Top Safety Pick

2018 Toyota RAV4

small SUV / 4-door SUV

Award applies only to vehicles with specific headlights

2018 Toyota RAV4 4-door SUV — 2016 Toyota RAV4 shown

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
Standard system	Superior

Seat belts & child restraints

Evaluation criteria	Rating
LATCH ease of use

Other available safety features

Optional blind spot detection
Standard lane departure warning & 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 2015-18 models built after November 2014

Tested vehicle: 2015 Toyota RAV4 LE 4-door 4wd

The Toyota RAV4 was redesigned for the 2013 model year. Beginning with 2015 models built after November 2014, the front-end and occupant compartment structure was modified to improve occupant protection in small overlap frontal crashes. (Information about when a specific vehicle was manufactured is on the certification label typically affixed to the car on the driver door or adjacent B-pillar.)

Evaluation criteria	Rating

Structure and safety cage
Driver injury measures
Head/neck
Chest
Hip/thigh
Lower leg/foot
Driver restraints and dummy kinematics

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 very well.

The frontal and side curtain airbags worked well together to keep the head from coming close to any stiff structure or outside objects that could cause injury.

The driver's space was maintained well, and risk of injuries to the dummy's legs and feet was low.

Technical measurements for this test

Evaluation criteria	Measurement
Test ID	CEN1451
Lower occupant compartment
Lower hinge pillar max (cm)	9
Footrest (cm)	6
Left toepan (cm)	2
Brake pedal (cm)	3
Parking brake (cm)
Rocker panel lateral average (cm)	2
Upper occupant compartment
Steering column	1
Upper hinge pillar max (cm)	4
Upper dash (cm)	5
Lower instrument panel (cm)	5

Evaluation criteria	Measurement
Test ID	CEN1451
Head
HIC-15	163
Peak gs at hard contact	no contact
Neck
Tension (kN)	1.2
Extension bending moment (Nm)	9
Maximum Nij	0.26
Chest maximum compression (mm)	22
Femur (kN)
Left	1.6
Right	1.1
Knee displacement (mm)
Left	0
Right	1
Knee-thigh-hip injury risk (%)
Left	0
Right	0
Maximum tibia index
Left	0.40
Right	0.41
Tibia axial force (kN)
Left	3.5
Right	1.5
Foot acceleration (g)
Left	62
Right	47

About the small overlap front test

Small overlap front: passenger-side

Rating applies to 2013-18 models

Tested vehicle: 2015 Toyota RAV4 LE 4-door 4wd

The Toyota RAV4 was redesigned for the 2013 model year. Although Toyota reinforced the structure in later model years 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 passenger door opened during the crash, which shouldn't happen because the driver could be partly or completely ejected from the vehicle. Still, the dummy’s head loaded the frontal airbag, which stayed in front of the dummy until rebound. 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.
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 frontal and side curtain airbags worked well together to keep the head from coming close to any stiff structure or outside objects that could cause injury.

Despite extensive intrusion of the door hinge pillar and dashboard, risk of injury was moderate and limited to both lower legs.

Technical measurements for this test

Evaluation criteria	Measurement
Test ID	CN15002
Lower occupant compartment
Lower hinge pillar max (cm)	40
Footrest (cm)	40
Right toepan (cm)	23
Center toepan (cm)	21
Rocker panel lateral average (cm)	17
Upper occupant compartment
Center dash (cm)	10
Upper hinge pillar max (cm)	26
Upper dash (cm)	23
Right lower dash (cm)	21

Evaluation criteria	Measurement
Test ID	CN15002
Head
HIC-15	102
Peak gs at hard contact	no contact
Neck
Tension (kN)	1.1
Extension bending moment (Nm)	15
Maximum Nij	0.23
Chest maximum compression (mm)	21
Femur (kN)
Left	0.7
Right	2.2
Knee displacement (mm)
Left	2
Right	4
Knee-thigh-hip injury risk (%)
Left	0
Right	0
Maximum tibia index
Left	0.91
Right	0.89
Tibia axial force (kN)
Left	0.9
Right	1.4
Foot acceleration (g)
Left	71
Right	118

Evaluation criteria	Measurement
Test ID	CN15002
Head
HIC-15	33
Peak gs at hard contact	no contact
Neck
Tension (kN)	0.6
Extension bending moment (Nm)	12
Maximum Nij	0.15
Chest maximum compression (mm)	24
Femur (kN)
Left	2.0
Right	1.3
Knee displacement (mm)
Left	2
Right	3
Knee-thigh-hip injury risk (%)
Left	0
Right	0
Maximum tibia index
Left	0.38
Right	0.25
Tibia axial force (kN)
Left	1.1
Right	0.6
Foot acceleration (g)
Left	32
Right	50

About the small overlap front test

Moderate overlap front: original test

Rating applies to 2013-18 models

Tested vehicle: 2013 Toyota Rav4 LE 4-door 4wd

The Toyota RAV4 was redesigned for the 2013 model year. Moderate overlap frontal ratings are assigned by the Institute based on a test conducted by Toyota.

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

Technical measurements for this test

Evaluation criteria	Measurement
Test ID	VTF1221
Footwell intrusion
Footrest (cm)	6
Left (cm)	9
Center (cm)	6
Right (cm)	5
Brake pedal (cm)	5
Instrument panel rearward movement
Left (cm)	1
Right (cm)	1
Steering column movement
Upward (cm)	-1
Rearward (cm)	-4
A-pillar rearward movement (cm)	1

Evaluation criteria	Measurement
Test ID	VTF1221
Head
HIC-15	237
Peak gs at hard contact	no contact
Neck
Tension (kN)	1.7
Extension bending moment (Nm)	12
Maximum Nij	0.31
Chest maximum compression (mm)	27
Legs
Femur force - left (kN)	1.0
Femur force - right (kN)	1.2
Knee displacement - left (mm)	0
Knee displacement - right (mm)	1
Maximum tibia index - left	0.48
Maximum tibia index - right	0.40
Tibia axial force - left (kN)	2.3
Tibia axial force - right (kN)	2.6
Foot acceleration (g)
Left	68
Right	81

About the original moderate overlap front test

Side: original test

Rating applies to 2013-18 models

Tested vehicle: 2013 Toyota RAV4 LE 4-door 4wd with standard front and rear head curtain airbags and standard front seat-mounted torso airbags

The Toyota RAV4 was redesigned for the 2013 model year. Two side tests of the RAV4 were conducted, one by the Institute and the other by Toyota. Ratings are based on both tests.

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

View of the vehicle and barrier just after the Institute's crash test.

View of the vehicle after the crash with doors removed, showing the side airbags and damage to the occupant compartment (Institute test car shown).

Smeared greasepaint shows where the driver dummy's head was protected from being hit by hard structures by the side curtain airbag in the Institute's test.

Smeared greasepaint shows where the rear passenger dummy’s head was protected by the side airbag.

Technical measurements for this test

Test ID	VTS1225	CES1302
B-pillar to longitudinal centerline of driver's seat (cm)	-14.5	-15.0
Negative numbers indicate the amount by which the crush stopped short of the seat centerline.

Evaluation criteria	Measurement
Test ID	VTS1225	CES1302
Head HIC-15	277	201
Neck
Tension (kN)	0.6	0.4
Compression (kN)	0.1	0.2
Shoulder
Lateral deflection (mm)	47	36
Lateral force (kN)	2.2	1.8
Torso
Maximum deflection (mm)	38	19
Average deflection (mm)	26	13
Maximum deflection rate (m/s)	6.10	2.50
Maximum viscous criterion (m/s)	0.51	0.16
Pelvis
Iliac force (kN)	1.9	2.3
Acetabulum force (kN)	2.4	1.9
Combined force (kN)	4.2	4.2
Left femur
L-M force (kN)	1.0	0.2
L-M moment (Nm)	124	107
A-P moment (Nm)	34	-17

Evaluation criteria	Measurement
Test ID	VTS1225	CES1302
Head HIC-15	136	152
Neck
Tension (kN)	0.2	0.2
Compression (kN)	0.7	0.7
Shoulder
Lateral deflection (mm)	33	20
Lateral force (kN)	1.4	1.2
Torso
Maximum deflection (mm)	42	30
Average deflection (mm)	25	16
Maximum deflection rate (m/s)	3.30	2.49
Maximum viscous criterion (m/s)	0.76	0.37
Pelvis
Iliac force (kN)	0.6	0.8
Acetabulum force (kN)	1.9	1.3
Combined force (kN)	1.9	1.5
Left femur
L-M force (kN)	1.4	1.7
L-M moment (Nm)	192	206
A-P moment (Nm)	-30	-63

About the original side crash test

Roof strength

Rating applies to 2013-18 models

Tested vehicle: 2013 Toyota RAV4 LE 4-door 4wd

Overall evaluation
Curb weight	3,516 lbs
Peak force	17,575 lbs
Strength-to-weight ratio	5.00

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)	22
Distance below top of head (mm)	10
Seat design parameters
Pass/fail	Pass
Max T1 acceleration (g)	14.1
Head contact time (ms)	65
Force rating	1
Neck forces
Max neck shear force (N)	0
Max neck tension (N)	470

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

Headlights

Ratings are given for 2 different headlight variations available on this vehicle.

Trim level(s)

Platinum trim
Limited trim
Hybrid Limited trim
SE trim
Hybrid SE trim

Evaluation criteria	Rating
Low-beam headlight type	LED projector
High-beam headlight type	LED 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 inadequate on the left side. On curves, visibility was good on both right curves and inadequate on both left curves.

The low beams created some glare.

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.

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

Technical measurements for this test

Evaluation criteria	Measurement
Trim level(s)	Platinum trim Limited trim Hybrid Limited trim SE trim Hybrid SE trim
Low-beam headlight type	LED projector
High-beam headlight type	LED projector
Curve-adaptive?	No
High-beam assist?	Yes
Overall rating Applies to 2016-18 models

LOW BEAMS	Average minimum useful illumination distance (5 lux)	Amount glare exceeded threshold
Straightaway right edge	114.0 m	1.2%
Straightaway left edge	43.6 m	1.2%
250m radius right curve, right edge	73.0 m	None
250m radius left curve, left edge	40.8 m	None
150m radius right curve, right edge	60.2 m	0.8%
150m radius left curve, left edge	39.5 m	None

HIGH BEAMS	Average minimum useful illumination distance (5 lux)
Straightaway right edge	146.0 m
Straightaway left edge	115.6 m
250m radius right curve, right edge	64.8 m
250m radius left curve, left edge	62.1 m
150m radius right curve, right edge	53.0 m
150m radius left curve, left edge	52.3 m

Trim level(s)

XLE trim
Hybrid XLE trim
LE trim
Hybrid LE trim
Adventure trim

Evaluation criteria	Rating
Low-beam headlight type	Halogen projector
High-beam headlight type	Halogen 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 sharp right curves and inadequate on the gradual right and gradual left curves.

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.

High-beam assist compensates for some limitations of this vehicle's low beams on the straightaway and on the gradual left curve.

Technical measurements for this test

Evaluation criteria	Measurement
Trim level(s)	XLE trim Hybrid XLE trim LE trim Hybrid LE trim Adventure trim
Low-beam headlight type	Halogen projector
High-beam headlight type	Halogen projector
Curve-adaptive?	No
High-beam assist?	Yes
Overall rating Applies to 2016-18 models

LOW BEAMS	Average minimum useful illumination distance (5 lux)	Amount glare exceeded threshold
Straightaway right edge	94.3 m	None
Straightaway left edge	54.8 m	None
250m radius right curve, right edge	52.1 m	None
250m radius left curve, left edge	51.8 m	None
150m radius right curve, right edge	46.5 m	None
150m radius left curve, left edge	47.0 m	None

HIGH BEAMS	Average minimum useful illumination distance (5 lux)
Straightaway right edge	146.7 m
Straightaway left edge	99.4 m
250m radius right curve, right edge	51.4 m
250m radius left curve, left edge	52.8 m
150m radius right curve, right edge	44.7 m
150m radius left curve, left edge	46.3 m

About the headlight evaluation

Front crash prevention: vehicle-to-vehicle

System details

Standard Pre-Collision System with Pedestrian Detection

Overall evaluation

Applies to 2017-18 models

Superior

This system meets the requirements for forward collision warning.
In the 12 mph test, this vehicle avoided a collision.
In the 25 mph test, this vehicle avoided a collision.

About the original front crash prevention test

Child seat anchors

Rating applies to 2017-18 models built after March 2017

Evaluation criteria	Rating
Overall evaluation
Vehicle trim	LE
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 only.

Evaluation criteria	Rating
Overall evaluation
Vehicle trim	LE
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
	no other hardware could be confused for anchor
	Lower anchors
	not too deep in seat
	not too much force needed to attach
	easy to maneuver around anchors
2
2	Tether anchor
	easy-to-find location
	no other hardware could be confused for anchor
	Lower anchors
	none available
3
3	Tether anchor
	easy-to-find location
	no other hardware could be confused for anchor
	Lower anchors
	not 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)	15
Clearance angle (degrees)	70
Lower anchor B
Open access rated	No
Depth (cm)	0-2
Force (lbs)	7
Clearance angle (degrees)	67
Tether anchor
Location	Middle seatback
Confusing hardware present	Yes
Has contrasting label within 3 inches of tether anchor	Yes
Tether anchors can be accessed while seatback is properly positioned for use of LATCH	Not measured

Lower anchor A
No lower latch for this seat position
Lower anchor B
No lower latch for this seat position
Tether anchor
Location	Middle seatback
Confusing hardware present	Yes
Has contrasting label within 3 inches of tether anchor	Yes
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)	0-2
Force (lbs)	14
Clearance angle (degrees)	70
Lower anchor B
Open access rated	No
Depth (cm)	0-2
Force (lbs)	21
Clearance angle (degrees)	61
Tether anchor
Location	Middle seatback
Confusing hardware present	Yes
Has contrasting label within 3 inches of tether anchor	Yes
Tether anchors can be accessed while seatback is properly positioned for use of LATCH	Not measured

About the child seat anchor evaluation