9 photos
Photo: IIHS on YouTube / edited
None of the one-ton workhorses tested by the Insurance Institute for Highway Safety for crash avoidance have earned better than “marginal” for vehicle-to-vehicle prevention. Three of the four 3500-series trucks received “poor” ratings, and these results expose a weakness in AEB systems that are rightfully expected by customers to detect other vehicles and autobrake in a timely fashion.
The IIHS tests covered the 2025 model year Chevrolet Silverado 3500, its GMC-branded twin, the Ford Super Duty F-350, and the Ram truck brand’s 3500. The Silverado, Sierra, and F-350 were all rated “poor” for vehicle-to-vehicle prevention, while the Ram earned the slightly better “marginal” rating.
When it comes to pedestrian scores, the Ford and Ram both received the “acceptable” rating as opposed to “marginal” for the General Motors-developed trucks. Be that as it may, two-wheeled vehicles proved especially difficult for the AEB systems in question. The nonprofit organization found that several trucks failed to warn drivers as intended, not reducing impact speed effectively.
Other AEBs did reduce speed, sometimes mitigating or avoiding a collision, but still lost valuable points because their warnings came too late for comfort. Automatic braking may reduce impact speed, but a warning delivered just before impact leaves the driver with very little time to react.
In the organization’s vehicle-to-vehicle tests, the subject trucks are sent toward stationary car and motorcycle targets at three speeds: 31, 37, and 43 miles per hour, specifically 50, 60, and nearly 70 kilometers per hour in metric speak. The Safety boffins place the target vehicles in the center of the lane or offset to either side of the lane. A semi provides yet another challenge, although the IIHS evaluates only warning timeliness in this scenario.
Photo: IIHS on YouTube
Cargo vans, by comparison, delivered much stronger results in the very same tests. Their performance varied sharply by model, with the Mercedes-Benz Sprinter 2500 being the only vehicle in this group to earn a “good” rating against other vehicles.
The poor-selling Chevy BrightDrop 400 settled for “acceptable,” whereas the 500-series Rivian electric delivery van couldn’t do better than “marginal” even though Rivian has state-of-the-art AEB and semi-autonomous driving software in its R1 models and the newer R2.
The 250-flavored Ford Transit and the Ram ProMaster 2500 both scored “poor,” as did the oldest vans in the full-size segment. Believe it or not, the Chevrolet Express and GMC Savana are more than three decades old from the standpoint of their platform. Introduced for the 1996 model year, these vans received their last major structural updates for the 2003 model year.
Derived from the GMT400 full-size truck platform, the Express and Savana are gifted with a forward-cab layout and a relatively low floor. Despite competing against far more modern and efficient vans, which are heavily inspired by European vans, the full-size Chevy and GMC still capture a massive chunk of the US commercial vehicle market for their unmatched upfitting and upstream compatibility, low maintenance costs, and sheer durability.
Because of their age, neither van has convinced the IIHS for crash avoidance due to the lack of automatic emergency braking. Instead, Express and Savana customers are presented with nothing more than forward-collision warning. Child pedestrians exposed a general weakness in this segment, with even the F-350 and the Ram truck brand’s 3500 having trouble detecting and avoiding a child crossing in daylight conditions.
Night testing introduced further complications, with the IIHS noting that some vehicles struggle to brake for adult pedestrians when using the low beams. Others slowed less effectively at lower test speeds than at higher ones. All in all, subject automakers should do better when it comes to crash avoidance in heavy-duty pickup trucks and large vans.
