How safety testing helps safety advances Testing helps promote better designs for vehicles and vehicle occupants. The initial crashworthiness testing program of the Insurance Institute for Highway Safety, which got underway in 1995, provided the automotive industry with a set of independent standards. Although initially some automakers found the standards too demanding, they simply redesigned their vehicles to meet the toughest standards. Ultimately, the test programs resulted in stronger vehicle structures and more effective restraint systems.

But that’s how far the bar has risen as we get new test results from this year’s IIHS crash-testing program that show how challenging today’s crash-test protocols are for modern vehicles especially in the area of protecting rear-seating passengers. The updated moderate overlap front crash test pushed the redesigned 2026 Audi Q3 and Toyota RAV4 Plug-In Hybrid to the limit of their safety systems, and several other models came up just short of the top scores as well. And the tests show some critical ways that automakers are working to manipulate crash forces and seat-belt positioning for smaller rear-seating passengers.

1. IIGHS Safety Testing Evolution

The non-profit Insurance Institute for Highway Safety (IIHS) has a long history of advancing car safety through independent crash testing. The organization published its first crash-test ratings in 1995 and has modified its testing criteria when it finds security weaknesses in cars. Automakers sometimes felt its guidelines were too tough, though they worked to build vehicles that performed well in crash tests. Unlike the government-run National Highway Traffic Safety Administration, the IIHS is a private organization funded by the insurance industry, giving it unique access to car crash data.

Important Testing Details:

• First crash ratings published in 1995
• Independent insurance-industry-backed nonprofit
• Uses extensive insurance data
• Operates separately from NHTSA
• Encourages continuous vehicle safety improvements

Over the years, demands from the institute have prompted automakers to enhance their vehicle’s structure and protection systems for occupants. Its tests have evolved to look at areas beyond traditional crashworthiness, such as pedestrian crash prevention, vehicle-to-vehicle crash prevention, headlights, seat belt reminders, and the LATCH anchors used to attach child seats. These tests can reveal safety flaws that wouldn’t be uncovered in normal driving. By continually raising the bar, IIHS has inspired automakers to keep advancing vehicle safety.

2. Updated Crash-Test Requirements

The new IIHS ratings incorporate several new, more modern procedures that have been added to assess how cars defend their occupants in various types of crashes. Besides the IIHS two new procedures to assess systems designed to prevent whiplash injuries and assess pedestrian crash prevention and vehicle crash mitigation technologies, there is a more modernized moderate overlap front crash test that is expected to highlight the importance of protecting rear seat occupants. In 2022 the test was revised to reflect a 40 mph impact with a barrier that overlaps 40% of the vehicle width.

Modern Test Areas:

• Vehicle-to-pedestrian crash prevention
• Vehicle-to-vehicle crash prevention
• Headlight performance
• Child-seat LATCH anchor usability
• Updated side impact and whiplash testing

The new moderate overlap test pairs two crash-test dummies to measure protection in different seating positions. One will be an instrumented front dummy that stands for a 50th percentile adult male (5’9″, 160 pounds). The other will be a smaller dummy sitting behind the driver that stands for a 5th percentile adult female or a 12-year-old child (4’11”, 108 pounds). Having the smaller passenger helps the institute see if rear-seat seatbelts stay in the right place during a severe frontal crash.

3. Six Vehicles Evaluated

Six cars from various segments of the market participated in the most recent IIHS test cycle. The model lineup comprised the refreshed 2026 Audi Q3, 2026 Chevrolet Trailblazer, 2026 Nissan Kicks, the refreshed 2026 Toyota RAV4, 2026 Toyota RAV4 Plug-In Hybrid and 2027 Volkswagen Jetta. Among the tested models, there were stark differences in crashworthiness and rear-seat occupant protection, and while the other models did well in various other testing, only one crossover in the pack earned a 2026 Top Safety Pick award.

Vehicles Tested Include:

• 2026 Audi Q3
• 2026 Chevrolet Trailblazer
• Nissan Kicks
• 2026 Toyota RAV4 Hybrid and PHEV
• 2027 Volkswagen Jetta

The results demonstrated that scoring well in the old crash tests did not necessarily translate to earning an overall Top Safety Pick award. The Audi Q3, both RAV4 powertrain configurations had a failure in the revised moderate overlap test. The Chevrolet Trailblazer also had a Poor rating in that test, while the Volkswagen Jetta achieved a Good score. The Nissan Kicks became the only crossover in the class to attain a 2026 Top Safety Pick after the model’s rear seatbelts were upgraded. This illustrates why each seating position matters not just the drivers and front passengers.

4. Toyota RAV4 Hybrid Results

The sixth-generation RAV4, redesigned for the 2026 model year, was available with electric powertrain choices, a hybrid (designed to run on the electric motor alone or in combination with the gas engine) or a plug-in hybrid (can operate solely on electric power) as standard equipment. Both versions employ similar vehicle structures, but the slightly different powertrain configurations resulted in distinct responses in the new moderate overlap front test, which involves a higher-energy crash at the front corner of the car. Neither version earned the highest rating of Good in this evaluation, though the hybrid did slightly better than the PHEV.

RAV4 Test Ratings:

• Standard hybrid received Acceptable
• Plug-in hybrid received Marginal
• Neither achieved a Good rating
• Rear-seat protection affected both models
• Other IIHS evaluations received Good ratings

The 2026 RAV4 Hybrid, like the 2024, is a much better than average performer for frontal crash protection, but the results indicated a moderate risk of injury to the head, neck and chest of the rear passenger. The IIHS identified an issue with the shoulder belt pulling too far up towards the rear dummy’s neck in the crash. Even with this issue, the vehicle earned Acceptable ratings for head and neck protection, chest protection and rear restraint performance. The structure was rated as good and the shoulder belt didn’t stay in the right position for a small passenger. That made rear-seat restraint performance the main weakness of the crash worthiness of the RAV4 Hybrid.

5. RAV4 Plug-In Hybrid Issues

The 2026 Toyota RAV4 Plug-In Hybrid sustained worse rear-seat restraint issues in the updated moderate overlap front crash test. Just as with the base hybrid, the dummy’s shoulder belt traveled to the dummy’s neck. However, the lap belt traveled off the pelvis and onto the soft abdominal tissue. This is especially worrisome because the lap belt is supposed to stay in position over the pelvis, where the bony protection is greater. When it moves upward, internal organs are potentially more at risk in a crash.

PHEV Safety Findings:

• Rear shoulder belt moved toward the neck
• Lap belt shifted away from the pelvis
• Belt moved onto the abdomen
• Rear chest injury rating was Acceptable
• Rear restraints and dummy kinematics rated Poor

The IIHS gave the RAV4 PHEV an Acceptable rating for rear passenger chest injury, but a Poor rating for rear restraints and dummy kinematics. The evaluation shows that occupant protection can be influenced by restraint placement even in a well-structured vehicle. The extra weight of the battery is another factor that sets the plug-in hybrid apart from its sibling. But the many restraint problems that the test revealed largely contributed to its poor rating, and the seating area in the rear of the RAV4 PHEV is a major issue in the overall crash-test performance.

6. RAV4 Front Crash Protection

PHEV was not able to perform well in the moderate overlap test, it scored high in the small overlap front crash evaluation with the driver. The model used for this evaluation was a 2026 RAV4 SE PHEV 4-door, all-wheel drive. The IIHS scored the small overlap front evaluations as Good in all three categories. Displacement measurements showed relatively little intrusion into the cabin for the driver, showing that the safety cage and front-end had successfully withstood the crash force. With such a stark difference between front and back seat protection, there is a clear difference in restraint system efficacy.

Small Overlap Measurements:

• Lower hinge pillar intrusion-5 cm
• Footrest movement-2 cm
• Left toepan movement-2 cm
• Brake pedal movement-4 cm
• Upper dashboard intrusion-7 cm

The lower instrument panel was pushed in 8 centimeters and the steering column moved 2 centimeters inward. The parking brake was pushed inward 0 centimeters. The upper hinge pillar was pushed inward 5 centimeters. The figures compare to 12 centimeters of intrusion and 1 centimeter of lateral rocker panel movement in the lower instrument panel and 5 centimeters of intrusion in the upper hinge pillar for the moderate overlap test. These figures illustrate how well the occupant compartment held up during the small overlap crash. Driver-side protection remained a strength of the vehicle even though the rear-seat belt was ineffective in the moderate overlap test.

7. Driver Injury Measurements

RAV4 PHEV Driver dummy performance in small overlap test was also excellent. Head Injury Criterion (HIC) was recorded at 197 with no hard contact peaks. Neck tension was measured at 1.4kN, and extension bending moment was 8Nm, producing a maximum Nij of only 0.24. Chest compression was recorded at 28mm, and recorded femur and tibia forces were within the reported low risk range.

Driver Protection Data:

• Head Injury Criterion-197
• Neck tension-1.4 kilonewtons
• Maximum Nij-0.24
• Chest compression-28 millimeters
• Knee-thigh-hip injury risk-0%

Left and right femur forces were 2.7 and 1.5 kilonewtons, respectively. Tibia axial forces were 2.0 kilonewtons on the left and 2.3 kilonewtons on the right. This led to a 0-percent knee-thigh-hip injury risk in this crash report. The results show how well Toyota’s new front-row safety hardware protects against this crash type. However, the differences between the driver-side measurements and the seating problem causing the restraint concern highlight the importance of testing crash scenarios with occupants of other sizes in all seating rows.

8. Audi Q3 Rear-Seat Problems

Redesign The 2026 Audi Q3 (which carries an estimated test rating that may be valid for the 2027 model year, too) encountered the same issues in the redesigned moderate overlap front crash test. The luxury crossover earned a Poor rating in the test after achieving Good scores in the small overlap front test, the redesigned side impact test and the front crash prevention evaluation. In the moderate overlap crash, the shoulder belt of the rear passenger dummy was displaced well in the direction of the neck, and the lap belt was displaced away from the pelvis and into the soft abdomen.

Audi Q3 Test Findings:

• Moderate overlap rating-Poor
• Shoulder belt moved toward the neck
• Lap belt shifted onto the abdomen
• Rear chest injury risk increased
• Head, neck, and thigh protection rated Good

The IIHS rated the Q3 Poor for rear passenger restraint, dummy kinematics, and high chest injury risk. It still received a good score for the head, neck, and thigh protection for the dummy, however, which demonstrates the rear passenger’s head was reasonably restrained, even if the system used to restrain their upper body was not. Nonetheless, this was a factor that prevented the Audi Q3 from being designated a Top Safety Pick for 2026. It also shows a vehicle can have a number of strengths in their safety tests, but be held back overall by one critical weakness.

9. Safety Awards And Competitors

To be eligible for the 2026 Top Safety Pick award, a vehicle has to meet certain criteria set by the IIHS. All trims need to score Good in the moderate overlap front, small overlap front, and side impact crash tests. The headlights have to be Acceptable or better in all trims and the vehicle needs to have at least an Acceptable rating in daytime pedestrian crash prevention. The Audi Q3, standard RAV4 Hybrid, and RAV4 PHEV did not qualify as there was no model with a Good rating in the new moderate overlap front test.

Award Qualification Rules:

• Good moderate overlap front rating
• Good small overlap front rating
• Good side impact rating
• Acceptable or Good headlights
• At least Acceptable daytime pedestrian prevention

Vehicles in the test other than the ones listed had mixed results. The other vehicles in our test had mixed results. The Chevrolet Trailblazer received a Poor overall rating in the moderate overlap test, as well as weak headlight performance and strong front crash prevention. The 2027 Volkswagen Jetta earned a Good overall rating in the updated moderate overlap test, but its other scores were not enough for it to earn top marks. The Nissan Kicks was the only crossover to earn a 2026 Top Safety Pick, while the 2026 Hyundai Tucson was a good comparison, earning Good in the front, side, headlight, pedestrian and vehicle-to-vehicle tests reported here to earn Top Safety Pick & designation.

10. Nissan Kicks And Toyota Trends

The Kicks showed how a modest change to a vehicle’s engineering can have a positive impact in crash tests. The current generation of the Kicks was first rated Poor under the new moderate overlap test when it arrived for the 2025 model year. The automaker altered the rear seat belts on Kicks models built after June 2026, and when the model was retested, the Kicks achieved a Good rating in the current-generation model. It did not qualify for the top award of Top Safety Pick because of the Marginal rating it received on its vehicle-to-vehicle front crash prevention test.

Wider Safety Findings:

• Nissan revised rear seat belts after June 2026
• Updated Kicks earned a Good rating
• Kicks received a Marginal vehicle-to-vehicle prevention score
• Several Toyota TNGA models received Acceptable or Marginal ratings
• Toyota Prius and Camry achieved top marks

The IIHS results provide a broader indication of the implications across other Toyota models built on the TNGA platform. The Corolla Cross, Toyota bZ, and bZ Woodland were rated Acceptable in the revised moderate overlap test. The Corolla Sedan, Crown Signia, Highlander, Land Cruiser, and 4Runner received Marginal ratings. The Toyota Prius and the Camry were the only two Toyota models that earned Good ratings and safety awards. These tests indicate that the geometry of the rear-seat belts and restraint design may be a manufacturing challenge across all other Toyota vehicles. It does not imply these other models are inherently unsafe but indicates room for improvement to help better protect smaller rear-seat occupants.