Brand logo

Citroën C5 Aircross

C5 Aircross frontal view
4018b21e-08ba-4150-a042-8c1e68831fda
f4bd07fb-7232-46c7-8391-0290f2cd705f
434c83b9-ed4b-41a5-9b57-f6fb49ed823b
dce47942-b3ab-468c-9e3c-ec516dcd5dfa
7ec9ca7e-8dc8-4869-801b-f72123a19690
9142a970-a869-4b01-82e1-88f75c7c0013
bbdeb6dd-651a-4656-b138-ab9841f7ef6b
b7e12e35-0cf3-4fbd-8eb0-011637a60967
f9219f91-3dbd-4234-98bc-3716ec510bed
e44baa81-ac9e-4f9c-ac8a-66b9abd3cccb
Play
2025
Standard
Standard

Verdict

The Citroën C5 Aircross is a 'corporate twin' to the Peugeot 3008.  Safety equipment and performance is identical between the two cars, so this rating is based on an assessment of the Peugeot.

The passenger compartment remained stable in the frontal offset test.  Dummy readings indicated good protection of the knees and femurs of both the driver and the front seat passenger. Citroën showed that a similar level of protection would be provided to occupants of different sizes and to those sitting in different positions.  Analysis of the deceleration of the impact trolley during the test, and analysis of the deformable barrier after the test, revealed that the car would be a moderately benign impact partner in a frontal collision.  In the full-width rigid barrier test, protection was good or adequate for all critical body regions of the driver rear seat passenger.    In both the side barrier test and the more severe side pole impact, good protection was provided to all critical body areas and the car scored maximum points in this part of the assessment.  Control of excursion (the extent to which a body is thrown to the other side of the vehicle when it is hit from the far side) was found to be marginal.  The Citroën C5 Aircross does not have a countermeasure to mitigate against occupant-to-occupant injuries in such impacts.  Tests on the front seats and head restraints demonstrated good protection against whiplash injuries in the event of a rear-end collision.  A geometric analysis of the rear seats also indicated good whiplash protection.   The car has an advanced eCall system which alerts the emergency services in the event of a crash, and a  system to prevent secondary impacts after the car has been in a collision.  Citroën demonstrated that the doors would be openable to allow occupants to escape in the event of vehicle submergence.

In both the frontal offset and the side barrier tests, protection was good for all critical body areas for both child dummies, and the C5 Aircross scored maximum points in this part of the assessment.  The front passenger airbag can be disabled to allow a rearward-facing child restraint to be used in that seating position.  Clear information is provided to the driver regarding the status of the airbag and the system was rewarded.    The C5 Aircross has no 'child presence detection', a system which can alert others if children have been left in the car. All of the child restraint types for which the Citroën C5 Aircross is designed could be properly installed and accommodated in the car.

Protection of the head of a struck pedestrian or cyclist was largely good or adequate, with poor results recorded on the stiff windscreen pillars and at the base and top of the screen.   Protection of the pelvis was good at all test locations. Protection of the femur was good at all test locations, while that of the knee and tibia was good at all test locations  The autonomous emergency braking system responds to vulnerable road users such as pedestrians and cyclists, as well as to other vehicles.  In tests of its response to pedestrians, the system performed adequately.  The system performed well in tests of its reaction to cyclists, and its response to motorcyclists was also good.

Overall, the performance of the autonomous emergency braking (AEB) system was adequate in tests of its reaction to other vehicles.  A seatbelt reminder system is fitted as standard to the front and rear seats.  However, the rear seats are not equipped with occupant detection and fail Euro NCAP's assessment.  The car has an indirect driver status monitoring system as standard, detecting driver fatigue but not distraction.    The lane support system gently corrects the vehicle’s path if it is drifting out of lane and also intervenes in some more critical situations.  The speed assistance system identifies the local speed limit.  The driver can choose to allow the limiter to be set automatically by the system.

Tested ModelPeugeot e3008, 73kWh, LHD
Kerb Weight2104 kg
ClassSmall SUV
Adult Occupant

Adult Occupant

80%
Child Occupant

Child Occupant

85%
Vulnerable Road Users

Vulnerable Road Users

79%
Safety Assist

Safety Assist

62%

Safety Equipment

Driver
Passenger
Rear
Front Airbag
FITTED_STANDARD
FITTED_STANDARD
NOT_APPLICABLE
Belt Pretensioner
FITTED_STANDARD
FITTED_STANDARD
FITTED_STANDARD
Belt Loadlimiter
FITTED_STANDARD
FITTED_STANDARD
FITTED_STANDARD
Knee Airbag
NOT_AVAILABLE
NOT_AVAILABLE
NOT_APPLICABLE

Note: other equipment may be available on the vehicle but was not considered in the test year

  • Fitted to the vehicle as standard
    Fitted to the vehicle as standard
  • Fitted to the vehicle as part of the safety pack
    Fitted to the vehicle as part of the safety pack
  • Not fitted to the test vehicle but available as option or as part of the safety pack
    Not fitted to the test vehicle but available as option or as part of the safety pack
  • Not available
    Not available
  • Not applicable
    Not applicable

Rating Validity

Body Type
Variant Description
Drivetrain
Rating Applies LHD
Rating Applies RHD
  • * Tested Variant

Additional Information