Subaru Forester Gets Top Rating in IIHS Roof Strength Test
The all-new Subaru Forester is among four vehicles which were given the top rating of ‘Good’ in the Insurance Institute for Highway Safety’s new roof strength rating system. Designed to help consumers choose vehicles that will help protect them in rollover crashes, twelve small SUVs were tested with only four receiving a ‘good’ rating.
The Tiguan, Subaru Forester, Honda Element, and Jeep Patriot all earned good ratings, while the Suzuki Grand Vitara, Chevrolet Equinox, Toyota RAV4, Nissan Rogue, and Mitsubishi Outlander have been rated acceptable. Roofs on the Honda CR-V and Ford Escape are marginal, and the Kia’s is poor.
Institute research indicates that roofs have gotten stronger during the past few years. Part of the reason is that manufacturers have made structural improvements to earn better front and side ratings in Institute crash tests. Strong A and B pillars help prevent intrusion in these types of crashes and also help hold up the roof.
Says Institute president Adrian Lund:
“We anticipate that our roof strength test will drive improved rollover crash protection the same way our frontal offset and side impact consumer test programs have led to better protection in these kinds of crashes.”
More than 10,000 people a year are killed in rollovers. When vehicles roll, their roofs hit the ground, deform, and crush. Stronger roofs crush less, reducing the risk that people will be injured by contact with the roof itself. Stronger roofs also can prevent occupants, especially those who aren’t using safety belts, from being ejected through windows, windshields, or doors that have broken or opened because the roof has deformed. Roofs that don’t collapse help keep people inside vehicles as they roll.
Tom Doll, chief operating officer for Subaru of America, Inc.:
“The all-new Subaru Forester continues to deliver the highest levels of safety as evidenced by this new IIHS test. Safety is an important part of our brand promise and we at Subaru are proud of the renowned performance of our vehicles in crash testing as well as real-life accident conditions.”
Click here to view the full report [PDF].
About IIHS
In the Institute’s roof strength test, a metal plate is pushed against 1 side of a roof at a constant speed. To earn a good rating, the roof must withstand a force of 4 times the vehicle’s weight before reaching 5 inches of crush. This is called a strength-to-weight ratio. For an acceptable rating, the minimum required strength-to-weight ratio is 3.25. A marginal rating value is 2.5. Anything lower than that is poor.
The Institute’s frontal crashworthiness evaluations are based on results of 40 mph frontal offset crash tests. Each vehicle’s overall evaluation is based on measurements of intrusion into the occupant compartment, injury measures recorded on a Hybrid III dummy in the driver seat, and analysis of slow-motion film to assess how well the restraint system controlled dummy movement during the test.
Side evaluations are based on performance in a crash test in which the side of a vehicle is struck by a barrier moving at 31 mph. The barrier represents the front end of a pickup or SUV. Ratings reflect injury measures 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 back seat behind the driver, are used to determine the likelihood that a driver and/or passenger in a similar real-world crash would sustain serious injury to various parts of the body. The movements and contacts of the dummies’ heads during the test also are evaluated. Structural performance is based on measurements indicating the amount of B-pillar intrusion into the occupant compartment.
Rear crash protection is rated according to a two-step procedure. Starting points for the ratings are measurements of head restraint geometry - the height of a restraint and its horizontal distance behind the back of the head of an average-size man. Seats with good or acceptable restraint geometry are tested dynamically using a dummy that measures forces on the neck. This test simulates a collision in which a stationary vehicle is struck in the rear at 20 mph. Seats without good or acceptable geometry are rated poor overall because they can’t be positioned to protect many people.
Loading ...
I think I prioritize car safety as much as I do it’s green factor. Not that I’m anticipating any rollover crashes soon, but the top 4 SUVs with tough roofs seem like a good investment to me.