Not a fan of the NHTSA tests myself, so I don't give them much of a thought. I prefer the IIHS (Insurance Institute for Highway Safety). They usually test at higher speeds and are a little more brutal and thorough with their tests, but that's just my opinion. With that being said, the 2011 Forester got their highest score for side impact protection in all categories except for the pelvis for the front passengers which received an acceptable. Either way, it did very good for the severity of the impact.

Since the 2009-2011's all have the same structure and airbag system, here are the videos for the side impact testing....

But for comparison reasons, here is the video from the NHTSA as well. The NHTSA does their side impact as an "offset" for some reason, which doesn't excerpt the full force of the impact on the vehicle being hit.

 

2011 testing might be a little different because on video Forester almost tips over.
It doesn't look too great on 2011 testing.

2011 Forester

2011 CR-V

2011 Highlander

 

2011 Forester side crash rating from NHTSA

Found out why there is a difference in the rating. From the information I received, I have more faith in the Insurance institutes ratings. I hope this helps, it was in response to an email I received from NHTSA, after asking about it.
Here it is:

The "discrepancy" may stem from the inherent differences between the Side Impact test run by NHTSA and the Side Impact test run by IIHS. Please see the information included below. Furthermore, NHTSA has added a Side Pole test. The Side rating is calculated using the data from both the Side Impact and Side Pole tests.

What are the main differences between NCAP’s side impact test and the Insurance Institute’s side impact test?

There are several differences between IIHS's side impact test and NHTSA's Side NCAP test. One of the main differences is that IIHS uses a higher and heavier moving deformable barrier (MDB) than NCAP does. According to IIHS's website, the mounting plate is 100 mm higher off the ground and extends 200 mm taller than the Side NCAP barrier. Additionally, the impact angle is different between the two tests. The MDB in NHTSA's Side NCAP test is configured at a 27 degree crabbed angle while the IIHS barrier is not crabbed, and instead allows for a perpendicular impact with the vehicle. The test weight of the IIHS barrier is ~1,500 kg, while the weight of the Side NCAP MDB is ~1,361 kg.

What are the main differences between NCAP’s side impact rating and the Insurance Institute’s side impact rating?

NCAP's Side rating is based on recorded chest injury only, while the IIHS rating is based on the dummy's head and neck, chest, pelvis and leg, and vehicle structure measurements.



Thank you for your continued interest in our program.
NCAP

 

NCAP's Side rating is based on recorded chest injury only, while the IIHS rating is based on the dummy's head and neck, chest, pelvis and leg, and vehicle structure measurements.



Thank you for your continued interest in our program.
NCAP

That's odd. I'm curious as to why NCAP wouldn't use the same basis as the IIHS.

 

For a company which touts safety as a primary concern, I am thoroughly unimpressed with the results of the NHTSA crash tests on the 2011 Subaru Forester.

We can make excuses to suppress any buyers remorse but there is no reasonable explanation. The Forester performed very mediocre. Period.

FRONTAL CRASH
Front Driver - 4 star (35 mph crash...evaluation of injury to head, neck, chest, legs)
* I would prefer a perfect score to the location which is occupied 100% of the time. Not terrible, but Forester should do better.

Front Passenger - 5 star ("35 mph crash....")
* For the second most important location, this is what I like to see.

Side Crash
Thankfully for the driver seating position, the Forester excels. In all other aspects, the Forester failed. I know the Forester received a "Good" rating from IIHS on the side impact, but we can't deny that it is best to take both tests into account. First, the NHTSA test is done at 38.5 mph as opposed to the IIHS which is evaluated at only 31 mph.

Driver Front Seat - 5 stars
Rear seat - 2 STARS!!!
Side pole rating front seat - 2 STARS!!!

This is not good, and hopefully something Subaru R&D can rectify before the next generation. There is a poor design somewhere along the line for the Forester to receive such a poor score in side crash.

I think both tests are important, and believe the new NHTSA evaluation is more stringent than both the old tests and IIHS tests currently being performed. Most vehicles receive 5 stars on IIHS tests, similar to the old NHTSA tests. NHTSA has raised the standard for 2011, and I expect Subaru to do something about this...because our vehicles aren't as safe as we thought when it comes to rear passenger safety....which in most cases....are our kids

 

I could plan out a perfect world all out on paper but that's just "on paper." Crash tests cannot account for all of the other factors in real life crashes. They are definitely a good starting point given that not all tests are the same and different factors affect different crashes. As far as I'm concerned, these tests are not run merely enough to speak for the entire fleet of that specific vehicle of vehicles being mass produced. That isn't to say these tests don't hold water either, just not as much as some would like.

It's like taking a sample of a lake in one spot and letting it speak for the entire lake when location plays a key role in that specific test. It's the same logic people use when they're racist, sexist, etc.

In short, grain of salt please. It's unfortunate the 2011 Subaru Forester apparently did so poorly in the tests only by the NHTSA but the bigger picture still matters just as much as ever.

 

I just bought a 2011 Forester essentially to keep my kids, who are 0 and 2 years old, safe. My understanding had been that the Foresters had excellent side impact ratings even for the back. Of course this was based on the old testing scheme for the 09/10 Foresters.

Now when watching those crash videos the first thing that comes to mind is that the impact area they looked at is relatively low off the ground. I understand that perhaps the hip of somebody sitting at the very side might get crushed, but what about a toddler or newborn in a significantly raised baby seat that's also placed on the seat several inches away from the door?

Wouldn't the Foresters still be safer than other cars that have lower clearance because other cars are more likely to hit lower relative to the passenger's body, thereby reducing risk of injury to vital organs and head?

I guess my overall question is this: if the Forester gets such a low NHTSA rating for body injury, how would a comparable car with lower clearance do? Also, are there any mid-sized SUV's that fair better than the Forester in the NHTSA tests?

 

Wouldn't the Foresters still be safer than other cars that have lower clearance because other cars are more likely to hit lower relative to the passenger's body, thereby reducing risk of injury to vital organs and head?

I think a side impact may be the luck of the draw (where exactly where does the strike hit.)

With the quality of kid seats..I wouldn't lose sleep.

 

the angle of the impact is why the rear seat is getting a lower rating, the edge of the 'ram' is being driven right into the rear door, placing maximum force right at that point. Of course the rear would take more damage then. The test appears designed to attempt maximum damage to the rear seat, when I would think most side impacts are more often at a 90 degree angle, spreading the impact over more of the cars body, lessening impact force.

 

I don't understand, isn't the 2011 the same body as the 09/10? If different testing procedures were used this year should we assume the 09/10 would receive the same ratings if re-tested??

 

I would have to agree on that. Safety was one of the major reasons we bought a Subaru and a Forester. This is a bitter pill to swallow. RAV4 I believe fares better on side impact. Safety is so important to the wife I wouldn't put it past her to trade it in.

 

As others have said, the testing is different for NHTSA this year, and it includes a completely new test, the side pole impact.

The idea is that manufacturers have, overall, come a long way since the tests started, and can meet most of the very common crash types fairly well. Now, they are moving on to a test that involves a crash scenario that's not as common, but still happens frequently. The whole idea is to push vehicle safety even further than we have.

Relax. Realize that people have driven cars with far less safety design for years, and relatively speaking, death and/or high injury rates have continously dropped over the past 50 years. Realize that many people are stuck with older generation vehicles that do not have the level of protection that the 2011 Forester offers. Heck, our baby will sometime get to ride in my wife's 2002 Kia Rio, not because it's the safest vehicle we own, but because it's the only other vehicle we have until we can afford to replace it. I'd rather she was driving my previous car, an '05 xB, but a blonde in a Tahoe totaled that vehicle, and it ended up we had to replace my car even though I would've rather replaced hers.

When I went in to buy my 2005 Scion xB 6 1/2 Years ago, I was driving a 1985 Honda Civic (I MISS that car LOL). Every dealer kept trying to sell me on safety features. I told every single one of them that I didn't really care. ANY vehicle I bought was going to be safer than what I was driving at the time!

 

I have owned a 1998 and now a 2005 and I feel the the 1998 was safer simply because there was steel in many places where there is now aluminum or lighter weight alloys. I know they have compensated for it with boron rods and superior engineering but the MPG gains come at a price and the price is a less substantial car that 'may' be less safe. Just my opinion.

 

On our 2010 Subaru's (WRX and Forester) both had crash test information on the window sticker. Neither of our 2011 Subaru's (WRX and STI) have any information on the sticker. Both say "not available". We bought the 2010's in spring of '10. the 2011's in the summer of '11.

I could understand the STI not having a crash rating, considering its a "factory race car", but I would think the WRX would have some sort of rating posted.

 

Has the side crash test results kept anyone from buying a 2012 Forester?

I want to upgrade from a 200, but the 2 star results is really bothering me.