Skip to main content

Front crash prevention slashes police-reported rear-end crashes, says IIHS

Vehicles equipped with front crash prevention are much less likely to rear-end other vehicles, the Insurance Institute for Highway Safety (IIHS) has found in the first study of the feature's effectiveness using US police-reported crash data. The study found that systems with automatic braking reduce rear-end crashes by about 40 per cent on average, while forward collision warning alone cuts them by 23 per cent. The automatic braking systems also greatly reduce injury crashes.
January 29, 2016 Read time: 2 mins
Vehicles equipped with front crash prevention are much less likely to rear-end other vehicles, the 7120 Insurance Institute for Highway Safety (IIHS) has found in the first study of the feature's effectiveness using US police-reported crash data.

The study found that systems with automatic braking reduce rear-end crashes by about 40 per cent on average, while forward collision warning alone cuts them by 23 per cent. The automatic braking systems also greatly reduce injury crashes.

"The success of front crash prevention represents a big step toward safer roads," says David Zuby, IIHS chief research officer. "As this technology becomes more widespread, we can expect to see noticeably fewer rear-end crashes. The same goes for the whiplash injuries that often result from these crashes and can cause a lot of pain and lost productivity."

Using police reports allows researchers to identify front-to-rear crashes in order to gauge front crash prevention systems' effectiveness specifically for the type of collision they are designed to address.

For the study, researchers looked at police-reported rear-end crashes in 22 states during 2010-14 involving Acura, Honda, Mercedes-Benz, Subaru and Volvo vehicles with optional front crash prevention. The crash rates of vehicles equipped with the technology were compared with the crash rates of the same models without front crash prevention.

Individual vehicles with the technology were identified using trim level information or, in some cases, lists of vehicle identification numbers supplied by the manufacturers.

Front crash prevention is steadily becoming more prevalent, but in most cases it is offered as optional equipment. That may soon change, however. In September, the 834 National Highway Traffic Safety Administration and IIHS announced an agreement in principle with automakers to make automatic braking standard on all models.

Related Content

  • Cooperative road infrastructures - progress and the future
    February 1, 2012
    Robert Bertini, deputy administrator of the USDOT's Research and Innovative Technology Administration, discusses the research and deployment paths of cooperative road infrastructures. High-level analysis by the US's National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) of the potential of Vehicle-to-Infrastructure/Infrastructure-to-Vehicle (V2I/I2V) and Vehicle-to-Vehicle (V2V) technologies indicates that V2V could in exclusivity address a large proportion of crashes involving unimpaired drivers. In fact,
  • New USDOT report points to need for more investment in highways, transit
    March 3, 2014
    US Transportation Secretary Anthony Foxx has announced that a new report on the state of America's transportation infrastructure, 2013 Status of the Nation's Highways, Bridges and Transit: Conditions and Performance, confirms that more investment is needed to maintain and improve the nation's highway and transit systems. Last month, Secretary Foxx highlighted the need for transportation investment in a speech that took aim at America’s infrastructure deficit and identified ways to use innovation and improv
  • The effectiveness of roads policing
    March 6, 2015
    The Joint Roads Policing Unit of Thames Valley Police and Hampshire Constabulary in the UK commissioned the Transport Research laboratory (TRL) to evaluate the effectiveness of their roads policing strategy in terms of reducing the number of people killed and seriously injured in road collisions. The focus was on the fatal four causes of collisions: speeding, drink-driving, not wearing a seat belt and drivers using mobile phones. TRL carried out a detailed literature review, in-depth review and analysis of
  • Two seconds – the difference between life and death
    October 17, 2016
    Professor Donald Fisher has spent 15 years identifying factors that increase the crash risk of novice and older drivers. His findings highlight the difference between living and dying, Colin Sowman reports.