- With standard equipment
- With safety pack
Find more information in the General Comments section of the assessment
Find more information in the Rating Validity tab of the assessment
-
See More
![]()
62% -
See More
![]()
80% -
See More
![]()
81% -
See More
![]()
54%
- Good
- Adequate
- Marginal
- Weak
- Poor
-
![]()
Mobile Progressive Deformable Barrier![]()
-
![]()
Full Width Rigid Barrier
-
![]()
Side Mobile Barrier
![]()
Side Pole
-
![]()
Far-Side Excursion
Occupant Interaction![]()
Occupant Interaction
Rear Seat
Front Seat
| Rescue Sheet |
Available, ISO compliant
|
|||
| Advanced eCall | Available | |||
| Multi Collision Brake | Available | |||
| Submergence Check | Partially Compliant | |||
- 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
i-Size
![]()
Easy![]()
Difficult![]()
Safety critical![]()
Not allowed-
![]()
Airbag ON
Rearward facing restraint installation not allowed
Difficult
Safety critical
Airbag ON
Isofix
![]()
Easy![]()
Difficult![]()
Safety critical![]()
Not allowed-
![]()
Airbag ON
Rearward facing restraint installation not allowed
![]()
Easy![]()
Difficult![]()
Safety critical![]()
Not allowed-
![]()
Airbag ON
Rearward facing restraint installation not allowed
In both the frontal offset test, protection of the head of the 6 year dummy was rated as marginal, based on readings of decelerations. Otherwise, all critical parts of the body were well or adequately protected for the 6 and 10 year dummy in both the frontal offset and side barrier tests. The front 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. The Tourneo Courier is equipped with an indirect 'child presence detection' system, which issues a warning when it recognises that a child or infant may have been left in the car. All of the child restraint types for which the Ford Tourneo Courier is designed could be properly installed and accommodated in the car.
- Good
- Adequate
- Marginal
- Weak
- Poor
Pedestrian & Cyclist Head 13.1 Pts
Pelvis 2.7 Pts
Femur 4.5 Pts
Knee & Tibia 8.9 Pts
| System Name | Pre-Collusion Assist | ||
| Operational From | 4 km/h | ||
| PERFORMANCE | | |||
Protection of the head of a struck pedestrian or cyclist was predominantly good, with a few poor results recorded only on the stiff windscreen pillars. Protection of the pelvis was good at all test locations, while that of the femur was mostly good. Protection of the knee and tibia was good at all test locations. The autonomous emergency braking (AEB) system of the Ford can respond to vulnerable road users as well as to other vehicles. The system’s response both to pedestrians was adequate, but the system does not react to pedestrians to the rear of the car. The system’s performance in tests of its reaction to cyclists was good, but there is no protection against ‘dooring’, where a door is suddenly opened in the path of a cyclist approaching from behind. Performance of the AEB system was good in tests of its response to motorcyclists.
- Good
- Adequate
- Marginal
- Weak
- Poor
| System Name | Intelligent Speed Assistance |
| Speed Limit Information Function | Camera & Map, subsigns supported |
| Speed Control Function | Intelligent Speed Limiter not default ON (accurate to 5km/h) |
| Applies To | Front and rear seats | ||
| Warning | Driver Seat | Front Passenger(s) | Rear Passenger(s) |
| Visual | |
|
|
| Audible | |
|
|
| Occupant Detection |  |
|
|
|
|||
| System Name | Driver Alert System |
| Type | Indirect monitoring |
| Operational From | 10 km/h |
| Fatigue | Drowsiness |
| System Name | LKS |
| Type | LKA and ELK |
| Operational From | 60 km/h |
| Performance | |
| Emergency Lane Keeping | |
| Lane Keep Assist | |
| Human Machine Interface | |
| System Name | Pre-Collision System | |||
| Type | Autonomous emergency braking and forward collision warning | |||
| Operational From | 4 km/h | |||
| Sensor Used | camera and radar | |||
Overall, the performance of the autonomous emergency braking (AEB) system was marginal in tests of its reaction to other vehicles, with no reaction to vehicles crossing the car’s path. A seatbelt reminder system is fitted as standard to the front and rear seats. The car has a direct driver status monitoring system as standard, detecting driver fatigue but not distraction. The lane support system gently corrects the vehicle’s path if it is drifting out of lane and also intervenes in some more critical situations. The speed assistance system identifies the local speed limit. The driver can choose to allow the limiter to be set automatically by the system.
- Specifications
- Safety Equipment
- Videos
- Rating Validity
Specifications
Tested Model Ford Tourneo Courier, 1.0 'Trend', LHD
Body Type - 5 door MPV
Year Of Publication 2024
Kerb Weight 1373kg
VIN From Which Rating Applies - all Tourneo Couriers
Class Small MPV
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 part of the safety pack![]()
Not fitted to the test vehicle but available as option or as part of the safety pack![]()
Not available![]()
Not applicable
Fitted to the vehicle as part of the safety packVideos
Rating Validity
Variants of Model Range
| Body Type | Engine & Transmission | Model Name/Code | Drivetrain | Rating Applies | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| LHD | RHD | ||||
| 5 door MPV | 1.0 petrol | Tourneo Courier * | 4 x 2 |  |
|
* Tested variant
Find more information in the General Comments section of the assessment
Share
The passenger compartment of the Ford Tourneo Courier remained stable in the frontal offset test. Dummy readings indicated good protection of the knees and femurs of both the driver and passenger. Ford demonstrated that a similar level of protection would be provided to the knees and femurs of occupants of different sizes and to those sitting in different positions. Based on dummy readings of compression, protection of the driver’s chest was rated as marginal. Protection was good for all critical body areas of the front passenger. Analysis of the deceleration of the impact trolley during the test, and analysis of the deformable barrier after the test, revealed that the Ford Tourneo Courier would be a somewhat aggressive impact partner in a frontal collision. In the full-width rigid barrier test, protection of the rear passenger’s head was rated as poor, based on dummy readings of deceleration, and the car scored no points for this test. In the side barrier test, protection was good for all critical body areas, and maximum points were scored. In the more severe side pole impact, protection the chest was adequate and that of other body areas was good. Control of excursion (the extent to which a body is thrown to the other side of the vehicle when it is hit from the far side) was found to be good. The Ford Tourneo Courier has a countermeasure to mitigate against occupant-to-occupant injuries in such impacts. The airbag performed well in Euro NCAP’s tests with dummy readings indicating good protection for both the driver and passenger. Tests on the front seats and head restraints demonstrated good protection against whiplash injuries in the event of a rear-end collision. A geometric analysis of the rear seats also indicated good whiplash protection. The car has an advanced eCall system which alerts the emergency services in the event of a crash, and a system to prevent secondary impacts after the car has been in a collision. Ford demonstrated that the doors would be openable to allow occupants to escape in the event of vehicle submergence.