The Toyota Camry has long been recognized for its reliability and practicality, and the 2016 Toyota Camry Le continues this tradition while also prioritizing safety. For prospective buyers, understanding crash test ratings is crucial when making informed decisions. This article delves into the safety performance of the 2016 Toyota Camry LE, drawing upon data from rigorous crash tests to provide a clear picture of its occupant protection capabilities.
The Insurance Institute for Highway Safety (IIHS) conducted small overlap frontal crash tests on Toyota Camry models, including those built after December 2013. While the specific vehicle tested was a 2014 model, the structural modifications implemented from late 2013 onwards, and the extended side curtain airbags introduced in 2015 models, mean these ratings are applicable to the 2016 Toyota Camry LE. These tests are designed to simulate a challenging real-world scenario: a frontal collision impacting a small portion of the vehicle’s front corner.
The results for the tested Toyota Camry are encouraging. The vehicle achieved a “Good” overall rating in the small overlap frontal crash test, the highest rating awarded by the IIHS. This indicates a strong level of protection for occupants in this type of severe collision.
| Evaluation criteria | Rating |
|---|---|
| Small overlap frontal crash test | G |
| Structure and safety cage | A |
| Driver injury measures | |
| Head/neck | G |
| Chest | G |
| Hip/thigh | G |
| Lower leg/foot | G |
| Driver restraints and dummy kinematics | G |
Specifically, in terms of driver injury measures, the 2016 Toyota Camry LE demonstrated “Good” protection for all critical body regions: head/neck, chest, hip/thigh, and lower leg/foot. This is a testament to the effectiveness of the vehicle’s safety cage, restraint systems, and airbag deployment in mitigating potential injuries. The “Good” rating for driver restraints and dummy kinematics further confirms that the seatbelt and airbag systems worked effectively together to control the dummy’s movement during the crash, minimizing injury risk.
Measurements taken after the crash test provide further detailed insights into the vehicle’s structural performance. While the structure and safety cage received an “Acceptable” rating, indicating some room for improvement, the intrusion into the driver’s space was “reasonably well controlled”. This means that despite structural deformation, the area surrounding the driver remained largely intact, maintaining a crucial survival space.
The technical measurements reinforce this observation. Lower occupant compartment intrusion measurements for the lower hinge pillar, footrest, toepan, brake pedal, and parking brake, while present, were within a range indicating manageable deformation. Similarly, upper occupant compartment intrusion measurements for the steering column, upper hinge pillar, upper dash, and lower instrument panel were also recorded, providing a comprehensive view of the structural response during the crash.
Technical measurements for this test
Measures of occupant compartment intrusion on driver side
| Evaluation criteria | Measurement |
|---|---|
| Test ID | CEN1349 |
| Lower occupant compartment | |
| Lower hinge pillar max (cm) | 16 |
| Footrest (cm) | 8 |
| Left toepan (cm) | 5 |
| Brake pedal (cm) | 6 |
| Parking brake (cm) | 17 |
| Rocker panel lateral average (cm) | 2 |
| Upper occupant compartment | |
| Steering column | 2 |
| Upper hinge pillar max (cm) | 8 |
| Upper dash (cm) | 10 |
| Lower instrument panel (cm) | 9 |
Driver injury measures
| Evaluation criteria | Measurement |
|---|---|
| Test ID | CEN1349 |
| Head | |
| HIC-15 | 126 |
| Peak gs at hard contact | no contact |
| Neck | |
| Tension (kN) | 1.4 |
| Extension bending moment (Nm) | 22 |
| Maximum Nij | 0.30 |
| Chest maximum compression (mm) | 20 |
| Femur (kN) | |
| Left | 1.5 |
| Right | 1.0 |
| Knee displacement (mm) | |
| Left | 3 |
| Right | 1 |
| Knee-thigh-hip injury risk (%) | |
| Left | 0 |
| Right | 0 |
| Maximum tibia index | |
| Left | 0.80 |
| Right | 0.40 |
| Tibia axial force (kN) | |
| Left | 3.6 |
| Right | 2.1 |
| Foot acceleration (g) | |
| Left | 52 |
| Right | 35 |
In conclusion, the 2016 Toyota Camry LE demonstrates a strong safety profile, particularly in small overlap frontal crashes. The “Good” overall rating and consistently “Good” driver injury measures provide reassurance for drivers and passengers. While the structural rating is “Acceptable,” the controlled intrusion and maintained occupant survival space highlight the vehicle’s ability to protect occupants in a challenging collision scenario. For those prioritizing safety in their vehicle choice, the 2016 Toyota Camry LE stands as a reliable and well-performing option.
