- 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
![]()
92% -
See More
![]()
86% -
See More
![]()
82% -
See More
![]()
73%
- Good
- Adequate
- Marginal
- Weak
- Poor
Passenger
Driver
Rear Passenger
Driver
Car
Pole
Rear Seat
Front Seat
-
Approaching a stationary car: Left Offset
-
Approaching a stationary car: No Offset
-
Approaching a stationary car: Right Offset
- 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 CRS
-
ISOFIX CRS
-
Universal Belted CRS
![]()
Easy![]()
Difficult![]()
Safety critical![]()
Not allowed
Difficult| Seat Position | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Front | 2nd row | |||
| Passenger | Left | center | Right | |
| Maxi Cosi 2way Pearl & 2wayFix (rearward) (iSize) |  |
|
|
|
| Maxi Cosi 2way Pearl & 2wayFix (forward) (iSize) | |
|
|
|
| BeSafe iZi Kid X2 i-Size (iSize) | |
|
|
|
| BeSafe iZi Flex FIT i-Size (iSize) | |
|
|
|
| Maxi Cosi Cabriofix & FamilyFix (ISOFIX) | |
|
|
|
| BeSafe iZi Kid X4 ISOfix (ISOFIX) | |
|
|
|
| Britax Römer Duo Plus (ISOFIX) | |
|
|
|
| Britax Römer KidFix XP (ISOFIX) | |
|
|
|
| Maxi Cosi Cabriofix (Belt) | |
|
|
|
| Maxi Cosi Cabriofix & EasyBase2 (Belt) | |
|
 |
|
| Britax Römer King II LS (Belt) | |
|
|
|
| Britax Römer KidFix XP (Belt) | |
|
|
|
![]()
Easy![]()
Difficult![]()
Safety critical![]()
Not allowed
In both the frontal and side barrier tests, protection of all critical body areas was good for both dummies with the exception of the head of the 10 year dummy, protection of which was rated as adequate. 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. One universal child restraint could not be properly installed in the rear centre seat owing to the centre tunnel preventing correct placement of the support leg of the base. Otherwise, all restraints types for the which the Kuga is designed could be properly installed and accommodated.
- Good
- Adequate
- Marginal
- Weak
- Poor
Head Impact 17.7 Pts
Pelvis Impact 5.2 Pts
Leg Impact 5.8 Pts
| System Name | Pre-Collision Assist with AEB | ||
| Type | Auto-Brake with Forward Collision Warning | ||
| Operational From | 10 km/h | ||
| PERFORMANCE | | |||
- Day time
- Night time
Day time
-
Adult crossing the road
-
Child running from behind parked vehicles
-
Adult along the roadside
Night time
-
Adult crossing the road
-
Adult along the roadside
-
Approaching a crossing cyclist
-
Cyclist along the roadside
The bonnet provided predominantly good or adequate protection to the head of a struck pedestrian, with some poor results recorded on the stiff windscreen pillars. The bumper provided generally good protection to pedestrians' legs and protection of the pelvis was also mostly good. The Kuga's AEB system can detect vulnerable road users like pedestrians and cyclists, as well as other vehicles. In tests, the system's response to both was good, with collisions avoided or mitigated in most cases.
- Good
- Adequate
- Marginal
- Weak
- Poor
| System Name | Adjustable Speed Limiting Device |
| Speed Control Function | Manually set (accurate to 5km/h) |
| Applies To | All Seats | ||
| Warning | Driver Seat | Front Passenger(s) | Rear Passenger(s) |
| Visual | |
|
|
| Audible | |
|
|
| Occupant Detection | |
|
|
|
|||
| System Name | Lane Keeping System |
| Type | ELK + LKA (including LDW) |
| Operational From | 30 km/h |
| Performance | |
| Emergency Lane Keeping | |
| Lane Keep Assist | |
| Human Machine Interface | |
| System Name | Pre-Collision Assist with AEB | |||
| Type | Autonomous Emergency Braking and Forward Collision Warning | |||
| Operational From | 5 km/h | |||
- Autobrake function only
- Driver reacts to warning
Autobrake function only
-
Approaching a slower moving car
-
Approaching a slower moving car
-
Approaching a slower moving car
-
Approaching a braking car
Driver reacts to warning
-
Approaching a stationary car
-
Approaching a stationary car
-
Approaching a stationary car
-
Approaching a slower moving car
-
Approaching a slower moving car
-
Approaching a slower moving car
-
Approaching a braking car
The Kuga has a seatbelt reminder system for the front and rear seats. The AEB system performed adequately in tests of its response to other vehicles at highway speeds. A lane support system helps prevent inadvertent drifting out of lane and also intervenes in some more critical situations. A driver-set speed limiter helps the driver to avoid over-speeding.
- Specifications
- Safety Equipment
- Videos
- Rating Validity
Specifications
Tested Model Ford Kuga 2.0 diesel 4x4 automatic, LHD
Body Type - 5 door SUV
Year Of Publication 2019
Kerb Weight 1769kg
VIN From Which Rating Applies - all Kugas
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 | Drivetrain | Rating Applies | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| LHD | RHD | |||
| 5 door SUV | 2.0 diesel | 4 x 2 |  |
|
| 5 door SUV | 2.0 diesel* | 4 x 4 | |
|
| 5 door SUV | 1.5 diesel | 4 x 2 | |
|
| 5 door SUV | 1.5 petrol | 4 x 2 | |
|
| 5 door SUV | 1.5 petrol | 4 x 4 | |
|
| 5 door SUV | 2.5 petrol PHEV | 4 x 4 | |
|
| 5 door SUV | 2.5 petrol FHEV | 4 x 4 | |
|
* Tested variant
Find more information in the General Comments section of the assessment
Share
The passenger compartment of the Kuga remained stable in the frontal offset test. Dummy readings indicated good protection of the knees and femurs of the driver and passenger. Ford showed that a similar level of protection would be provided to occupants of different sizes and to those sitting in different positions. Protection of the driver's chest and lower leg was rated as marginal. In the full-width rigid barrier test, protection the driver's chest was again marginal but that of all other critical body areas was good or adequate for both the driver and rear passenger. In both the side barrier and the more severe side pole tests, protection of all critical body areas was good and the car scored full points in both of these tests. Tests on the front seats and head restraints demonstrated good protection against whiplash injuries in the event of a rear-end collision. A geometric assessment of the rear seats also indicated good whiplash protection. The standard-fit autonomous emergency braking (AEB) system performed well in tests of its functionality at the low speeds at which many whiplash injuries occur.