The IIHS (Insurance Institute for Highway Safety) is making better second-row passenger safety and protection key to automakers earning a Top Safety Pick or Top Safety Pick Plus rating for their vehicles in 2025 with a new and more rigorously demanding “moderate overlap front test.”
The IIHS now requires vehicles to achieve an “Acceptable” or “Good” rating in this specific test, which measures the amount of protection afforded to people riding in the second row, in order to be eligible for Top Safety ranking.
IIHS Side Crash Test
The change is in response to automakers significantly improving safety measures, such as inclusion of advanced seat belts and wider use of side air bags and better air bag technology, but almost exclusively for the front seats. Stronger vehicle structures introduced for recent model years also chiefly focused on front-seat protection.
As a result, second-row fatalities are now significantly higher than front-row deaths. The IIHS wants to redress the balance, noting that even while wearing seat belts, adults in the second row are statistically killed more frequently than those in the vehicle’s front. The second row remains the safest spot for kids under 13 despite the difference in adult results.
However, the second-row picture isn’t entirely gloomy, and the IIHS says that in the small to medium crossover segment, “results show that manufacturers are working hard to make their vehicles as safe for back seat passengers as they are for those up front,” even if there is “still progress to be made.”
The 2025 Chevy Traverse is notable as the only GM model to achieve a Top Safety Pick rating so far in the 2025 awards, an improvement from the 2024 Top Safety Pick Awards when not a single GM vehicle got a top rating. Meanwhile, the GMC Acadia received an “Acceptable” rating and the Buick Enclave received a “Good” rating after being subjected to the same tests.
One significant weak spot continues to be minivans and small pickups. David Harkey, IIHS president, points out that “the new emphasis on back seat protection appears to have winnowed minivans and pickups from the winners’ ranks.” He added “that’s unfortunate, considering that minivans are marketed as family haulers and extended cab and crew cab pickups are often used for that purpose.”
While GM doesn’t have any minivans, it still offers the Chevy Colorado and GMC Canyon as smaller pickup options that are likely to be used as family vehicles and therefore could benefit strongly from improved back seat safety. The revised IIHS moderate overlap front test, with vehicles rated on back seat safety when colliding at 40 mph with a 40 percent front overlap, is designed to push automakers toward correcting this type of deficiency.
Comments
This article headline is badly worded. The IIHS can NOT require anything of automakers. They are not a legal entity driving industry standards. They are a think tank of non-automotive people based in Virginia who invent new tests that are outside of the comprehensive standards that NHTSA requires automakers to meet. They then use their results to push their agenda to influence what they think is important.
Only the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration can “Require” automakers to meet standards.
All true Rick but the IIHS is far more responsible for the greatly improved safety of today’s vehicles than the NHTSA. In fact, I would argue that if one were looking to cut government, much of the NHTSA agency could be eliminated because they are no longer driving automotive safety as they were originally constituted to do. All the heavy lifting is coming from the insurance industry and IIHS these days and has been for at least 25 years.
The headline isn’t badly worded. The word “require” doesn’t hold any legal connotation in this regard. You’re interpreting it that way but it’s not the case.
Even on the the IIHS’s website (linked in this article) they say the following: “The Insurance Institute for Highway Safety is requiring better protection for second-row occupants for the 2025 TOP SAFETY PICK and TOP SAFETY PICK+ awards”.
I wanted to take a moment to remind you of the peculiar but essential magic trick we call “mandatory insurance.” You see, thanks to the law, every vehicle needs a little insurance fairy dust to hit the roads legally.
So, if our friends at the auto manufacturing party don’t play nice with IIHS, their shiny new cars might just find themselves face-to-face with the dreaded “no insurance” signs. And we all know how fun it is to explain to that friendly officer why your car is a no-go!
Isn’t the new Acadia and Enclave the same body as the Traverse?