2017 Toyota Prius v

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

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

Evaluation criteria	Rating
LATCH ease of use

Small overlap front: driver-side

Rating applies to 2015-17 models

Tested vehicle: 2015 Toyota Prius v Two wagon

The Toyota Prius v was introduced in the 2012 model year. Beginning with 2015 models, the front structure, A-pillar, door sill, and hinge pillar were modified and the side curtain airbags were lengthened 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

Action shot taken during the 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	CEN1452
Lower occupant compartment
Lower hinge pillar max (cm)	6
Footrest (cm)	6
Left toepan (cm)	4
Brake pedal (cm)	4
Parking brake (cm)	9
Rocker panel lateral average (cm)	2
Upper occupant compartment
Steering column	0
Upper hinge pillar max (cm)	5
Upper dash (cm)	5
Lower instrument panel (cm)	3

Evaluation criteria	Measurement
Test ID	CEN1452
Head
HIC-15	193
Peak gs at hard contact	no contact
Neck
Tension (kN)	1.5
Extension bending moment (Nm)	13
Maximum Nij	0.28
Chest maximum compression (mm)	23
Femur (kN)
Left	2.1
Right	2.7
Knee displacement (mm)
Left	4
Right	7
Knee-thigh-hip injury risk (%)
Left	0
Right	0
Maximum tibia index
Left	0.73
Right	0.79
Tibia axial force (kN)
Left	3.2
Right	2.6
Foot acceleration (g)
Left	52
Right	54

About the small overlap front test

Moderate overlap front: original test

Rating applies to 2012-17 models

Tested vehicle: 2012 Toyota Prius v wagon

The Toyota Prius v wagon was introduced in the 2012 model year. It is derived from the Toyota Prius but is longer and taller to provide more rear seat room and cargo-carrying capacity. 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	VTF1107
Footwell intrusion
Footrest (cm)	3
Left (cm)	7
Center (cm)	14
Right (cm)	6
Brake pedal (cm)	6
Instrument panel rearward movement
Left (cm)	0
Right (cm)	0
Steering column movement
Upward (cm)	0
Rearward (cm)	3
A-pillar rearward movement (cm)	2

Evaluation criteria	Measurement
Test ID	VTF1107
Head
HIC-15	210
Peak gs at hard contact	no contact
Neck
Tension (kN)	1.2
Extension bending moment (Nm)	20
Maximum Nij	0.28
Chest maximum compression (mm)	24
Legs
Femur force - left (kN)	1.9
Femur force - right (kN)	2.3
Knee displacement - left (mm)	2
Knee displacement - right (mm)	3
Maximum tibia index - left	0.39
Maximum tibia index - right	0.43
Tibia axial force - left (kN)	2.5
Tibia axial force - right (kN)	3.7
Foot acceleration (g)
Left	66
Right	65

About the original moderate overlap front test

Side: original test

Rating applies to 2013-17 models

Tested vehicle: 2013 Toyota Prius v Three wagon with standard front and rear head curtain airbags and standard front seat-mounted torso airbags

The Toyota Prius v wagon was introduced in the 2012 model year. It is derived from the Toyota Prius but is longer and taller to provide more rear seat room and cargo-carrying capacity. Beginning with 2013 models, design changes were made to the front and rear door trim panels to improve occupant protection in side impact crashes.

Two tests of the Prius v were conducted, one of a 2012 model by the Institute and the other representing a 2013 model by Toyota. These vehicles are rated separately, except that the structure ratings for both vehicles are based on both tests. (The car tested by Toyota was designated as a 2012 model but included the front and rear door trim changes of the 2013 models.)

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 The dummy's head pushed past the side curtain airbag and was hit by the window frame of the passenger door. This impact did not produce high head injury measures, but the head protection is inadequate.

Technical measurements for this test

Test ID	CES1117	VTS1221
B-pillar to longitudinal centerline of driver's seat (cm)	-10.5	-11.0
Negative numbers indicate the amount by which the crush stopped short of the seat centerline.

Evaluation criteria	Measurement
Test ID	VTS1221
Head HIC-15	457
Neck
Tension (kN)	0.8
Compression (kN)	0.6
Shoulder
Lateral deflection (mm)	51
Lateral force (kN)	1.6
Torso
Maximum deflection (mm)	36
Average deflection (mm)	26
Maximum deflection rate (m/s)	4.40
Maximum viscous criterion (m/s)	0.67
Pelvis
Iliac force (kN)	2.3
Acetabulum force (kN)	2.1
Combined force (kN)	4.3
Left femur
L-M force (kN)	0.6
L-M moment (Nm)	57
A-P moment (Nm)	-39

Evaluation criteria	Measurement
Test ID	VTS1221
Head HIC-15	86
Neck
Tension (kN)	0.1
Compression (kN)	0.4
Shoulder
Lateral deflection (mm)	38
Lateral force (kN)	1.4
Torso
Maximum deflection (mm)	25
Average deflection (mm)	19
Maximum deflection rate (m/s)	5.39
Maximum viscous criterion (m/s)	0.30
Pelvis
Iliac force (kN)	0.1
Acetabulum force (kN)	2.1
Combined force (kN)	1.8
Left femur
L-M force (kN)	1.7
L-M moment (Nm)	70
A-P moment (Nm)	125

About the original side crash test

Roof strength

Rating applies to 2012-17 models

Tested vehicle: 2012 Toyota Prius v Two wagon

Overall evaluation
Curb weight	3,274 lbs
Peak force	14,180 lbs
Strength-to-weight ratio	4.33

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)	27
Distance below top of head (mm)	32
Seat design parameters
Pass/fail	Pass
Max T1 acceleration (g)	12.3
Head contact time (ms)	60
Force rating	1
Neck forces
Max neck shear force (N)	0
Max neck tension (N)	407

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)

Five trim equipped with Advanced Technology package

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 fair on the left side. On curves, visibility was good on the sharp right curve, fair on the gradual right and sharp left curves, and inadequate on the gradual left curve.

The low beams never exceeded glare limits.

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

Technical measurements for this test

Evaluation criteria	Measurement
Trim level(s)	Five trim equipped with Advanced Technology package
Low-beam headlight type	LED projector
High-beam headlight type	LED projector
Curve-adaptive?	No
High-beam assist?	Yes
Overall rating Applies to 2016-17 models

LOW BEAMS	Average minimum useful illumination distance (5 lux)	Amount glare exceeded threshold
Straightaway right edge	117.9 m	None
Straightaway left edge	52.7 m	None
250m radius right curve, right edge	64.8 m	None
250m radius left curve, right edge	50.1 m	None
150m radius right curve, right edge	55.4 m	None
150m radius left curve, left edge	49.4 m	None

HIGH BEAMS	Average minimum useful illumination distance (5 lux)
Straightaway right edge	156.9 m
Straightaway left edge	154.7 m
250m radius right curve, right edge	67.4 m
250m radius left curve, left edge	66.4 m
150m radius right curve, right edge	54.5 m
150m radius left curve, left edge	53.6 m

Trim level(s)

Five trim

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

The low beams never exceeded glare limits.

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

Technical measurements for this test

Evaluation criteria	Measurement
Trim level(s)	Five trim
Low-beam headlight type	LED projector
High-beam headlight type	LED projector
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	117.9 m	None
Straightaway left edge	52.7 m	None
250m radius right curve, right edge	64.8 m	None
250m radius left curve, right edge	50.1 m	None
150m radius right curve, right edge	55.4 m	None
150m radius left curve, left edge	49.4 m	None

HIGH BEAMS	Average minimum useful illumination distance (5 lux)
Straightaway right edge	156.9 m
Straightaway left edge	154.7 m
250m radius right curve, right edge	67.4 m
250m radius left curve, left edge	66.4 m
150m radius right curve, right edge	54.5 m
150m radius left curve, left edge	53.6 m

Trim level(s)

Two trim
Three trim
Four 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 inadequate 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 both sides of the road. On curves, visibility was fair on the gradual right curve and inadequate on the sharp right and both left curves.

Technical measurements for this test

Evaluation criteria	Measurement
Trim level(s)	Two trim Three trim Four 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	71.2 m	None
Straightaway left edge	32.2 m	None
250m radius right curve, right edge	51.8 m	None
250m radius left curve, left edge	35.8 m	None
150m radius right curve, right edge	44.8 m	None
150m radius left curve, left edge	31.7 m	None

HIGH BEAMS	Average minimum useful illumination distance (5 lux)
Straightaway right edge	168.6 m
Straightaway left edge	154.1 m
250m radius right curve, right edge	67.1 m
250m radius left curve, left edge	59.8 m
150m radius right curve, right edge	52.1 m
150m radius left curve, left edge	44.4 m

About the headlight evaluation

Front crash prevention: vehicle-to-vehicle

System details

Optional Pre-Collision System

Package name

Optional Limited Advanced Technology Package

Overall evaluation

Applies to 2015-17 models

Advanced

with optional equipment

This system meets the requirements for forward collision warning.
In the 12 mph test, impact speed was reduced by 9 mph.
In the 25 mph test, impact speed was reduced by 7 mph.

About the original front crash prevention test

Child seat anchors

Rating applies to 2016-17 models built after January 2016

Evaluation criteria	Rating
Overall evaluation
Vehicle trim	Two
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	Two
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
	hard-to-find location
	no other hardware could be confused for anchor
	Lower anchors
	too deep in seat
	too much force needed to attach
	easy to maneuver around anchors
2
2	Tether anchor
	hard-to-find location
	no other hardware could be confused for anchor
	Lower anchors
	none available
3
3	Tether anchor
	hard-to-find location
	no other hardware could be confused for anchor
	Lower anchors
	too deep in seat
	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)	could not measure
Clearance angle (degrees)	81
Lower anchor B
Open access rated	No
Depth (cm)	4-6
Force (lbs)	could not measure
Clearance angle (degrees)	82
Tether anchor
Location	Bottom 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	Bottom seatback
Confusing hardware present	No
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)	4-6
Force (lbs)	could not measure
Clearance angle (degrees)	86
Lower anchor B
Open access rated	No
Depth (cm)	4-6
Force (lbs)	could not measure
Clearance angle (degrees)	83
Tether anchor
Location	Bottom 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

Rating applies to 2016-17 models built after January 2016

Evaluation criteria	Rating
Overall evaluation
Vehicle trim	Five
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	Five
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
	hard-to-find location
	no other hardware could be confused for anchor
	Lower anchors
	too deep in seat
	too much force needed to attach
	easy to maneuver around anchors
2
2	Tether anchor
	hard-to-find location
	no other hardware could be confused for anchor
	Lower anchors
	none available
3
3	Tether anchor
	hard-to-find location
	no other hardware could be confused for anchor
	Lower anchors
	too deep in seat
	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)	could not measure
Clearance angle (degrees)	85
Lower anchor B
Open access rated	No
Depth (cm)	4-6
Force (lbs)	could not measure
Clearance angle (degrees)	84
Tether anchor
Location	Bottom 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	Bottom seatback
Confusing hardware present	No
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)	4-6
Force (lbs)	could not measure
Clearance angle (degrees)	87
Lower anchor B
Open access rated	No
Depth (cm)	4-6
Force (lbs)	could not measure
Clearance angle (degrees)	84
Tether anchor
Location	Bottom 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

2017 Toyota Prius v

midsize car / 4-door wagon

Crashworthiness

Crash avoidance & mitigation

Seat belts & child restraints

Other available safety features

Small overlap front: driver-side

Moderate overlap front: original test

Side: original test

Roof strength

Head restraints & seats

Headlights

Trim level(s)

Trim level(s)

Trim level(s)

Front crash prevention: vehicle-to-vehicle

System details

Package name

Overall evaluation

Child seat anchors