Find more information in the General Comments section of the assessment
Find more information in the Rating Validity tab of the assessment
-
See More
![]()
85% -
See More
![]()
86% -
See More
![]()
80% -
See More
![]()
79%
- 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
Not fitted to the test vehicle but available as option
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 and side barrier tests, good protection was provided to all critical body areas for both child dummies, and the Honda CR-V scored maximum points in this part of the assessment. 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 CR-V is equipped with 'child presence detection', a system which issues a warning when it recognises that a child or infant has been left in the car. All of the child restraint types for which the CR-V is designed could be properly installed and accommodated in the car.
- Good
- Adequate
- Marginal
- Weak
- Poor
Pedestrian & Cyclist Head 12.9 Pts
Pelvis 2.4 Pts
Femur 4.5 Pts
Knee & Tibia 9.0 Pts
| System Name | Collision Mitigation Braking System | ||
| Type | Auto-Brake with Forward Collision Warning | ||
| Operational From | 5 km/h | ||
| PERFORMANCE | | |||
Protection of the head of a struck pedestrian or cyclist was predominantly good or adequate, with poor results recorded only on the stiff windscreen pillars. Protection of the pelvis was mixed, while that of the femur and of the knee and tibia was good across the whole width of the car. The autonomous emergency braking (AEB) system of the Honda can respond to vulnerable road users as well as to other vehicles. ‘Honda Sensing 360’, an optional safety pack featuring multi-radar and camera fusion, performs better than the standard single-radar system. In tests of its reaction to pedestrians, performance was adequate and was good when tested in cyclist scenarios. Similarly, the AEB system performed well in all tests of its response to motorcyclists and the lane support function also performed adequately in this regard.
- Good
- Adequate
- Marginal
- Weak
- Poor
| System Name | Traffic Sign Recognition System & Intelligent Speed Limiter |
| Speed Limit Information Function | Camera & Map, subsigns supported |
| Speed Control Function | Intelligent ACC (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 Attention Monitor |
| Type | Indirect monitoring |
| Operational From | 45 km/h |
| Fatigue | Drowsiness |
| System Name | Road Departure Mitigation System (RDM) |
| Type | LKA and ELK |
| Operational From | 65 km/h |
| Performance | |
| Emergency Lane Keeping | |
| Lane Keep Assist | |
| Human Machine Interface | |
| System Name | Collision Mitigation Braking System | |||
| Type | Autonomous emergency braking and forward collision warning | |||
| Operational From | 5 km/h | |||
| Sensor Used | camera and radar | |||
Overall, when fitted with the optional ‘Honda Sensing 360’pack, the autonomous emergency braking (AEB) system of the Honda CR-V performed well in tests of its reaction to other vehicles, including in the head-on test scenarios. In Euro NCAP’s tests, collisions were avoided in almost all scenarios. A seatbelt reminder system is fitted as standard to the front and rear seats but the driver status monitoring system did not score highly, detecting only driver fatigue, 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. ‘Honda Sensing 360’ adds blind spot monitoring to the functionality of the base system. The speed assistance system identifies the local speed limit, and the driver can choose to allow the limiter to be set automatically by the system.
- Specifications
- Safety Equipment
- Videos
- Rating Validity
Specifications
Tested Model Honda CR-V 2.0 Hybrid 'ADVANCE', LHD
Safety Pack Name Honda Sensing 360
Body Type - 5 door SUV
Year Of Publication 2024
Kerb Weight 1813kg
VIN From Which Rating Applies - all CR-Vs with Honda Sensing 360
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 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 SUV | 2.0 litre hybrid | ADVANCE * | 4 x 4 |  |
|
| 5 door SUV | 2.0 litre hybrid |
ELEGANCE / EXECUTIVE |
4 x 4 | |
|
| 5 door SUV | 2.0 litre hybrid |
ELEGANCE / EXECUTIVE |
4 x 2 | |
|
| 5 door SUV | 2.0 litre plug-in hybrid | ADVANCE TECH | 4 x 2 | |
|
* Tested variant
Find more information in the General Comments section of the assessment
Share
The passenger compartment of the CR-V remained stable in the frontal offset test. Dummy numbers showed good protection of the knees and femurs of both the driver and passenger. Honda showed that a similar level of protection would be provided to occupants of different sizes and to those sitting in different positions. Protection was good for all critical body areas of the passenger, and good or adequate for the driver. Analysis of the deceleration of the impact trolley during the test, and of the deformable barrier after the test, revealed that the CR-V would be a moderately benign impact partner in a frontal collision. In the full-width rigid barrier test, protection of all critical body areas was good for the driver, and good or adequate for the rear passenger. In both the side barrier test and the more severe side pole impact, dummy readings indicated good protection of all critical body areas and the CR-V scored maximum points in this part of the assessment. 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 adequate. The CR-V has a centre airbag mounted on the driver’s seat to mitigate against occupant to occupant injuries in such impacts. Dummy numbers were good in Euro NCAP's test, with equal protection to the front driver and passenger. However, a penalty was applied because analysis showed that the front seat occupants’ heads could sometimes get very close to contacting one another. 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 CR-V has an advanced eCall system which alerts the emergency services in the event of a crash. The car also has a system which applies the brakes after an impact, to avoid secondary collisions. Honda demonstrated that if the car entered water the doors, if locked, could be opened within two minutes of power being lost but not that electric windows would remain functional long enough to allow occupants to escape.