These automobiles come cheaply — and you get what you pay for

The 2006 model year is young. Not all new cars have crash-test scores available, but many do, and the slide show features the six with the worst crashworthiness.

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/15500917/

http://www.forbes.com/2005/10/21/cx_...?partner=msnbc

I was glad not to see any GM cars make this list! But is that a toyota I see.

 

A Hyundai, a Kia, a Mazda, a Nissan, a Toyota, and a Suzuki....


Hmmmmm........

 

Mazda 6 is on the list, but what about Ford Fusion? Same car, different sheetmetal?

Or does Fusion include certain options that Mazda 6 lacks, such as side curtain airbags?

 

This article is somewhat odd...they make no mention of several cars and at least some of the ones they do list have been replaced by models that are total re-designs in which case, you have to wonder what the point is of talking about them now??? Also...

1. Probably even the worst of any of these cars are much more "safe" than cars of 10 or 20 years ago.

2. All of these cars are very small cars and I have to believe that has to come into play in how well a car will protect its occupants in a crash.

3. The article seems to be implying that that inexpensive cars should not be sold becasue they aren't "safe" enough...the proble is, you can't add a lot of high technology safety stuff to a car and keep the price down so what is someone on a tight budget supposed to do?

Everything has trade-offs, small engines and light weight give great gas mileage but if they also tend to equal less safe cars - someone has to decide what the priority is going to be.

Maybe someday the industry will produce a 2,500lb car that can cary 10 passengers; gets 500 miles per gallon (of water), can do 0-60 in under 3 seconds with a top speed of 240MPH and, if wercked at that speed will keep all 10 occupants totally safe from harm and cost $1,500 brand new but we aren't there yet.

 

Note the subtle bias in that article. Early on they say the six most dangerous cars come from hyundai, kia and suzuki. However, those 3 brands are only half the list, the rest are mainstay japanese brands toyota, mazda and nissan, however unless you flip through the whole slide show you'd never know.

 

I found it funny that they made excuses for the Corolla being on the list. While they made fun of every other car.

This link was also on my AOL homepage with the Cobalt SS in the picture, yet it wasn't on the list. I guess they were upset that GM didn't make the list??

 

N/M they made up for it with "The worst American Cars 2006" link on the smae page. What is the point of that besides bashing American cars?

 

I noticed that on my page too.

 

Are the little Smart cars in the U.S. yet? If they are, they should be number one on the list, talk about a coffin on wheels.

 

I found it interesting that when MSN and others have tested cars with optional side curtain air bags are always tested without them. More times then not, the American car then gets bashed for not having them standard.....sucks when you have to eat your words. Wasn't is not too long ago that the Cobalt got blasted by someone when it was tested without side curtains against a Civic/Corolla (or something like that) that had them? They then proceded to blast the Cobalt for the poor crash ratings.

 

Well now... ain't that odd...

Seems the Aveo and Cobalt and G5 ain't on that there list, are they?

 

Not surprisingly all compacts and subcompacts it seems.

 

2006 Elantra is a 2001 design and the new redesigned '07's are on the lot. Someone posted on the Elantra forums a pic of his brothers car that rolled several times, the only damage a bashed fender, smashed windshield and several dents in the roof. The tone of the article leads me to believe that they are elitists.

 

Those are actually very very safe.

 

except for the fact one is on there.......