Pickup trucks have been a tough cookie to crack for automakers with regards to crash testing. Although they’re far from unsafe, there are many vehicles that perform far better. That includes the Chevrolet Colorado and GMC Canyon.
Recently, the Insurance Institute for Highway Safety conducted its testing on General Motors’ mid-size pickups and both walked away with “Good” overall safety ratings. However, neither were good enough to earn a coveted Top Safety Pick from the IIHS. A lack of active-safety equipment, such as automatic emergency braking, and poor headlights kept the GMC Canyon and Chevrolet Colorado from earning higher marks.
The IIHS tested both crew and extended cab versions of the pickup trucks with the former performing better in overall crash worthiness. Extended cabs only earned “Acceptable” ratings.
Headlights remain an overlooked measure that the IIHS has only recently brought into the spotlight. All pickups recently tested received a “Poor” grade for their headlights.
If there is one mid-size pickup to avoid, it would be the Nissan Frontier, which hasn’t undergone a structural redesign since the 2005 model year. During its crash tests, the IIHS had no choice but to brand it with “Marginal” overall safety ratings.
Comments
These safety ratings are overrated! Spend the money on making vehicles that don’t get into accidents!
Better suspensions, brakes, platforms!
Unfortunately, you forgot one main reason why vehicles get into accidents. People.
I stand corrected people are horrible drivers and the bad ones should be taken off of the road permanently
The IIHS are generally a bunch of grand standes that like to hype thing a bit. Then the media takes it and makes it more dramatic.
Case in point here. They act very critical of these vehicles by saying the best is only good. What gets lost here is nearly all did very well in the crash test and held up very well.
But they take these vehicles and mark them down because they do not offer auto braking systems. What they fail to state then is over half the cars made today do not offer auto braking. If they do it is a car north of $50k in most cases or it is just an option if under.
Then they get critical of the headlamps. Well they fail to mention that they well exceed DOT standards and work just fine. Yes there are some better system but they also add to the cost of the vehicle. These light work more than enough and will improve as the cost of the better lights drop.
I watched the videos and they all did pretty well. The newer designs of course faired a little better but all were survivable and all were marked improvements from the past.
As for the idiots out ther hold them accountable vs just slapping their hands. I tire of having to deal with these nanny systems because of drunk, stoned and distracted idiots. They have driven the cost of owning and insuring a car up for the rest of us and it is time they pay us back.
Scott- True for most of what you said, including about auto safety systems. One BIG exception- Toyota offers some very advanced collision avoidance features on most, if not all, of their vehicles. A really smart move on their part- no separate manufacturing processes to add (or leave out) these things, they charge a nominal amount more, and they then look really caring by having this stuff in even the most basic version of the vehicle.
Just truly clever marketing, in my opinion. Probably gets them even more customers, and I really wish GM would step up and match this behavior.