Seven out of eight small SUVs tested performed well in the Insurance Institute for Highway Safety (IIHS) rear crash prevention evaluation, which addresses low-speed backing crashes.

Those types of collisions account for a large portion of insurance claims, according to IIHS.

The Ford Escape, Honda CR-V, Mitsubishi Outlander, and Subaru Forester earned the highest rating, superior. The Mazda CX-5, Toyota RAV4, and Volkswagen Taos were rated advanced. The Hyundai Tucson earned a basic rating.

“The rear AEB evaluation is designed to test how well these systems prevent the most common backing crashes,” said David Aylor, vice president of active safety at IIHS. “These are challenging scenarios in which a pole or another vehicle is behind you and off to the side. Meanwhile, you are backing up and sometimes turning at the same time.”

IIHS first tested rear crash prevention systems in 2018 and has periodically added to the ratings since then, according to the release.

“Since 2018, new vehicles have been required to come with a rear camera that makes it easier to see where you’re going when you’re backing up,” said IIHS President David Harkey, in a news release. “Rear automatic emergency braking systems aren’t required, making the feature far less common. That’s too bad because our research consistently shows that technology that intervenes on behalf of the driver is more effective in preventing crashes than other types of solutions.”

Vehicles with parking sensors that issue warnings and/or only rear cross-traffic alerts earn a basic rating. Ratings of vehicles with rear automatic emergency braking (AEB) are determined by how their systems perform in three tests. The tests use a passenger vehicle target with different approach angles. One test uses a bollard representing a pole or garage pillar.

Tests with a pedestrian dummy are not included because the ultrasonic sensors used by most of today’s rear AEB systems aren’t designed to detect people; however, they sometimes do, IIHS said.

The complete evaluation comprises 24 test runs conducted at 4 mph. Some scenarios are weighted more heavily than others. Systems are assigned points based on the number of runs that either avoid the target or reduce speeds to less than 1 mph before hitting it.

The low-speed crashes that rear AEB addresses don’t typically cause serious injuries but they can result in thousands of dollars in damage, IIHS said. Nearly 30% of collision claims in 2022 were for rear points of impact costing more than $4,000, according to data analyzed by the IIHS-affiliated Highway Loss Data Institute (HLDI).

In contrast, rear AEB costs as little as $600 as an optional feature on some vehicles, IIHS said.

HLDI evaluations of rear AEB show that the feature slashes the frequency of claims for damage to other vehicles by 29% and reduces the frequency of claims for damage to policyholders’ vehicles by 9%.

An IIHS study found that when rear cameras, parking sensors, and rear AEB are combined police-reported backing crashes decrease by 78% including rear cross-traffic alert by 22%.

“Rear AEB probably offers the biggest bang for the buck of any of the crash avoidance systems we monitor,” said HLDI Senior Vice President Matt Moore, in the release. “The cost of parking lot fender benders really adds up.”

Among the four superior-rated vehicles recently tested, the Escape avoided collisions consistently in all four of the test scenarios, hitting the passenger car target in only one trial with it positioned at a 10-degree angle to the vehicle’s backward path.

The Forester avoided collisions in all scenarios except when the test vehicle reversed toward a passenger car target positioned at a 45-degree angle.

The CR-V and the Outlander avoided collisions when the offset vehicle target was positioned in line with their backing path. However, they both made contact with the target at a 45-degree and 10-degree angle. The CR-V also hit the bollard in one of three test runs, though it slowed substantially, IIHS said.

The CX-5, RAV4, and Taos hit the passenger car target without slowing substantially in all the trials when it was angled at 10 degrees and often when it was angled at 45 degrees. The CX-5 and Taos also had trouble avoiding the offset bollard, though the RAV4 avoided a collision in two of three trials and slowed substantially in the third.

The Tucson failed to slow or avoid a collision in any of the scenarios. However, in some instances, it did provide a warning as the vehicle neared the target.

“While rear AEB is becoming more common, it’s still not as ubiquitous as front AEB, which automakers agreed to make standard on nearly all new models as part of a voluntary commitment brokered by IIHS and the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration,” IIHS said. “Rear AEB was standard on only 23% of model year 2023 passenger vehicles and only available as an option on another 32%. At the current growth rate, most vehicles in the U.S. fleet won’t have it until nearly 2050, a HLDI analysis shows.”

Among the small SUVs tested, the feature is standard on the Outlander and optional on the other seven models.

A separate recent study by HLDI found little evidence that partial automation systems prevent collisions beyond the benefits of front AEB.

IIHS says there’s a key difference between crash avoidance features and partial automation systems — crash avoidance features like AEB, blind spot warning, and lane departure prevention only come into play when a potential danger arises while a partial automation system works constantly to keep the vehicle in the desired position on the road.

Images

Featured image: IIHS YouTube video screenshot

Chart provided by IIHS