A small Chevy crossover flunked the one crash test that puts a small dummy behind the driver and measures what the belt does to her ribs. The 2026 Trailblazer earned a Poor overall rating in the Insurance Institute for Highway Safety’s updated moderate-overlap front test. Its vehicle-to-vehicle crash prevention also got Poor, and so did the headlights on the RS and Activ trims.
The detail that should bother GM most: the car IIHS crashed already had the fix.
What the test does
The updated test runs a vehicle at 40 mph into a barrier that covers 40% of its front end. IIHS says that’s equivalent to two vehicles colliding offset at a little under 40 mph each. The 2022 update added a small Hybrid III dummy, the size of a small woman or a 12-year-old, belted in behind the driver. A belt-tension sensor and a pressure mat on that dummy’s chest record how hard the belt loads its torso.
Where the Trailblazer fell short
The IIHS rating page shows a front half that did everything right.
The structure and safety cage rated Good. Driver head and neck, chest, hips, legs and restraints all rated Good. Maximum intrusion was 11 centimeters at the brake pedal, and the steering column barely moved.
The back seat is the problem. The rear passenger’s head never hit anything, and the head, neck and thigh measures were Good. But the chest index came in at 41, rated Marginal. Shoulder belt tension peaked at 4.8 kilonewtons, roughly 1,080 pounds of force pressed through a belt across a small person’s ribs. Restraints and dummy kinematics, the category covering how well the belt held the dummy in place and how the body moved, rated Poor. One Poor sub-rating is enough to make the whole test Poor.
Related Articles
- Russia’s Supreme Court Says a Dodge Ram Canada Flagged as Stolen Can Be Registered, and the Duma Wants to Make That the Rule
- Cadillac’s $239K Escalade-V Collector Series Is Numbered by Year, 1902 to 2027, and Only 252 Will Be Built
The tested vehicle was a 2026 Trailblazer LT with all-wheel drive, and the rating covers 2026 models built after February 2026. IIHS notes that GM upgraded the rear seat belt load limiters starting with those builds. So the Poor rating already reflects GM’s improved belts.
Why rear belts are hard to get right
Front belts have used two pieces of hardware for years. A pretensioner snaps the belt tight the instant a crash starts. A load limiter then lets the belt pay out a little so the force on the chest doesn’t climb high enough to break ribs. Up front, the airbag catches the occupant as the belt gives. In the back there’s no airbag, so the belt has to do everything.
Belt engineers aren’t surprised by any of this. A 2007 research paper partly funded through NHTSA’s rear-seat research found that rear adults in newer vehicles had lost part of their historical safety advantage over front-seat occupants, because front restraints kept improving and rear ones didn’t. The same work found that a pretensioner combined with a force-limiting belt could cut chest injury risk without letting the head travel further forward.
That’s the tuning problem GM didn’t solve. Let the belt give too much and the passenger slides forward toward the front seatback. Hold too firmly and the belt crushes the chest. The Trailblazer’s numbers suggest the belt is still holding too hard: high belt force, a Marginal chest rating and a Poor kinematics rating, with no head contact at all.
Not the only problem
The rest of the scorecard has issues too:
- Vehicle-to-vehicle crash prevention: Poor. At 31 mph, standard automatic emergency braking cut speed by 18 mph against a car target and 19 mph against a motorcycle target. That reduces the impact, but it doesn’t prevent it.
- Pedestrian crash prevention: Marginal.
- Headlights depend on trim. LS and LT models rate Acceptable, with good low-beam visibility and some glare. RS and Activ models rate Poor because their low beams produce excessive glare for oncoming drivers. That’s a problem for everyone else on the road, not for the Trailblazer driver’s view.
- Small overlap (both sides) and the updated side test: Good. GM changed the side structure and the thorax airbag for February 2026 builds as well.
- Seat belt reminders and LATCH child seat anchors: Acceptable.
It’s a long way down for a model that earned Top Safety Pick+ in its early years under older criteria, when its original moderate overlap rating came from a structurally identical Buick Encore GX and only covered the front seats. The Trailblazer didn’t get worse. The test changed.
Related Articles
- Land Rover Is Drilling Drain Holes in 93,997 Range Rover Tailgates Because Water Keeps Pooling on the Backup Camera
- A Tesla Semi Caught Fire on I-880 With No Crash, and CHP Shut Down Both Directions Over Possible Hazardous Smoke
In IIHS’s October release, the Nissan Kicks shows what’s possible. Its rear belts were changed for builds after June 2026, it moved to a Good rating in this test and won a Top Safety Pick. The Kicks rating page shows earlier Kicks builds still rated Marginal. A belt revision is enough to move a small SUV from failing to passing, and GM’s attempt didn’t.
What owners and shoppers should do
- Check the build date on the door-jamb sticker. The updated rating covers only February 2026 and later builds. Earlier 2026 cars have different rear belts and no updated rating at all.
- Know which seat was tested. IIHS put the small dummy behind the driver. If a kid that size rides there, that’s the belt this rating is about.
- If you’re buying an RS or Activ, have the headlight aim checked before delivery. Glare is the reason for the Poor rating, and a misaimed lamp makes it worse.
- Don’t treat the emergency braking as a backup driver. At 31 mph, it reduced speed but didn’t stop the car.
GM’s upgraded belt still put about 1,080 pounds of force across a small dummy’s ribs. Who rides behind the driver in your car, and did you ever think of the back seat as the risky one?