2017 Ford Escape

small SUV / 4-door SUV

Crashworthiness

Rating overview
Evaluation criteria	Rating
Small overlap front: driver-side
Small overlap front: passenger-side
Moderate overlap front: original test
Side: original test
Roof strength
Head restraints & seats

Crash avoidance & mitigation

Evaluation criteria	Rating
Headlights (varies by trim/option)
Front crash prevention: vehicle-to-vehicle
Optional system	Basic

Seat belts & child restraints

Evaluation criteria	Rating
LATCH ease of use

Other available safety features

Optional blind spot detection
Optional lane departure warning
Optional lane departure prevention

Key

G
Good
A
Acceptable
M
Marginal
P
Poor

Superior
Advanced
Basic

Some ratings use a scale of Poor to Good. Others range from Basic to Superior.

Small overlap front: driver-side

Rating applies to 2017-19 models

Tested vehicle: 2017 Ford Escape SE 4-door 4wd

The Ford Escape was redesigned for the 2013 model year. Beginning with 2017 models, the driver door hinge pillar was reinforced and the front-end structure was modified to improve occupant protection in small overlap frontal crashes.

Evaluation criteria	Rating

Structure and safety cage
Driver injury measures
Head/neck
Chest
Hip/thigh
Lower leg/foot
Driver restraints and dummy kinematics The dummy’s head contacted the frontal airbag but started to slide off the left side because the seat belt allowed excessive forward excursion of the head and torso. The side curtain airbag deployed and has sufficient forward coverage to protect the head from contact with side structure and outside objects. The side torso airbag also deployed.

Action shot taken during the driver-side small overlap frontal crash test.

The dummy's position in relation to the door frame, steering wheel, and instrument panel after the crash test indicates that the driver's survival space was maintained reasonably well.

The dummy’s head contacted the frontal airbag but then slid partway off the left side, allowing the head to move into the gap in coverage between the frontal and side curtain airbags.

Intrusion into the driver's space was reasonably well controlled, and risk of injuries to the dummy's legs and feet was low.

Technical measurements for this test

Evaluation criteria	Measurement
Test ID	CEN1622
Lower occupant compartment
Lower hinge pillar max (cm)	8
Footrest (cm)	4
Left toepan (cm)	3
Brake pedal (cm)	3
Parking brake (cm)
Rocker panel lateral average (cm)	1
Upper occupant compartment
Steering column	2
Upper hinge pillar max (cm)	12
Upper dash (cm)	9
Lower instrument panel (cm)	5

Evaluation criteria	Measurement
Test ID	CEN1622
Head
HIC-15	113
Peak gs at hard contact	no contact
Neck
Tension (kN)	0.8
Extension bending moment (Nm)	14
Maximum Nij	0.17
Chest maximum compression (mm)	26
Femur (kN)
Left	0.5
Right	1.1
Knee displacement (mm)
Left	3
Right	1
Knee-thigh-hip injury risk (%)
Left	0
Right	0
Maximum tibia index
Left	0.47
Right	0.43
Tibia axial force (kN)
Left	1.7
Right	2.2
Foot acceleration (g)
Left	51
Right	49

About the small overlap front test

Small overlap front: passenger-side

Rating applies to 2013-19 models

Tested vehicle: 2018 Ford Escape SE 4-door 4wd

The Ford Escape was redesigned for the 2013 model year. Although Ford reinforced the structure starting with the 2017 model year on the driver side to improve occupant protection in small overlap frontal crashes, no such changes were made on the passenger side.

Evaluation criteria	Rating
Overall evaluation
Structure and safety cage
Passenger injury measures
Head/neck
Chest
Hip/thigh
Lower leg/foot
Passenger restraints and dummy kinematics The dummy’s head contacted the frontal airbag but then rolled around the right side. The side curtain airbag did not deploy, leaving the dummy's head vulnerable to contact with side structure and outside objects.
Driver injury measures
Head/neck
Chest
Hip/thigh
Lower leg/foot
Driver restraints and dummy kinematics

Action shot taken during the passenger-side small overlap frontal crash test.

The dummy's position in relation to the door frame and dashboard after the crash test indicates that the passenger's survival space was not maintained well.

The dummy's head contacted the frontal airbag but then rolled around to the right. The side curtain airbag did not deploy, uncommon for 2018 model year and later vehicles.

Extensive intrusion of the dashboard and door hinge pillar contributed to a likely risk of injury to the right hip.

Technical measurements for this test

Evaluation criteria	Measurement
Test ID	CEP1807
Lower occupant compartment
Lower hinge pillar max (cm)	22
Footrest (cm)	14
Right toepan (cm)	12
Center toepan (cm)	10
Rocker panel lateral average (cm)	10
Upper occupant compartment
Center dash (cm)	16
Upper hinge pillar max (cm)	27
Upper dash (cm)	19
Right lower dash (cm)	16

Evaluation criteria	Measurement
Test ID	CEP1807
Head
HIC-15	75
Peak gs at hard contact	no contact
Neck
Tension (kN)	1.0
Extension bending moment (Nm)	9
Maximum Nij	0.20
Chest maximum compression (mm)	20
Femur (kN)
Left	3.4
Right	16.1
Knee displacement (mm)
Left	1
Right	12
Knee-thigh-hip injury risk (%)
Left	1
Right	100
Maximum tibia index
Left	0.38
Right	0.77
Tibia axial force (kN)
Left	1.3
Right	1.9
Foot acceleration (g)
Left	42
Right	41

Evaluation criteria	Measurement
Test ID	CEP1807
Head
HIC-15	34
Peak gs at hard contact	no contact
Neck
Tension (kN)	0.7
Extension bending moment (Nm)	16
Maximum Nij	0.17
Chest maximum compression (mm)	34
Femur (kN)
Left	0.5
Right	0.5
Knee displacement (mm)
Left	2
Right	1
Knee-thigh-hip injury risk (%)
Left	0
Right	0
Maximum tibia index
Left	0.39
Right	0.30
Tibia axial force (kN)
Left	0.5
Right	0.2
Foot acceleration (g)
Left	21
Right	34

About the small overlap front test

Moderate overlap front: original test

Rating applies to 2013-19 models

Tested vehicle: 2013 Ford Escape SE 4-door 4wd

The Ford Escape was redesigned for the 2013 model year. Two moderate overlap frontal tests of the Escape were conducted, one by the Institute and the other by Ford. Ratings are based on both tests.

Evaluation criteria	Rating
Overall evaluation
Structure and safety cage
Driver injury measures
Head/neck
Chest
Leg/foot, left
Leg/foot, right
Driver restraints and dummy kinematics

Action shot taken during the Institute's moderate offset frontal crash test.

The dummy's position in relation to the steering wheel and instrument panel after the crash test indicates that the driver's survival space was maintained well (Institute test car shown).

Smeared greasepaint behind the dummy's head shows where the head was protected from hitting hard structures during rebound by the side curtain airbag in the Institute's test.

Intrusion into the driver's space was minimal in both tests, and all leg and foot injury measures were low.

Technical measurements for this test

Evaluation criteria	Measurement
Test ID	VTF1205	CEF1206
Footwell intrusion
Footrest (cm)	6	8
Left (cm)	8	12
Center (cm)	8	10
Right (cm)	8	7
Brake pedal (cm)	3	2
Instrument panel rearward movement
Left (cm)	1	1
Right (cm)	1	1
Steering column movement
Upward (cm)	1	3
Rearward (cm)	1	-1
A-pillar rearward movement (cm)	1	1

Evaluation criteria	Measurement
Test ID	VTF1205	CEF1206
Head
HIC-15	223	212
Peak gs at hard contact	no contact	no contact
Neck
Tension (kN)	1.1	1.1
Extension bending moment (Nm)	12	23
Maximum Nij	0.22	0.23
Chest maximum compression (mm)	24	26
Legs
Femur force - left (kN)	0.6	0.4
Femur force - right (kN)	0.6	0.5
Knee displacement - left (mm)	1	0
Knee displacement - right (mm)	1	0
Maximum tibia index - left	0.27	0.26
Maximum tibia index - right	0.35	0.36
Tibia axial force - left (kN)	1.7	1.6
Tibia axial force - right (kN)	2.0	2.2
Foot acceleration (g)
Left	38	61
Right	85	85

About the original moderate overlap front test

Side: original test

Rating applies to 2013-19 models

Tested vehicle: 2013 Ford Escape SE 4-door 4wd with standard front and rear head curtain airbags and standard front seat-mounted torso airbags

The Ford Escape was redesigned for the 2013 model year. Side impact ratings are assigned by the Institute based on a test conducted by Ford.

Evaluation criteria	Rating
Overall evaluation
Structure and safety cage
Driver injury measures
Head/neck
Torso
Pelvis/leg
Driver head protection
Rear passenger injury measures
Head/neck
Torso
Pelvis/leg
Rear passenger head protection

Technical measurements for this test

Test ID	VTS1203
B-pillar to longitudinal centerline of driver's seat (cm)	-19.5
Negative numbers indicate the amount by which the crush stopped short of the seat centerline.

Evaluation criteria	Measurement
Test ID	VTS1203
Head HIC-15	160
Neck
Tension (kN)	0.8
Compression (kN)	0.3
Shoulder
Lateral deflection (mm)	41
Lateral force (kN)	1.8
Torso
Maximum deflection (mm)	27
Average deflection (mm)	21
Maximum deflection rate (m/s)	2.70
Maximum viscous criterion (m/s)	0.29
Pelvis
Iliac force (kN)	1.6
Acetabulum force (kN)	1.5
Combined force (kN)	3.0
Left femur
L-M force (kN)	0.5
L-M moment (Nm)	47
A-P moment (Nm)	-25

Evaluation criteria	Measurement
Test ID	VTS1203
Head HIC-15	118
Neck
Tension (kN)	0.2
Compression (kN)	0.3
Shoulder
Lateral deflection (mm)	37
Lateral force (kN)	2.0
Torso
Maximum deflection (mm)	32
Average deflection (mm)	19
Maximum deflection rate (m/s)	3.00
Maximum viscous criterion (m/s)	0.41
Pelvis
Iliac force (kN)	0.5
Acetabulum force (kN)	2.5
Combined force (kN)	2.6
Left femur
L-M force (kN)	0.3
L-M moment (Nm)	50
A-P moment (Nm)	18

About the original side crash test

Roof strength

Rating applies to 2013-19 models

Tested vehicle: 2013 Ford Escape SE 4-door 4wd

Overall evaluation
Curb weight	3,612 lbs
Peak force	18,167 lbs
Strength-to-weight ratio	5.03

About the roof strength test

Head restraints & seats

Seat type: Manual cloth seats

Overall evaluation
Dynamic rating
Seat/head restraint geometry

Technical measurements for this test

Seat type	Manual cloth seats
Geometry
Backset (mm)	12
Distance below top of head (mm)	-11
Seat design parameters
Pass/fail	Pass
Max T1 acceleration (g)	12.1
Head contact time (ms)	46
Force rating	1
Neck forces
Max neck shear force (N)	7
Max neck tension (N)	324

About the head restraint & seat test
Currently, IIHS tests apply only to front seats.

Headlights

Ratings are given for 3 different headlight variations available on this vehicle.

Trim level(s)

Titanium trim equipped with Titanium Technology package

Evaluation criteria	Rating
Low-beam headlight type	HID projector
High-beam headlight type	HID projector
Curve-adaptive?	No
High-beam assist?	Yes
Overall rating
Distance at which headlights provide at least 5 lux illumination:

Low beams
On the straightaway, visibility was good on the right side of the road and fair on the left side. On curves, visibility was fair on the sharp left and both right curves and inadequate on the gradual left curve.

The low beams never exceeded glare limits.

High beams
On the straightaway, visibility was good on the right side of the road and fair on the left side. On curves, visibility was fair on the gradual right and gradual left curves and inadequate on the sharp right and sharp left curves.

High-beam assist compensates for some limitations of this vehicle's low beams on the straightaway and all 4 curves.

Technical measurements for this test

Evaluation criteria	Measurement
Trim level(s)	Titanium trim equipped with Titanium Technology package
Low-beam headlight type	HID projector
High-beam headlight type	HID projector
Curve-adaptive?	No
High-beam assist?	Yes
Overall rating Applies to 2017-19 models

LOW BEAMS	Average minimum useful illumination distance (5 lux)	Amount glare exceeded threshold
Straightaway right edge	95.6 m	None
Straightaway left edge	49.7 m	None
250m radius right curve, right edge	61.6 m	None
250m radius left curve, left edge	48.1 m	None
150m radius right curve, right edge	51.5 m	None
150m radius left curve, left edge	45.6 m	None

HIGH BEAMS	Average minimum useful illumination distance (5 lux)
Straightaway right edge	143.3 m
Straightaway left edge	129.8 m
250m radius right curve, right edge	66.5 m
250m radius left curve, left edge	65.7 m
150m radius right curve, right edge	54.0 m
150m radius left curve, left edge	53.2 m

Trim level(s)

SE trim equipped with SE Technology package
Titanium trim

Evaluation criteria	Rating
Low-beam headlight type	Halogen projector
High-beam headlight type	Halogen reflector
Curve-adaptive?	No
High-beam assist?	No
Overall rating
Distance at which headlights provide at least 5 lux illumination:

Low beams
On the straightaway, visibility was fair on both sides of the road. On curves, visibility was inadequate in all 4 tests.

The low beams never exceeded glare limits.

High beams
On the straightaway, visibility was good on the right side of the road and inadequate on the left side. On curves, visibility was inadequate in all 4 tests.

Technical measurements for this test

Evaluation criteria	Measurement
Trim level(s)	SE trim equipped with SE Technology package Titanium trim
Low-beam headlight type	Halogen projector
High-beam headlight type	Halogen reflector
Curve-adaptive?	No
High-beam assist?	No
Overall rating Applies to 2017-19 models

LOW BEAMS	Average minimum useful illumination distance (5 lux)	Amount glare exceeded threshold
Straightaway right edge	90.5 m	None
Straightaway left edge	49.5 m	None
250m radius right curve, right edge	49.8 m	None
250m radius left curve, left edge	45.0 m	None
150m radius right curve, right edge	41.9 m	None
150m radius left curve, left edge	39.6 m	None

HIGH BEAMS	Average minimum useful illumination distance (5 lux)
Straightaway right edge	172.8 m
Straightaway left edge	113.2 m
250m radius right curve, right edge	58.3 m
250m radius left curve, left edge	55.5 m
150m radius right curve, right edge	46.5 m
150m radius left curve, left edge	46.3 m

Trim level(s)

S trim
SE trim

Evaluation criteria	Rating
Low-beam headlight type	Halogen reflector
High-beam headlight type	Halogen reflector
Curve-adaptive?	No
High-beam assist?	No
Overall rating
Distance at which headlights provide at least 5 lux illumination:

Low beams
On the straightaway, visibility was good on the right side of the road and fair on the left side. On curves, visibility was fair on the sharp left curve and inadequate on the gradual left and both right curves.

The low beams created some glare.

High beams
On the straightaway, visibility was good on the right side of the road and fair on the left side. On curves, visibility was fair on the gradual left curve and inadequate on the sharp left and both right curves.

Technical measurements for this test

Evaluation criteria	Measurement
Trim level(s)	S trim SE trim
Low-beam headlight type	Halogen reflector
High-beam headlight type	Halogen reflector
Curve-adaptive?	No
High-beam assist?	No
Overall rating Applies to 2017-19 models

LOW BEAMS	Average minimum useful illumination distance (5 lux)	Amount glare exceeded threshold
Straightaway right edge	95.5 m	36.1%
Straightaway left edge	52.9 m	36.1%
250m radius right curve, right edge	45.3 m	None
250m radius left curve, left edge	49.1 m	8.9%
150m radius right curve, right edge	41.9 m	None
150m radius left curve, left edge	45.0 m	14.1%

HIGH BEAMS	Average minimum useful illumination distance (5 lux)
Straightaway right edge	165.4 m
Straightaway left edge	136.4 m
250m radius right curve, right edge	61.9 m
250m radius left curve, left edge	66.1 m
150m radius right curve, right edge	51.2 m
150m radius left curve, left edge	52.0 m

About the headlight evaluation

Front crash prevention: vehicle-to-vehicle

System details

Optional Forward Collision Warning and Brake Support

Package name

Optional Adaptive Cruise Control with Forward Collision Warning and Brake Support

Overall evaluation

Applies to 2017-19 models

Basic

with optional equipment

This system meets the requirements for forward collision warning.
Autobrake not available.

About the original front crash prevention test

Child seat anchors

Rating applies to 2015-19 models

Evaluation criteria	Rating
Overall evaluation
Vehicle trim	SE
Seat type	cloth

This vehicle has 2 rear seating positions with complete child seat attachment (LATCH) hardware.

It has 1 additional seating position with a tether anchor and the ability to borrow lower anchors from the other seating positions.

Note: When anchors are borrowed, they aren't available to use in their designated positions.

Evaluation criteria	Rating
Overall evaluation
Vehicle trim	SE
Seat type	cloth

Rating icon	Rating
G	Good
A	Acceptable
M	Marginal
P	Poor
	Seating positions that rely on borrowed lower anchors or have only a tether anchor available are not rated.
thether anchor symbol	Tether anchor
lower anchor symbol	Lower anchors
shared lower achors symbol	Lower anchor(s) can be borrowed from adjacent positions(s)
	No hardware available

Details by seating position

Position	Rating
1
1	Tether anchor
	easy-to-find location
	other hardware could be confused for anchor
	Lower anchors
	too deep in seat
	not too much force needed to attach
	difficult to maneuver around anchors
2
2	Tether anchor
	easy-to-find location
	no other hardware could be confused for anchor
	Lower anchors
	Can be borrowed from 1 and 3
3
3	Tether anchor
	easy-to-find location
	other hardware could be confused for anchor
	Lower anchors
	too deep in seat
	not too much force needed to attach
	easy to maneuver around anchors

Technical measurements for this test

Lower anchor A
Open access rated	No
Depth (cm)	0-2
Force (lbs)	7
Clearance angle (degrees)	62
Lower anchor B
Open access rated	No
Depth (cm)	2-4
Force (lbs)	21
Clearance angle (degrees)	63
Tether anchor
Location	Middle seatback
Confusing hardware present	Yes
Has contrasting label within 3 inches of tether anchor	No
Tether anchors can be accessed while seatback is properly positioned for use of LATCH	Not measured

Lower anchor A
Lower latch is shared for this seat position
Lower anchor B
Lower latch is shared for this seat position
Tether anchor
Location	Middle seatback
Confusing hardware present	No
Has contrasting label within 3 inches of tether anchor	No
Tether anchors can be accessed while seatback is properly positioned for use of LATCH	Not measured

Lower anchor A
Open access rated	No
Depth (cm)	2-4
Force (lbs)	19
Clearance angle (degrees)	64
Lower anchor B
Open access rated	No
Depth (cm)	2-4
Force (lbs)	21
Clearance angle (degrees)	46
Tether anchor
Location	Middle seatback
Confusing hardware present	Yes
Has contrasting label within 3 inches of tether anchor	No
Tether anchors can be accessed while seatback is properly positioned for use of LATCH	Not measured

About the child seat anchor evaluation