Man, I bet this article will get some people stirred up!

most of them are american automakers? last time i checked 10 out of 20 was not MOST. and we wonder why there is such a poor opinion of american cars and trucks.

I think its time people start demanding standard safety features such as side airbags on all models - a move that Honda has made. US manufactures always seem to lag on safety.

When I buy a car, safety always comes in at the top. I won't comprise my safety as well as that of my family to save a few thousand bucks. This is the reason why I bought a 07 CRV over an Escape.

It's also a shame that the "poor" have to comprise their safety in purchasing a car.

well being that 10 out of 20 cars makes up 50% of the cars coming from the "Big 3" ... and the other 10 represent 7 completely different companies... could possibly be the reason behind that poor opinion of american cars and trucks.

re: Kyle

There are more cars in this list from the big three than from the Japansese or Korean Automakers.

American = 10

Japanese = 7

Korean = 3

Ford Focus?

Are you serious?!! It got very very good safety reviews from european media..

Hmmm...not a single German vehicle on the list.

The European Focus is not the same as the one sold in the U.S.

I think this report is based on cars sold in the U.S. only and not the different versions that are sold elsewhere in the world.

Safty is relative, cars now are way safer than cars few years back.

Thing is they are comparing safty to the best ones. None of these cars are even slightly close to the Pinto tin boxes you drove 20 years ago. So yeah for most part, you're safe unless you drive like heck or have bad luck when some dude run into you at 60mph on the side.

They need to list the ION with the Cobalt, they are the same car, not the Cobalt and the G6.

Seeing no actual report or the claimed math used to make the determination on which vehicles are considered unsafe, I am leary anything that Forbes makes claimed too, along with state-by-state numbers of brands, models and year of vehicle. Sad part I had to correct the math problem discovered with Forbes writer Mat in the article "Worst vehicles - 2005. Sad to see someone claimed to be authoritative writer and can't even add. Example: 2005 Durango is the worst vehicle but behind it was the 2005 Honda Accord. However, the Accord beat it out by 45 more TSBs. The Ram only suffered three major recalls and some other brand were misrepresentation with that article. One truck and one mid-szie car comparo.

CR if anything has no creditability when it comes to real world testing seeing the improper measurement that was used and biased attitude's when I reading the claim about the Dakota was not safe and the Honda was...well, being in a 55-MPH real world offset crash, the 2000 Dakota saved my life and started up to be moved out of road. While the Honda frontal was completely gone and basically all over the rode.

Not only that, replacing the Dakota with the 03 Ram, the Ram was hit five times - yes five times. Each vehicle it encountered was basically done for...that included four Japanese vehicles and one Chevy that even the wheel falloff. Pathetic....

The Dodge Ram was put back together and now with 114K miles has only one recall and no TSB [2500 Hemi Manual]. Looking at CR report of the vehicle, rated poor. Hmm...comparing it against the same year HDs and Tundra, talk about junk [using the stats from NHTSA recall/tsb/investigations]. Here, there is no biases cards to fill out by dealerships or claimed to be owners as to Toyota and Hyundai duping the 0-90 days QC cards - just the real world truth on what is happening.

It comes back to reality and not subjectedness or someone previous biases attitude as to the case of the lead engineer who was a disgruntle Chrysler employee....get over it son and move on.

IN the end, you have to research out yourself to see what is true and what is false.

Hmmm...I wonder why?

Maybe because the majority of the cars on that list are small cars. Which obviously don't have the structural support a larger car has. Especially in a day when large SUVs rule the roads. Of course someone in an Ion, Cobalt, Yaris, etc. is likely to be hurt or killed when an Expedition plows into them. It's a matter of mass. Small light thing hitting/being hit by big heavy thing is more likely to suffer greater damage.

And to Steve, of course your 2500 Hemi Ram stood up against 4 smaller import cars. You don't say what the Chevy is so I can't judge that. It's a work truck with all steel construction vs. cars that are made to fold up on impact. And if you've been in 6 accidents, I suggest you think about paying more attention to the road.

My 87 Camaro IROC-Z got rearended at a dead stop by a Chevy S-10 Extreme. It suffered a broken rear bumper at the corner and a bent rear quarter panel. I drove away. The truck, not so lucky. He didn't drive away. Why? All steel construction vs. crumple zones. That was my only accident.

The Cobalt I'm in now is extremely well made and I've got the 6 airbags for the event that I'm in an accident. But instead of relying on that, I just pay attention to the road and avoid potential accidents.

Why aren't any German cars on the list? The majority of German cars aren't subcompacts. I have to wonder if they even tested the Mini Cooper though. I can guarantee you that thing hitting something isn't gonna be pretty. With how low it is to the ground, if an SUV hit it, the driver would likely be cut in half from the SUV rolling right over it.

Wow, what a dumb article. A list based on standard safety equipment? Stick to the money talk.

It's actually smarter than you think, marco.
Accident rate and fatality data per vehicle (hoepfully adjusted for driver's record) was how they assessed it in lieu with safety equipment.

The Mazda 3 is the basis of the European Focus, so I am curious to see it make the list, Considering it's 4 star crash rating frontal, 4 star roll over test rating and 3 star side impact test rating I seriously question seeing it here.

The Scion tC manages a 5 star front drivers crash test rating and 4 star for all other safety ratings.

The PT Cruiser manages 4 stars all around for the current model, though apparently the first year had some issues and managed just 2 stars for the drivers side frontal.

The Jeep Liberty other than a 3 star roll over, manages 5 stars in almost every crash test.

The Kia Rio manages just 2 stars for side impact, which would be a concern to me.

But honestly it looks to me like this list is a bunch of sensationalist hooey. Most of these cars if you do some research are pretty darn safe. 4 stars in a frontal crash means 11~20% chance of serious injury in a 30 or 35 mph serious crash, And the side impact test 4 stars means 6~10% chance of injury.

to mrk::
>> I think its time people start demanding standard safety features such as side airbags on all models

Well I don't. I don't want to have to pay for all that redundant crap in my car. I wish they'd make ALL airbags optional.

How about letting the auto sites cover this?

Stay focused

Thanks,

john

John, this IS an auto site. Check the URL... it is associated with other sites, not a part of them.

As for the list, I'm gonna agree with Steve and Marco. Not a very useful list. I highly doubt they did anything intelligent like adjusting for crappy drivers, Paul. Their "measurements" are largely subjective.

Jeez, thats the whole idea of safety equipment.
To protect all drivers, not just crappy ones.
Like any of this changes anyones mind on what they drive.
God you people take everything like an insult.

"The Mazda 3 is the basis of the European Focus, so I am curious to see it make the list, Considering it's 4 star crash rating frontal, 4 star roll over test rating and 3 star side impact test rating I seriously question seeing it here."

It's most likely on there because it doesn't have side airbags to pummel your body from every direction in an accident (to ensure that no part of your escapes unscathed) and to add extra weight to kill your gas mileage.

The more the government requires excess crap to be made mandatory, the more I'm thinking I'll just find nice, old cars (or just low production stuff that doesn't have to follow the rules - like a Lotus) to drive. Airbags are only useful in certain circumstances - that aren't very likely. As a result, I'd rather have a car that's cheaper, faster, more maneuverable, and gets better mpg.

Remy:

Nice to hear someone who shares my opinion on cars. I'm strongly considering building a kit car in the future so I don't have to carry around a thousand pounds I don't want down the road with me.

Completely worthless methodology for determining the list of the 20 cars. Absolutely scientifically invalid.

Fatality statistics: Skews the results, penalizing cars that are marketed and designed for a younger driver. Younger drivers have more accidents and fatalities than older drivers because of their maturity. You can't allow the typical driver of a vehicle determine that vehicle's safety rating. Example: The Toyota Yaris - marketed to and driven primarily by late teens/early 20's drivers. How do you have a valid study when you're allowing driver demographics to affect the outcome?

Safety equipment: Skews the results, penalizing cars that are marketed and sold as entry-level transportation. If one particular vehicle doesn't have side air bags, it's immediately penalized, regardless of how it performs in the crash.

Consumer reports accident avoidance data: Skews the results, penalizing cars that are not designed as performance vehicles. If a particular vehicle can't run a slalom course as fast as another, it's penalized whether that has anything to do with it's safety performance in a crash or not.

The only valid data used in the survey was crash data, but it's overshadowed by the other invalid factors.

Completely worthless, scientifically invalid study. I choose to ignore it completely because I have a brain that can understand basic information.

"I'm strongly considering building a kit car in the future so I don't have to carry around a thousand pounds I don't want down the road with me."

There's that or buying a Lotus. I think the heaviest they sell these days is like 2,090 lbs!

I think it goes without saying that Forbes and Fortune are both magazines that have been bought by companies with vested interests. I mean if you can sway opinion and get people to buy specific products that you get a share of the sales from, why not right? This happens a lot lot lot more than people are realizing. It's business, and most business is today is dirty. What I especially love is how they make themselves sound so ethical with the "green" push and the "business ethics" crap we get taught in business college. It's all a sham, pulling wool over the entire world's eyes.

True John. Like the new legislation requiring stability control on all vehicles. Now, if you just drive safely and don't try taking turns crazy fast (or buying an SUV merely because you think it's "cool" when you have no actual use for one) there's no need for it. Even in trucks and SUV's you'll most likely never need it if you're halfway competent. The best guess is that the companies that make the stability control systems paid a good chunk of money to get that passed knowing that they'll make a LOT more money in all the years to come.

According to this article, when is the s2000 and "entry" level vehicle? Base price $34,000 how much do these writers/editors get paid?

Good point. The S2000, like half the cars on this list, have 5 star crash ratings. The criteria used in this article is more than absurd. As far as I'm concerned, the twenty most dangerous vehicles are all SUVs - high centers of gravity and high probability of rollover - the most lethal type of crash. Add the high weights that cause mor collateral damage, and you have a convincing case that can be made with relevant data.

Are these unsafe cars? Or bought by the worst US-drivers?
Looks to me more like the latter part, since there are some 4-5star Eurocap cars in the list.

yeah, i agree with steve and someone out there who said this is a dumb article which makes it more true at the last sentence generalizing european and american cars.

to me, the list is more useful to which cars are most driven hard by aggressive drivers.
i mean, u know the physics of Pickup Trucks, but drive them slow, you get safety better than any luxury car out there.

Kyle said:
most of them are american automakers? last time i checked 10 out of 20 was not MOST. and we wonder why there is such a poor opinion of american cars and trucks.

Noah said:
There are more cars in this list from the big three than from the Japansese or Korean Automakers.
American = 10
Japanese = 7
Korean = 3

I say:
-Buick Rendevous = American
-Ford Escape/ Mercury Mariner (2007 Model) = American
-Ford Focus = American
-Jeep Liberty = American
-Dodge Dakota = American
-Saturn Ion = American
-Chrysler PT Cruiser = American
-Chevrolet Cobalt/ Pontiac G5 = American
-Total is 8 American or 9 if you count the Aveo

-Nissan Frontier = Japanese
-Toyota Yaris = Japanese
-Honda S2000 = Japanese
-Toyota Scion tC = Japanese
-Mazda3 = Japanese
-Suzuki Forenza/ Reno = Japanese
-Nissan Xterra = Japanese
-Total is 7 Japanese

-Ford Ranger/ Mazda B-Series Truck = American/Rebadged Japanese
-Toyota Matrix/ Pontiac Vibe = Japanese/Rebadged American
Total Mixed = 2

-Hyundai Accent = Korean
-Kia Rio = Korean
-Chevrolet Aveo = Korean (Mainly)
-Total is about 3 if you count the Aveo

If we take away the rebadges... we have 8 American and 9 Asian vehicles... Add the rebadges by who originally designed the vehicle/not who sells it and we have 9 American and 11 Asian.

To me, there are more non-American company vehicles on the list.

I'd be intereste to see some data on pickup trucks with reworked suspensions that jack the body up about 12 inches.

I suspect they are very prone to rolling over on turns because of the raised centre of gravity. And if so, do their drivers know that? And how does that affect their insurance?

Also, what do they do to occupants of smaller vehicles that they collide with? Probably shear their heads off.

Ratings here are based on vehicles without side air bags, now standard on virtually everything. It's interesting that the Scion Xa and Xb, with no side protection, don't make the list. Their '08 replacements have the bags, and haven't been tested. While some credit is given to drivers' age and habits, I don't think there's enough.
Just my personal opinion as an Industrial Designer and engineer of 45 years experience.

The S2000 has a 5-star crash rating and is one of the toughest little cars in crash tests. However, it is dangerous because it's somewhat prone to oversteer and fishtail and an inexperienced driver can easily crash. It is only recommended for experienced drivers who can handle a proper sports car. In addition, it doesn't have side-curtain airbags. But it also has a 5-star side-impact crash test rating.

The S2000 is not unsafe because of the car but the drivers. It doesn't have 5-star crash ratings (front and side impacts) for nothing. The suspension is super stiff and the rear can fishtail if not properly driven with experience.

Mazda: Is 33.4% owned by Ford. Ford and Mazda have many vehicles that are based on each other. Sure Mazda is Japanese, but Ford (along with it's poor quality/engineering) has a controlling interest in Mazda.

Suzuki: is a bastard child that is in co-hoots with many manufacturers to develop and rebadge many of its cars throughout the world. Specifically, the Forenza mentioned in this article is almost WHOLLY build/designed my general motors.

Mazda B-Series trucks: I wouldn't even consider this "mixed" the b series truck is almost 100% a Ford Ranger.

Chevy Aveo: Built in Korea - but almost 100% engineered/designed by General Motors - and distributed by GM across the world under different names (there are factories for this Aveo in like 6 or 7 different countries, not just Korea).

That makes 13 American Cars by my standards. I don't care where a car is built, but rather who designed it. A shitty product built in Korea/China.S is still going to be a poor product if built in the U.S.

You guys must not have ever taken a statistics class, and neither must anyone at Forbes. More than half of these cars are very popular TEEN cars. The Rio, the tC, the Yaris, X3, etc. They are all cheap, trendy cars that get good gas mileage and pack at least a little bit of punch behind the hood. Thus, the average person DRIVING them is more likely to get in an accident, because they are less experienced drivers. This is why you'll never see a Caddy on this list - not because it's substantially safer, but because the people who drive Caddies (not including the CTS and XLR) drive them at about 20MPH on the highway.
This is what we call a "lurking variable" that makes the data look like it implies something it does not. I'm sure some of these cars actually did get VERY GOOD safety reviews, and they probably are VERY SAFE cars. But the average DRIVER of many of these cars is another story.
Consider it for a moment and you'll see I'm right.

I just don't understand some people... first you moan and whine that cars aren't safe enough and that we should FORCE OR REQUIRE more airbags so you can feel safe talking on your cell phones while you drive, but then you whine that cars are 4,000+ pound tanks that are inefficient and get crappy MPG.

So typical.

Make them options, I personally would like to see the weight going down and performance and mileage go up. I personally could even do without front air bags and front bumpers, etc. I will never need them because I don't use the phone or even the radio while I drive, I don't tail gate, and generally don't put myself into a position where I will ever rear end anyone or anything that would require a front air bag. Any time I have been hit has been from the rear where I am stopped and boxed in and can't go anywhere to avoid some idiot looking down at his CDs.

JC wrote "You guys must not have ever taken a statistics class, and neither must anyone at Forbes. More than half of these cars are very popular TEEN cars. The Rio, the tC, the Yaris, X3, etc."

Then by your logic Honda Civic should be #1 on this list. It is the most popular car among teenagers. It's not anywhere to be found though. In fact, it has recently appeared on the list of the safest cars posted on this site earlier. Your logic is flawed. There are definitely more variables at play in this survey.

@Chris: I totally agree with the cell phone while driving thing but the rest of your comments just make you an arrogant troll... So you have never blinked your eyes or ever drive where there are other idiots on the road with THEIR cell phones who cut you off then slam on the brakes? Insurance scammers? You never know... Why don't I stop paying taxes because I don't support the war? Give me a break buddy, you aren't God!

You can get killed walking your doggy!

So, next up we need to see the top 20 most dangerous vehicles... To get hit by.

It may not be very safe driving a small car in the US, but in Europe for example, where more of the cars are much smaller, it's totally different. America has WAY too many HUGE freaking vehicles. It's not the lack of safety features in the smaller entry-level cars in this list that's the problem, it what they get hit by that's the problem. Next time you see some stupid fucking soccer mom driving her Nissan Armada, give her the middle finger.

WOW no German cars

WOW no German cars or civics

How about we focus more on DRIVER education/safety than putting more "bells & whistles" into every damn car & truck on the market. If people would learn to drive better, & take more responsibility for their own actions instead of blaming the auto makers, tire companies, etc. for accidents, the costs of vehicles might come down a bit, & then maybe the "big 3" U.S. Car companies would begin to do better again.

First of all, there are twenty vehicles listed. Of those ten, half are made in the US, that is if you don't consider outsourcing. The other half are foreign made. Therefore, your assertion that "most are made by American auto makers" is false. Let's advocate more accuracy in reporting and less personal bias. Facts are much more important.

Who gives a crap where they are made.
Most of these are cheaper cars, so the price will reflect the amount of engineering.
What is often not taken into account is what most people that are driving these vehicles were driving before this.
If you take that into account you are much safer in any one of these compared to a car you could have had before that was 5 - 10 years old.

If your a good driver like me, you never have to worry about a crash! Why make a big fuss of it all?

rofl.. jokes

The "Big 3" make up way over half of US auto sales, so I'm not surprised 10 of the 20 are from American companies. The Asian manufacturers are way over-represented on this list. I've read numerous articles that Ford's quality is on par with Toyota (JD Power). I know import lovers don't like to be confused with facts, though ....

Safty considerations do not affect my purchasing decision.

To Joe P:

Are you talking about J.D. Power's absurdly irrelevant and highly over-rated "Initial Quality" award? If you're a fan of JD Power, you would probably also know about their long-term reliability studies too. Go read up on those and get back to us....

I think there are several factors at work here.

Driver: The driver makes a huge difference. One of the people posting above touted the safety of his vehicles because they had survived, or allowed him to survive, 6 accidents since 2000 which totalled the other cars involved. Interesting, as during that same time period I've not been in a single accident, much less one that totalled anyones car. One accident=bad luck. 2-3 coincedence. More than that? Either the driver is a factor, or that driver spends a lot of time in demolition derbies.

Car: Less expensive cars tend to have less safety features. They may not have side airbags. They may not have anti-lock brakes. They may not have other anti-skid control features. They may have less competent suspensions, less powerful brakes, and cheaper (less grippy) tires. All of those things add to the expense of a car. That's unavoidable.

Car+Driver: Young drivers tend to have less money, and thus tend to own less expensive cars. This is a generality, but it was certainly true for me. Also, people with less money tend to skimp on maintenance, buy cheaper tires, etc...

Safety isn't made or lost due to any single factor. Gotta look at the whole picture.

I have to agree with the people that call this 'study' flawed.

Hell, it's hardly even news.

"LITTLE BITTY CARS FARE POORLY IN ACCIDENTS!!"
.....more obvious news after the break.

Consider for a moment a "safe" car (since it's not on the list it's not as likely to kill you, right?)...the Ford Explorer.

Compared to every car on this list (especially when miles driven or per capita figures are considered), the explorer is more likely to experience a rollover, when all other factors are held the same.

Sure, the Explorer is more likely to not kill you in a rollover than the S2000 is (the S is a convertible, of course), but which is more likely to roll in the first place?

If you read the three pages of the Forbes article, you'll see where they sorta suggest how the numbers were created. Crash testing and saftey systems. Not driver's style, not handing, nothing that actually prevents or causes the accident, nothing more than how the car reacts to the accident.

The assumption then, is that accidents just happen with no outside input or provocation, and these cars are the most likely to kill you when they do.

Well they are, for the most part, tiny cheap cars. How is this remotely surprising? Why is it news?

Oh yeah....someone wants to stir up a controversy over nothing and get a few more hits on a webiste for their advertisers.

I'm more than a little concerned that (excluding the platform cousins) there is only one model per brand listed....
The Yaris is bad, but the Xa and Fit are good?
The S2000 is bad, but the Miata and Skyy/Solstice are good?

It almost seems as though they picked the top brands in sales, and then picked the smallest/"most dangerous" model in the brand.

That's not a study, that's a witchhunt looking for eyeballs and water cooler talk.

As an aside, several of you are wrong. Those who are dividing cars out by brand to american/japanese/korean, and then proclaiming the lack of german vehicles as some sort of wonderment...

There are 3 DaimlerChrysler vehicles on the list.

If you call the Aveo American because it's a GM product, you have to call the Liberty, the Dakota, and the PT Cruiser German because they are DC products.

.....and to MRK:

Feel free to demand that the car makers offer you the opportunity to buy the car you want all you like.

But please do not demand that they stop building the cars I want.

And certainly stop trying to suggest that the police power of the federal government be used to force automakers to build only the cars you want, while punishing them for building the cars I want.

I don't want airbags, traction control, and onstar. I do want the latest in suspension and powertrain design.

I don't want to be fined or jailed for disconnecting an airbag in my own car. I do want my brand new car to run correctly after I unplug the ABS sensors in the knuckles.

If you want to leave the saftey of you and your family up to automotive designers you've never met, that's fine. But DO NOT force me to do the same.

You might feel more comfortable with a flammable pillow potentially exploding at your face, your knees, your head, your shoulder, and all over your passenger at 200 miles an hour..., but I don't.

You might feel more comfortable with your car deciding where it thinks you want to go and taking over the throttle, steering, and brakes to get you there.....but I don't.

However, just because I don't feel the need to hand my safety over to others should not mean that I'm denied the opportunity to drive modern cars.

To some, a car is nothing more than an mobile appliance, a fridge you can take to the mall.

To me, a car (or a bike, or a truck) is an extension of my personality. I take an active role in driving my cars, my bikes, and my trucks. I shouldn't have to put up with a nanny (electronic or governmental) telling me how i can drive, so long as my style does not endanger others.

Demand airbags and traction control if you like, but be prepared to pay for them. Allow the rest of us to not have them...and the financial savings that come along with not having them.

hey check it out no germans cars on the list or european all american cars that list is to damn correct all those cars do suck

I am trying to locate anything that may shed a little light on any known flaws in the design of the 2005 Buick Rendevous' seat belts and air bags. We were involved in an accident that was not a direct head on, but close enough that they both should have worked and did not. The front passenger side took the majority of the hit at about 35 MPH. The seat belt fully extended and then clothes lined me causing multiple injuries including an impact fracture to my femur from hitting the dash. My husband, the driver, also had seatbelt and airbag failure. He hit the steering wheel so hard that it knocked him out. He also has neck injuries that are inoperaple.
We purchased a rendevous because Buick had a great saftety record--or so we thought. I would really appreciate any help that anyone can offer. I need to know if this was a fluke or if it has happened to others and GM was made aware of it. Thanks in advance.

I Drive the Buick Rendezvous and i have neve felt unsafe or not protected but if i take a in town corner at 25 mph or more i am sure it will roll. So one thing i added it weights to the back so its not so top heavy and i also put stiffer suspension in and a 4.0 v6 in it and that seemed to add some weight to the bottom also. if anybody has any ?'s or comments please email me. little_ricardo@hotmail.com

Dave A.:
Kyle said:
most of them are american automakers? last time i checked 10 out of 20 was not MOST. and we wonder why there is such a poor opinion of american cars and trucks.

Noah said:
There are more cars in this list from the big three than from the Japansese or Korean Automakers.
American = 10
Japanese = 7
Korean = 3

U say:
-Buick Rendevous = American
-Ford Escape/ Mercury Mariner (2007 Model) = American
-Ford Focus = American
-Jeep Liberty = American
-Dodge Dakota = American
-Saturn Ion = American
-Chrysler PT Cruiser = American
-Chevrolet Cobalt/ Pontiac G5 = American
-Total is 8 American or 9 if you count the Aveo

-Nissan Frontier = Japanese
-Toyota Yaris = Japanese
-Honda S2000 = Japanese
-Toyota Scion tC = Japanese
-Mazda3 = Japanese
-Suzuki Forenza/ Reno = Japanese
-Nissan Xterra = Japanese
-Total is 7 Japanese

-Ford Ranger/ Mazda B-Series Truck = American/Rebadged Japanese
-Toyota Matrix/ Pontiac Vibe = Japanese/Rebadged American
Total Mixed = 2

-Hyundai Accent = Korean
-Kia Rio = Korean
-Chevrolet Aveo = Korean (Mainly)
-Total is about 3 if you count the Aveo

If we take away the rebadges... we have 8 American and 9 Asian vehicles... Add the rebadges by who originally designed the vehicle/not who sells it and we have 9 American and 11 Asian.

To me, there are more non-American company vehicles on the
list.

-------------------------------My comments below------------------------------
You do realize that you're comparing cars made in a country (United States of America) vs cars made in an entire Continent (Asia) when you refer to the cars as such. There may be 9 American (all made in the U.S.) and 11 cars made in Asia, but to compare apples with apples, you must compare them as the guy up above did (as separate countries, not America vs. the rest of the world, or the continent of Asia for that matter)

American/U.S.: 10
Japanese: 7
Korean: 3

Oh and don't try to call a Chevy "a rebadged Asian car" & then throw it under your "mixed" category, just to help make your inflated point.