Midsized sedan crash tests - front, side looking good

In the latest crash tests from the Insurance Institute for Highway Safety (IIHS), all seven midsized sedans provide good frontal crash protection and six provide good side-impact protection. However, results for the rear tests were mixed, with only the Kia Optima earning a good rating. With its latest report, the Institute notes that there has been a marked improvement in side-crash performance for midsized sedans, but it appears more can be done to protect passengers from possible whiplash injuries from rear-end collisions.

As we wrote in "Many cars don't protect against whiplash injuries": "A rear-end crash occurs every 17 seconds in the U.S. But a surprising number of vehicles offer inadequate protection from the whiplash injuries that can result, according to crash-test data and our own analysis."

This is again proven true with the latest test results from the IIHS, in which five of the seven vehicles tested earned marginal or poor ratings for rear-crash protection. Because rear crashes are rarely fatal, and the IIHS rear tests relatively new, Consumer Reports does not currently use them as a prerequisite for recommending a vehicle.

The good news with this test group is that vehicles are indeed improving, with better designs and increased safety equipment enabling them to more effectively protect occupants in the high-risk front and side collisions. As always, do check safety ratings before making a vehicle purchase. 

Midsized sedans
The April crash-test group from IIHS is listed below in rank order, with the specific air bag configuration tested and applicable model years listed. See how these vehicles perform in the crash test videos.

Dodge Avenger / Chrysler Sebring
Front - Good; Side - Good; Rear - Acceptable
With front and rear head-curtain air bags and front torso air bags.
Front, side, and rear: 2008 Avenger, 2007-2008 Sebring

Infiniti G35
Front - Good; Side - Good; Rear - Marginal
With front and rear head-curtain air bags and front torso air bags.
Front, side, and rear: 2007-2008 models

Nissan Altima
Front - Good; Side - Good; Rear - Marginal
With front and rear head-curtain air bags and front torso air bags.
Front, side, and rear: 2007-2008 models

Chevrolet Malibu
Front - Good; Side - Good; Rear - Marginal
With front and rear head-curtain air bags and front torso air bags.
Front and rear: 2008 models. Side: 2008 models built after February 2008.

Saturn Aura
Front - Good; Side - Good; Rear - Marginal
With front and rear head-curtain air bags and front torso air bags.
Front, side, and rear: 2007-2008 models

Mitsubishi Galant
Front - Good; Side - Good; Rear - Poor
With front and rear head-curtain air bags and front torso air bags.
Front and rear: 2004-2008 models. Side: 2007-2008 models.

Kia Optima
Front - Good; Side - Acceptable; Rear - Good
With front and rear head-curtain air bags and front torso air bags.
Front and rear: 2006-2008 models. Built after September 2005.
Side: 2006-2008 models. Built after June 2006.

See how these sedans and more than 200 other models perform in the crash test videos.

—Jeff Bartlett

Comments

[Paul Rivers]

I'm not a big fan of those whiplash reducing headrests - while I've never been rear ended, I have ridden in more than one car that had really uncomfortable headrests that seemed to be designed for that purpose. I'd like to be able to completely lean back against the seat, and instead these headrests push my head in front of my body while sitting in the seat. Not comfortable.

[Jim n Sue]

I have been with CR for quite a long time. However, I am starting to question the bias against American Car Manufactures - The Asian Manufactures can do no wrong but on the contrary American Manufactures can do no right.

I think when the test engineers and technicians prior to even testing has a built-in bias that effects the test results.

All the car manufactures Asian, American etc. uses the same suppliers around the world - why the big discrepancy???

Jim n Sue

[Paul Rivers]

Personally, I'm getting kind of tired of reading about how someone thinks Consumer Reports has bias. I guess they're doing something right, though, if they're getting criticized evenly about everything. On this entry it's that they don't like American cars. On the previous entry I was reading it was because their ratings were "out of date" because they don't focus solely on gas mileage. On another comment, someone thought they had become anti-Toyota.

Personally, I'm annoyed that the search box on their web page recently stopped working in Firefox.

[BostonMike]

Jim n Sue charge that CR is biased against US manufacturers, and that "Asian can do no wrong but American can do no right."

If the results of the test were fixed (and that's a pretty serious allegation for which there is no proof), then maybe there would be bias. But these were the objective results of a test, not an opinion. Bias? I don't think so.

Secondly, a cursory look at the results reveals that the poorest performing vehicle is Asian. Asian manufacturers can do no wrong? I don't think so.

Lastly, the opening sentence stated that the tests were conducted by the Insurance Institute for Highway Safety. Was this even CR's own test? I don't think so.

Take Jim n Sue seriously? I don't think so.

[Ajlouny]

Hey, if a head rest is going to help reduce the risk of whiplash, I am all for it. It's not fun living a life of chronic pain.