In a Vehicle-to-Vehicle Frontal Crash Prevention 2.0 test conducted by the Insurance Institute for Highway Safety (IIHS), the Chevrolet Equinox achieved a “Acceptable” rating - the second highest possible - for its performance in forward collision warning and automatic braking systems, demonstrating its excellent capabilities in preventing collisions. The Subaru Outback has not been tested.
The Equinox offers an optional Surround Vision to allow the driver to see objects all around the vehicle on a screen. The Outback only offers a rear monitor and rear parking sensors that beep or flash a light. That doesn’t help with obstacles to the front or sides.
The Equinox has a standard blind spot warning system that uses sensors to alert the driver to objects in the vehicle’s blind spots where the side view mirrors don’t reveal them and moves the vehicle back into its lane. A system to reveal vehicles in the Outback’s blind spot costs extra.
To help make backing out of a parking space safer, the Equinox has standard Rear Cross Traffic Alert and Rear Cross Traffic Braking automatically engages the brakes to help avoid a collision. Subaru charges extra for Rear Cross Traffic Alert on the Outback and it’s not available on the Base and the Outback’s Rear Cross Traffic Alert does not include automatic braking.
Compared to metal, the Equinox’s plastic fuel tank can withstand harder, more intrusive impacts without leaking; this decreases the possibility of fire. The Subaru Outback has a metal gas tank.
Both the Equinox and the Outback have standard driver and passenger frontal airbags, front side-impact airbags, side-impact head airbags, front and rear seatbelt pretensioners, four-wheel antilock brakes, traction control, electronic stability systems to prevent skidding, crash mitigating brakes, daytime running lights, lane departure warning systems, rearview cameras and available all-wheel drive.
The Insurance Institute for Highway Safety does 40 MPH moderate front offset crash tests on new cars. In this updated test, results indicate that the Equinox is much safer than the Outback:
|
|
Equinox |
Outback |
| Overall Evaluation |
GOOD |
MARGINAL |
| Structure |
GOOD |
GOOD |
|
|
Driver Injury Measures |
|
| Head/Neck Rating |
GOOD |
GOOD |
| Chest Rating |
GOOD |
GOOD |
| Thigh/hip Rating |
GOOD |
GOOD |
| Leg/foot Rating |
GOOD |
GOOD |
| Leg Forces L/R |
292/337 pounds |
517/584 pounds |
| Restraints |
GOOD |
GOOD |
|
|
Rear Passenger Injury Measures |
|
| Head/Neck Rating |
GOOD |
GOOD |
| Chest Rating |
GOOD |
ACCEPTABLE |
| Thigh Rating |
GOOD |
GOOD |
| Restraints |
ACCEPTABLE |
POOR |
Side impacts caused 23% of all road fatalities in 2018, down from 29% in 2003, when the Insurance Institute for Highway Safety introduced its side barrier test. In order to continue improving vehicle safety, the IIHS has started using a more severe side impact test: 37 MPH (up from 31 MPH), with a 4189-pound barrier (up from 3300 pounds). The results of this newly developed test demonstrates that the Chevrolet Equinox is safer than the Outback:
|
|
Equinox |
Outback |
| Overall Evaluation |
GOOD |
GOOD |
| Structure |
GOOD |
ACCEPTABLE |
|
|
Driver Injury Measures |
|
| Head/Neck |
GOOD |
GOOD |
| Torso |
ACCEPTABLE |
ACCEPTABLE |
| Torso Max Deflection |
1.26 in |
1.54 in |
| Pelvis |
GOOD |
ACCEPTABLE |
| Pelvis Force |
848 lbs. |
1026 lbs. |
| Head Protection |
GOOD |
GOOD |
|
|
Passenger Injury Measures |
|
| Head/Neck |
GOOD |
GOOD |
| Head Injury Criterion |
320 |
387 |
| Neck Compression |
67 lbs. |
201 lbs. |
| Torso |
GOOD |
ACCEPTABLE |
| Shoulder Deflection |
1.57 in |
1.81 in |
| Shoulder Force |
402 lbs. |
469 lbs. |
| Torso Max Deflection |
1.3 in |
1.42 in |
| Torso Deflection Rate |
7 MPH |
9 MPH |
| Pelvis |
GOOD |
GOOD |
| Pelvis Force |
736 lbs. |
848 lbs. |
| Head Protection |
GOOD |
GOOD |


