I own a 2024 CR-V Hybrid and was amazed and disappointed about the left rear shoulder belt being attached to the roof instead of over the back of the seat. Not surprised to see the poor results.
But how often do you have rear seat passengers? What would be more relevant is to raise the frontal crash test to 50 mph, as 80 mph is becoming a less uncommon speed.
Given that this car has excellent structure and good results in all IIHS more severe tests (except this one), it amazes me that the rear seat brackets deform and that the seatbelt is mounted weird ... like c'mon Honda.
Thank you for the detailed explanation on this car! I own a Sport touring trim so it's super informative. Hopefully Honda sees this and is taking notes.
I worked over a decade ago for a Honda dealer. Honda dis some training and ranted how they do their own testing, which I thought was cool. Then I learned they had a number of cars, including the CRV at the time, that performed poorly, even the door skin was ripped off and the drivers body exposed to debris. Made me wonder; what are they doing with the testing? Are they that stubborn? I don't think this though is that problem, as the car did fantastic except for the backseat result. Yes, it sucked, but that's why IIHS is amazing - I bet now Honda engineers are already working on that problem. This car crashed well because of tests like this and it's why IIHS always tighten their gradings. The winner is us the buyer. It would be a chance to own a CRV now thinking of your back seat passenger but the chance of a crash is so small is still own one since the rest of the crash protection was superior.
The 2023 score should be updated to reflect the 2024 test results, otherwise IIHS is misleading the public in thinking two identical cars are completely different in safety.
The 2023 score needs to reflect the 2024 test or else you're misleading the public if they only go by the overall Good/Fair/Poor scores. At the very least you need to more strongly emphasize how the testing is different now. This also applies to any 2023 vehicle you tested from other makes that are identical to 2024 but suddenly have Poor results. Either that, or remove the overall scores altogether to point out that safety results are far more nuanced than a red, yellow or green square. I truly wonder how many sales will be avoided in 2024 because one small addition has made such a massive change to the overall scores.
Unacceptable rear seat design, Honda used to pride themselves in crash simulations to build safe car. How did this even past computerized simulations before even the car is built?
Having sat in quite a few rear seats recently I can see this issue in a lot of vehicles. Shoulder belt on my neck, and lap belt riding up, and that’s just sitting there going down the road normally. I get this a lot up front, too (Looking at YOU GM).
@@vijayrk7329 Out for sale but not re-tested. They might have introduced an update that requires a re-test. No 2025 IIHS test is currently available on the site.
Just to think my 2009 Volvo xc60 most likely does far superior to this as the seatbelts and seatbacks are very similar to some of the other Volvos getting a good Piss poor effort Honda 😂
Honda's crash tests are really bad, because there steering wheel points up instead middle so the dummy does avoid the airbag. wich can lead to severe injurys. also poor test for driver-side IIHS crash tests. the side impact is also leading to severe injurys about there curtain airbags being too small, and to thin, wich can happen severe injury or death.
You’re starting to do things that are becoming increasingly irrelevant to the real world. How often do you have rear seat passengers? How about raising the frontal crash speed from 40 mph to 50 mph? 80 mph is becoming a less uncommon speed on the freeway. Sorry but thumbs DOWN!
For safety nerds, we tend to care about rear safety for children. Most 80 mph freeways have strong dividers that wouldn't allow for a frontal overlap without extreme conditions. This test is for single lane highways or urban roads with a single turn lane for both sides of traffic.
@@MrFoolsDaysthey should increase the speed because, even a 40 mph crash between differently weighted vehicles is fatal to the lighter vehicle. As demonstrated by their previous testing between honda pilot vs honda civic. When your car hits a pickup truck head on at 40 mph, these tests will not mean anything and you will be dead.
@@LivingTheDream77They literally came out with a video explaining why they won't increase the speed; basically, increasing the speed will lead automakers to make their cars even stiffer to withstand the higher impact speeds, which has a negative impact on crash test performance at lower speeds. Furthermore, it also impacts structural weight, which has a negative impact on handling and braking distances, which has a negative impact on safety as well as you won't be as capable of evading a collision. Basically, you'll be safer at higher speed, but paradoxically, less safe at lower speeds.
Loved the detailed explanation.
I own a 2024 CR-V Hybrid and was amazed and disappointed about the left rear shoulder belt being attached to the roof instead of over the back of the seat. Not surprised to see the poor results.
This test doesn't mention anything about the center buckle. And the Passport has its belt in the same spot. Not a new thing.
❤❤❤❤❤❤❤❤❤😂❤❤❤❤❤❤❤❤😂😂❤❤❤😂😂😂😂😂😂❤❤❤
Don't think it should get a top safety pick award when half the family is in harms way.
the kids can take the bus
99 percent of the time it has only the driver and no passengers.
Great job as always. Continuing to raise the safety bar more and more
But how often do you have rear seat passengers? What would be more relevant is to raise the frontal crash test to 50 mph, as 80 mph is becoming a less uncommon speed.
@@unknownunknowns It's a family car the Crv. Also very popular for ride share.
Given that this car has excellent structure and good results in all IIHS more severe tests (except this one), it amazes me that the rear seat brackets deform and that the seatbelt is mounted weird ... like c'mon Honda.
I agree, especially since the Ford Bronco has more rearward shoulder belt anchors and a higher seat cushion angle.
Thanks IIHS for continuing to raise the bar on safety
Thank you for the detailed explanation on this car! I own a Sport touring trim so it's super informative. Hopefully Honda sees this and is taking notes.
A vehicle should not receive a top safety pick award if it scores a poor on one of the tests.
What's interesting is the new Accord aces this rear seat test. You would think Honda would put more effort into a vehicle that hauls kids around a lot
I worked over a decade ago for a Honda dealer. Honda dis some training and ranted how they do their own testing, which I thought was cool. Then I learned they had a number of cars, including the CRV at the time, that performed poorly, even the door skin was ripped off and the drivers body exposed to debris. Made me wonder; what are they doing with the testing? Are they that stubborn? I don't think this though is that problem, as the car did fantastic except for the backseat result. Yes, it sucked, but that's why IIHS is amazing - I bet now Honda engineers are already working on that problem. This car crashed well because of tests like this and it's why IIHS always tighten their gradings. The winner is us the buyer. It would be a chance to own a CRV now thinking of your back seat passenger but the chance of a crash is so small is still own one since the rest of the crash protection was superior.
Sad that this is an all new model in 2023.
The 2023 score should be updated to reflect the 2024 test results, otherwise IIHS is misleading the public in thinking two identical cars are completely different in safety.
I enjoyed this explanation, thank you!
Do you think the excessive shoulder belt movement is caused by the anchor location being too far forward?
Why didn't the tensioner tighten sooner? Strange.
ah.. so the rear selt belt does not come with pre tensioners? like the front seatbelt?
The 2023 score needs to reflect the 2024 test or else you're misleading the public if they only go by the overall Good/Fair/Poor scores. At the very least you need to more strongly emphasize how the testing is different now. This also applies to any 2023 vehicle you tested from other makes that are identical to 2024 but suddenly have Poor results.
Either that, or remove the overall scores altogether to point out that safety results are far more nuanced than a red, yellow or green square.
I truly wonder how many sales will be avoided in 2024 because one small addition has made such a massive change to the overall scores.
The only car safety agency I trust❤
Would it still be safer in the rear in a front end collision? Seeing as it's further from the point of impact?
Do the same visual explanation on the competitors please
Well, is Honda going to fix this problem?
No, likely not. Honda doesn't seem to care about safety.
My dad had a 2023 Crv before it was hit and totaled, but now he has a 2024 Hybird, honestly it's disappointed the rating it got, come on Honda.
Unacceptable rear seat design, Honda used to pride themselves in crash simulations to build safe car. How did this even past computerized simulations before even the car is built?
Love all the details but still keeping it short.
Good that they're testing backseats now. Even scarier that kids are usually the ones siting in the back.
True, but they would be in a car seat, so they hopefully wouldn’t be so badly affected by this.
Gosh it's "one ding", but I really wouldn't want to be a rear passenger in a head on collision in that car
Having sat in quite a few rear seats recently I can see this issue in a lot of vehicles. Shoulder belt on my neck, and lap belt riding up, and that’s just sitting there going down the road normally.
I get this a lot up front, too (Looking at YOU GM).
When you say 'downgrade', do you mean the rear seats in 24 is different from those in 23 models?
Maybe the rear seat isn’t the safest for children after all
Hope Honda issues a recall.. my passenger on the rear is always my young son...im dead scared to ferry him around now.
The 2024 Honda Accord got a Good rating vs poor for the CRV. I'm sure they are already planning a fix for 2025 CRV.
2025 model is out for sale already and I don't think they have fixed it
@@vijayrk7329 Out for sale but not re-tested. They might have introduced an update that requires a re-test. No 2025 IIHS test is currently available on the site.
My next car will be a Volvo SUV or RAV4.
That's Sad Car accident
❤️🔥
First and do better Honda.
When cars that score poor get called top safety
Again and same as all other testers no similar test for Toyota cars. Only for driver.
frame held up but shocked on results. cars are expensive and quality is gone
Subaru and Mazda still do pretty well.
Just to think my 2009 Volvo xc60 most likely does far superior to this as the seatbelts and seatbacks are very similar to some of the other Volvos getting a good Piss poor effort Honda 😂
$2000 more from last years model for a drop in safety 🤡
Where is there a drop in safety? This 2024 CRV is identical to 2023 when it comes to all things safety.
all these suv look alike...this looks like an old ford escape, or any other box on the road....smh
Honda for safety? It’s a joke😂
Even CRV, the old generation, had poor safety. Not a nice car. cheaply built.
IMAGINE IF THIS CRAP IS DEEMED SAFE.
Honda's crash tests are really bad, because there steering wheel points up instead middle so the dummy does avoid the airbag. wich can lead to severe injurys. also poor test for driver-side IIHS crash tests. the side impact is also leading to severe injurys about there curtain airbags being too small, and to thin, wich can happen severe injury or death.
You watch this video? They said the driver results were fine, so there’s no issue with the steering wheel.
Honda is failed, no kids will survive. Avoid Honda, disappointed 😮
somehow I managed to survive childhood in a '69 malibu with no seatbelts...
You’re starting to do things that are becoming increasingly irrelevant to the real world. How often do you have rear seat passengers? How about raising the frontal crash speed from 40 mph to 50 mph? 80 mph is becoming a less uncommon speed on the freeway. Sorry but thumbs DOWN!
For safety nerds, we tend to care about rear safety for children. Most 80 mph freeways have strong dividers that wouldn't allow for a frontal overlap without extreme conditions. This test is for single lane highways or urban roads with a single turn lane for both sides of traffic.
They had a recent video on why they don't raise the speed as then the cars are designed differently.
@@MrFoolsDaysthey should increase the speed because, even a 40 mph crash between differently weighted vehicles is fatal to the lighter vehicle. As demonstrated by their previous testing between honda pilot vs honda civic. When your car hits a pickup truck head on at 40 mph, these tests will not mean anything and you will be dead.
@@LivingTheDream77we can’t increase the speed, because that will negatively affect the crash performance of vehicles at 40mph.
@@LivingTheDream77They literally came out with a video explaining why they won't increase the speed; basically, increasing the speed will lead automakers to make their cars even stiffer to withstand the higher impact speeds, which has a negative impact on crash test performance at lower speeds. Furthermore, it also impacts structural weight, which has a negative impact on handling and braking distances, which has a negative impact on safety as well as you won't be as capable of evading a collision. Basically, you'll be safer at higher speed, but paradoxically, less safe at lower speeds.
safety Karen