For enhanced safety, the front and middle seat shoulder belts of the Chrysler Voyager are height-adjustable to accommodate a wide variety of driver and passenger heights. A better fit can prevent injuries and the increased comfort also encourages passengers to buckle up. The Toyota Grand Highlander doesn’t offer height-adjustable middle seat belts.
The Chrysler Voyager has standard driver and front passenger side knee airbags mounted low on the dashboard. These airbags help prevent the driver and front passenger from sliding under their seatbelts or the main frontal airbags; this keeps them better positioned during a collision for maximum protection. Knee airbags also help keep the legs from striking the dashboard, preventing knee and leg injuries in the case of a serious frontal collision. The Grand Highlander doesn’t offer a front passenger side knee airbag.
Both the Voyager and the Grand Highlander have standard driver and passenger frontal airbags, front side-impact airbags, driver knee airbags, side-impact head airbags, front seatbelt pretensioners, front wheel drive, height adjustable front shoulder belts, plastic fuel tanks, four-wheel antilock brakes, traction control, electronic stability systems to prevent skidding, crash mitigating brakes, daytime running lights, lane departure warning systems, blind spot warning systems, rearview cameras, rear cross-path warning and available all wheel drive.
The National Highway Traffic Safety Administration does 35 MPH front crash tests on new vehicles. In this test, results indicate that the Chrysler Voyager is safer than the Toyota Grand Highlander:
|
|
Voyager |
Grand Highlander |
| OVERALL STARS |
5 Stars |
4 Stars |
|
|
Driver |
|
| STARS |
5 Stars |
4 Stars |
| HIC |
168 |
218 |
| Neck Injury Risk |
29% |
39.3% |
| Neck Stress |
230 lbs. |
355 lbs. |
| Leg Forces (l/r) |
75/194 lbs. |
331/316 lbs. |
|
|
Passenger |
|
| STARS |
5 Stars |
4 Stars |
| HIC |
196 |
356 |
| Chest Compression |
.4 inches |
.6 inches |
| Neck Injury Risk |
25% |
33% |
| Neck Stress |
117 lbs. |
199 lbs. |
| Neck Compression |
51 lbs. |
60 lbs. |
New test not comparable to pre-2011 test results. More stars = Better. Lower test results = Better.
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 Chrysler Voyager is safer than the Grand Highlander:
|
|
Voyager |
Grand Highlander |
| Overall Evaluation |
GOOD |
ACCEPTABLE |
| Restraints |
GOOD |
ACCEPTABLE |
| Head Neck Evaluation |
GOOD |
GOOD |
| Head injury index |
71 |
112 |
| Peak Head Forces |
0 G’s |
0 G’s |
| Steering Column Movement Rearward |
2 cm |
5 cm |
| Chest Evaluation |
GOOD |
GOOD |
| Max Chest Compression |
20 cm |
21 cm |
| Hip & Thigh Evaluation |
GOOD |
GOOD |
| Femur Force R/L |
1.2/.8 kN |
3.5/1.3 kN |
| Hip & Thigh Injury Risk R/L |
0%/0% |
1%/0% |
| Lower Leg Evaluation |
GOOD |
GOOD |
The National Highway Traffic Safety Administration does side impact tests on new vehicles. In this test, which crashes the vehicle into a post at 20 MPH, results indicate that the Chrysler Voyager is safer than the Toyota Grand Highlander:
|
|
Voyager |
Grand Highlander |
|
|
Into Pole |
|
| STARS |
5 Stars |
5 Stars |
| Max Damage Depth |
13 inches |
17 inches |
| HIC |
293 |
344 |
| Hip Force |
616 lbs. |
823 lbs. |
New test not comparable to pre-2011 test results. More stars = Better. Lower test results = Better.
Instrumented handling tests conducted by the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration and analysis of its dimensions indicate that the Voyager is 5.3% to 5.8% less likely to roll over than the Grand Highlander.

