Front & Side Impact Crash Test Results for RAV4 & Legacy
The
2004 Toyota RAV4 equipped with optional side airbags is the first vehicle to earn
good ratings and "best pick" designations for both front and side impact
crashworthiness tests conducted by the Insurance Institute for Highway Safety
-- a "double best pick." The Institute rates vehicles on how well they
protect occupants in front and side crashes, assigning each vehicle a rating of
good, acceptable, marginal, or poor. The better performers among the good vehicles
in front and side tests are designated "best picks." Vehicles that earn
"best pick" designations in both tests are "double best picks."
"Results
for this small SUV show manufacturers can provide good protection for occupants
in the two most common kinds of serious crashes," says Institute chief operating
officer Adrian Lund. "Unfortunately Toyota hasn't made side airbags standard,
and the RAV4 without side airbags is still rated poor for side impact protection." The
Institute also tested the Subaru Legacy, which earned a good rating and a "best
pick" designation in the frontal test but a marginal rating in the side impact
test. This midsize inexpensive car was redesigned for the 2005 model year. The
RAV4 was tested because of the recent addition of side airbags and because Toyota
made some changes to this vehicle's front-end structure to improve frontal crash
performance. Both the RAV4 and the Legacy belong to groups of vehicles that the
Institute evaluated in earlier front and side crashes. In
the Institute's frontal offset test, a vehicle strikes a deformable barrier at
40 mph. The vehicle is offset so that only 40 percent of the front end strikes
the barrier on the driver side. In offset tests, a smaller area of the front end
must manage the crash energy than in full-width tests. Injury measures are taken
from a dummy representing an average-size male (50th percentile) positioned in
the driver seat. In
the Institute's side impact test, a moving deformable barrier strikes the driver
side of a passenger vehicle at 31 mph. The barrier weighs 3,300 pounds and has
a front end shaped to simulate the front of a typical pickup or SUV. In each side-struck
vehicle are two instrumented dummies the size of a short (5th percentile) female.
One dummy is positioned in the driver seat, and one is in the rear seat behind
the driver. RAV4
improves in both tests:
This is the third version of the RAV4 evaluated
in the Institute's frontal test. "In
the first frontal crash test in 1998, the RAV4 was a marginal performer,"
Lund says. The dummy's head hit the window frame during the crash. Its knee hit
a metal flange under the steering column, which punctured the dummy's vinyl "skin."
High accelerations were recorded on the dummy's head and chest. There also was
a likelihood of injury to the left leg.
The
RAV4 was redesigned in 2001, and its performance improved. "But it still
was rated only acceptable in the frontal test," Lund says. High accelerations
were recorded when the dummy's head struck the steering wheel through the driver
airbag, and forces on both legs indicated the possibility of injuries.
For
2004 model RAV4s manufactured after December 2003, Toyota made structural modifications
to improve offset test performance.
"RAV4s
with the modifications are much improved," Lund says. "The dummy's movement
during the crash was well controlled, and injury measures taken from the head,
neck, and chest all were low. The new RAV4 is now a good performer and a 'best
pick' in the frontal test."
RAV4's
side test results improve with side airbags:
In the Institute's
first set of side impact tests of small SUVs, the 2003 RAV4 was among seven designs
that earned the lowest rating of poor. Only the Subaru Forester with standard
side airbags and the 2001-04 Ford Escape with optional side airbags earned good
ratings. The Hyundai Santa Fe with standard side airbags was rated acceptable.
"In
2003 you couldn't buy a RAV4 with side airbags," Lund points out. "The
side structure was rated marginal, and because there were no head protection airbags
the driver dummy's head was struck by the intruding barrier. Measures also showed
the likelihood of major torso injuries and pelvic fractures. The 2004 RAV4 equipped
with optional side airbags is a huge improvement. The structure is better, but
side airbags with head protection made the biggest difference compared with the
old RAV4."
Forces
recorded on the driver and passenger dummies were "dramatically lower,"
Lund adds. "This time, the driver dummy's head was cushioned by the curtain
airbag and wasn't struck by the barrier."
A
torso airbag deploying from the seat also helped to reduce injury forces on the
lower body of the driver dummy.
"When
the Institute began frontal offset crash testing in 1995, manufacturers made big
improvements in the protection vehicles provide to occupants in frontal crashes,"
says Lund. "The side impact test is now driving similar improvements in protection
for occupants in side crashes. But only buyers of RAV4s who opt for the side airbags
get good protection in side impacts. All manufacturers should provide side airbags
with head protection as standard equipment."
Side
airbags are reducing risks in real-world crashes:
Institute research shows that in vehicles with side airbags to protect the
head, the risk of a fatal injury is reduced by 45 percent among drivers of cars
struck on the driver side. Side airbags that protect the chest and abdomen, but
not the head, also are reducing deaths but are less effective (about a 10 percent
reduction in deaths). Before the availability of head-protecting airbags, there
was virtually nothing to prevent people's heads from being struck by intruding
vehicles or rigid objects like trees or poles in serious side impacts.
Legacy
earns top rating in frontal test:
The driver space was maintained with little intrusion into the occupant compartment.
Dummy movement was well controlled, and all injury measures were low.
"The
Legacy performed well across the board in the frontal test and earns a good rating
and a 'best pick,'" Lund says.
Subaru
recalls Legacy after side impact test: The Institute conducted two side impact
crash tests of the Legacy. In the first test, the standard side curtain airbag
deployed improperly, so the driver dummy's head was hit by the intruding barrier.
Subaru found that the side airbags weren't folded correctly at the factory where
they were produced. Subaru corrected the problem and recalled Legacy models manufactured
earlier. When the Institute tested another Legacy with the modified airbags, the
driver side curtain inflated properly.
"The
heads of the front and rear dummies were protected by the airbag," Lund says,
"but other measures taken from the driver dummy indicated the likelihood
of rib fractures and internal organ injuries plus the possibility of pelvic fractures.
These kept the Legacy from earning a higher than marginal rating."
The
Institute recently tested 13 midsize car designs, and only the Honda Accord and
Toyota Camry with optional side airbags earned good ratings. The Chevrolet Malibu
with side airbags was acceptable. The rest were poor.How
vehicles are evaluated:
The Institute's frontal crashworthiness evaluations are based on results
of frontal offset crash tests at 40 mph. Each vehicle's overall evaluation is
based on three aspects of performance -- measurements of intrusion into the occupant
compartment, injury measures from a Hybrid III dummy positioned in the driver
seat, and analysis of slow-motion film to assess how well the restraint system
controlled dummy movement during the test.
Each
vehicle's overall side evaluation is based on injurymeasures recorded on two
instrumented SID-IIs dummies, assessment of head protection countermeasures, and
the vehicle's structural performance during the impact. Injury measures obtained
from the two dummies, one in the driver seat and the other in the rear seat behind
the driver, are used to determine the likelihood that the driver and/or passenger
would have sustained serious injury to various body regions.
The
movements and contacts of the dummies' heads during the crash also are evaluated.
This assessment is more important for seating positions without head-protecting
airbags which, ssuming they perform as intended, should prevent injurious head
contacts. Structural performance is based on measurements indicating the amount
of B-pillar intrusion into the occupant compartment. Some intrusion into the compartment
is inevitable in serious side impacts, but any intrusion that does occur should
be uniform both horizontally and vertically and shouldn't seriously compromise
the driver or passenger space.
©1996-2004,
Insurance Institute for Highway Safety, Highway Loss Data Institute
For
more information visit IIHS at www.iihs.org.
|