In the past twenty years hundreds of infants and young children have died after being left in vehicles, usually by accident. When turning the vehicle off, drivers of the CX-30 are reminded to check the back seat if they opened the rear door before starting out. The Rav4 doesn’t offer a back seat reminder.
The Mazda CX-30 has standard driver and front passenger side knee airbags mounted low on the dashboard. These airbags helps prevent the driver and front passenger from sliding under their seatbelts or the main frontal airbags; this keeps them better positioned during a collision for maximum protection. Knee airbags also help keep the legs from striking the dashboard, preventing knee and leg injuries in the case of a serious frontal collision. The Rav4 doesn’t offer a front passenger side knee airbag.
The CX-30 has standard Whiplash-Reducing Headrests, which use a specially designed headrest to protect the driver and front passenger from whiplash. During a rear-end collision, the Whiplash-Reducing Headrests system moves the headrests forward to prevent neck and spine injuries. The Rav4 doesn’t offer a whiplash protection system.
To provide maximum traction and stability on all roads, All-Wheel Drive is standard on the CX-30. But it costs extra on the Rav4.
The CX-30 has a standard blind spot warning system that uses sensors to alert the driver to objects in the vehicle’s blind spots where the side view mirrors don’t reveal them. A system to reveal vehicles in the Rav4’s blind spot costs extra.
To help make backing out of a parking space safer, the CX-30 has standard Rear Cross Traffic Alert and Smart Braking Support - Rear Crossing on the Turbo Premium Plus automatically engages the brakes to help avoid a collision. Toyota charges extra for Rear Cross Traffic Alert on the Rav4.
Both the CX-30 and the Rav4 have standard driver and passenger frontal airbags, front side-impact airbags, driver knee airbags, side-impact head airbags, front and rear seatbelt pretensioners, height adjustable front shoulder belts, four-wheel antilock brakes, traction control, electronic stability systems to prevent skidding, crash mitigating brakes, daytime running lights, lane departure warning systems, rearview cameras, driver alert monitors and available around view monitors.
The National Highway Traffic Safety Administration does 35 MPH front crash tests on new vehicles. In this test, results indicate that the Mazda CX-30 is safer than the Toyota Rav4:
|
CX-30 |
Rav4 |
OVERALL STARS |
5 Stars |
4 Stars |
|
Driver |
|
STARS |
5 Stars |
4 Stars |
HIC |
148 |
152 |
Neck Injury Risk |
26.7% |
29.3% |
Neck Stress |
216 lbs. |
306 lbs. |
Neck Compression |
18 lbs. |
56 lbs. |
Leg Forces (l/r) |
201/172 lbs. |
400/388 lbs. |
|
Passenger |
|
STARS |
5 Stars |
5 Stars |
HIC |
179 |
284 |
Neck Injury Risk |
33.5% |
37.4% |
Neck Stress |
172 lbs. |
258 lbs. |
Neck Compression |
85 lbs. |
95 lbs. |
New test not comparable to pre-2011 test results. More stars = Better. Lower test results = Better.
The National Highway Traffic Safety Administration does side impact tests on new vehicles. In this test, which crashes the vehicle into a flat barrier at 38.5 MPH and into a post at 20 MPH, results indicate that the Mazda CX-30 is safer than the Toyota Rav4:
|
CX-30 |
Rav4 |
|
Front Seat |
|
STARS |
5 Stars |
5 Stars |
HIC |
73 |
83 |
|
Into Pole |
|
STARS |
5 Stars |
5 Stars |
Max Damage Depth |
12 inches |
14 inches |
HIC |
178 |
299 |
Spine Acceleration |
30 G’s |
36 G’s |
Hip Force |
583 lbs. |
835 lbs. |
New test not comparable to pre-2011 test results. More stars = Better. Lower test results = Better.
Side impacts caused 23% of all road fatalities in 2018, down from 29% in 2003, when the Insurance Institute for Highway Safety introduced its side barrier test. In order to continue improving vehicle safety, the IIHS has started using a more severe side impact test: 37 MPH (up from 31 MPH), with a 4180-pound barrier (up from 3300 pounds). The results of this newly developed test demonstrates that the Mazda CX-30 is safer than the Rav4:
|
CX-30 |
Rav4 |
Overall Evaluation |
GOOD |
ACCEPTABLE |
Structure |
GOOD |
GOOD |
|
Driver Injury Measures |
|
Head/Neck |
GOOD |
GOOD |
Head Injury Criterion |
89 |
120 |
Neck Compression |
45 lbs. |
67 lbs. |
Pelvis |
GOOD |
ACCEPTABLE |
Pelvis Force |
759 lbs. |
1093 lbs. |
Head Protection |
GOOD |
GOOD |
|
Passenger Injury Measures |
|
Head/Neck |
GOOD |
GOOD |
Head Injury Criterion |
144 |
542 |
Head Peak Forces |
no contact |
104 G’s |
Neck Tension |
89 lbs. |
312 lbs. |
Neck Compression |
67 lbs. |
223 lbs. |
Torso |
GOOD |
GOOD |
Shoulder Force |
245 lbs. |
290 lbs. |
Torso Max Deflection |
.71 in |
.83 in |
Pelvis |
GOOD |
GOOD |
Pelvis Force |
379 lbs. |
692 lbs. |
Head Protection |
GOOD |
MARGINAL |