By on June 4, 2015

Subaru Impreza Wagon Dog Circa March 2008

As part of its effort to keep pets safe on the road, Subaru is funding crash tests of pet carriers and crates.

The funding will be directed to the Center for Pet Safety in Reston, Va. according to AutoGuide, who will use the funds to determine structural integrity of every crate and carrier put through testing, as well as looking over safer methods to connect crates and carriers to the vehicle.

Subaru’s ongoing partnership with the CPS has thus far resulted in a pet harness crashworthiness test, which put several harnesses through the gauntlet, with few performing as hoped.

The tests will be carried out by MGA Research Corporation’s lab in nearby Manassas, Va., with results and recommendations to come by later this summer.

[Photo credit: Katie Brady/Flickr/CC BY 2.0]

Get the latest TTAC e-Newsletter!

50 Comments on “Subaru Funding Crash Tests Of Pet Carriers, Crates...”


  • avatar
    caltemus

    Good on subaru for knowing their customer base and caring

    • 0 avatar
      rudiger

      Yeah, if there’s a car company that’s tuned into the people who are buying their vehicles today, it’s Subaru. I’d go so far as to say they’re outdoing Volkswagen, who have traditionally been the master at uncanny marketing savvy.

  • avatar
    Chocolatedeath

    I dont really care for animals but if I did I would own a Husky again..

  • avatar
    cpthaddock

    Memories of the last presidential election come flooding back. Who know, maybe “strapped to the roof” will turn out to be safe and Mittens will be vindicated.

    • 0 avatar
      CJinSD

      It’s a safer place for a dog than in Obama’s wok.

      • 0 avatar
        ClutchCarGo

        I’ve seen plenty of obtuse, perverted, biased and just plain wrong comments from you, CJ, but this is a new low.

        • 0 avatar
          APaGttH

          Nah, Obama compared to Nazis was as low as it has gotten, but give it time, he’ll find another rock layer.

          • 0 avatar
            RideHeight

            Yeah, he’s just plain silly.

            Like Obama would ever cook for himself.

          • 0 avatar
            ClutchCarGo

            It’s probably a lack of historical perspective on my part , but it seems to me that saying someone would eat somebody’s pet dog is worse than saying he’s a Nazi. I mean, you might have joined the Nazi party just to keep your job, but short of a zombie apocalypse, nobody would have to eat somebody’s pet.

        • 0 avatar
          Hummer

          Clutch, be honest, if the same had been said about either Bush or Romney, would you have even posted a response? Would you have defended either from the comment, feeling the same way about them? I leaning towards doubtfully, with a side of your laughter in approval of such a comment about either of them.

          • 0 avatar
            ClutchCarGo

            On other sites, I used to reprimand posters for disrespectful references and terms for pols of any persuasion, because I sincerely believe that the terms we use really matter, and it becomes impossible to have meaningful discussion when we dishonor the parties in question. I gave it up because on these comment boards there is no honor, but, yes, had cpthaddock’s post gone beyond referring to Romney as Mittens (which I disapprove of) and drifted into, say, suggesting that Mitt put the dog on the car roof as a means of training the dog for fighting, I might well have called him out for it. I’ll admit that I’m also just really sick and tired of the level of disrespect aimed at Obama. Whether you agree with his policies or not, implying he’s a pet eater, or witch doctor, or successor to Hitler/Stalin/Nero is just a level of contempt that I find reflects more on the author than the subject.

          • 0 avatar
            Skink

            This is the first time I’ve ever read a comment from someone mentioning Mitt Romney and training a dog for fighting in the same breath. It’s so cute the way it’s plausibly deniable wink wink that the implication was ever made.

          • 0 avatar
            ClutchCarGo

            Skink, you are either being consciously disingenuous or incredibly naive to suggest that my example above was anything but making a point about scurrilous commentary of the sort routinely made about Obama, that point being it would be equally foul directed at Romney.

        • 0 avatar
          CJinSD

          If it is any consolation, I think you’re completely deranged for caring more about the plight of a dog than the plight of millions of innocent people.

        • 0 avatar
          Skink

          Hey, Clutch, the guy didn’t say Obama necessarily ate someone’s PET dog. He may have eaten somebody’s pet dog, but we just can’t be sure from his dissembling memoir. His pre-achievement memoirs were,in part, an immunity bath for dog-eating, dope-smoking, coke-snorting, h-shooting, being mentored by the Communist pedophile pornographer Frank Marshall Davis who may have been his father, and so on.

        • 0 avatar
          Skink

          Do a Husky a favor. Don’t get another one.

        • 0 avatar
          TheyBeRollin

          I thought it was funny. Funnier that everyone else too such offense to it. The finest parody trolling I’ve seen in a while.

      • 0 avatar
        Skink

        In one of his unwarranted and prematurely self-congratulatory memoirs, he admitted to eating dog. Why people want to suppress that fact is interesting.

        • 0 avatar
          ClutchCarGo

          There’s a huge difference between, as a child, eating dog meat served to you, and cooking up a pet as CJ implied.

          • 0 avatar
            Skink

            See chronologically misarranged response above.

          • 0 avatar
            cpthaddock

            OK – maybe referring to Mr. Romney as “Mittens” is a bit cheeky, but the rest of my comment did actually have some relevance to the topic!

            https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mitt_Romney_dog_incident

  • avatar
    sco

    Pet safety, ha! The vast majority of pet owners I see have their loved ones riding in their laps with the pet’s head out the window. If Subaru could make that safe then they’d have something.

    • 0 avatar
      APaGttH

      Have to agree, with that said. I got the doggie seatbelts they have for my furball and there was crash testing done 12 or 18 months ago that showed they all sucked. Not only did the doggie seatbelts basically not work, but the dog bouncing around strapped to a tether was worse than the dog bouncing around unsecured.

      I pitched the dog seatbelt, he hated the darn thing anyway.

      • 0 avatar
        TheyBeRollin

        My girlfriend’s dog is 8.8lbs of fury, has a harness that covers 3/4 of her torso, and we use a tether belt to attach her. She’s probably safer than either of us and the bonus of her not even having the opportunity to distract the driver or interfere with operation is likely the greatest safety benefit.

        For an average dog or one attached just to a collar, however, I couldn’t see them having any additional protective benefits in the case of an accident. In fact, I would expect it to break their neck instead of just leaving them bruised.

        My sister’s dog was with her (~70lbs) when she was in a head-on accident where the airbags deployed. The dog wasn’t secured and got off with a bruise, which is a lot better than my sister fared, though both were luckily able to walk away.

      • 0 avatar
        rpn453

        If I remember correctly, every dog restraint failed this CBC Marketplace test:

        http://www.cbc.ca/marketplace/episodes/2014-2015/pet-safety-paws-for-concern

        • 0 avatar
          APaGttH

          Correct. We didn’t have a collar harness, that would be cruel and a good way to kill your dog. None of them worked – and all were reported to do more harm then good. So Yoda gets to wander.

  • avatar
    APaGttH

    Can we put Michael Vick in an animal carrier and crash the car – just to see what happens.

  • avatar
    nickeled&dimed

    Having 2x 70lb dogs loose in the back is extra incentive to drive safely and scan the road ahead vigilantly – because if you hit something hard, it doesn’t matter if the Takata shrapnel gets you because you know the dog-shaped projectile will.

    Seriously, though… I’m really glad they’re looking into it. Subaru has done a brisk business in aftermarket dog barriers for the trunk area, but if they can design a safer way to carry pets in “dog tested – dog approved” cars, it will corner a market.

    Also – SCO… I was driving up I-83 in PA one afternoon (with my two dogs in back) and someone drove by us with his large dog in his lap, front feet/head/shoulders out the window. Five minutes later we come around a curve and cars are bailing out on both sides of the road and there’s the dog weaving down the middle of I-83, with clearly hysterical owner behind him (on foot). Amazing that nobody was injured (and that the dog survived the fall). My parents had a dog die after wiggling out of it’s collar and jumping out the back of a pickup. Before my time.

  • avatar
    johnny ringo

    I’m glad Subaru is researching this issue, I frequently travel with my Newfoundlands and the thought of a couple of 100+lb. dogs careening inside the vehicle is a rather frightening thought. I have seen seatbelts for dogs, and some people using them, but I have no idea of how effective they are and I am unaware of any studies to their effectiveness. Hopefully, something useful will come out of this.

  • avatar
    ClutchCarGo

    How long before we see the “They Lived” commercial featuring a thankful dog, frolicking around having survived a horrific crash in a Subaru? And it would have to be a dog. Cats won’t thank you for anything, because it was the least that you could do for them.

    • 0 avatar
      Japanese Buick

      Well unlike dogs, cats do not enjoy car rides. You don’t take your cat to the cat park or the lake for some fetch. They basically only get in the car to go to the vet. And they are almost always in carriers, many of which have a seat belt attachment on them so they can be belted in. I love cats, but car safety is way down the list of things to be concerned about for them, compared to dogs.

  • avatar
    rentonben

    Subie knows their market – Dual income and some pampered pets to give a faint whiff of meaning.

  • avatar
    Brumus

    Christ Almighty…shame on me for clicking “Read more” on this bit of nonsense.

  • avatar
    BrunoT

    Not the best use of funds. It’s probably more important how the crate is secured in the vehicle than its actual construction. How many cars are in collisions where the crate in back is crushed? It’s far more important that the crate not go flying.

  • avatar
    FreedMike

    At least 70,000 black labs in Boulder who ride in Subarus – all named “Dylan,” coincidentally – are applauding this.

  • avatar
    CoreyDL

    The correct answer for “dog container” is the back of a two-tone XC70, with the metal grate behind rear seat.

Read all comments

Recent Comments

  • tonycd: Nice.
  • tonycd: “With the overwhelming evidence that lockdowns (and masks, and even rushed, emergency use vaccines)...
  • SaulTigh: I wonder how they count those? In 1995, the corner store was a thousand square feet and had 2-4 gas pumps....
  • la834: Tesla also built their own charging infrastructure that only works with Teslas, and in some areas they are the...
  • ToolGuy: Two questions: a) If I can purchase a pony for a thousand bucks and ride it starting 48 months from now, how...

New Car Research

Get a Free Dealer Quote

Who We Are

  • Adam Tonge
  • Bozi Tatarevic
  • Corey Lewis
  • Jo Borras
  • Mark Baruth
  • Ronnie Schreiber