Find more information in the General Comments section of the assessment
Find more information in the Rating Validity tab of the assessment
-
See More
![]()
94% -
See More
![]()
86% -
See More
![]()
70% -
See More
![]()
100%
- Good
- Adequate
- Marginal
- Weak
- Poor
Passenger
Driver
Front Seat
Car
Pole
- 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
Not fitted to the test vehicle but available as optionBased on dummy readings in the dynamic tests, the Kuga scored maximum points for its protection of both the 3 year and 18 month infants. In the frontal test, 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 the protective shells of their restraints, minimising the likelihood of head contact with parts of the car interior. A switch is available as an option which allows the passenger airbag to be disabled, allowing a rearward-facing child restraint to be used in that seating position. The switch was not assessed as it is not standard equipment. The dangers of using a rearward-facing child restraint without first disabling that airbag are clearly marked inside the car.
- Good
- Adequate
- Marginal
- Weak
- Poor
Head Impact 15.4 Pts
Pelvis Impact 3.7 Pts
Leg Impact 6.0 Pts
The bumper scored maximum points for its protection of pedestrians' legs. In most areas where the bonnet would be struck by the head of a child, good protection was provided. However, in those areas likely to be struck by an adult's head, protection was predominantly poor or marginal.
- Good
- Adequate
- Marginal
- Weak
- Poor
| System Name | ESP | |
| Performance | ||
| Vehicle Yaw Rate @ COS + 1.00 s | 2.26% | meets ECE requirements |
| Vehicle Yaw Rate @ COS + 1.75 s | 1.61% | meets ECE requirements |
| Lateral Displacement @ BOS + 1.07 s | 2.59 m | meets ECE requirements |
| Applies To | All seats | ||
| Warning | Driver Seat | Front Passenger(s) | Rear Passenger(s) |
| Visual | |
|
|
| Audible | |
|
|
|
|||
FailElectronic stability control is standard equipment and met Euro NCAP's test requirements. A seatbelt reminder is also standard for both front and rear seats while a driver-set speed limitation device scored maximum points in Euro NCAP's assessment.
- Specifications
- Safety Equipment
- Videos
- Rating Validity
Specifications
Tested Model Ford Kuga 2.0 diesel 'Trend', LHD
Body Type - 5 door SUV
Year Of Publication 2012
Kerb Weight 1665kg
VIN From Which Rating Applies - applies to all Kuga of the specification tested
Class Small SUV
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
Fitted to the vehicle as optionVideos
Rating Validity
Find more information in the General Comments section of the assessment
Share
The passenger compartment remained stable in the frontal impact. Dummy readings indicated good protection of the knees and femurs of both the driver and passenger and Ford demonstrated that a similar level of protection would be provided for occupants of different sizes and to those sat in different positions. In the side barrier test, the Kuga scored maximum points, with good protection of all body regions. In the more severe side pole test, protection of the chest was adequate and that of other body regions was good. The seat and head restraint provided good protection against whiplash injuries in the event of a rear-end collision.