The IIHS rewarded the Cybertruck with the Top Safety Pick+ honors, the highest marks a vehicle can receive from the agency.

Only the most outstanding of performances in crash tests can warrant an IIHS Top Safety Pick+ award, as vehicles listed with that ranking must achieve “Good” ratings in the small overlap front, updated side, and updated moderate overlap front tests, along with “Acceptable” or “Good” headlights standard on all trims.

Absolutely insane.

Tesla Cybertruck was the ONLY pickup on the market to be awarded a Top Safety Pick+ rating by the IIHS

The safest rating out there belongs to Cybertruck pic.twitter.com/Y8gLOqaL0d

— TESLARATI (@Teslarati) March 24, 2026

Cybertruck was the only truck to also win an NHTSA Five-Star Safety rating, making it the only pickup available on the market to be recognized with top marks from both agencies.

There are a multitude of options for pickups in the U.S. market, as it is one of the most popular vehicle types for consumers in the country. Pickups are great vehicles for anyone who does any sort of hauling or is just looking for extra space for any variety of reasons.

Pickups are also inherently safer than other body types on the road, mostly because they are larger and heavier, making them more favorable against other vehicle types in the event of a collision. However, Tesla has a significant advantage in safety with its vehicles because it engineers them to not only be safer in collisions, but also easier to repair.

The Cybertruck managed to achieve “Good” ratings, the highest marks available by the IIHS, in all three Crashworthiness categories, as well as “Good” ratings in both Crash Avoidance and Mitigation assessments.

It also received “Good” ratings across all driver and pedestrian crash-test performance metrics, except for one, where it earned an “Acceptable” rating for rear passengers in the Chest category.

The Cybertruck’s outstanding crash test performance has won it this incredible mark as the pickup still tends to be one of the more polarizing vehicle designs on the market.

It is no secret that Tesla has struggled with demand of the Cybertruck due to pricing, but the recent rollout of a trim that was temporarily priced at just $59,990 showed plenty of people want the all-electric pickup.

The post Tesla Cybertruck just won a rare and elusive crash safety honor appeared first on TESLARATI.

To qualify for the IIHS’s Top Safety Pick+ or even the lower-tier Top Safety Pick label, vehicles need good ratings in the small overlap front and side crash tests, an acceptable or good rating in the pedestrian front crash prevention evaluation, and acceptable or good ratings for headlights across all trim levels.

The difference between the two labels is that an “Acceptable” rating in the moderate overlap front test will get a car the Top Safety Pick rating, but a “Good” rating in this category will win the elusive Top Safety Pick+ category.

The 2025 Model Y, codenamed “Juniper” internally by Tesla, was released in the United States earlier this year and received the top rating across each of the categories, automatically qualifying it for the Top Safety Pick+ label:

The 2025 Tesla Model Y has earned the Top Safety Pick+ award and label from the IIHS

It aced each of the collision rating test scenarios in its recent assessment

The safest cars on Earth! pic.twitter.com/XHoOLPa3IJ

— TESLARATI (@Teslarati) July 24, 2025

Other vehicles in Tesla’s lineup have extraordinary marks in crash testing according to other agencies, like the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA), but there are reasons those cars are not on the IIHS lists.

In 2024, we reported that the IIHS had evaluated some Tesla vehicles for the necessary tests to achieve these marks. Joe Young of the agency told us that the Model 3, for example, was not featured on either the Top Safety Pick or Top Safety Pick+ lists because the vehicle had several missing tests.

Here’s why the Tesla Model 3 wasn’t an IIHS Top Safety Pick+, and why it could be soon

This is not to say those other Tesla vehicles would not perform well. The Cybertruck performed better than any pickup has ever in NHTSA crash testing assessments.

The Model Y is Tesla’s most popular vehicle and was the best-selling car in the world over the past two years. Tesla’s intense focus on safety continues to show that this priority goes into every decision the company makes regarding design and engineering. This focus has continued to pay dividends as some real-world crashes save the lives of those inside the cars.

The post Tesla Model Y awarded Top Safety Pick+ from IIHS appeared first on TESLARATI.

The study found that the likelihood a driver will remain engaged when driving with partially automated systems is higher when using “cooperative steering,” in which manual movements to the steering wheel don’t disengage the software, according to the study results shared in a press release on Tuesday. Inversely, those using partially automated systems that turn off when drivers use the steering wheel were less likely to take an active role.

“These results suggest that small differences in system design can nudge drivers toward safer habits,” said David Harkey, IIHS President.

This recent study looked at survey responses from 1,260 owners of vehicles from Ford, General Motors (GM), Nissan/Infiniti, and Tesla, who regularly use their partially automated driving systems.

Drivers who are used to partial automation that switches off when they try to share control over the steering were found to be less willing to steer or put their hands on the wheel in circumstances that required steering adjustments, while systems with some degree of manual steering were more likely to help drivers remain engaged with the road and take an active role when road scenarios demanded it.

Those with cooperative systems were ultimately 36 percent more likely than the others to say they would steer to one side of the travel lane when needed.

Drivers with vehicle systems that did offer shared control were 40 to 48 percent less likely than the others to say they would keep their hands off the wheel in situations that would make most drivers nervous, while two other recent IIHS studies showed that even those warned to remain engaged did not often do so.

Systems that remain on when drivers adjust steering include Ford’s BlueCruise system and Nissan/Infiniti’s ProPILOT Assist system, while both GM’s Super Cruise and Tesla’s Autopilot disengaged from lane-centering upon receiving driver steering inputs. While both the systems from Tesla and Nissan required drivers to keep their hands on the steering wheel, Tesla’s upgraded Supervised Full Self-Driving (FSD) allows some hands-free driving, and so do the aforementioned Ford and GM systems.

“Those are sizable differences,” said Alexandra Mueller, IIHS Research Scientist and Lead Author of the study. “Although there could be many reasons, one plausible explanation is that systems that switch themselves off whenever the driver steers may make drivers less likely to want to intervene, as it’s a pain to reactivate the system again and again.”

“These findings suggest that cooperative steering may have an implicit influence on how willing drivers are to take action when the situation calls for it, regardless of how they think their system is designed,” Mueller added.

You can see the full study results from the IIHS here.

RELATED: Tesla highlights FSSD safety in edge case test videos

Tesla’s Full Self-Driving Supervised and Cybercab unveil

The news comes weeks after Tesla unveiled its Cybercab robotaxi, which is built without a steering wheel, an accelerator, or brake pedals. It also comes in response to the company’s longtime bet on completely autonomous driving, first through the deployment of its FSD Supervised system, which is eventually expected to unlock an unsupervised version that buyers can use in their own vehicles.

While Tesla’s bet on full autonomy will likely come to fruition in future years, discussions about driver engagement have been ongoing, especially as those using Supervised FSD and other partially automated driving systems have used them in unintended ways that weren’t approved by the manufacturers.

At least for now, driver attention remains an important part of the path to full autonomy, until systems become safe enough to be trusted without supervision. Until then, efforts to keep drivers engaged may prove fruitful, and Tesla and others have taken steps to monitor drivers more closely when they use these systems, in order to ensure full engagement and readiness to regain control of the vehicle when needed.

What are your thoughts? Let me know at zach@teslarati.com, find me on X at @zacharyvisconti, or send us tips at tips@teslarati.com.

IIHS tested Tesla Autopilot safeguards: Here’s what they found

The post Drivers using ‘cooperative steering’ more likely to stay engaged: IIHS appeared first on TESLARATI.

The IIHS study sought to determine whether partially automated driving systems and their safeguards increase driver attentiveness. With the rollout of more advanced driver assistance systems (ADAS) and semi-autonomous driving functionalities, the goal is to increase safety.

However, these suites still require the driver to pay attention and be aware of any potential opportunity to take over if needed. These driving systems and features are designed to increase safety but still require the driver’s full attention, hence their semi-autonomous label.

Credit: Tesla

For the study, the IIHS tested both Tesla Autopilot safeguards and those available in Volvo’s Pilot Assist.

The study gave 14 drivers a month with a 2020 Tesla Model 3 and required them to travel on Autopilot, when available, over one month. The IIHS wanted to see how drivers behaved leading up to, during, and after attention reminders prompted by a lack of focus on their end.

The Autopilot study found that drivers could learn safeguard sequences and identify “windows of opportunity” to perform non-driving-related tasks. These vehicles still utilized an Autopilot nag and a torque sensor to monitor whether the driver was paying attention. Failure to keep hands on the steering wheel would result in attention reminders.

Failure to change after the reminders would result in suspension of the Autopilot system, commonly referred to as “Autopilot jail.”

The study found:

“In total, the volunteers drove a little more than 12,000 miles with Autopilot engaged. During that time, they triggered 3,858 attention-related warnings from the partial automation system. About half of those alerts occurred when they had at least one hand on the steering wheel but were apparently not moving it enough to satisfy the torque sensor.”

Most warnings did not go past the initial reminder, and only 72 instances resulted in the driver not responding fast enough to prevent the alerts from escalating.

The study found that while initial warnings increased by 26 percent over the first four weeks, showing drivers were prone to expect it, escalations fell by 64 percent, meaning they did not allow the system to continue warning them.

However, this does not mean that non-driving secondary activities stopped after the first warning. Instead, the study showed something interesting:

“The researchers found that the drivers did nondriving secondary activities, looked away from the road, and had both hands off the wheel more often during the alerts and in the 10 seconds before and after them as they learned how the attention reminders worked. The longer they used the system, the less time it took them to take their hands off the wheel again once the alerts stopped.”

The IIHS admits that the safety impact of the change is hard to measure. While the agency noted that some research shows the longer a driver allows their attention to wander, the more likely they will be involved in an accident, the study also said that “even short lapses of attention become so frequent that the periods of supposed engagement between them have little value.”

The study also said the safeguards can be beneficial to behavior immediately and in the longer term, and other patterns showed potentially unintended consequences:

“The current study has shown that driver interactions with partial automation are dynamic. Some of the changes we observed indicate that system safeguards can beneficially shape behavior both immediately and in the longer term, whereas other patterns revealed potentially unintended consequences. It is important to note that these findings are likely not unique to Tesla’s Autopilot, as many systems on the market have overtly similar safeguard designs. As such, some observations from this study maybe relevant to other driver assistance technology that still requires the driver to be engaged in the driving task.”

IIHS Senior Research Scientist Alexandra Mueller, who led the study, said:

“These results show that escalating, multimodal attention reminders are very effective in getting drivers to change their behavior. However, better safeguards are needed to ensure that the behavior change actually translates to more attentive driving.”

While this study provides evidence that perhaps better safeguards are needed, it is important to note that Tesla has upgraded the in-cabin camera to monitor driver attentiveness.

Tesla activates cabin-facing camera in bid to improve vehicle safety

Additionally, many cars are on the road without these driver assistance and safety features.

Distracted driving is going to occur whether a vehicle is equipped with modern technology or not.

Tesla and other automakers have brought their newest vehicles up to speed in the fight against distracted driving, and perhaps this study showed that warnings could and should come at varying rates to prevent anticipation from drivers.

I’d love to hear from you! If you have any comments, concerns, or questions, please email me at joey@teslarati.com. You can also reach me on Twitter @KlenderJoey, or if you have news tips, you can email us at tips@teslarati.com.

The post IIHS tested Tesla Autopilot safeguards: Here’s what they found appeared first on TESLARATI.

In a press release shared on Tuesday, the IIHS noted that the R1T had been boosted to a Top Safety Pick+, and the only one in the large pickup category, due to the truck receiving a “Good” score in an updated moderate overlap front test, a requirement for the plus status. Although the R1T had previously received the base-level Top Safety Pick, the pending test results officially boosted the pickup’s status.

You can see the R1T’s overall IIHS test results, and both the original and updated moderate overlap front test results below.

Credit: IIHS

Credit: IIHS

Credit: IIHS

The other vehicles in the large pickups category included the 2024 Toyota Tundra, both crew and extended cab, each receiving the base-level Top Safety Pick. Additionally, the IIHS gave Top Safety Pick+ status to a few other electric vehicles (EVs) in other categories, including the 2024 Tesla Model Y (midsize luxury SUVs), the Hyundai Ioniq 6 (midsize cars), the Genesis GV60 (small SUVs), and others, still.

You can watch the video from the IIHS 2024 Rivian R1T updated moderate overlap crash test below. You can also see the full breakdown of the R1T’s Top Safety Pick+ score here.

The news also comes after Rivian beat its Q1 estimates, delivering a total of 13,588 vehicles and producing 13,980. It also comes as the EV maker prepares to shut down its production facility in Normal, Illinois, in order to re-tool the plant in preparation for the upcoming production of its R2 vehicles, unveiled last month alongside the surprise R3.

The plans to produce the R2 at its plant in Illinois also came as news, as the company previously planned to build the vehicle at an upcoming factory in Georgia. Rivian has also elected to delay the construction of its Georgia factory, instead producing the R2 at its Normal facility.

Tesla Supercharger network opens to Rivian vehicles

What are your thoughts? Let me know at zach@teslarati.com, find me on X at @zacharyvisconti, or send us tips at tips@teslarati.com.

The post Rivian R1T safety score boosted in IIHS pickup category appeared first on TESLARATI.

In a press release shared on Tuesday, the IIHS released early results from the new ratings system, noting that partial automation systems from Tesla, Ford, Nissan, and most other automakers that were tested were lacking in multiple categories. The study offered ratings of good, acceptable, marginal or poor, both overall and in specific categories.

Level 2 systems like Tesla Autopilot can improve drivers’ attentiveness: IIHS study

“We evaluated partial automation systems from BMW, Ford, General Motors, Genesis, Lexus, Mercedes-Benz, Nissan, Tesla and Volvo,” said David Harkey, IIHS President. “Most of them don’t include adequate measures to prevent misuse and keep drivers from losing focus on what’s happening on the road.”

Of the 14 partially automated systems tested thus far, only one system from any automaker was deemed acceptable, while two were rated marginal, 11 were rated poor, and none were rated good. The categories that were individually rated for each system included driver monitoring, attention reminders, emergency procedures, lane change, adaptive cruise control (ACC) resume, cooperative steering, and safety features.

The IIHS gave both Tesla’s Autopilot and Full Self-Driving (FSD) beta systems poor ratings overall, while Volvo Pilot Assist, Nissan ProPilot, Mercedes Active Distance Assist Distronic, Ford BlueCruise and several others were rated poor. Driver monitoring and attention reminders were some of the lower-rated categories across most brands, highlighting the ability for drivers to trick systems into thinking they’re being fully aware.

The research non-profit also noted that there was “little” evidence to support that partially automated systems like these are actually at the point that they currently make driving safer—though most companies target safety as a number one goal with ADAS programs.

“Some drivers may feel that partial automation makes long drives easier, but there is little evidence it makes driving safer,” Harkey said. “As many high-profile crashes have illustrated, it can introduce new risks when systems lack the appropriate safeguards.”

The top-rated systems in the index  included Lexus Teammate with Advanced Drive with an acceptable rating, along with the GM Super Cruise and Nissan ProPilot Assist with Navi-Link. Every other system was rated poor overall.

You can see the full category breakdowns from tests of Tesla’s Autopilot and FSD beta systems from the IIHS below, along with those of a few others.

Credit: IIHS

Credit: IIHS

Credit: IIHS

Credit: IIHS

Credit: IIHS

“These results are worrying, considering how quickly vehicles with these partial automation systems are hitting our roadways,” Harkey added.

“But there’s a silver lining if you look at the performance of the group as a whole. No single system did well across the board, but in each category at least one system performed well. That means the fixes are readily available and, in some cases, may be accomplished with nothing more than a simple software update.”

Below you can see overall ratings for each system tested.

You can view the full list of rankings with individual category rankings from the IIHS here, or view the institute’s test protocol and rating guidelines here. Additionally, see the institute’s press release detailing the rating system’s early results here.

What are your thoughts? Let me know at zach@teslarati.com, find me on X at @zacharyvisconti, or send your tips to us at tips@teslarati.com.

The post ADAS safeguards are lacking across auto brands: IIHS appeared first on TESLARATI.

There is a reason it did not make the list, and there’s a reason why it could be included in it in the near future.

IIHS Top Safety Pick+ for 2024

The IIHS Top Safety Pick+ award is the pinnacle of automotive crash safety accolades. It means the vehicle obtained top marks in the small overlap front test and updated side test, and at least an acceptable rating in the updated moderate overlap front test, headlight standard, and pedestrian front crash prevention test.

Twenty-two vehicles made the list this year, and only one Tesla, the Model Y, was awarded.

Tesla Model Y secures 2024 IIHS TOP SAFETY PICK+ award despite tougher metrics

Some people might have scrolled down to look for other Teslas, especially the Model 3, on even the Top Safety Pick list, which is still an accomplishment. However, it was not on there either.

The Model 3 was listed on the Top Safety Pick+ awards in 2020, 2021, and 2022. However, it did not make the list in 2023 or 2024, and there is a reason for that.

Tesla Model 3 retains its esteemed IIHS Top Safety Pick+ award for 2020

Why didn’t the Tesla Model 3 make the list?

“It actually comes down to missing tests,” Joe Young of the IIHS told Teslarati this morning. “The Model 3 has not been evaluated in our updated side crash test, which is a requirement for both awards this year. It is also missing a rating in our updated moderate overlap crash test, which is part of the “plus” criteria.”

Simply put, the Model 3 has not been evaluated for certain crash tests, and the IIHS cannot add it to the list without those assessments being performed.

However, it is not the end of the world.

“It’s possible that the 2024 Model 3 could earn an award later in the year as we fill out additional ratings. We’ll be issuing awards throughout the year as more tests are complete,” Young added.

I’d love to hear from you! If you have any comments, concerns, or questions, please email me at joey@teslarati.com. You can also reach me on Twitter @KlenderJoey, or if you have news tips, you can email us at tips@teslarati.com.

The post Here’s why the Tesla Model 3 wasn’t an IIHS Top Safety Pick+, and why it could be soon appeared first on TESLARATI.

There’s an explanation for all of it, however.

The Cybertruck’s Situation with the NHTSA

The NHTSA does not “approve” new vehicles, but it establishes performance requirements that comply with FMVSS. Manufacturers certify compliance with these standards when they crash test internally. Some vehicles are crash-tested directly by the NHTSA, but the Cybertruck is not one of these vehicles. At least not yet.

According to a 2020 report from Consumer Reports, “97 percent of all new vehicles sold are crash-test rated by one or both of the independent organizations.”

However, as the Cybertruck’s preliminary safety ratings have been added to the NHTSA database, they do not include any specific ratings in terms of crash ratings. The only ratings are safety features, such as Front Collision Warning, Lane Departure Warning, Crash Imminent Braking, and Dynamic Brake Support, which all meet performance criteria.

The Cybertruck is not mentioned on the 2024 list of vehicles to be included in the agency’s five-star safety ratings tests.

This means the Cybertruck will not have official ratings from the NHTSA until the truck is tested by them directly, per the agency, which clarified its plans to Teslarati on Monday.

The Cybertruck’s Situation with the IIHS

The IIHS also has no plans to test the Cybertruck, the organization told us.

“Automakers do perform their own crash tests to ensure compliance with federal regulations and for internal purposes,” Joe Young of the IIHS said. “Regardless of whether the [Cybertruck] is ever tested by IIHS or for NHTSA’s NCAP program, it will still need to meet federal motor vehicle safety standards, which require certain crash test standards.”

The Cybertruck has done this, and the recommendation from the NHTSA and IIHS is more or less another nod of confidence for any vehicle that is tested. Tesla has received five-star ratings for its vehicles from the NHTSA in the past.

Young also said the Cybertruck could be tested by the IIHS in the future. However, that decision will be made after it can assess “the level of general consumer interest in the vehicle.” If it is popular enough, the IIHS may test it.

Tesla ‘highly confident’ Cybertruck is safer than other trucks: Elon Musk

Additionally, Tesla could reach out to the IIHS and nominate the Cybertruck for testing:

“The testing nomination process allows automakers to essentially reimburse us for the cost of the vehicle(s) to get it tested more quickly than we might otherwise do so. Either scenario would require vehicle availability, however,” Young said.

The IIHS also has a verification test program, which allows automakers to submit in-house data and results of crash testing. Due to limited funding and time, the IIHS cannot independently test every consumer vehicle on the market, so it can use OEM data to do so. The program is regularly audited to ensure accuracy.

However, the Cybertruck is not currently able to be a part of the verification test program. Young explained, “As a new model, the Cybertruck wouldn’t be eligible for this program in our driver-side small overlap test, and we don’t accept verification data for our updated moderate overlap frontal crash test program. It’s possible it could be eligible for a verification rating in one or more of our other tests, but that would be at the discretion of our crashworthiness team.”

I’d love to hear from you! If you have any comments, concerns, or questions, please email me at joey@teslarati.com. You can also reach me on Twitter @KlenderJoey, or if you have news tips, you can email us at tips@teslarati.com.

The post Tesla Cybertruck crash test rating situation revealed by NHTSA, IIHS appeared first on TESLARATI.

Since the announcement, however, some have also spotted that Tesla may have removed a front-seat airbag from the design, leaving some onlookers with questions.

Earlier this week, Reddit u/Capital-Pomegranate6 noticed that the new Model 3 doesn’t include a knee airbag for front-seat passengers, as spotted in the French owner’s manual. Interestingly, the manual also shows that the design has an additional airbag inside the driver’s seat, which appears to be the same one noticed in China-built Model Y units last year.

Some users responded that the design could be region-based, depending on what airbags are available in certain countries. Others said that U.S. regulations may require knee airbags while European countries don’t. However, u/Capital-Pomegranate6 reiterated that their Model 3 does include the knee airbags, though others outside of North America pointed out that theirs didn’t.

Above: Airbags in the U.S./North America Tesla Model 3, according to the owner’s manual. (Credit: Tesla)

In any case, it seems clear from the U.S. owner’s manual (and those of other North American countries) that pre-refresh Model 3 builds include knee airbags. The new Model 3 design is not yet on sale in the United Kingdom, however, and you can see in their owner’s manual that the older European-shipped models also did not include a knee airbag.

It’s not clear as of yet whether the new Model 3 will include the knee airbags in the U.S. or other North American countries. Currently, there aren’t any markets with knee airbags in their owner’s manual.

Above: Tesla’s airbags in the 2024 Model 3 refresh (left; via French owners manual) compared to the pre-refresh Model 3 (right; via UK owner’s manual). (Credit: Tesla)

Still, it’s entirely possible that Tesla could remove the knee airbags in 2024 Model 3 builds in North America, especially if they aren’t deemed necessary. Capital-Pomegranate6 also points out that the European New Car Assessment Programme (EuroNCAP) conducts thorough safety testing of new cars. As such, Tesla could simply prioritize the inner driver’s seat airbag as more critical, especially if it still meets North American safety standards.

In 2019, the Insurance Institute for Highway Safety (IIHS) published an article stating that researchers found knee airbags could have “a negligible effect on injury risk,” even making injuries more likely in some cases. The accompanying study showed that knee airbags decreased injury risks from 7.9 percent to 7.4 percent in a real-world analysis. The 0.5-percent drop was “not statistically significant,” according to the IIHS.

“There are many different design strategies for protecting against the kind of leg and foot injuries that knee airbags are meant to address,” said Becky Mueller, IIHS senior research engineer and co-author of the study. “Other options may be just as, if not more, effective.”

The IIHS also acknowledges that some manufacturers have continued building cars with knee airbags. Despite their potentially marginal effects, the organization adds that automakers could be using knee airbags to target high scores on federally mandated tests, and specifically those requiring dummies to be unbelted.

What are your thoughts? Let me know at zach@teslarati.com, find me on X at @zacharyvisconti, or send your tips to us at tips@teslarati.com.

The post Tesla modifies airbag placement in Model 3 Highland appeared first on TESLARATI.

The Ford Mustang Mach-E, Tesla Model Y, Ford Explorer, and Subaru Ascent were the only vehicles of the thirteen tested to earn the IIHS’ “good” ratings, while the Chevrolet Traverse, Toyota Highlander, and Volkswagen Atlas earned “marginal” marks.

However, six of the thirteen midsize SUVs were given poor ratings, including the Honda Pilot, Hyundai Palisade, Jeep Grand Cherokee, Jeep Wrangler 4-door, Mazda CX-9, and Nissan Murano.

Of all the vehicles tested, the Mustang Mach-E was the only car to gain the top rating across all eleven categories. The Model Y received top marks in ten categories, including the overall rating, but only received an “Acceptable” grade in the category of rear passenger restraints and kinetics.

The Ford Mustang Mach-E was the only vehicle of the thirteen tested to receive top marks across all categories. (Credit: IIHS)

The thirteen vehicles tested did not fail to offer excellent protection for the driver, IIHS president David Harkey said. “But only a handful extend that level of safety to the back seat.”

The testing process involved utilizing a Hybrid III dummy that is the size of a small woman or 12-year-old child, which is positioned in the second row behind the driver. The test uses specific metrics that focus on the injuries that occur most often to occupants in the back seat.

Good ratings are obtained by not exceeding limits that would indicate an excessive risk of injury to the head, neck, chest, abdomen, or thigh and are recorded by sensors.

This is where the Model Y obtained only an Acceptable rating, as “the rear dummy’s head approached the front seatback, which increases the risk of head injuries,” the IIHS said in its findings.

The Model Y is still one of the few select vehicles to be given the title of Top Safety Pick+, which only a handful of vehicles have obtained. The IIHS also made the requirements for the Top Safety Pick awards stronger this year, demanding better side crash protection and improved pedestrian crash prevention systems and also eliminating subpar headlights from the ability to qualify for the award.

Tesla Model Y earns IIHS’ 2023 Top Safety Pick+ award despite stricter standards

“Zeroing in on weaknesses in rear seat safety is an opportunity to make big gains in a short time, since solutions that are already proven to work in the front can successfully be adapted for the rear,” Marcy Edwards, the IIHS’ Senior Research Engineer, said. “The four good ratings in this round of testing show that some automakers are already doing it.”

I’d love to hear from you! If you have any comments, concerns, or questions, please email me at joey@teslarati.com. You can also reach me on Twitter @KlenderJoey, or if you have news tips, you can email us at tips@teslarati.com.

The post Tesla Model Y, Ford Mustang Mach-E top IIHS most recent crash safety tests appeared first on TESLARATI.