Top Safety Pick +

2016 Lexus CT 200h

small car / 4-door hatchback

Award applies only to vehicles with optional front crash prevention

2016 Lexus CT 200h 4-door hatchback
2015 Lexus CT 200h shown

Crashworthiness

Rating overview
Small overlap front: driver-side
Moderate overlap front
Side
Roof strength
Head restraints & seats

Crash avoidance & mitigation

Headlights
Front crash prevention
Optional system
Advanced

Child seat anchors

LATCH ease of use

Key

  • G
    Good
  • A
    Acceptable
  • M
    Marginal
  • P
    Poor
  • Superior
  • Advanced
  • Basic

Some ratings use a scale of Poor to Good. Others range from Basic to Superior.

Small overlap front: driver-side

Rating applies to 2015-17 models built after September 2014

Tested vehicle: 2015 Lexus CT 200h 4-door

The Lexus CT 200h was introduced in the 2011 model year and is derived from the Toyota Prius. Beginning with 2015 models built after September 2014, the front-end and door frame structure was modified to improve occupant protection in small overlap frontal crashes. (Information about when a specific vehicle was manufactured is on the certification label typically affixed to the car on the driver door or adjacent B-pillar.)

Overall evaluation
Structure and safety cage
Driver injury measures
Head/neck
Chest
Hip/thigh
Lower leg/foot
Driver restraints and dummy kinematics

Action shot taken during the small overlap frontal crash test.

The dummy's position in relation to the door frame, steering wheel, and instrument panel after the crash test indicates that the driver's survival space was maintained very well.

The frontal and side curtain airbags worked well together to keep the head from coming close to any stiff structure or outside objects that could cause injury.

The driver's space was maintained well, and risk of injuries to the dummy's legs and feet was low.

Technical measurements for this test

Measures of occupant compartment intrusion on driver side

Test ID CEN1450
Lower occupant compartment
Lower hinge pillar max (cm) 5
Footrest (cm) 4
Left toepan (cm) 1
Brake pedal (cm) 3
Parking brake (cm) 9
Rocker panel lateral average (cm) 1
Upper occupant compartment
Steering column 1
Upper hinge pillar max (cm) 3
Upper dash (cm) 4
Lower instrument panel (cm) 5

Driver injury measures

Test ID CEN1450
Head
HIC-15 142
Peak gs at hard contact no contact
Neck
Tension (kN) 1.2
Extension bending moment (Nm) 12
Maximum Nij 0.27
Chest maximum compression (mm) 21
Femur (kN)
Left 1.4
Right 1.1
Knee displacement (mm)
Left 1
Right 1
Knee-thigh-hip injury risk (%)
Left 0
Right 0
Maximum tibia index
Left 0.63
Right 0.58
Tibia axial force (kN)
Left 2.8
Right 2.1
Foot acceleration (g)
Left 47
Right 51

How the driver-side small overlap front test is conducted

Moderate overlap front

Rating applies to 2011-17 models

Tested vehicle: 2011 Lexus CT 200h 4-door

The Lexus CT 200h was introduced in the 2011 model year and is derived from the Toyota Prius. Moderate overlap frontal ratings are assigned by the Institute based on a test conducted by Toyota as part of frontal crash test verification.

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 VTF1101
Footwell intrusion
Footrest (cm) 6
Left (cm) 12
Center (cm) 18
Right (cm) 7
Brake pedal (cm) 8
Instrument panel rearward movement
Left (cm) 3
Right (cm) 2
Steering column movement
Upward (cm) 0
Rearward (cm) -2
A-pillar rearward movement (cm) 2

Driver injury measures

Test ID VTF1101
Head
HIC-15 219
Peak gs at hard contact no contact
Neck
Tension (kN) 1.5
Extension bending moment (Nm) 14
Maximum Nij 0.29
Chest maximum compression (mm) 18
Legs
Femur force - left (kN) 2.4
Femur force - right (kN) 2.6
Knee displacement - left (mm) 2
Knee displacement - right (mm) 2
Maximum tibia index - left 0.37
Maximum tibia index - right 0.51
Tibia axial force - left (kN) 2.1
Tibia axial force - right (kN) 2.7
Foot acceleration (g)
Left 55
Right 64

How the moderate overlap front test is conducted

Side

Rating applies to 2013-17 models

Tested vehicle: 2013 Lexus CT 200h 4-door with standard front and rear head curtain airbags and standard front seat-mounted torso airbags

The Lexus CT 200h was introduced in the 2011 model year and is derived from the Toyota Prius. Beginning with 2013 models, design changes were made to the rear door trim panels to improve occupant protection in side impact crashes.

Two tests of the CT 200h were conducted, one of a 2011 model by the Institute and the other representing a 2013 model by Toyota as part of side crash test verification. These vehicles are rated separately, except that the structure ratings for both vehicles are based on both tests, as are driver dummy injury and head protection ratings, because no changes were made affecting front seat occupants. (The car tested by Toyota was designated as a 2011 model but included the rear door trim changes of the 2013 models.)

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 CES1109 VTS1220
B-pillar to longitudinal centerline of driver's seat (cm) -14.0 -13.5
Negative numbers indicate the amount by which the crush stopped short of the seat centerline.

Driver injury measures

Test ID CES1109 VTS1220
Head HIC-15 287 240
Neck
Tension (kN) 0.6 0.7
Compression (kN) 0.2 0.3
Shoulder
Lateral deflection (mm) 32 44
Lateral force (kN) 1.9 1.4
Torso
Maximum deflection (mm) 22 28
Average deflection (mm) 16 19
Maximum deflection rate (m/s) 4.14 3.08
Maximum viscous criterion (m/s) 0.25 0.28
Pelvis
Iliac force (kN) 0.9 0.7
Acetabulum force (kN) 1.1 2.5
Combined force (kN) 1.9 3.2
Left femur
L-M force (kN) 0.6 0.8
L-M moment (Nm) 166 121
A-P moment (Nm) 52 195

Passenger injury measures

Test ID CES1109 VTS1220
Head HIC-15 127 97
Neck
Tension (kN) 0.2 0.3
Compression (kN) 0.8 0.9
Shoulder
Lateral deflection (mm) 37 48
Lateral force (kN) 1.4 1.7
Torso
Maximum deflection (mm) 32 33
Average deflection (mm) 22 19
Maximum deflection rate (m/s) 2.80 3.14
Maximum viscous criterion (m/s) 0.45 0.56
Pelvis
Iliac force (kN) 0.8 0.4
Acetabulum force (kN) 1.5 2.0
Combined force (kN) 2.0 2.1
Left femur
L-M force (kN) 1.7 1.4
L-M moment (Nm) 225 41
A-P moment (Nm) 50 127

How the side crash test is conducted

Roof strength

Rating applies to 2011-17 models

Tested vehicle: 2011 Lexus CT 200h Premium 4-door

Overall evaluation
Curb weight 3,229 lbs
Peak force 16,238 lbs
Strength-to-weight ratio 5.03

How the roof strength test is conducted

Head restraints & seats

Rating applies to 2011-17 models

Seat type: Power leather seat

Overall evaluation
Dynamic rating
Seat/head restraint geometry
Technical measurements for this test
Seat type Power leather seat
Geometry
Backset (mm) 20
Distance below top of head (mm) 10
Seat design parameters
Pass/fail Pass
Max T1 acceleration (g) 11.4
Head contact time (ms) 68
Force rating 1
Neck forces
Max neck shear force (N) 16
Max neck tension (N) 570

How the head restraint & seat test is conducted

Headlights

Trim level(s)

  • All trims
Low-beam headlight type Halogen projector
High-beam headlight type Halogen 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 inadequate on both sides of the road. On curves, visibility was inadequate in all 4 tests.

The low beams never exceeded glare limits.

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

Technical measurements for this test
Trim level(s)
  • All trims
Low-beam headlight type Halogen projector
High-beam headlight type Halogen reflector
Curve-adaptive? No
High-beam assist? No
Overall rating
Applies to 2016-17 models
LOW BEAMS Average minimum useful
illumination distance (5 lux)
Amount glare
exceeded threshold
Straightaway right edge 56.5 m None
Straightaway left edge 28.3 m None
250m radius right curve, right edge 44.1 m None
250m radius left curve, left edge 30.8 m None
150m radius right curve, right edge 39.4 m None
150m radius left curve, left edge 29.9 m None
HIGH BEAMS Average minimum useful
illumination distance (5 lux)
Straightaway right edge 162.3 m
Straightaway left edge 156.4 m
250m radius right curve, right edge 73.6 m
250m radius left curve, left edge 71.4 m
150m radius right curve, right edge 51.8 m
150m radius left curve, left edge 49.9 m

How headlights are evaluated

Front crash prevention

System details

  • Optional Pre-Collision System

Package name

  • Optional Pre-Collision System with Dynamic Radar Cruise Control

Applies to 2015-17 models

Overall evaluation

  • This system meets the requirements for forward collision warning.
  • In the 12 mph IIHS test, impact speed was reduced by 7 mph.
  • In the 25 mph IIHS test, impact speed was reduced by 6 mph.
Advanced
Advanced
with optional equipment

How front crash prevention is evaluated

Child seat anchors

Applies to 2015-17 models

Overall evaluation
Vehicle trim base
Seat type leather

This vehicle has 2 rear seating positions with complete child seat attachment (LATCH) hardware.

It has 1 additional seating position with a tether anchor only.

1 2 3
G Good
A Acceptable
M Marginal
P Poor
Seating positions that rely on borrowed lower anchors or have only a tether anchor available are not rated.
thether anchor symbol
Tether anchor
lower anchor symbol
Lower anchors
shared lower achors symbol
Lower anchor(s) can be borrowed from adjacent positions(s)
No hardware available

Details by seating position

1
Tether anchor
easy-to-find location
other hardware could be confused for anchor
Lower anchors
too deep in seat
not too much force needed to attach
difficult to maneuver around anchors
2
Tether anchor
easy-to-find location
no other hardware could be confused for anchor
Lower anchors
none available
3
Tether anchor
easy-to-find location
other hardware could be confused for anchor
Lower anchors
too deep in seat
not too much force needed to attach
difficult to maneuver around anchors
Technical measurements for this test

Seat position 21

3

Lower anchor A
Open access rated No
Depth (cm) 2-4
Force (lbs) 0
Clearance angle (degrees) 56
Lower anchor B
Open access rated No
Depth (cm) 4-6
Force (lbs) 0
Clearance angle (degrees) 49
Tether anchor
Location Middle seatback
Confusing hardware present Yes
Has contrasting label
within 3 inches of tether anchor
No

Seat position 22

2

Lower anchor A
No lower latch for this seat position
Lower anchor B
No lower latch for this seat position
Tether anchor
Location Middle seatback
Confusing hardware present No
Has contrasting label
within 3 inches of tether anchor
No

Seat position 23

1

Lower anchor A
Open access rated No
Depth (cm) 4-6
Force (lbs) 0
Clearance angle (degrees) 43
Lower anchor B
Open access rated No
Depth (cm) 4-6
Force (lbs) 0
Clearance angle (degrees) 52
Tether anchor
Location Middle seatback
Confusing hardware present Yes
Has contrasting label
within 3 inches of tether anchor
No

How child seat anchors are evaluated