, as well as a side impact.

In the newest and toughest IIHS crashworthiness evaluation, the small overlap front test, the Camaro earns a good rating, the Mustang earns acceptable, and the Challenger is rated marginal.

"The Mustang is just one good rating away from earning Top Safety Pick," Lund points out. "Its small overlap rating holds it back."

Added in 2012, the small overlap test replicates what happens when a vehicle runs off the road and hits a tree or pole or clips another vehicle that has crossed the center line. In the test, 25 percent of the total width of the vehicle strikes the 5-foot-tall rigid barrier on the driver side at 40 mph. It is an especially challenging test because it involves a vehicle's outer edges, which aren't well-protected by the crush-zone structures. Crash forces go directly into the front wheel, suspension system and firewall.

The Challenger wasn't up to the challenge of the small overlap test. Extensive intrusion into the lower occupant compartment limited the driver's survival space and resulted in a poor rating for structure and for leg/foot protection. Measures taken from the dummy indicate a high likelihood of serious lower leg injuries.

"During the crash, the Challenger's front wheel was forced rearward into the occupant compartment, and the footwell intrusion trapped the dummy's left foot and deformed its ankle," Lund explains. "Our technicians had to unbolt the dummy's foot from its leg in order to free it. Entrapment is pretty rare. That's only happened five other times in a small overlap test."

In contrast, survival space for the driver in the Camaro was well-maintained, and the risk of injuries to the dummy's legs and feet was low. The Camaro was redesigned for the 2016 model year.

"The Camaro's safety cage is built to resist intrusion in a small overlap crash, and that's good news for Camaro drivers," Lund says.

The Mustang's structural performance in the small overlap test fell short of the Camaro's but was an improvement over the Challenger. The roof buckled, and the driver's survival space was compromised by considerable intrusion of the door hinge pillar and instrument panel. Still, measures taken from the dummy indicated low risk of injuries to all body regions, including the legs and feet.

The Camaro and Mustang earn good ratings for head restraints and seats to protect against neck injuries in rear crashes. The Challenger's head restraints are rated acceptable.

The Mustang earns a good rating for roof strength, and the Camaro and Challenger earn acceptable. Stronger roofs crush less in rollovers, reducing the risk that people will be injured by contact with the roof itself and the risk that unbelted occupants will be ejected. Strong roofs are especially important for sports cars, which have among the highest driver death rates in single-vehicle rollovers (see "Saving lives: Improved vehicle designs bring down death rates," Jan. 29, 2015).

The Mustang earns a good rating for roof strength, and the Camaro and Challenger earn acceptable. Stronger roofs crush less in rollovers, reducing the risk that people will be injured by contact with the roof itself and the risk that unbelted occupants will be ejected. Strong roofs are especially important for sports cars, which have among the highest driver death rates in single-vehicle rollovers (see "Saving lives: Improved vehicle designs bring down death rates," Jan. 29, 2015).

Ford and Dodge offer optional forward collision warning systems on the Mustang and Challenger, and both coupes earn a basic rating for front crash prevention because their systems meet performance criteria set by the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration.

How 2016 sports cars rate in IIHS evaluations

GOOD ACCEPTABLE MARGINAL POOR

2016 Chevrolet Camaro

Small overlap front test results were mixed.

The Camaro's safety cage resisted intrusion, while the driver's survival space wasn't well-maintained in the Mustang. In the Challenger test, the force of the crash shoved the wheel back toward the occupant compartment, and the resulting intrusion trapped the dummy's left foot.

Good: Chevrolet Camaro

Chevrolet Camaro intrusion

Acceptable: Ford Mustang

Ford Mustang instrusion

MARGINAL: Dodge Challenger

Dodge Challenger intrusion

2016 Dodge Challenger

Foot entrapment in the Dodge Challenger

The Dodge Challenger struggled in the small overlap test. Extensive occupant compartment intrusion limited survival space for the driver.

The footwell deformed around the dummy's left foot, and technicians had to unbolt the dummy's leg to free it from the wreckage.

Read more: STATUS REPORT: Volume 51, Number 5

BMW X1 earns Top Safety Pick+

ARLINGTON, Va. — The 2016 BMW X1 qualifies for the Insurance Institute for Highway Safety's highest award after a redesign boosted its performance in the small overlap front crash test. The small SUV also has a new optional front crash prevention system that earns an advanced rating.

ARLINGTON, Va. — The 2016 BMW X1 qualifies for the Insurance Institute for Highway Safety's highest award after a redesign boosted its performance in the small overlap front crash test. The small SUV also has a new optional front crash prevention system that earns an advanced rating.

The X1 earns a good small overlap rating. In the test, the driver's space was maintained reasonably well, with maximum intrusion of about 4 inches at the lower door hinge pillar and at the instrument panel.

In contrast, in the test of the previous version, intrusion reached 16 inches at the footwell, trapping the dummy's right foot.

Like its predecessor, the new X1 earns good ratings in the moderate overlap front, side, roof strength and head restraint tests.

The X1's newly available front crash prevention system earns an advanced rating from IIHS. In track tests at 12 mph, impact speed was reduced by an average of 10 mph. In the 25 mph tests, impact speed was reduced by 7 mph. The system includes a forward collision warning component that meets National Highway Traffic Safety Administration criteria.

To qualify for Top Safety Pick+, a vehicle must have good ratings in all five crashworthiness tests and an available front crash prevention system that earns an advanced or superior rating.

Read more: BMW X1 earns Top Safety Pick+

Muscle cars fall short of safety awards

Think "muscle car" performance, and images of speed and power are more likely to come to mind than crash tests and safety ratings. Because no one buys a sports car to drive in the slow lane, the best all-around occupant crash protection is crucial. IIHS recently put a trio of iconic sports coupes through their paces, and unlike more sedate sedans, none earns the scores needed to clinch a Top Safety Pick award.

IIHS evaluated 2016 models of the Chevrolet Camaro, Dodge Challenger and Ford Mustang in the full battery of crashworthiness evaluations. The Mustang comes closest to earning Top Safety Pick, while the Camaro falls short in one category and lacks an available front crash prevention system. The Challenger is most in need of improvement.

IIHS evaluated 2016 models of the Chevrolet Camaro, Dodge Challenger and Ford Mustang in the full battery of crashworthiness evaluations. The Mustang comes closest to earning Top Safety Pick, while the Camaro falls short in one category and lacks an available front crash prevention system. The Challenger is most in need of improvement.

To qualify for Top Safety Pick, vehicles must earn good ratings in the small overlap front, moderate overlap front, side, roof strength and head restraint evaluations and have a basic-rated front crash prevention system. To qualify for the Institute's highest award, Top Safety Pick+, vehicles must earn good ratings in the five crashworthiness tests and an advanced or superior rating for front crash prevention.

IIHS doesn't typically crash-test sports cars as they make up a small share of the consumer market. IIHS engineers decided to evaluate these models with optional V-8 engines because they are big sellers in their class, and consumers often ask how they would perform in crash tests.

Insurance data point to high losses for sports cars. As a group, they have the highest losses among passenger vehicles for crash damage repairs under collision coverage, data from the Highway Loss Data Institute show. Collision coverage insures against physical damage to the at-fault policyholder's vehicle in a crash.

"Given that sports cars have high crash rates, it's especially important that they offer the best occupant protection possible in a crash," says Adrian Lund, IIHS president.

The Camaro, Challenger and Mustang earn good ratings for occupant protection in a moderate overlap front crash, as well as a side impact.

In the newest and toughest IIHS crashworthiness evaluation, the small overlap front test, the Camaro earns a good rating, the Mustang earns acceptable, and the Challenger is rated marginal.

"The Mustang is just one good rating away from earning Top Safety Pick," Lund points out. "Its small overlap rating holds it back."

Added in 2012, the small overlap test replicates what happens when a vehicle runs off the road and hits a tree or pole or clips another vehicle that has crossed the center line. In the test, 25 percent of the total width of the vehicle strikes the 5-foot-tall rigid barrier on the driver side at 40 mph. It is an especially challenging test because it involves a vehicle's outer edges, which aren't well-protected by the crush-zone structures. Crash forces go directly into the front wheel, suspension system and firewall.

The Challenger wasn't up to the challenge of the small overlap test. Extensive intrusion into the lower occupant compartment limited the driver's survival space and resulted in a poor rating for structure and for leg/foot protection. Measures taken from the dummy indicate a high likelihood of serious lower leg injuries.

"During the crash, the Challenger's front wheel was forced rearward into the occupant compartment, and the footwell intrusion trapped the dummy's left foot and deformed its ankle," Lund explains. "Our technicians had to unbolt the dummy's foot from its leg in order to free it. Entrapment is pretty rare. That's only happened five other times in a small overlap test."

In contrast, survival space for the driver in the Camaro was well-maintained, and the risk of injuries to the dummy's legs and feet was low. The Camaro was redesigned for the 2016 model year.

"The Camaro's safety cage is built to resist intrusion in a small overlap crash, and that's good news for Camaro drivers," Lund says.

The Mustang's structural performance in the small overlap test fell short of the Camaro's but was an improvement over the Challenger. The roof buckled, and the driver's survival space was compromised by considerable intrusion of the door hinge pillar and instrument panel. Still, measures taken from the dummy indicated low risk of injuries to all body regions, including the legs and feet.

The Camaro and Mustang earn good ratings for head restraints and seats to protect against neck injuries in rear crashes. The Challenger's head restraints are rated acceptable.

The Mustang earns a good rating for roof strength, and the Camaro and Challenger earn acceptable. Stronger roofs crush less in rollovers, reducing the risk that people will be injured by contact with the roof itself and the risk that unbelted occupants will be ejected. Strong roofs are especially important for sports cars, which have among the highest driver death rates in single-vehicle rollovers (see "Saving lives: Improved vehicle designs bring down death rates," Jan. 29, 2015).

The Mustang earns a good rating for roof strength, and the Camaro and Challenger earn acceptable. Stronger roofs crush less in rollovers, reducing the risk that people will be injured by contact with the roof itself and the risk that unbelted occupants will be ejected. Strong roofs are especially important for sports cars, which have among the highest driver death rates in single-vehicle rollovers (see "Saving lives: Improved vehicle designs bring down death rates," Jan. 29, 2015).

Ford and Dodge offer optional forward collision warning systems on the Mustang and Challenger, and both coupes earn a basic rating for front crash prevention because their systems meet performance criteria set by the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration.

How 2016 sports cars rate in IIHS evaluations

GOOD ACCEPTABLE MARGINAL POOR

2016 Chevrolet Camaro

Small overlap front test results were mixed.

The Camaro's safety cage resisted intrusion, while the driver's survival space wasn't well-maintained in the Mustang. In the Challenger test, the force of the crash shoved the wheel back toward the occupant compartment, and the resulting intrusion trapped the dummy's left foot.

Good: Chevrolet Camaro

Chevrolet Camaro intrusion

Acceptable: Ford Mustang

Ford Mustang instrusion

MARGINAL: Dodge Challenger

Dodge Challenger intrusion

2016 Dodge Challenger

Foot entrapment in the Dodge Challenger

The Dodge Challenger struggled in the small overlap test. Extensive occupant compartment intrusion limited survival space for the driver.

The footwell deformed around the dummy's left foot, and technicians had to unbolt the dummy's leg to free it from the wreckage.

Read more: Muscle cars fall short of safety awards

social_icon

    

JOIN OUR MAILING LIST

Thanks for your subscriptions!

CONTACT DETAILS

Contact By Mail:

Unit 3, 100 Hanlan Road,

Vaughan, Ontario, Canada L4L 4V8

 

We on Maps

Scroll to Top