Twenty-two of the 30 vehicles evaluated earned a good or acceptable rating in a recent assessment, ... [+]
Automakers have made major improvements to their automatic emergency braking systems following the introduction of a new, tougher front crash prevention test. Twenty-two of the 30 vehicles evaluated earned a good or acceptable rating in a recent assessment, which requires systems to be able to prevent or substantially mitigate crashes at higher speeds.
In test results released last year, only three out of 10 small SUVs performed to that level.
Those are the highlights of new ratings for the updated front crash prevention test program released on Wednesday by the Insurance Institute for Highway Safety, a nonprofit financed by the insurance industry.
“The rapid progress manufacturers have made to improve these vital crash avoidance systems is impressive,” David Harkey, the Insurance Institute’s president, said in a statement. “Vehicles that excel in this new test will save lives, as it addresses the most dangerous kinds of front-to-rear crashes.”
The updated test was designed to determine how well vehicle autobrake technology detects cars, motorcycles and large trucks. Trials were run at 31, 37 and 43 mph (50, 60 and 70 kph), higher speeds than in previous evaluations. In trials with passenger cars and motorcycles, systems with both forward collision warning and automatic emergency braking (AEB) capabilities were evaluated.
The top rating in the Insurance Institute’s assessments is good, followed by acceptable, marginal or poor.
The Best Rated Systems
Fifteen models earned a good rating for their standard systems: The Acura ZDX, BMW X5, BMW 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 and Toyota Tacoma. In addition, the Mercedes-Benz E-Class, which is available with an optional system, also earned a good rating.
The models with good-rated systems “delivered timely forward collision warnings and came to a complete stop before impact in all the trials with the passenger car target,” the safety group said, adding that they also did well in most trials with the motorcycle target and provided timely warnings in all semitrailer trials.
For vehicles that did not rate as well, the motorcycle tests were the most common stumbling block.
The Worst Rated Systems
Seven models earned the lowest rating of poor: Audi Q7, Audi Q8, Buick Envista, Chevrolet Tahoe, Chevrolet Trax, Kia Seltos and Nissan Altima.
These vehicles hit the motorcycle target in the slowest, 31 mph test, with the target centered. “Some barely reduced speed or did not issue timely warnings,” according to the results of the assessments. “The poor-rated vehicles also struggled in the tests with the passenger car target. Most failed to slow enough in the 37 mph test with the target centered to qualify for additional AEB testing. However, in most trials with the passenger car and semitrailer, they delivered timely forward collision alerts.”
The recent assessments reflected a greater proportion of police-reported front-to-rear crashes, including many that resulted in serious injuries or fatalities, the safety group said, noting that more than 400 people are killed annually in rear-end crashes with semi trailers, while rear impacts account for over 200 motorcyclist deaths every year.
“These results indicate that preventing crashes at higher speeds, especially collisions with motorcycles, remains a challenge for some systems,” Harkey added.. “Motorcycles are a special area of concern because, unlike passenger vehicle occupants, riders have little protection from crash injuries.”
For more information and updated front crash prevention ratings for all models evaluated, click here.
