Top Safety PickTop Safety Pick criteria

2017 Hyundai Sonata

midsize car / 4-door sedan

Award applies only to vehicles with optional front crash prevention

2017 Hyundai Sonata 4-door sedan

Crashworthiness

Rating overview
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

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

Seat belts & child restraints

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.

Overall evaluation
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

Measures of occupant compartment intrusion on driver side

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

Driver injury measures

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

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.)

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

Measures of occupant compartment intrusion on passenger side

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

Passenger injury measures

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

Driver injury measures

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.

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

Measures of occupant compartment intrusion on driver side

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

Driver injury measures

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.

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

Measures of occupant compartment intrusion on driver side

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.

Driver injury measures

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

Passenger injury measures

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 weight3,285 lbs
Peak force17,046 lbs
Strength-to-weight ratio5.19

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
  • Sport 2.0T trim
Low-beam headlight typeHalogen projector
High-beam headlight typeHalogen reflector
Curve-adaptive?No
High-beam assist?No
Overall rating
Distance at which headlights provide at least 5 lux illumination:
car-simpler car-simpler car-simpler car-simpler car-simpler 0 ft 100 ft 200 ft 300 ft 400 ft 500 ft 600 ft Low beams Optimal low-beam illumination High beams Optimal high-beam illumination Excessive glare

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
Trim level(s)
  • SE trim
  • Sport trim
  • Eco trim
  • Limited trim
  • Sport 2.0T 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 2.0T trim
  • Limited trim equipped with Tech and Ultimate packages
Low-beam headlight typeHID projector
High-beam headlight typeHID projector
Curve-adaptive?Yes
High-beam assist?Yes
Overall rating
Distance at which headlights provide at least 5 lux illumination:
car-simpler car-simpler car-simpler car-simpler car-simpler 0 ft 100 ft 200 ft 300 ft 400 ft 500 ft 600 ft Low beams Optimal low-beam illumination High beams Optimal high-beam illumination High-beam assist credit Excessive glare

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 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 fair on the right side of the road and inadequate on the left side. On curves, visibility was fair 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
Trim level(s)
  • Limited 2.0T trim
  • Limited trim equipped with Tech and Ultimate packages
Low-beam headlight type HID projector
High-beam headlight type HID projector
Curve-adaptive? Yes
High-beam assist? Yes
Overall rating
Applies to 2017 models
LOW BEAMS Average minimum useful
illumination distance (5 lux)		 Amount glare
exceeded threshold
Straightaway right edge 98.1 m 167.0%
Straightaway left edge 54.6 m 167.0%
250m radius right curve, right edge 75.6 m 19.2%
250m radius left curve, left edge 60.9 m 34.1%
150m radius right curve, right edge 71.1 m 58.9%
150m radius left curve, left edge 57.8 m 113.7%
HIGH BEAMS Average minimum useful
illumination distance (5 lux)
Straightaway right edge 132.5 m
Straightaway left edge 115.4 m
250m radius right curve, right edge 71.4 m
250m radius left curve, left edge 69.6 m
150m radius right curve, right edge 59.2 m
150m radius left curve, left edge 60.0 m

Trim level(s)

  • Limited trim equipped with Tech package
Low-beam headlight typeHID projector
High-beam headlight typeHID projector
Curve-adaptive?Yes
High-beam assist?No
Overall rating
Distance at which headlights provide at least 5 lux illumination:
car-simpler car-simpler car-simpler car-simpler car-simpler 0 ft 100 ft 200 ft 300 ft 400 ft 500 ft 600 ft Low beams Optimal low-beam illumination High beams Optimal high-beam illumination Excessive glare

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 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 fair on the right side of the road and inadequate on the left side. On curves, visibility was fair in all 4 tests.

Technical measurements for this test
Trim level(s)
  • Limited trim equipped with Tech package
Low-beam headlight type HID projector
High-beam headlight type HID projector
Curve-adaptive? Yes
High-beam assist? No
Overall rating
Applies to 2017 models
LOW BEAMS Average minimum useful
illumination distance (5 lux)		 Amount glare
exceeded threshold
Straightaway right edge 98.1 m 167.0%
Straightaway left edge 54.6 m 167.0%
250m radius right curve, right edge 75.6 m 19.2%
250m radius left curve, left edge 60.9 m 34.1%
150m radius right curve, right edge 71.1 m 58.9%
150m radius left curve, left edge 57.8 m 113.7%
HIGH BEAMS Average minimum useful
illumination distance (5 lux)
Straightaway right edge 132.5 m
Straightaway left edge 115.4 m
250m radius right curve, right edge 71.4 m
250m radius left curve, left edge 69.6 m
150m radius right curve, right edge 59.2 m
150m radius left curve, left edge 60.0 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
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

Overall evaluation
Vehicle trimSE
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.

Overall evaluation
Vehicle trimSE
Seat type cloth
1 2 3
GGood
AAcceptable
MMarginal
PPoor
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

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
Tether anchor
easy-to-find location
no other hardware could be confused for anchor
Lower anchors
none available
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

Seat position 21

3

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

Seat position 22

2

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

Seat position 23

1

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

Overall evaluation
Vehicle trimLimited
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.

Overall evaluation
Vehicle trimLimited
Seat type leather
1 2 3
GGood
AAcceptable
MMarginal
PPoor
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

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
Tether anchor
easy-to-find location
no other hardware could be confused for anchor
Lower anchors
none available
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

Seat position 21

3

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

Seat position 22

2

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

Seat position 23

1

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