The Toyota Yaris subcompact crumpled in a simulated 40-mph head-on collision with a Toyota Camry. See more photos
of the IIHS's crash tests in today's slideshow.
The Honda Fit, Smart ForTwo, and Toyota Yaris have all earned the highest rating of Good in the offset-frontal crash test conducted by the Insurance Institute for Highway Safety.
But in that test, cars are driven into a barrier mounted on a wall, which simulates a front-end collision with a vehicle that's the same weight. The tiny two-seat Smart did very well in a simulated collision with another tiny two-seat Smart, but not so well against a larger vehicle.
The IIHS paired the three subcompact cars against the midsize sedans from the same automakers: the Honda Fit hit the Honda Accord, the Smart ForTwo hit the Mercedes-Benz C-Class, and the Toyota Yaris hit the Toyota Camry.
And the little cars did not fare well. All would have earned the lowest rating of Poor had they performed similarly in the standard IIHS barrier test.
A combination of the extra weight and the longer hoods of the larger cars helped them dramatically outperform the subcompacs.
The IIHS did not say, however, that there would be any fatal injuries in the 40-mph head-on collision between the subcompacts and the larger cars. Occupants of a car that earns the highest rating of Good are expected to walk away uninjured, while a Poor only means injury is likely. The drivers of the Fit, ForTwo, and Yaris would have likely suffered leg, head and neck injuries in such a head-on collision, however.
The IIHS used its results to criticize the safety of the smallest cars sold, though it bears mentioning that the Accord, C-Class, and Camry would likely have fared poorly against an even larger vehicle, like a pickup truck or SUV. Small-car advocates have long discouraged treating buying a car as an arms race to always try and have a bigger vehicle than the other drivers around you, correctly noting that you are unlikely to ever have the largest car on the road no matter how big you go.
However, the smaller your car, the more likely it is that the car you hit will be bigger than yours. And as the IIHS results show, size matters.
IIHS news release
Comments
The pairings for the crashes were interesting. I like that they did Toyota vs Toyota, etc...
Interesting test but it one shouldn't over emphasize passive safety. It's commonly overlooked that automotive safety has two aspects: active and passive. Active safety is the car's ability to avoid an accident in the first place--this is where small cars often shine as they are more maneuverable, their small size enables them to squirt through a space too tiny for a bigger vehicle, and they have lower centers of gravity than SUVs so are less likely to flip over on their roofs. Problem is, it's difficult to establish a testing standard for active safety.
A small cars ability to avoid an accident is highly misleading, if that were the case a motorcycle would be ranked safer which isn't the case, one could argue a smaller car is less visible, a slower smaller car would also less maneuverable than a high end mid-size car like a Mercedes as most sub-compacts are economy cars unlike most mid-size cars. Tires that are thinner on small cars also prevent them from handling better not to mention it's smaller track and wheel base so a smaller car having better active safety is wrong.
I do agree with SUV's tipping with the lower center of gravity however and that is not usually factored into crash tests.
Got something to say?
Examiner.com is looking for writers, photographers, and videographers to join the fastest growing group of local insiders. If you are interested in growing your online rep apply to be an Examiner today!