The Toyota GR86 has a standard driver’s side knee airbag mounted low on the dashboard. The knee airbag helps prevent the driver from sliding under the seatbelts or the main frontal airbag; this keeps the driver better positioned during a collision for maximum protection. A knee airbag also helps keep the legs from striking the dashboard, preventing knee and leg injuries in the case of a serious frontal collision. The Challenger doesn’t offer knee airbags.
The GR86 has a standard Pre-Collision Braking, which uses forward mounted sensors to warn the driver of a possible collision ahead. If the driver doesn’t react and the system determines a collision is imminent, it automatically applies the brakes at full-force in order to reduce the force of the crash or avoid it altogether. The Challenger offers an available collision warning system without the automated brake feature that would prevent or reduce the collision if the driver fails to react.
Over 200 people are killed each year when backed over by motor vehicles. The GR86 Auto has standard Reverse Automatic Braking that uses rear sensors to monitor for objects to the rear and automatically applies the brakes to prevent a collision. The Challenger doesn’t offer backup collision prevention brakes.
The GR86’s lane departure warning system alerts a temporarily inattentive driver when the vehicle begins to leave its lane. The Challenger doesn’t offer a lane departure warning system.
The GR86’s driver alert monitor detects an inattentive driver then sounds a warning and suggests a break. According to the NHTSA, drivers who fall asleep cause about 100,000 crashes and 1500 deaths a year. The Challenger doesn’t offer a driver alert monitor.
Both the GR86 and the Challenger have standard driver and passenger frontal airbags, front side-impact airbags, side-impact head airbags, front seatbelt pretensioners, four-wheel antilock brakes, traction control, electronic stability systems to prevent skidding, daytime running lights, rearview cameras, available blind spot warning systems, rear parking sensors and rear cross-path warning.
A significantly tougher test than their original offset frontal crash test, the Insurance Institute for Highway Safety does 40 MPH small overlap frontal offset crash tests. In this test, where only 25% of the total width of the vehicle is struck, results indicate that the Toyota GR86 is safer than the Challenger:
|
|
GR86 |
Challenger |
| Overall Evaluation |
GOOD |
MARGINAL |
| Restraints |
GOOD |
GOOD |
| Head Neck Evaluation |
GOOD |
GOOD |
| Peak Head Forces |
0 G’s |
0 G’s |
| Steering Column Movement Rearward |
0 cm |
8 cm |
| Chest Evaluation |
GOOD |
GOOD |
| Max Chest Compression |
25 cm |
26 cm |
| Hip & Thigh Evaluation |
GOOD |
GOOD |
| Hip & Thigh Injury Risk R/L |
0%/0% |
0%/0% |
| Lower Leg Evaluation |
GOOD |
POOR |
| Tibia index R/L |
.44/.47 |
1.46/1.01 |
| Tibia forces R/L |
3.8/1.6 kN |
4.8/2.4 kN |
The Insurance Institute for Highway Safety (IIHS) performs roof strength tests. In that test the GR86 earned the top rating of “Good” because its roof supported over four times the GR86’s weight before being crushed five inches. The Challenger was rated lower at “Acceptable.”
The Insurance Institute for Highway Safety rates the general design of front seat head restraints for their ability to protect front seat occupants from whiplash injuries. The IIHS also performs a dynamic test on those seats with “good” or “acceptable” geometry. In these ratings, the GR86 with leather seats is safer than the Challenger:
|
|
GR86 |
Challenger |
| Overall Evaluation |
GOOD |
ACCEPTABLE |
| Head Restraint Design |
GOOD |
GOOD |
| Distance from Back of Head |
24 mm |
61 mm |
| Dynamic Test Rating |
GOOD |
ACCEPTABLE |
| Seat Design |
Pass |
Fail |
| Neck Force Rating |
Low |
Low |
| Max Neck Shearing Force |
27 |
83 |
(Lower numerical results are better in all tests.)