The 2019 Ford Escape, a popular compact SUV, offers a blend of versatility and practicality for families and individuals alike. Understanding its safety performance is crucial for making informed decisions. This article delves into the comprehensive safety ratings of the 2019 Ford Escape, providing an in-depth analysis based on rigorous crash tests conducted by the Insurance Institute for Highway Safety (IIHS).
Small Overlap Front Crash Test: Driver-Side
The small overlap front crash test simulates a collision where only a small portion of the vehicle’s front end impacts another vehicle or a narrow object like a tree or pole. This is a particularly challenging test because it bypasses the main energy-absorbing structures of the vehicle.
Driver-Side Performance: Good Rating
The 2019 Ford Escape demonstrated a Good rating in the driver-side small overlap front crash test, showcasing robust structural integrity and effective occupant protection. This rating applies to models manufactured from 2017 to 2019, as Ford implemented structural improvements starting in 2017 to enhance performance in this demanding test.
| Evaluation Criteria | Rating |
|---|---|
| Overall Evaluation | Good |
| Structure and Safety Cage | Acceptable |
| Driver Injury Measures | |
| Head/Neck | Good |
| Chest | Good |
| Hip/Thigh | Good |
| Lower Leg/Foot | Good |
| Driver Restraints and Dummy Kinematics | Acceptable |
Structure and Safety Cage: The structure and safety cage of the 2019 Ford Escape held up reasonably well in the driver-side small overlap test, earning an Acceptable rating. This indicates that the vehicle maintained a sufficient survival space for the driver.
Driver Injury Measures: Crucially, injury measures for the driver were all rated as Good across all body regions – head/neck, chest, hip/thigh, and lower leg/foot. This signifies a low risk of significant injuries to the driver in a real-world crash of similar severity.
Driver Restraints and Dummy Kinematics: The restraints and kinematics were rated Acceptable. The test results indicated that while the dummy’s head contacted the frontal airbag, it slid off the left side due to excessive forward movement allowed by the seatbelt. However, the side curtain airbag deployed effectively, providing substantial forward coverage to protect the head from hitting side structures or external objects. The side torso airbag also deployed as intended.
Action shot from the 2019 Ford Escape driver-side small overlap frontal crash test, highlighting structural performance.
Dummy positioning after the driver-side small overlap crash test in the 2019 Ford Escape, demonstrating adequate occupant space maintenance.
Airbag deployment and head movement in the 2019 Ford Escape driver-side small overlap crash, showing airbag contact and slight head slide-off.
Driver-side footwell intrusion in the 2019 Ford Escape small overlap test, indicating controlled intrusion and low leg/foot injury risk.
Technical Measurements – Driver-Side Small Overlap Frontal Crash Test
| Measurement Category | Metric | Measurement (cm) |
|---|---|---|
| Lower Occupant Compartment Intrusion | ||
| Lower Hinge Pillar Max | Maximum Intrusion | 8 |
| Footrest | Intrusion | 4 |
| Left Toepan | Intrusion | 3 |
| Brake Pedal | Intrusion | 3 |
| Rocker Panel Lateral Average | Average Lateral Intrusion | 1 |
| Upper Occupant Compartment Intrusion | ||
| Steering Column | Intrusion | 2 |
| Upper Hinge Pillar Max | Maximum Intrusion | 12 |
| Upper Dash | Intrusion | 9 |
| Lower Instrument Panel | Intrusion | 5 |
| Driver Injury Measures | Metric | Measurement |
|---|---|---|
| Head | HIC-15 | 113 |
| Peak gs at Hard Contact | No Contact | |
| Neck | Tension (kN) | 0.8 |
| Extension Bending Moment (Nm) | 14 | |
| Maximum Nij | 0.17 | |
| Chest | Maximum Compression (mm) | 26 |
| Femur | Left (kN) | 0.5 |
| Right (kN) | 1.1 | |
| Knee Displacement | Left (mm) | 3 |
| Right (mm) | 1 | |
| Knee-Thigh-Hip Injury Risk | Left (%) | 0 |
| Right (%) | 0 | |
| Maximum Tibia Index | Left | 0.47 |
| Right | 0.43 | |
| Tibia Axial Force | Left (kN) | 1.7 |
| Right (kN) | 2.2 | |
| Foot Acceleration | Left (g) | 51 |
| Right (g) | 49 |
Small Overlap Front Crash Test: Passenger-Side
While the driver-side small overlap performance is commendable, the passenger-side results for the 2019 Ford Escape reveal a significant difference. It’s crucial to note that while Ford enhanced the driver-side structure starting in 2017, similar improvements were not implemented on the passenger side.
Passenger-Side Performance: Poor Rating
The 2019 Ford Escape received a Poor rating in the passenger-side small overlap front crash test. This is a concerning result, indicating a considerably higher risk of injury for the front-seat passenger in this type of collision compared to the driver. This rating applies to 2013-2019 models, highlighting a consistent structural weakness on the passenger side during this period.
| Evaluation Criteria | Rating |
|---|---|
| Overall Evaluation | Poor |
| Structure and Safety Cage | Poor |
| Passenger Injury Measures | |
| Head/Neck | Good |
| Chest | Good |
| Hip/Thigh | Poor |
| Lower Leg/Foot | Good |
| Passenger Restraints and Dummy Kinematics | Marginal |
| Driver Injury Measures | |
| Head/Neck | Good |
| Chest | Good |
| Hip/Thigh | Good |
| Lower Leg/Foot | Good |
| Driver Restraints and Dummy Kinematics | Good |
Structure and Safety Cage: The structure and safety cage performance on the passenger side was rated Poor. Significant intrusion into the passenger compartment was observed, compromising the survival space for the passenger.
Passenger Injury Measures: While head/neck, chest, and lower leg/foot injury risks were rated Good, the hip/thigh injury measure was Poor. This poor rating is directly linked to the extensive structural intrusion, indicating a high likelihood of hip and thigh injuries for the passenger.
Passenger Restraints and Dummy Kinematics: The passenger restraints and kinematics were rated Marginal. The dummy’s head contacted the frontal airbag but then rotated around the right side. Critically, the side curtain airbag did not deploy on the passenger side, leaving the passenger’s head vulnerable to impact with side structures and outside objects. This non-deployment is unusual for vehicles of this model year and later and further contributes to the Marginal rating.
Action shot from the 2019 Ford Escape passenger-side small overlap frontal crash test, illustrating substantial structural deformation.
Dummy positioning after the passenger-side small overlap crash test in the 2019 Ford Escape, highlighting inadequate passenger space maintenance.
Airbag failure in the 2019 Ford Escape passenger-side small overlap crash, showing non-deployment of the side curtain airbag and head rotation.
Passenger-side footwell and dashboard intrusion in the 2019 Ford Escape small overlap test, showing extensive deformation and hip injury risk.
Technical Measurements – Passenger-Side Small Overlap Frontal Crash Test
| Measurement Category | Metric | Measurement (cm) |
|---|---|---|
| Lower Occupant Compartment Intrusion | ||
| Lower Hinge Pillar Max | Maximum Intrusion | 22 |
| Footrest | Intrusion | 14 |
| Right Toepan | Intrusion | 12 |
| Center Toepan | Intrusion | 10 |
| Rocker Panel Lateral Average | Average Lateral Intrusion | 10 |
| Upper Occupant Compartment Intrusion | ||
| Center Dash | Intrusion | 16 |
| Upper Hinge Pillar Max | Maximum Intrusion | 27 |
| Upper Dash | Intrusion | 19 |
| Right Lower Dash | Intrusion | 16 |
| Passenger Injury Measures | Metric | Measurement |
|---|---|---|
| Head | HIC-15 | 75 |
| Peak gs at Hard Contact | No Contact | |
| Neck | Tension (kN) | 1.0 |
| Extension Bending Moment (Nm) | 9 | |
| Maximum Nij | 0.20 | |
| Chest | Maximum Compression (mm) | 20 |
| Femur | Left (kN) | 3.4 |
| Right (kN) | 16.1 | |
| Knee Displacement | Left (mm) | 1 |
| Right (mm) | 12 | |
| Knee-Thigh-Hip Injury Risk | Left (%) | 1 |
| Right (%) | 100 | |
| Maximum Tibia Index | Left | 0.38 |
| Right | 0.77 | |
| Tibia Axial Force | Left (kN) | 1.3 |
| Right (kN) | 1.9 | |
| Foot Acceleration | Left (g) | 42 |
| Right (g) | 41 |
Moderate Overlap Front Crash Test: Original Test
The moderate overlap front crash test involves a larger portion of the vehicle’s front end impacting a deformable barrier. This test is more traditional and represents a significant portion of real-world frontal collisions.
Moderate Overlap Performance: Good Rating
The 2019 Ford Escape earned a Good rating in the moderate overlap front crash test. This indicates that the vehicle provides strong protection in more common frontal collisions. The rating is based on tests conducted on a 2013 model, and applies to 2013-2019 models as the fundamental structure remained consistent in this area.
| Evaluation Criteria | Rating |
|---|---|
| Overall Evaluation | Good |
| Structure and Safety Cage | Good |
| Driver Injury Measures | |
| Head/Neck | Good |
| Chest | Good |
| Leg/Foot, Left | Good |
| Leg/Foot, Right | Good |
| Driver Restraints and Dummy Kinematics | Good |
Structure and Safety Cage: The structure and safety cage were rated Good, signifying that the vehicle effectively maintained its structural integrity during the moderate overlap impact.
Driver Injury Measures: All driver injury measures were rated Good, across head/neck, chest, and legs/feet (left and right). This indicates a low risk of significant injuries for the driver in a moderate overlap frontal crash.
Driver Restraints and Dummy Kinematics: Driver restraints and dummy kinematics also received a Good rating, indicating proper functioning of the airbags and seatbelts in controlling occupant movement and reducing injury risk.
Action shot from the 2019 Ford Escape moderate overlap frontal crash test, showing effective energy absorption.
Dummy positioning after the moderate overlap crash test in the 2019 Ford Escape, showing well-maintained driver survival space.
Side curtain airbag deployment in the 2019 Ford Escape moderate overlap crash, highlighting head protection during rebound.
Driver-side footwell intrusion in the 2019 Ford Escape moderate overlap test, indicating minimal intrusion and low leg/foot injury risk.
Technical Measurements – Moderate Overlap Frontal Crash Test
| Measurement Category | Metric | Measurement (cm) – Test 1 | Measurement (cm) – Test 2 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Footwell Intrusion | |||
| Footrest | Intrusion | 6 | 8 |
| Left | Intrusion | 8 | 12 |
| Center | Intrusion | 8 | 10 |
| Right | Intrusion | 8 | 7 |
| Brake Pedal | Intrusion | 3 | 2 |
| Instrument Panel Rearward Movement | |||
| Left | Rearward Movement | 1 | 1 |
| Right | Rearward Movement | 1 | 1 |
| Steering Column Movement | |||
| Upward | Upward Movement | 1 | 3 |
| Rearward | Rearward Movement | 1 | -1 |
| A-Pillar Rearward Movement | Rearward Movement | 1 | 1 |
| Driver Injury Measures | Metric | Measurement – Test 1 | Measurement – Test 2 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Head | HIC-15 | 223 | 212 |
| Peak gs at Hard Contact | No Contact | No Contact | |
| Neck | Tension (kN) | 1.1 | 1.1 |
| Extension Bending Moment (Nm) | 12 | 23 | |
| Maximum Nij | 0.22 | 0.23 | |
| Chest | Maximum Compression (mm) | 24 | 26 |
| Legs | Femur Force – Left (kN) | 0.6 | 0.4 |
| Femur Force – Right (kN) | 0.6 | 0.5 | |
| Knee Displacement – Left (mm) | 1 | 0 | |
| Knee Displacement – Right (mm) | 1 | 0 | |
| Maximum Tibia Index – Left | 0.27 | 0.26 | |
| Maximum Tibia Index – Right | 0.35 | 0.36 | |
| Tibia Axial Force – Left (kN) | 1.7 | 1.6 | |
| Tibia Axial Force – Right (kN) | 2.0 | 2.2 | |
| Foot Acceleration | Left (g) | 38 | 61 |
| Right (g) | 85 | 85 |
Side Impact Crash Test: Original Test
The side impact test evaluates the vehicle’s ability to protect occupants in a side collision, a scenario that can be particularly dangerous due to the reduced crush zone compared to frontal impacts.
Side Impact Performance: Good Rating
The 2019 Ford Escape achieved a Good rating in the side impact crash test. This reflects effective protection for both the driver and rear passenger in a side collision scenario. The rating applies to 2013-2019 models, and the test was conducted on a 2013 Ford Escape equipped with standard side airbags.
| Evaluation Criteria | Rating |
|---|---|
| Overall Evaluation | Good |
| Structure and Safety Cage | Good |
| Driver Injury Measures | |
| Head/Neck | Good |
| Torso | Good |
| Pelvis/Leg | Good |
| Driver Head Protection | Good |
| Rear Passenger Injury Measures | |
| Head/Neck | Good |
| Torso | Good |
| Pelvis/Leg | Good |
| Rear Passenger Head Protection | Good |
Structure and Safety Cage: The structure and safety cage received a Good rating, indicating that the vehicle’s side structure effectively resisted intrusion and maintained occupant space.
Driver and Rear Passenger Injury Measures: All injury measures for both the driver and rear passenger – head/neck, torso, and pelvis/leg – were rated Good. This signifies a low risk of significant injuries for occupants in side impact collisions.
Driver and Rear Passenger Head Protection: Both driver and rear passenger head protection were rated Good, confirming the effectiveness of the side curtain airbags in preventing head injuries in side impacts.
Technical Measurements – Side Impact Crash Test
| Measurement Category | Metric | Measurement |
|---|---|---|
| Occupant Compartment Intrusion | ||
| B-Pillar to Driver’s Seat Centerline | Intrusion (cm) | -19.5 |
| Driver Injury Measures | Metric | Measurement |
|---|---|---|
| Head | HIC-15 | 160 |
| Neck | Tension (kN) | 0.8 |
| Compression (kN) | 0.3 | |
| Shoulder | Lateral Deflection (mm) | 41 |
| Lateral Force (kN) | 1.8 | |
| Torso | Maximum Deflection (mm) | 27 |
| Average Deflection (mm) | 21 | |
| Maximum Deflection Rate (m/s) | 2.70 | |
| Maximum Viscous Criterion (m/s) | 0.29 | |
| Pelvis | Iliac Force (kN) | 1.6 |
| Acetabulum Force (kN) | 1.5 | |
| Combined Force (kN) | 3.0 | |
| Left Femur | L-M Force (kN) | 0.5 |
| L-M Moment (Nm) | 47 | |
| A-P Moment (Nm) | -25 |
| Rear Passenger Injury Measures | Metric | Measurement |
|---|---|---|
| Head | HIC-15 | 118 |
| Neck | Tension (kN) | 0.2 |
| Compression (kN) | 0.3 | |
| Shoulder | Lateral Deflection (mm) | 37 |
| Lateral Force (kN) | 2.0 | |
| Torso | Maximum Deflection (mm) | 32 |
| Average Deflection (mm) | 19 | |
| Maximum Deflection Rate (m/s) | 3.00 | |
| Maximum Viscous Criterion (m/s) | 0.41 | |
| Pelvis | Iliac Force (kN) | 0.5 |
| Acetabulum Force (kN) | 2.5 | |
| Combined Force (kN) | 2.6 | |
| Left Femur | L-M Force (kN) | 0.3 |
| L-M Moment (Nm) | 50 | |
| A-P Moment (Nm) | 18 |
Roof Strength Test
The roof strength test assesses the roof’s ability to withstand forces in a rollover accident. A strong roof is crucial for maintaining survival space and preventing roof crush injuries.
Roof Strength Performance: Good Rating
The 2019 Ford Escape earned a Good rating for roof strength. This indicates that the roof structure is robust and provides significant protection in rollover scenarios. The rating applies to 2013-2019 models.
| Evaluation Criteria | Rating |
|---|---|
| Overall Evaluation | Good |
| Curb Weight | 3,612 lbs |
| Peak Force | 18,167 lbs |
| Strength-to-Weight Ratio | 5.03 |
Strength-to-Weight Ratio: The Ford Escape achieved a strength-to-weight ratio of 5.03. This means the roof could withstand a force of 5.03 times the vehicle’s weight before significant crush, demonstrating excellent roof strength.
Head Restraints & Seats
Whiplash is a common injury in rear-end collisions. The head restraints and seats evaluation assesses how well the vehicle protects against whiplash in such crashes.
Head Restraints & Seats: Good Rating
The 2019 Ford Escape received a Good rating for head restraints and seats. This signifies effective design in minimizing whiplash risk in rear-end impacts.
| Evaluation Criteria | Rating |
|---|---|
| Overall Evaluation | Good |
| Dynamic Rating | Good |
| Seat/Head Restraint Geometry | Good |
Dynamic and Geometric Evaluation: Both dynamic testing and geometric measurements of the seat and head restraint contributed to the Good overall rating, indicating a well-designed system for whiplash protection.
Technical Measurements – Head Restraints & Seats
| Measurement Category | Metric | Measurement |
|---|---|---|
| Geometry | ||
| Backset (mm) | Backset | 7 |
| Distance Below Top of Head (mm) | Distance | 5 |
Headlights
Headlight performance is critical for nighttime driving safety. IIHS evaluates headlights based on visibility and glare. The 2019 Ford Escape has multiple headlight options, and their ratings vary significantly.
Headlight Ratings: Ranging from Poor to Acceptable
The 2019 Ford Escape headlight ratings vary depending on the trim level and headlight type. Ratings range from Poor to Acceptable, with no headlight option achieving a Good rating.
Best Available Headlights: Acceptable
The best-performing headlights on the 2019 Ford Escape are found on the Titanium trim equipped with the Ford Safe and Smart package, which feature HID projector low and high beams and high-beam assist. These headlights achieve an Acceptable rating.
| Trim Level(s) | Rating | Low-Beam Type | High-Beam Type | Curve-Adaptive? | High-Beam Assist? |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Titanium trim equipped with Ford Safe and Smart package | Acceptable | HID projector | HID projector | No | Yes |
| Titanium trim | Acceptable | HID projector | HID projector | No | No |
| SEL trim equipped with Ford Safe and Smart package | Marginal | Halogen projector | Halogen reflector | No | Yes |
| SEL trim | Marginal | Halogen projector | Halogen reflector | No | No |
| SE trim equipped with Ford Safe and Smart package | Poor | Halogen reflector | Halogen reflector | No | Yes |
| S trim, SE trim | Poor | Halogen reflector | Halogen reflector | No | No |
Key Headlight Performance Observations:
- HID Projector Headlights (Titanium trims): Rated Acceptable. Provide fair to good visibility on straightaways and curves, with high-beam assist improving performance. Glare is not an issue.
- Halogen Projector Headlights (SEL trims): Rated Marginal. Offer fair visibility on straightaways but inadequate visibility on curves. High-beam assist offers some improvement. Glare is not an issue.
- Halogen Reflector Headlights (SE, S trims): Rated Poor. Provide fair to good visibility on straightaways but inadequate visibility on curves. High-beam assist offers some improvement, but these headlights produce some glare.
Front Crash Prevention: Vehicle-to-Vehicle
Front crash prevention systems can significantly reduce the likelihood of frontal collisions. IIHS tests vehicle-to-vehicle front crash prevention systems at different speeds.
Front Crash Prevention: Basic Rating
The 2019 Ford Escape’s optional front crash prevention system is rated Basic. This system meets the requirements for forward collision warning, but automatic emergency braking is not available.
| System Details | Rating |
|---|---|
| Optional Forward Collision Warning and Brake Support | Basic |
| Autobrake Availability | No |
Forward Collision Warning: The system provides a forward collision warning, alerting the driver to potential frontal collisions. However, the lack of autobrake functionality limits its effectiveness in automatically mitigating or preventing crashes.
Child Seat Anchors (LATCH)
Child seat anchors (LATCH) ease the installation of child safety seats. IIHS evaluates the ease of use of LATCH systems.
Child Seat Anchors (LATCH): Marginal Rating
The 2019 Ford Escape’s LATCH system received a Marginal rating for ease of use.
| Evaluation Criteria | Rating |
|---|---|
| Overall Evaluation | Marginal |
LATCH System Usability Issues:
- Lower Anchors: Lower anchors are positioned too deep in the seat and are difficult to maneuver around in some seating positions.
- Tether Anchors: Some tether anchors are easy to find, while others have hardware that could be confused for the anchor.
LATCH Details by Seating Position:
- Positions 1 & 3: Marginal rating due to lower anchors being too deep and difficult to maneuver around. Tether anchor location is easy to find but has confusing hardware nearby.
- Position 2: Not rated as it relies on borrowed lower anchors. Tether anchor is easy to find and has no confusing hardware.
Conclusion: 2019 Ford Escape Safety Analysis
The 2019 Ford Escape demonstrates a mixed safety performance. It excels in moderate overlap front, side, and roof strength tests, providing Good protection in these common crash scenarios. Head restraints and seats also earn a Good rating for whiplash protection. However, the Poor rating in the passenger-side small overlap front crash test is a significant concern, indicating a potential vulnerability for front-seat passengers in this demanding crash scenario. Headlight ratings range from Poor to Acceptable, and the LATCH system is rated Marginal for ease of use. The vehicle offers a Basic rated front crash prevention system with forward collision warning but lacks automatic emergency braking.
For prospective buyers of a 2019 Ford Escape, it’s crucial to weigh these safety ratings carefully. While the vehicle offers strong protection in many areas, the passenger-side small overlap performance is a notable weakness. Prioritizing trim levels with Acceptable-rated headlights and understanding the limitations of the Basic front crash prevention system are also important considerations for maximizing safety.
