Find more information in the General Comments section of the assessment
Find more information in the Rating Validity tab of the assessment
- See More
- See More
- See More
- See More
- Good
- Adequate
- Marginal
- Weak
- Poor
- Good
- Adequate
- Marginal
- Weak
- Poor
Passenger
outboard
center
- Fitted to the vehicle as standard
- Not fitted to the test vehicle but available as option
- Not Available
-
Infants up to 13 kg
-
Infants and toddlers up to 18 kg
-
Toddlers from 9 to 18 kg
-
Toddlers over 18 kg
- Easy
- Difficult
- Safety critical
- Not allowed
Seat Position | ||||
---|---|---|---|---|
Front | 2nd row | |||
Passenger | Left | center | Right | |
Maxi Cosi Cabriofix (Belt) | ||||
Britax Römer King Plus (Belt) | ||||
Britax Römer Duo Plus (ISOFIX) | ||||
Britax Römer KidFix (Belt) | ||||
Maxi Cosi Cabriofix & EasyFix (Belt) | ||||
Maxi Cosi Cabriofix & EasyFix (ISOFIX) | ||||
BeSafe iZi Kid X3 ISOfix (ISOFIX) | ||||
Maxi Cosi Pearl & Familyfix (ISOFIX) | ||||
Britax Römer KidFix (ISOFIX) |
- Easy
- Difficult
- Safety critical
- Not allowed
For 2013, Euro NCAP is using improved child dummies and applying a broader assessment of CRS to vehicle compatibility. Based on dummy readings, the Auris scored maximum points for its protection of the 1½ year dummy in the dynamic impact tests. In the frontal impact, forward movement of the 3 year dummy, sat in a forward-facing restraint, was not excessive. In the side impact, both dummies were properly contained by their restraints, minimising the likelihood of dangerous head contact with parts of the car interior. All child restraints for which the car is designed could be installed without problem. The passenger airbag can be disabled to allow a rearward-facing child restraint to be used in that seating position. Clear information is provided to the driver regarding the status of the airbag and the system was rewarded.
- Good
- Adequate
- Marginal
- Weak
- Poor
Head Impact 16.8 Pts
Pelvis Impact 2.0 Pts
Leg Impact 6.0 Pts
The bumper scored maximum points for its protection of pedestrians' legs. The front edge of the bonnet provided good protection to the pelvis towards the centre of the car but was poor at the outer edges. Similarly, the bonnet provided good protection to the head of struck pedestrian in some areas but protection was poor for an adult's head around the windscreen pillars.
- Good
- Adequate
- Marginal
- Weak
- Poor
System Name | VSC | |
Performance | ||
Vehicle Yaw Rate @ COS + 1.00 s | 2.914% | meets ECE requirements |
Vehicle Yaw Rate @ COS + 1.75 s | 2.627% | meets ECE requirements |
Lateral Displacement @ BOS + 1.07 s | 3.21 m | meets ECE requirements |
Applies To | All seats | ||
Warning | Driver Seat | Front Passenger(s) | Rear Passenger(s) |
Visual | |||
Audible | |||
|
Electronic stability control is standard equipment on all Aurises, and passed Euro NCAP's test requirements. A seatbelt reminder is also standard for the driver, passenger and rear seats. A speed limitation device is available as an option but is not expected to be sold in sufficient numbers to qualify for inclusion in Euro NCAP's assessment.
- Specifications
- Safety Equipment
- Videos
- Rating Validity
Specifications
Tested Model Toyota Auris 1.6 mid grade, RHD
Body Type - 5 door hatchback
Year Of Publication 2013
Kerb Weight 1300kg
VIN From Which Rating Applies - applies to all Auris of the specification tested
Class Small Family Car
Safety Equipment
Note: Other equipment may be available on the vehicle but was not considered in the test year.
- Fitted to the vehicle as standard
- Fitted to the vehicle as option
- Not fitted to the test vehicle but available as option
- Not Available
- Not Applicable
Videos
Rating Validity
Find more information in the General Comments section of the assessment
Based on data reviewed by Euro NCAP, it is expected that a similar level of safety could be expected from the Toyota Auris Touring Sports (wagon variant).
Share
The passenger compartment remained stable in the frontal impact. Dummy readings indicated good protection of the knees and femurs of both front seat occupants. Toyota showed that a similar level of protection would be provided to occupants of different sizes and to those sat in different positions. In the side barrier test, dummy readings indicated good protection of all body regions. However, the rear driver's side door opened during the impact. Such door opening could be hazardous for rear seat occupants and the car was penalised. In the side pole test, protection of the driver's chest was adequate and that of other body regions was good. The front seats and head restraints provided good protection against whiplash injury in the event of a rear-end collision.