Top Safety Pick +

2016 Hyundai Sonata

midsize car / 4-door sedan

Award applies only to vehicles with optional front crash prevention built after October 2015

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
Front crash prevention: vehicle-to-vehicle
Optional system	Superior

Seat belts & child restraints

Evaluation criteria	Rating
LATCH ease of use

Other available safety features

Optional blind spot detection
Optional lane departure warning

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 2016-19 models built after October 2015

Tested vehicle: 2016 Hyundai Sonata Eco 4-door

The Hyundai Sonata was redesigned for the 2015 model year. Beginning with 2016 models, the driver's seat belt was modified, and front suspension changes were made to alter wheel movement during small overlap frontal crashes. Later, beginning with 2016 models built after October 2015, the structure was reinforced at the junction between the door sill and hinge pillar to improve occupant protection in small overlap 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.)

The Kia Optima was redesigned for the 2016 model year and since then has been built on the same platform as the Hyundai Sonata. All 2016 and later Optimas include equivalent modifications made on the driver side of Sonatas built after October 2015.

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 of the 2016 Hyundai Sonata built after October 2015.

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 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.

Forces during the crash contributed to a moderate risk of injury to the dummy's left foot.

Technical measurements for this test

Evaluation criteria	Measurement
Test ID	CEN1549
Lower occupant compartment
Lower hinge pillar max (cm)	14
Footrest (cm)	7
Left toepan (cm)	4
Brake pedal (cm)	3
Parking brake (cm)	13
Rocker panel lateral average (cm)	3
Upper occupant compartment
Steering column	4
Upper hinge pillar max (cm)	11
Upper dash (cm)	11
Lower instrument panel (cm)	9

Evaluation criteria	Measurement
Test ID	CEN1549
Head
HIC-15	152
Peak gs at hard contact	no contact
Neck
Tension (kN)	1.2
Extension bending moment (Nm)	7
Maximum Nij	0.22
Chest maximum compression (mm)	18
Femur (kN)
Left	2.7
Right	0.1
Knee displacement (mm)
Left	5
Right	3
Knee-thigh-hip injury risk (%)
Left	0
Right	0
Maximum tibia index
Left	0.76
Right	0.43
Tibia axial force (kN)
Left	2.3
Right	0.7
Foot acceleration (g)
Left	193
Right	44

Rating applies to 2016 models built before November 2015

Tested vehicle: 2016 Hyundai Sonata Eco 4-door

The Hyundai Sonata was redesigned for the 2015 model year. Beginning with 2016 models, the driver's seat belt was modified, and front suspension changes were made to alter wheel movement during small overlap frontal crashes. The changes, however, weren’t enough to improve the Sonata's performance in the small overlap test.

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 face remained in contact with the frontal airbag, but its head still rolled around the left side as the steering column moved 11 cm to the right, leaving the head vulnerable to contact with forward structure. Additionally, the seat belt allowed excessive forward excursion of the dummy’s head and torso. The side curtain airbag deployed and had 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 of the 2016 Hyundai Sonata built before November 2015.

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 seat belt allowed far too much forward movement of the dummy as the steering column moved to the right to the extent that its head approached the A-pillar.

Door hinge pillar and instrument panel intrusion contributed to a significant risk of injury to the left lower leg.

Technical measurements for this test

Evaluation criteria	Measurement
Test ID	CEN1527
Lower occupant compartment
Lower hinge pillar max (cm)	19
Footrest (cm)	8
Left toepan (cm)	4
Brake pedal (cm)	3
Parking brake (cm)	13
Rocker panel lateral average (cm)	1
Upper occupant compartment
Steering column	3
Upper hinge pillar max (cm)	11
Upper dash (cm)	13
Lower instrument panel (cm)	11

Evaluation criteria	Measurement
Test ID	CEN1527
Head
HIC-15	130
Peak gs at hard contact	no contact
Neck
Tension (kN)	1.4
Extension bending moment (Nm)	8
Maximum Nij	0.26
Chest maximum compression (mm)	20
Femur (kN)
Left	3.0
Right	0.0
Knee displacement (mm)
Left	5
Right	1
Knee-thigh-hip injury risk (%)
Left	1
Right	0
Maximum tibia index
Left	1.08
Right	0.51
Tibia axial force (kN)
Left	1.9
Right	0.9
Foot acceleration (g)
Left	148
Right	69

About the small overlap front test

Small overlap front: passenger-side

Rating applies to 2016-19 models

Tested vehicle: 2017 Hyundai Sonata SE 4-door

The Hyundai Sonata was redesigned for the 2015 model year. Beginning with 2016 models, the driver's seat belt was modified, and front suspension changes were made to alter left and right wheel movement during small overlap frontal crashes to improve occupant protection.

The Kia Optima was redesigned for the 2016 model year and since then has been built on the same platform as the Hyundai Sonata, with the exception that the Optima's passenger side structure was lacking some of the strengthening needed for optimal performance in passenger-side small overlap crashes.

Beginning with 2018 Optima models built after January 2018, the passenger-side door sill, lower door hinge pillar, and toepan were reinforced to improve occupant protection in such 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
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 moved off toward the right side, leaving the head vulnerable to contact with forward structure. 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 maintained well.

The dummy’s head contacted the frontal airbag but moved toward the right side, allowing the head to slip into the gap in coverage between the frontal and side curtain airbags.

The passenger'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	CEP1708
Lower occupant compartment
Lower hinge pillar max (cm)	9
Footrest (cm)	6
Right toepan (cm)	2
Center toepan (cm)	2
Rocker panel lateral average (cm)	2
Upper occupant compartment
Center dash (cm)	4
Upper hinge pillar max (cm)	5
Upper dash (cm)	10
Right lower dash (cm)	7

Evaluation criteria	Measurement
Test ID	CEP1708
Head
HIC-15	283
Peak gs at hard contact	no contact
Neck
Tension (kN)	1.7
Extension bending moment (Nm)	44
Maximum Nij	0.56
Chest maximum compression (mm)	25
Femur (kN)
Left	0.1
Right	0.1
Knee displacement (mm)
Left	1
Right	1
Knee-thigh-hip injury risk (%)
Left	0
Right	0
Maximum tibia index
Left	0.49
Right	0.63
Tibia axial force (kN)
Left	1.6
Right	1.3
Foot acceleration (g)
Left	48
Right	39

Evaluation criteria	Measurement
Test ID	CEP1708
Head
HIC-15	133
Peak gs at hard contact	no contact
Neck
Tension (kN)	0.8
Extension bending moment (Nm)	12
Maximum Nij	0.16
Chest maximum compression (mm)	31
Femur (kN)
Left	0.2
Right	0.7
Knee displacement (mm)
Left	3
Right	1
Knee-thigh-hip injury risk (%)
Left	0
Right	0
Maximum tibia index
Left	0.31
Right	0.31
Tibia axial force (kN)
Left	0.2
Right	1.6
Foot acceleration (g)
Left	34
Right	40

About the small overlap front test

Moderate overlap front: original test

Rating applies to 2015-19 models

Tested vehicle: 2015 Hyundai Sonata Sport 2.0T 4-door

The Hyundai Sonata was redesigned for the 2015 model year and the Kia Optima was redesigned for the 2016 model year (since then the two cars have been built on the same platform). Moderate overlap frontal ratings are assigned by the Institute based on a test of a 2015 Sonata conducted by Hyundai.

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	VTF1403
Footwell intrusion
Footrest (cm)	6
Left (cm)	9
Center (cm)	8
Right (cm)	4
Brake pedal (cm)	10
Instrument panel rearward movement
Left (cm)	0
Right (cm)	1
Steering column movement
Upward (cm)	-2
Rearward (cm)	-3
A-pillar rearward movement (cm)	0

Evaluation criteria	Measurement
Test ID	VTF1403
Head
HIC-15	186
Peak gs at hard contact	no contact
Neck
Tension (kN)	1.5
Extension bending moment (Nm)	8
Maximum Nij	0.28
Chest maximum compression (mm)	25
Legs
Femur force - left (kN)	0.5
Femur force - right (kN)	1.1
Knee displacement - left (mm)	1
Knee displacement - right (mm)	2
Maximum tibia index - left	0.35
Maximum tibia index - right	0.46
Tibia axial force - left (kN)	1.7
Tibia axial force - right (kN)	1.5
Foot acceleration (g)
Left	43
Right	50

About the original moderate overlap front test

Side: original test

Rating applies to 2015-19 models

Tested vehicle: 2015 Hyundai Sonata SE 4-door with standard front and rear head curtain airbags and standard front seat-mounted torso airbags

The Hyundai Sonata was redesigned for the 2015 model year and the Kia Optima was redesigned for the 2016 model year (since then the two cars have been built on the same platform). Side ratings are assigned by the Institute based on a test of a 2015 Sonata conducted by Hyundai.

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	VTS1403
B-pillar to longitudinal centerline of driver's seat (cm)	-15.5
Negative numbers indicate the amount by which the crush stopped short of the seat centerline.

Evaluation criteria	Measurement
Test ID	VTS1403
Head HIC-15	303
Neck
Tension (kN)	0.3
Compression (kN)	0.9
Shoulder
Lateral deflection (mm)	30
Lateral force (kN)	1.4
Torso
Maximum deflection (mm)	34
Average deflection (mm)	30
Maximum deflection rate (m/s)	3.87
Maximum viscous criterion (m/s)	0.39
Pelvis
Iliac force (kN)	1.6
Acetabulum force (kN)	2.0
Combined force (kN)	3.6
Left femur
L-M force (kN)	0.4
L-M moment (Nm)	125
A-P moment (Nm)	-34

Evaluation criteria	Measurement
Test ID	VTS1403
Head HIC-15	94
Neck
Tension (kN)	0.2
Compression (kN)	0.4
Shoulder
Lateral deflection (mm)	12
Lateral force (kN)	0.7
Torso
Maximum deflection (mm)	33
Average deflection (mm)	27
Maximum deflection rate (m/s)	2.62
Maximum viscous criterion (m/s)	0.41
Pelvis
Iliac force (kN)	0.5
Acetabulum force (kN)	0.7
Combined force (kN)	1.2
Left femur
L-M force (kN)	0.5
L-M moment (Nm)	147
A-P moment (Nm)	-42

About the original side crash test

Roof strength

Rating applies to 2015-19 models

Tested vehicle: 2015 Hyundai Sonata SE 4-door

Rating applies to both the 2015-19 models of the Hyundai Sonata (tested) and the structurally similar 2016-20 models of the Kia Optima.

Overall evaluation
Curb weight	3,285 lbs
Peak force	17,046 lbs
Strength-to-weight ratio	5.19

About the roof strength test

Head restraints & seats

Seat type: Power cloth seat

Overall evaluation
Dynamic rating
Seat/head restraint geometry

Technical measurements for this test

Seat type	Power cloth seat
Geometry
Backset (mm)	38
Distance below top of head (mm)	-7
Seat design parameters
Pass/fail	Pass
Max T1 acceleration (g)	11.9
Head contact time (ms)	55
Force rating	1
Neck forces
Max neck shear force (N)	0
Max neck tension (N)	370

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)

SE trim
Sport trim
Eco trim
Limited 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 fair on the sharp right curve and inadequate on the gradual right and both left curves.

The low beams created excessive 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 inadequate in all 4 tests.

Technical measurements for this test

Evaluation criteria	Measurement
Trim level(s)	SE trim Sport trim Eco trim Limited trim
Low-beam headlight type	Halogen projector
High-beam headlight type	Halogen reflector
Curve-adaptive?	No
High-beam assist?	No
Overall rating Applies to 2016-17 models

LOW BEAMS	Average minimum useful illumination distance (5 lux)	Amount glare exceeded threshold
Straightaway right edge	91.8 m	72.5%
Straightaway left edge	48.7 m	72.5%
250m radius right curve, right edge	49.2 m	None
250m radius left curve, left edge	43.6 m	None
150m radius right curve, right edge	48.2 m	25.5%
150m radius left curve, left edge	38.6 m	None

HIGH BEAMS	Average minimum useful illumination distance (5 lux)
Straightaway right edge	152.5 m
Straightaway left edge	136.0 m
250m radius right curve, right edge	63.5 m
250m radius left curve, left edge	61.6 m
150m radius right curve, right edge	52.3 m
150m radius left curve, left edge	48.9 m

Trim level(s)

Limited trim equipped with Ultimate package
Limited 2.0T trim

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 both sides of the road. On curves, visibility was good on the sharp left and both right curves and fair on the gradual left curve.

The low beams created excessive glare.

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

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)	Limited trim equipped with Ultimate package Limited 2.0T trim
Low-beam headlight type	HID projector
High-beam headlight type	HID projector
Curve-adaptive?	No
High-beam assist?	Yes
Overall rating Applies to 2016 models

LOW BEAMS	Average minimum useful illumination distance (5 lux)	Amount glare exceeded threshold
Straightaway right edge	99.0 m	246.2%
Straightaway left edge	67.6 m	246.2%
250m radius right curve, right edge	70.1 m	29.9%
250m radius left curve, right edge	58.2 m	None
150m radius right curve, right edge	60.3 m	18.6%
150m radius left curve, left edge	59.5 m	None

HIGH BEAMS	Average minimum useful illumination distance (5 lux)
Straightaway right edge	114.7 m
Straightaway left edge	106.8 m
250m radius right curve, right edge	71.9 m
250m radius left curve, left edge	76.8 m
150m radius right curve, right edge	60.7 m
150m radius left curve, left edge	61.7 m

Trim level(s)

Limited trim equipped with Tech package
Sport 2.0T trim

Evaluation criteria	Rating
Low-beam headlight type	HID projector
High-beam headlight type	HID projector
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 both sides of the road. On curves, visibility was good on the sharp left and both right curves and fair on the gradual left curve.

The low beams created excessive glare.

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

Technical measurements for this test

Evaluation criteria	Measurement
Trim level(s)	Limited trim equipped with Tech package Sport 2.0T trim
Low-beam headlight type	HID projector
High-beam headlight type	HID projector
Curve-adaptive?	No
High-beam assist?	No
Overall rating Applies to 2016 models

LOW BEAMS	Average minimum useful illumination distance (5 lux)	Amount glare exceeded threshold
Straightaway right edge	99.0 m	246.2%
Straightaway left edge	67.6 m	246.2%
250m radius right curve, right edge	70.1 m	29.9%
250m radius left curve, right edge	58.2 m	None
150m radius right curve, right edge	60.3 m	18.6%
150m radius left curve, left edge	59.5 m	None

HIGH BEAMS	Average minimum useful illumination distance (5 lux)
Straightaway right edge	114.7 m
Straightaway left edge	106.8 m
250m radius right curve, right edge	71.9 m
250m radius left curve, left edge	76.8 m
150m radius right curve, right edge	60.7 m
150m radius left curve, left edge	61.7 m

About the headlight evaluation

Front crash prevention: vehicle-to-vehicle

System details

Optional Automatic Emergency Braking

Package name

Optional Ultimate Package

Overall evaluation

Applies to 2016-19 models

Superior

with optional equipment

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 2015-17 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 only.

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
	no 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
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
	too deep in seat
	not too much force needed to attach
	difficult to maneuver around anchors

Technical measurements for this test

Lower anchor A
Open access rated	No
Depth (cm)	2-4
Force (lbs)	18
Clearance angle (degrees)	52
Lower anchor B
Open access rated	No
Depth (cm)	2-4
Force (lbs)	16
Clearance angle (degrees)	57
Tether anchor
Location	Rear deck
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
No lower latch for this seat position
Lower anchor B
No lower latch for this seat position
Tether anchor
Location	Rear deck
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)	15
Clearance angle (degrees)	63
Lower anchor B
Open access rated	No
Depth (cm)	2-4
Force (lbs)	20
Clearance angle (degrees)	59
Tether anchor
Location	Rear deck
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

Rating applies to 2016-17 models

Evaluation criteria	Rating
Overall evaluation
Vehicle trim	Limited
Seat type	leather

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	Limited
Seat type	leather

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
	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
	none available
3
3	Tether anchor
	easy-to-find location
	no 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)	4-6
Force (lbs)	22
Clearance angle (degrees)	63
Lower anchor B
Open access rated	No
Depth (cm)	4-6
Force (lbs)	21
Clearance angle (degrees)	55
Tether anchor
Location	Rear deck
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
No lower latch for this seat position
Lower anchor B
No lower latch for this seat position
Tether anchor
Location	Rear deck
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)	4-6
Force (lbs)	22
Clearance angle (degrees)	58
Lower anchor B
Open access rated	No
Depth (cm)	4-6
Force (lbs)	25
Clearance angle (degrees)	53
Tether anchor
Location	Rear deck
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

About the child seat anchor evaluation