Skip to footer

Small SUVs fail crash test. Is yours on the list?

Eleven of 13 popular small SUVs tested receive marginal or poor ratings for a front-end collision. Insurance Institute for Highway Safety, which conducted the tests, calls the results 'troubling.' 

|
Subaru of America, Inc./PRNewsFoto/File
Subaru's 2014 Forester was the only small SUV tested by the . Insurance Institute for Highway Safety that earned an acceptable rating for protecting passengers from a front-end collision. Eleven of 13 small SUVs rated marginal or poor.

Some of the most popular small SUVs have failed crash tests that simulate a common and deadly front end collision.

"These are troubling results," said Joe Nolan with the Insurance Institute for Highway Safety. "These small SUV's are very popular and for the most part pretty safe, but with these tests most of them did not do well."

For the first time the Insurance Institute for Highway Safety conducted small overlap crash tests with small SUV's. Eleven of the thirteen models tested received marginal or poor ratings. (Read More: Bigger Is Better: SUVs and CUVs Rule the Road in China)

"Too often many of these models did a poor job protecting the front occupant cabin," said Nolan.

IIHS Small Frontal Crash Tests

Model Rating

'14 Subaru Forrester Good
Mitsubishi Outlander Sport Acceptable
BMW X1 Marginal
Nissan Rogue Marginal
Mazda CX-5 Marginal
Honda CR-V Marginal
Jeep Wrangler (2 door) Marginal
Volkswagen Tiguan Marginal
Hyundai Tuscon Poor
KIA Sportage Poor
Buick Encore Poor
Jeep Patriot Poor
Ford Escape Poor

First Time Crash Tests

So why did small SUVs struggle with these crash tests?

In part it's because many of these models were not designed to specifically protect passengers involved in small frontal crashes.

In these crashes only the front corner of a vehicle strikes another vehicle, or a tree or pole. The IIHS says this type of accident accounts for about 24% of the serious injuries and deaths that occur in frontal crashes.

(Read More: Chevy Gets in Luxury Pickup Race With Silverado)

In recent years IIHS has started testing for small overlap crashes because the risk of severe damage or structural collapse of the passenger cabin.

Following these tests, the IIHS was particularly critical of the performance of the Nissan Rogue.

Nissan responded to the results saying, "Nissan will continue to review these and other results from the IIHS 'small overlap front test' as we seek opportunities for improvement."

Top Safety Picks Despite Results

Even though most of the small SUV's tested received a marginal or poor ratings, many have been deemed Top Safety Picks by the IIHS. (Read More: Bye-Bye Minivans, Sales Slump While CUVs Surge)

While that may seem like a conflict, Nolan points out these small SUVs are still safe vehicles overall.

"I don't think these small overlap tests will force people to sell their SUV," said Nolan. "And in a couple years, when many of these models are re-designed I wouldn't be surprised if they improve their crash test results."

You've read  of  free articles. Subscribe to continue.
Real news can be honest, hopeful, credible, constructive.
What is the Monitor difference? Tackling the tough headlines – with humanity. Listening to sources – with respect. Seeing the story that others are missing by reporting what so often gets overlooked: the values that connect us. That’s Monitor reporting – news that changes how you see the world.
editor@csmonitor.com
Subscribe
Mark Sappenfield
Editor

Dear Reader,

About a year ago, I happened upon this statement about the Monitor in the Harvard Business Review – under the charming heading of “do things that don’t interest you”:

“Many things that end up” being meaningful, writes social scientist Joseph Grenny, “have come from conference workshops, articles, or online videos that began as a chore and ended with an insight. My work in Kenya, for example, was heavily influenced by a Christian Science Monitor article I had forced myself to read 10 years earlier. Sometimes, we call things ‘boring’ simply because they lie outside the box we are currently in.”

If you were to come up with a punchline to a joke about the Monitor, that would probably be it. We’re seen as being global, fair, insightful, and perhaps a bit too earnest. We’re the bran muffin of journalism.

But you know what? We change lives. And I’m going to argue that we change lives precisely because we force open that too-small box that most human beings think they live in.

The Monitor is a peculiar little publication that’s hard for the world to figure out. We’re run by a church, but we’re not only for church members and we’re not about converting people. We’re known as being fair even as the world becomes as polarized as at any time since the newspaper’s founding in 1908.

We have a mission beyond circulation, we want to bridge divides. We’re about kicking down the door of thought everywhere and saying, “You are bigger and more capable than you realize. And we can prove it.”

If you’re looking for bran muffin journalism, you can subscribe to the Monitor for $15. You’ll get the Monitor Weekly magazine, the Monitor Daily email, and unlimited access to CSMonitor.com.

Subscribe to insightful journalism

QR Code to Small SUVs fail crash test. Is yours on the list?
Read this article in
https://www.csmonitor.com/Business/In-Gear/2013/0516/Small-SUVs-fail-crash-test.-Is-yours-on-the-list
QR Code to Subscription page
Start your subscription today
https://www.csmonitor.com/subscribe