In Rear-End Crash Test, Most Trucks Fail To Stop Neck Injury

DETROIT, July 2 — More than 60 percent of light trucks tested by the Insurance Institute for Highway Safety have been found to provide inadequate protection against neck injuries in a rear-end crash, the most common type of accident.

Of 87 models evaluated, 21 received the highest rating, according to results scheduled for release Tuesday by the insurance institute. Fifty-four vehicles, or 62 percent, failed the test, which measures how well the head and neck restraints on seats guard against whiplash when the vehicle is struck from behind.

Any given day, youre more likely to need a good head restraint to protect you from a neck injury than you are an air bag to protect you in a head-on crash, said David S. Zuby, senior vice president of the insurance institutes Vehicle Research Center. People dont think too much about the fender benders that can result in neck pain for weeks or even months after the crash.

Only one pickup truck, the 2007 Toyota Tundra, received the highest rating of good in the rear-end crash tests. That was welcome news for Toyota, which was surprised and embarrassed when its redesigned Tundra earned four stars in government front crash tests while all of Detroits full-size pickups received five stars.

The Chevrolet Silverado, which also was overhauled for 2007, received the next-highest rating of acceptable. That was a considerable improvement from the rating of poor given to the previous version of the Silverado, which is still sold as the Silverado Classic. The Silverado Classic was one of nine models that the insurance institute said it did not fully test because their head restraints could not be positioned to protect many taller people.

Among sport utility vehicles and minivans, the best performers were generally those designed after the insurance institute created its rear crashworthiness standards in 2004. Many vehicles that had not been refreshed in the last three years, including the Nissan Quest, Ford Explorer and Toyota Highlander, failed.

Some newer S.U.V.s also failed, however, including the Dodge Nitro and Hummer H3.

No automaker got a passing grade on all of its light trucks.

The tests involve measuring a vehicles seats to ensure that they can protect people of varying sizes and then attaching them to a crash-simulation sled, which is struck at 20 miles an hour. Unlike front and side-impact tests, rear-end evaluations do not involve crashing fully assembled vehicles.

Daniel Jarvis, a spokesman for the Ford Motor Company, said the carmaker always designs seats and head restraints for real-world safety performance but that the insurance institutes standards were too new to expect that all vehicles would pass.

Mr. Jarvis noted that Fords newest S.U.V.s, the Edge crossover and Taurus X wagon, scored well. He said internal testing showed that the Ford Ranger pickup, which was rated poor because it did not meet the measurement criteria and was not tested further, would perform at a very high level in the real world.

Mr. Zuby acknowledged that it could be tricky for automakers to balance what people find comfortable with what they need for good whiplash protection and that few shoppers were as concerned with head restraints as with air bags and other safety features. But he expressed disappointment that so many vehicles fell short, even though the standards are relatively new.

When were talking about front and side, that involves a lot of structural changes, and its easy to see why that could take a long time, Mr. Zuby said. When youre just talking about changing the seat, we would have hoped it would happen faster.

Tag Cloud

External Information

Additional Information

Where Am I?