2024 Infiniti Q50

midsize luxury car / 4-door sedan

2024 Infiniti Q50 4-door sedan
2015 Infiniti Q50 shown

Crashworthiness

Rating overview
Moderate overlap front: original test
Side: original test

Crash avoidance & mitigation

Headlights
Front crash prevention: pedestrian
Standard system

Other available safety features

  • Standard daytime running lights
  • Standard blind spot detection
  • Standard lane departure warning
  • Standard lane departure prevention

Key

  • G
    Good
  • A
    Acceptable
  • M
    Marginal
  • P
    Poor

Moderate overlap front: original test

Rating applies to 2018-24 models

Tested vehicle: 2018 Infiniti Q50 3.0t 4-door

The Infiniti G was redesigned for the 2014 model year and renamed the Q50. Beginning with 2016 Q50 models, the frontal airbags and driver seat belt were modified. Beginning with 2018 models, the steering wheel and driver frontal airbag were further modified to improve occupant protection in small overlap and moderate overlap frontal crashes.

Moderate overlap frontal ratings are assigned by the Institute based on a test conducted by Nissan as part of frontal crash test verification. Because the vehicle structure was unchanged, the structure rating is based on results from this test and two earlier tests of 2014 and 2016 Q50 models conducted by Nissan.

Overall evaluation
Structure and safety cage
Driver injury measures
Head/neck
Chest
Leg/foot, left
Leg/foot, right
Driver restraints and dummy kinematics
Technical measurements for this test

Measures of occupant compartment intrusion on driver side

Test ID VTF1812 VTF1312 VTF1604
Footwell intrusion
Footrest (cm) 4 6 7
Left (cm) 5 5 6
Center (cm) 6 8 6
Right (cm) 7 7 6
Brake pedal (cm) 1 1 1
Instrument panel rearward movement
Left (cm) 0 1 2
Right (cm) 0 3 0
Steering column movement
Upward (cm) 1 3 0
Rearward (cm) -4 0 -3
A-pillar rearward movement (cm) 1 0 1

Driver injury measures

Test ID VTF1812
Head
HIC-15 212
Peak gs at hard contact no contact
Neck
Tension (kN) 1.1
Extension bending moment (Nm) 12
Maximum Nij 0.22
Chest maximum compression (mm) 32
Legs
Femur force - left (kN) 0.2
Femur force - right (kN) 0.3
Knee displacement - left (mm) 2
Knee displacement - right (mm) 0
Maximum tibia index - left 0.55
Maximum tibia index - right 0.40
Tibia axial force - left (kN) 2.2
Tibia axial force - right (kN) 1.8
Foot acceleration (g)
Left 76
Right 72

How the moderate overlap front test is conducted

Side: original test

Rating applies to 2014-24 models

Tested vehicle: 2014 Infiniti Q50 3.7 Premium 4-door 4wd with standard front and rear head curtain airbags and standard front seat-mounted torso airbags

The Infiniti G was redesigned for the 2014 model year and renamed the Q50. Side ratings are assigned by the Institute based on a test conducted by Nissan as part of side crash test verification.

Overall evaluation
Structure and safety cage
Driver injury measures
Head/neck
Torso
Pelvis/leg
Driver head protection
Rear passenger injury measures
Head/neck
Torso
Pelvis/leg
Rear passenger head protection
Technical measurements for this test

Measures of occupant compartment intrusion on driver side

Test ID VTS1307
B-pillar to longitudinal centerline of driver's seat (cm) -10.0
Negative numbers indicate the amount by which the crush stopped short of the seat centerline.

Driver injury measures

Test ID VTS1307
Head HIC-15 348
Neck
Tension (kN) 1.8
Compression (kN) 0.3
Shoulder
Lateral deflection (mm) 23
Lateral force (kN) 1.5
Torso
Maximum deflection (mm) 30
Average deflection (mm) 26
Maximum deflection rate (m/s) 2.90
Maximum viscous criterion (m/s) 0.28
Pelvis
Iliac force (kN) 1.6
Acetabulum force (kN) 1.8
Combined force (kN) 3.2
Left femur
L-M force (kN) 0.9
L-M moment (Nm) 139
A-P moment (Nm) 49

Passenger injury measures

Test ID VTS1307
Head HIC-15 137
Neck
Tension (kN) 0.1
Compression (kN) 0.3
Shoulder
Lateral deflection (mm) 31
Lateral force (kN) 1.6
Torso
Maximum deflection (mm) 29
Average deflection (mm) 22
Maximum deflection rate (m/s) 2.59
Maximum viscous criterion (m/s) 0.33
Pelvis
Iliac force (kN) 0.4
Acetabulum force (kN) 0.5
Combined force (kN) 0.8
Left femur
L-M force (kN) 1.1
L-M moment (Nm) 59
A-P moment (Nm) -172

How the side crash test is conducted

Headlights

Ratings are given for 2 different headlight variations available on this vehicle.

Trim level(s)

  • LUXE trim
  • Sensory trim
  • Red Sport trim
Low-beam headlight type LED projector
High-beam headlight type LED reflector
Curve-adaptive? No
High-beam assist? Yes
Overall rating
Distance at which headlights provide at least 5 lux illumination:
car-simpler car-simpler car-simpler car-simpler car-simpler 0 ft 100 ft 200 ft 300 ft 400 ft 500 ft 600 ft Low beams Optimal low-beam illumination High beams Optimal high-beam illumination High-beam assist credit

Low beams
On the straightaway, visibility was fair on both sides of the road. On curves, visibility was fair on both right curves and inadequate on both left curves.

The low beams never exceeded glare limits.

High beams
On the straightaway, visibility was fair on the right side of the road and inadequate on the left side. On curves, visibility was fair on the gradual right curve and inadequate on the sharp right and both left curves.

High-beam assist compensates for some limitations of this vehicle's low beams on the straightaway and all 4 curves.

Technical measurements for this test
Trim level(s)
  • LUXE trim
  • Sensory trim
  • Red Sport trim
Low-beam headlight type LED projector
High-beam headlight type LED reflector
Curve-adaptive? No
High-beam assist? Yes
Overall rating
Applies to 2021-24 models
LOW BEAMS Average minimum useful
illumination distance (5 lux)
Amount glare
exceeded threshold
Straightaway right edge 84.6 m None
Straightaway left edge 48.2 m None
250m radius right curve, right edge 61.2 m None
250m radius left curve, right edge 44.6 m None
150m radius right curve, right edge 46.7 m None
150m radius left curve, left edge 41.5 m None
HIGH BEAMS Average minimum useful
illumination distance (5 lux)
Straightaway right edge 140.1 m
Straightaway left edge 103.3 m
250m radius right curve, right edge 72.6 m
250m radius left curve, left edge 61.7 m
150m radius right curve, right edge 53.3 m
150m radius left curve, left edge 47.9 m

Trim level(s)

  • Base trim
Low-beam headlight type LED projector
High-beam headlight type LED reflector
Curve-adaptive? No
High-beam assist? No
Overall rating
Distance at which headlights provide at least 5 lux illumination:
car-simpler car-simpler car-simpler car-simpler car-simpler 0 ft 100 ft 200 ft 300 ft 400 ft 500 ft 600 ft Low beams Optimal low-beam illumination High beams Optimal high-beam illumination

Low beams
On the straightaway, visibility was fair on both sides of the road. On curves, visibility was fair on both right curves and inadequate on both left curves.

The low beams never exceeded glare limits.

High beams
On the straightaway, visibility was fair on the right side of the road and inadequate on the left side. On curves, visibility was fair on the gradual right curve and inadequate on the sharp right and both left curves.

Technical measurements for this test
Trim level(s)
  • Base trim
Low-beam headlight type LED projector
High-beam headlight type LED reflector
Curve-adaptive? No
High-beam assist? No
Overall rating
Applies to 2015-24 models
LOW BEAMS Average minimum useful
illumination distance (5 lux)
Amount glare
exceeded threshold
Straightaway right edge 84.6 m None
Straightaway left edge 48.2 m None
250m radius right curve, right edge 61.2 m None
250m radius left curve, right edge 44.6 m None
150m radius right curve, right edge 46.7 m None
150m radius left curve, left edge 41.5 m None
HIGH BEAMS Average minimum useful
illumination distance (5 lux)
Straightaway right edge 140.1 m
Straightaway left edge 103.3 m
250m radius right curve, right edge 72.6 m
250m radius left curve, left edge 61.7 m
150m radius right curve, right edge 53.3 m
150m radius left curve, left edge 47.9 m

How headlights are evaluated

Front crash prevention: pedestrian

Rating applies to all 2024 models

Overall evaluation

Pedestrian front crash prevention is not available on this model.

How front crash prevention is evaluated

End of main content