IIHS Evaluating Crash Test Equipment to Tackle Heavy EVs

Matt Posky
by Matt Posky

With automobiles becoming heavier every year, the Insurance Institute for Highway Safety (IIHS) has announced that it’ll be updating its crash-testing rigs to handle more weight. Up until now, the heaviest model to see an IIHS sled has been the roughly 6,000-pound Audi e-tron. While all vehicles have been packing on mass lately, EVs tend to be substantially heavier than their combustion-reliant counterparts due to the battery. For example, the new GMC Hummer is so insanely heavy that there are roads that its 9,600-pound frame simply cannot handle. All that mass likewise means the IIHS is going to have a hell of a time doing any crash testing if its equipment isn’t ready.


The group has been evaluating its existing hardware by loading up old vehicles with concrete blocks and steel plates to create units that exceed 9,500 pounds. This is important because the IIHS doesn’t actually drive the test vehicles into barricades. Instead, the system pulls them along using a system of hydraulic cables embedded beneath the floor. But this has to get those cars up to 40 mph for testing and wasn’t sure that the existing system was up to the challenge. 


Despite having been in operation for over two decades the IIHS “crash machine” isn’t accustomed to loads in excess of three tons and that’s about to become very important, assuming the industry-wide EV offensive is still on. 


While loading up vintage trucks and SUVs with giant anchors did reveal something about their own safety limitations – as the added load ultimately became a projectile that would have liquefied occupants – the important factor was that the testing system managed to get them up to 40 mph reliably enough for the IIHS to feel comfortable about the future. Though it doesn’t sound as though the system is capable of exceeding that speed threshold by much, were the organization to increase its frontal crash test speeds. Regardless, the group feels it’s good enough for the time being. 


That doesn’t mean there won’t still be some blind spots, however. 


Crash testing is an invaluable tool for determining the relative safety of specific vehicles, we just like to remind drivers that the laws of physics are always at play. Just because a model handled itself well when being thrown into a barricade, that doesn’t mean the matchup is even when it’s going head-to-head with a vehicle twice its size. For example, it’s fair to assume that an oncoming collision between a 2008 Honda Accord and the brand-new GMC Hummer EV probably isn’t going to work out well for the people riding in the sedan just by nature of the electric SUV weighing three times as much. 


But tossing dozens of differently-sized vehicles at each other from every perceivable angle is costly, time-consuming, and ultimately unrealistic. The testing protocols we have today are arguably the best modern safety nerds could put together and build off decades of people trying to perfect the process. At least the monstrous EVs the industry has been rolling out will get to be part of that at the IIHS, resulting in more valuable data for people interested in knowing where their car might stack up in a collision.


[Images: IIHS]

Become a TTAC insider. Get the latest news, features, TTAC takes, and everything else that gets to the truth about cars first by  subscribing to our newsletter.

Matt Posky
Matt Posky

A staunch consumer advocate tracking industry trends and regulation. Before joining TTAC, Matt spent a decade working for marketing and research firms based in NYC. Clients included several of the world’s largest automakers, global tire brands, and aftermarket part suppliers. Dissatisfied with the corporate world and resentful of having to wear suits everyday, he pivoted to writing about cars. Since then, that man has become an ardent supporter of the right-to-repair movement, been interviewed on the auto industry by national radio broadcasts, driven more rental cars than anyone ever should, participated in amateur rallying events, and received the requisite minimum training as sanctioned by the SCCA. Handy with a wrench, Matt grew up surrounded by Detroit auto workers and managed to get a pizza delivery job before he was legally eligible. He later found himself driving box trucks through Manhattan, guaranteeing future sympathy for actual truckers. He continues to conduct research pertaining to the automotive sector as an independent contractor and has since moved back to his native Michigan, closer to where the cars are born. A contrarian, Matt claims to prefer understeer — stating that front and all-wheel drive vehicles cater best to his driving style.

More by Matt Posky

Comments
Join the conversation
2 of 11 comments
  • Golden2husky Golden2husky on Dec 17, 2022

    Used to be that the 4,000 lb plus Town Car was the killer machine. Today its pickups...tomorrow it will be electric cars...then electric pickups. I don't stand much of a chance driving a sportscar...any one of these things would roll right over me...

  • Bobby D'Oppo Bobby D'Oppo on Dec 18, 2022

    You make it easy as possible to get a driver's license. Then you make it easier still to acquire a 5000 lb vehicle with over 300 hp and horrendous sightlines. Then you find it curious when your infrastructure begins to look woefully ill-equipped and wonder why your citizenry have become prone to vehicular manslaughter.


    Just don't forget to stay positive, because you've taken all of these measures in the interest of social engineering. Besides, look how all of the catastrophies you've fostered generate endless revenue streams! The courthouses, prisons, and pockets of insurance company executives were never more packed! And of course, your friends at the big auto companies couldn't be happier living in a world where bigger and newer is always better. After all, it's so much easier to scale-up than to innovate! It's America on top again; her glory only surpassed by the trail of rubble and detritus left in her wake.

  • Zipper69 "At least Lincoln finally learned to do a better job of not appearing to have raided the Ford parts bin"But they differentiate by being bland and unadventurous and lacking a clear brand image.
  • Zipper69 "The worry is that vehicles could collect and share Americans' data with the Chinese government"Presumably, via your cellphone connection? Does the average Joe in the gig economy really have "data" that will change the balance of power?
  • Zipper69 Honda seem to have a comprehensive range of sedans that sell well.
  • Oberkanone How long do I have to stay in this job before I get a golden parachute?I'd lower the price of the V-Series models. Improve the quality of interiors across the entire line. I'd add a sedan larger then CT5. I'd require a financial review of Celestiq. If it's not a profit center it's gone. Styling updates in the vision of the XLR to existing models. 2+2 sports coupe woutd be added. Performance in the class of AMG GT and Porsche 911 at a price just under $100k. EV models would NOT be subsidized by ICE revenue.
  • NJRide Let Cadillac be Cadillac, but in the context of 2024. As a new XT5 owner (the Emerald Green got me to buy an old design) I would have happy preferred a Lyriq hybrid. Some who really like the Lyriq's package but don't want an EV will buy another model. Most will go elsewhere. I love the V6 and good but easy to use infotainment. But I know my next car will probably be more electrified w more tech.I don't think anyone is confusing my car for a Blazer but i agree the XT6 is too derivative. Frankly the Enclave looks more prestigious. The Escalade still has got it, though I would love to see the ESV make a comeback. I still think GM missed the boat by not making a Colorado based mini-Blazer and Escalade. I don't get the 2 sedans. I feel a slightly larger and more distinctly Cadillac sedan would sell better. They also need to advertise beyond the Lyriq. I don't feel other luxury players are exactly hitting it out of the park right now so a strengthened Cadillac could regain share.
Next