The Toyota C-HR XLE, a popular compact SUV, has garnered attention for its distinctive styling and fuel efficiency. For prospective buyers and safety-conscious drivers, understanding its safety performance is crucial. This article delves into a detailed safety analysis of the Toyota C-HR XLE, drawing upon rigorous crash testing data to provide a comprehensive overview of its safety capabilities.
Small Overlap Front Crash Test: Driver-Side Evaluation
The small overlap front crash test represents a challenging scenario where only a small portion of the vehicle’s front end impacts a barrier. This test is particularly demanding on a vehicle’s structure and safety systems.
Driver-Side Performance
The 2018-22 Toyota C-HR models underwent the driver-side small overlap front test. The results indicate a strong performance in structural integrity.
| Evaluation Criteria | Rating |
|---|---|
| Overall | Good |
| Structure and Safety Cage | Good |
| Driver Injury Measures | |
| Head/Neck | Good |
| Chest | Good |
| Hip/Thigh | Good |
| Lower Leg/Foot | Good |
| Driver Restraints and Dummy Kinematics | Acceptable |
Action shot illustrating the dynamics of the Toyota C-HR XLE during a driver-side small overlap frontal crash test, highlighting vehicle deformation and safety system deployment.
The driver’s survival space was remarkably well-maintained during the test, as indicated by the dummy’s position relative to the vehicle’s interior components after the impact.
Image showing the post-impact position of the crash test dummy within the Toyota C-HR XLE, demonstrating the integrity of the driver’s survival space.
However, the dummy’s head movement revealed a point of concern. While the head contacted the frontal airbag, it began to slide off to the left side. This movement suggests that the seat belt allowed excessive forward motion of the head and torso, potentially increasing the risk of injury. The side curtain airbag deployed effectively, providing adequate forward coverage to protect the head from impacts with side structures or external objects.
Detailed view of the crash test dummy’s head interaction with airbags in the Toyota C-HR XLE small overlap test, illustrating airbag deployment and coverage.
Despite the head movement issue, the risk of leg and foot injuries for the driver was assessed as low, reflecting good lower extremity protection.
Image depicting the driver’s side footwell area in the Toyota C-HR XLE following the small overlap crash test, indicating minimal intrusion and good leg/foot protection.
Technical Measurements: Driver-Side Small Overlap Front Crash
Detailed technical measurements from the driver-side small overlap front test provide further insights into the Toyota C-HR XLE’s performance.
Occupant Compartment Intrusion (Driver Side)
| Evaluation Criteria | Measurement (cm) |
|---|---|
| Lower Hinge Pillar Max | 7 |
| Footrest | 4 |
| Left Toepan | 2 |
| Brake Pedal | 3 |
| Rocker Panel Lateral Average | 3 |
| Steering Column | 2 |
| Upper Hinge Pillar Max | 7 |
| Upper Dash | 5 |
| Lower Instrument Panel | 5 |
Driver Injury Measures
| Evaluation Criteria | Measurement |
|---|---|
| Head | |
| HIC-15 | 229 |
| Peak gs at Hard Contact | No Contact |
| Neck | |
| Tension (kN) | 1.5 |
| Extension Bending Moment (Nm) | 9 |
| Maximum Nij | 0.22 |
| Chest | |
| Maximum Compression (mm) | 22 |
| Femur (kN) | |
| Left | 0.4 |
| Right | 0.1 |
| Knee Displacement (mm) | |
| Left | 0 |
| Right | 0 |
| Knee-Thigh-Hip Injury Risk (%) | |
| Left | 0 |
| Right | 0 |
| Maximum Tibia Index | |
| Left | 0.37 |
| Right | 0.41 |
| Tibia Axial Force (kN) | |
| Left | 2.1 |
| Right | 1.4 |
| Foot Acceleration (g) | |
| Left | 65 |
| Right | 55 |
Small Overlap Front Crash Test: Passenger-Side Evaluation
The passenger-side small overlap front crash test assesses the vehicle’s ability to protect the front passenger in a similar frontal impact scenario.
Passenger-Side Performance
The Toyota C-HR XLE also performed well in the passenger-side small overlap front test.
| Evaluation Criteria | Rating |
|---|---|
| Overall Evaluation | Good |
| Structure and Safety Cage | Acceptable |
| Passenger Injury Measures | |
| Head/Neck | Good |
| Chest | Good |
| Hip/Thigh | Good |
| Lower Leg/Foot | Acceptable |
| Passenger Restraints and Dummy Kinematics | Good |
| Driver Injury Measures | |
| Head/Neck | Good |
| Chest | Good |
| Hip/Thigh | Good |
| Lower Leg/Foot | Good |
| Driver Restraints and Dummy Kinematics | Good |
Technical Measurements: Passenger-Side Small Overlap Front Crash
Occupant Compartment Intrusion (Passenger Side)
| Evaluation Criteria | Measurement (cm) |
|---|---|
| Lower Hinge Pillar Max | 11 |
| Footrest | 9 |
| Right Toepan | 7 |
| Center Toepan | 4 |
| Rocker Panel Lateral Average | 3 |
| Center Dash | 7 |
| Upper Hinge Pillar Max | 10 |
| Upper Dash | 11 |
| Right Lower Dash | 5 |
Passenger Injury Measures
| Evaluation Criteria | Measurement |
|---|---|
| Head | |
| HIC-15 | 167 |
| Peak gs at Hard Contact | No Contact |
| Neck | |
| Tension (kN) | 1.2 |
| Extension Bending Moment (Nm) | 37 |
| Maximum Nij | 0.44 |
| Chest | |
| Maximum Compression (mm) | 14 |
| Femur (kN) | |
| Left | 2.8 |
| Right | 2.2 |
| Knee Displacement (mm) | |
| Left | 5 |
| Right | 8 |
| Knee-Thigh-Hip Injury Risk (%) | |
| Left | 0 |
| Right | 0 |
| Maximum Tibia Index | |
| Left | 0.71 |
| Right | 0.99 |
| Tibia Axial Force (kN) | |
| Left | 4.1 |
| Right | 3.5 |
| Foot Acceleration (g) | |
| Left | 107 |
| Right | 73 |
Driver Injury Measures (Passenger-Side Test)
| Evaluation Criteria | Measurement |
|---|---|
| Head | |
| HIC-15 | 120 |
| Peak gs at Hard Contact | No Contact |
| Neck | |
| Tension (kN) | 0.9 |
| Extension Bending Moment (Nm) | 3 |
| Maximum Nij | 0.20 |
| Chest | |
| Maximum Compression (mm) | 28 |
| Femur (kN) | |
| Left | 0.2 |
| Right | 0.2 |
| Knee Displacement (mm) | |
| Left | 1 |
| Right | 0 |
| Knee-Thigh-Hip Injury Risk (%) | |
| Left | 0 |
| Right | 0 |
| Maximum Tibia Index | |
| Left | 0.36 |
| Right | 0.26 |
| Tibia Axial Force (kN) | |
| Left | 0.6 |
| Right | 0.8 |
| Foot Acceleration (g) | |
| Left | 46 |
| Right | 58 |
Moderate Overlap Front Crash Test: Original Test
In the moderate overlap front crash test, a larger portion of the vehicle’s front end impacts a deformable barrier, simulating a common type of frontal collision.
Performance in Moderate Overlap Test
The Toyota C-HR XLE achieved a ‘Good’ rating in the moderate overlap front crash test, indicating robust protection for occupants in this type of collision.
| Evaluation Criteria | Rating |
|---|---|
| Overall Evaluation | Good |
| Structure and Safety Cage | Good |
| Driver Injury Measures | |
| Head/Neck | Good |
| Chest | Good |
| Leg/Foot, Left | Good |
| Leg/Foot, Right | Good |
| Driver Restraints and Dummy Kinematics | Good |
Technical Measurements: Moderate Overlap Front Crash
Occupant Compartment Intrusion (Driver Side)
| Evaluation Criteria | Measurement (cm) |
|---|---|
| Footrest | 2 |
| Left Footwell | 5 |
| Center Footwell | 4 |
| Right Footwell | 5 |
| Brake Pedal | 4 |
| Instrument Panel Rearward Movement (Left) | 1 |
| Instrument Panel Rearward Movement (Right) | 1 |
| Steering Column Movement Upward | 1 |
| Steering Column Movement Rearward | -5 |
| A-Pillar Rearward Movement | 0 |
Driver Injury Measures
| Evaluation Criteria | Measurement |
|---|---|
| Head | |
| HIC-15 | 150 |
| Peak gs at Hard Contact | No Contact |
| Neck | |
| Tension (kN) | 1.2 |
| Extension Bending Moment (Nm) | 16 |
| Maximum Nij | 0.25 |
| Chest | |
| Maximum Compression (mm) | 39 |
| Legs | |
| Femur Force – Left (kN) | 0.7 |
| Femur Force – Right (kN) | 0.6 |
| Knee Displacement – Left (mm) | 1 |
| Knee Displacement – Right (mm) | 0 |
| Maximum Tibia Index – Left | 0.31 |
| Maximum Tibia Index – Right | 0.61 |
| Tibia Axial Force – Left (kN) | 1.8 |
| Tibia Axial Force – Right(kN) | 2.3 |
| Foot Acceleration (g) | |
| Left | 81 |
| Right | 56 |
Side Crash Test: Original Test
The side crash test evaluates the protection offered to occupants in a side impact collision.
Performance in Side Crash Test
The Toyota C-HR XLE demonstrated excellent side impact protection, earning a ‘Good’ rating across all evaluation metrics.
| Evaluation Criteria | Rating |
|---|---|
| Overall Evaluation | Good |
| Structure and Safety Cage | Good |
| Driver Injury Measures | |
| Head/Neck | Good |
| Torso | Good |
| Pelvis/Leg | Good |
| Driver Head Protection | Good |
| Rear Passenger Injury Measures | |
| Head/Neck | Good |
| Torso | Good |
| Pelvis/Leg | Good |
| Rear Passenger Head Protection | Good |
Post-crash image of the Toyota C-HR XLE following a side impact test, showing vehicle deformation and airbag deployment.
Image revealing the side airbags deployed and damage to the occupant compartment of the Toyota C-HR XLE after a side crash test.
The side curtain airbags effectively protected both the driver and rear passenger’s heads from hitting hard structures during the side impact.
Grease paint smear indicating the driver dummy’s head protection zone provided by the side curtain airbag during the Toyota C-HR XLE side crash test.
Grease paint smear showing the rear passenger dummy’s head protection by the side airbag in the Toyota C-HR XLE side crash test.
Technical Measurements: Side Crash Test
Occupant Compartment Intrusion (Driver Side)
| Evaluation Criteria | Measurement (cm) |
|---|---|
| B-pillar to Longitudinal Centerline of Driver’s Seat (cm) | -26.0 |
Driver Injury Measures
| Evaluation Criteria | Measurement |
|---|---|
| Head HIC-15 | 138 |
| Neck | |
| Tension (kN) | 0.6 |
| Compression (kN) | 0.1 |
| Shoulder | |
| Lateral Deflection (mm) | 19 |
| Lateral Force (kN) | 1.2 |
| Torso | |
| Maximum Deflection (mm) | 19 |
| Average Deflection (mm) | 17 |
| Maximum Deflection Rate (m/s) | 4.58 |
| Maximum Viscous Criterion (m/s) | 0.21 |
| Pelvis | |
| Iliac Force (kN) | 0.2 |
| Acetabulum Force (kN) | 1.0 |
| Combined Force (kN) | 1.2 |
| Left Femur | |
| L-M Force (kN) | 1.0 |
| L-M Moment (Nm) | 145 |
| A-P Moment (Nm) | -27 |
Passenger Injury Measures
| Evaluation Criteria | Measurement |
|---|---|
| Head HIC-15 | 175 |
| Neck | |
| Tension (kN) | 0.2 |
| Compression (kN) | 0.7 |
| Shoulder | |
| Lateral Deflection (mm) | 39 |
| Lateral Force (kN) | 1.6 |
| Torso | |
| Maximum Deflection (mm) | 31 |
| Average Deflection (mm) | 26 |
| Maximum Deflection Rate (m/s) | 1.57 |
| Maximum Viscous Criterion (m/s) | 0.25 |
| Pelvis | |
| Iliac Force (kN) | 0.0 |
| Acetabulum Force (kN) | 0.9 |
| Combined Force (kN) | 0.9 |
| Left Femur | |
| L-M Force (kN) | 0.4 |
| L-M Moment (Nm) | 161 |
| A-P Moment (Nm) | -63 |
Roof Strength Test
The roof strength test measures the roof’s ability to withstand forces in a rollover crash.
Roof Strength Performance
The Toyota C-HR XLE achieved a ‘Good’ rating in roof strength, demonstrating a strong roof structure.
| Evaluation Criteria | Measurement |
|---|---|
| Overall Evaluation | Good |
| Curb Weight | 3,272 lbs |
| Peak Force | 18,912 lbs |
| Strength-to-Weight Ratio | 5.78 |
Head Restraints & Seats
Whiplash protection in rear-end collisions is evaluated through head restraint and seat testing.
Head Restraints and Seats Rating
The Toyota C-HR XLE’s head restraints and seats earned a ‘Good’ rating for whiplash protection.
| Evaluation Criteria | Rating |
|---|---|
| Overall Evaluation | Good |
| Dynamic Rating | Good |
| Seat/Head Restraint Geometry | Good |
Technical Measurements: Head Restraints & Seats
| Evaluation Criteria | Measurement |
|---|---|
| Backset (mm) | 22 |
| Distance Below Top of Head (mm) | 6 |
| Max T1 Acceleration (g) | 12.4 |
| Head Contact Time (ms) | 56 |
| Force Rating | 1 |
| Max Neck Shear Force (N) | 0 |
| Max Neck Tension (N) | 140 |
Headlights
Headlight performance is critical for nighttime driving safety. The Toyota C-HR XLE has different headlight options depending on the trim level.
Headlight Ratings
The headlight ratings vary based on trim level. The Limited trim with LED projector headlights achieves a ‘Good’ rating, while the LE and XLE trims with LED reflector headlights receive a ‘Poor’ rating.
Limited Trim (LED Projector Headlights)
| Evaluation Criteria | Rating |
|---|---|
| Low-Beam Headlight Type | LED Projector |
| High-Beam Headlight Type | LED Projector |
| Curve-Adaptive? | Yes |
| High-Beam Assist? | Yes |
| Overall Rating | Good |
LE and XLE Trims (LED Reflector Headlights)
| Evaluation Criteria | Rating |
|---|---|
| Low-Beam Headlight Type | LED Reflector |
| High-Beam Headlight Type | LED Reflector |
| Curve-Adaptive? | No |
| High-Beam Assist? | Yes |
| Overall Rating | Poor |
Front Crash Prevention: Vehicle-to-Vehicle
Forward collision prevention systems are crucial for avoiding or mitigating frontal crashes.
Vehicle-to-Vehicle Front Crash Prevention
The Toyota C-HR XLE’s standard Toyota Safety Sense 2.5 system earned a ‘Superior’ rating for vehicle-to-vehicle front crash prevention.
| Overall Evaluation | Rating |
|---|---|
| System Rating | Superior |
The system successfully avoided collisions in both 12 mph and 25 mph tests and meets forward collision warning requirements.
Front Crash Prevention: Pedestrian (Day)
Pedestrian detection systems are designed to prevent or reduce the severity of pedestrian collisions.
Pedestrian Front Crash Prevention (Day)
The Toyota C-HR XLE’s pedestrian detection system also received a ‘Superior’ rating in daytime conditions.
| Overall Evaluation | Rating |
|---|---|
| System Rating | Superior |
The system avoided collisions in several pedestrian crossing scenarios and significantly reduced impact speed in more challenging tests.
Child Seat Anchors (LATCH)
Child seat anchor ease of use is important for proper and safe child restraint installation.
LATCH System Rating
The Toyota C-HR XLE’s LATCH system for child seat anchors is rated ‘Good’.
| Evaluation Criteria | Rating |
|---|---|
| Overall Evaluation | Good |
| Vehicle Trim | XLE Premium |
| Seat Type | Cloth |
The vehicle has two rear seating positions with complete LATCH hardware and an additional position with a tether anchor.
Conclusion
The Toyota C-HR XLE demonstrates strong safety performance across various crash tests, achieving ‘Good’ ratings in most categories. While the driver-side small overlap test revealed a potential issue with head restraint, the vehicle generally provides excellent occupant protection. The availability of ‘Superior’ rated front crash prevention systems further enhances its safety appeal. However, prospective buyers should note the ‘Poor’ headlight rating for LE and XLE trims and consider the Limited trim for optimal headlight performance. Overall, the Toyota C-HR XLE is a safe and reliable choice in the compact SUV segment.
