These cars and trucks scored the worst in crash test and rollover ratings for the model year

Earlier this week, Ford Motor and General Motors announced dismal sales results for the month of January. With all the industry’s giants–even Toyota–struggling so mightily, it’s a wonder how any automaker can survive the global recession by continuing to crank out unsafe cars.

Still, they do–scores of them. In good times and bad alike, automakers design, build, produce and sell dozens of models that fail to impress in crash and rollover tests. The 2009 model year is no exception.

“Definitely the economy is going to play a big role in some of this stuff,” says Doug Scott, senior vice president of GfK Automotive, a market research and consulting firm. “Things like safety are probably, if not put on hold, then money will simply be pulled from these sorts of things toward something else.”

Behind the Numbers
To compile our list of the most dangerous vehicles of 2009, we used crash results from the Insurance Institute for Highway Safety and rollover ratings from the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration. NHTSA awards up to five stars for rollover safety, while IIHS uses a scale of “good,” “acceptable,” “marginal” and “poor.”

After each IIHS crash, the test dummies are checked for trauma in 28 regions for front crashes and 37 regions for side crashes, with each region earning a rating based on specific parameters for trauma. A “poor” rating means severe and possibly fatal trauma happened to drivers and/or passengers during the crash, while a “good” rating means little to no trauma occurred.

We awarded point values for each NHTSA and IIHS rating, with more points awarded for better results. The 16 cars on our list scored the lowest number of total points.

Among the lowest-scoring are the Chevrolet Trailblazer SUV, the Kia Rio small sedan and the Ford Ranger pickup.

Chevrolet Aveo, $12,625; Mini Car
Front: Acceptable
Side: Marginal
Rear: Poor
Rollover: 4/5 Stars

Chevrolet Colorado, $18,555; Small Pickup
Front: Acceptable
Side: Poor
Rear: Marginal
Rollover: 4/5 stars

Chevrolet Trailblazer, $29,900; Mid-size SUV
Front: Acceptable
Side: Marginal
Rear: Poor
Rollover: 3/5 stars

Chrysler PT Cruiser, $18470; Small Car
Front: Good
Side: Poor
Rear: Poor
Rollover: 4/5 stars

Dodge Nitro, $22,685; Mid-size SUV
Front: Good
Side: Marginal
Rear: Poor
Rollover: 3/5 stars

Ford Ranger, $15,835; Small Pickup
Front: Acceptable
Side: Marginal
Rear: Poor
Rollover: 3/5 stars

GMC Canyon, $17,430; Small Pickup
Front: Acceptable
Side: Poor
Rear: Marginal
Rollover: 4/5 stars

GMC Envoy, $31,370; Mid-size SUV
Front: Acceptable
Side: Marginal
Rear: Poor
Rollover: 4/5 stars

Hummer H3, $34,135; Mid-size SUV
Front: Acceptable
Side: Acceptable
Rear: Poor
Rollover: 3/5 stars

Hyundai Accent, $9,970; Mini Car
Front: Acceptable
Side: Poor
Rear: Poor
Rollover: 4/5 stars

Jeep Liberty, $23, 460; Mid-size SUV
Front: Good
Side: Marginal
Rear: Poor
Rollover: 3/5 stars

Jeep Wrangler, $21,210; Small SUV
Front: Good
Side: Poor
Rear: Marginal
Rollover: 4/5 stars

Kia Rio, $12,145; Mini Car
Front: Acceptable
Side: Poor
Rear: Poor
Rollover: 4/5 stars

Mazda B Series, $16,780; Small Pickup
Front: Acceptable
Side: Marginal
Rear: Poor
Rollover: 3/5 stars

Nissan Frontier, $17,460; Small Pickup
Front: Good
Side: Marginal
Rear: Poor
Rollover: 3/5 stars

Suzuki Equator, $22,895; Small Pickup
Front: Good
Side: Marginal
Rear: Poor
Rollover: 3/5 stars

SOURCE: FORBES

As President Barack Obama rides about Washington in his new custom-made Cadillac, he should remember that the men and women who furnished his stylish ride need to hear from him, and soon.

The domestic auto industry’s outlook is brightened only modestly by Chrysler’s announced partnering with Italian automaker Fiat. It’s a reasonable move for Chrysler, offering an opportunity to diminish the company’s historical reliance on minivans and Jeeps. Fiat’s strength in small cars and high-end nameplates will bring balance in exchange for a 35% stake in Chrysler.

But Fiat’s reluctance to invest the first euro of its own money in Chrysler is telling. So is the unhappy history of Fiat’s short-lived partnership with GM, which began with a similar vision of geographic and segment synergy.

Chrysler’s desperate need for cash persists, and some doomsayers suggest its alliance with Fiat could even exacerbate that predicament by triggering a repayment provision in the terms of its emergency loan from Uncle Sam. In any event, the Fiat partnership does nothing to address Chrysler’s immediate problems.

Equally ominous is UAW President Ron Gettelfinger’s warning that it will be “almost impossible” for the Big Three to meet the Feb. 17 deadline the Bush administration ordained for the delivery of detailed restructuring plans. The new administration shouldn’t wait three weeks to find out if this is more than hyperbole.

Appointing a car czar with broad, proactive authority should be a priority on par with tackling the foreclosure crisis. It’s also consistent with the new president’s commitment to fiscal transparency and more energy-efficient automobiles.

In his inaugural address, Obama warned that “our time of putting off unpleasant decisions … has surely passed.” That is doubly true in the auto industry, and the new administration should seize the initiative now.

SOURCE: Freep.com

TWINSBURG, Ohio - A stamping plant near Cleveland is the Ohio auto factory most likely to feel the reverberations of a possible merger of General Motors Corp. and Chrysler LLC.

The companies continued Tuesday to discuss a potential merger amid an economic downturn, weak auto sales and hardships for the companies.

The Twinsburg stamping plant is one of four Chrysler factories that employ a total of about 5,000 in the state. General Motors has nine factories in Ohio that employ about 11,700.

The future of the Twinsburg site under different ownership is cloudy, because the current trend in automobile manufacturing is to integrate stamping plants with vehicle assembly plants, said Ned Hill, professor of economic development at Cleveland State University.

Chrysler is the largest employer in Twinsburg, providing 1,000 jobs and 18 percent of the tax base in the small city about 20 miles southeast of Cleveland.

Mayor Katherine Procop said she hopes the stamping plant, which celebrated its 50th anniversary last year and has been upgraded with modern technology, will remain viable. The plant makes parts for Chrysler’s minivans, trucks and other vehicles.

“They are an important corporation here,” Procop said. “It should continue to have a long future here.”

Analysts have said government funding might be needed to help spark a combination of Chrysler and GM because of difficult economic conditions and frozen credit markets.

A GM acquisition of Chrysler could cost 30,000 or more Chrysler jobs because GM would be forced to eliminate duplication and may be interested only in Chrysler’s minivans and the Jeep brand, industry analysts have said.

“No matter what happens, south Ontario (Canada) and Michigan will be in a world of hurt,” said Ned Hill, professor of economic development at Cleveland State University. Those areas have Chrysler and GM plants near each other making competing products.

The iconic Jeep brand needs an injection of new models but likely will be manufactured no matter what happens to Chrysler, Hill said. That bodes well for the Toledo area, where there is a Jeep factory, he said.

Chrysler employs about 49,000 in the U.S. and has roughly 125,000 pensioners. GM has 177,000 U.S. workers and around 500,000 people receiving pensions.

For each auto manufacturing job, there are at least seven jobs with parts makers and other support companies, according to the Center for Automotive Research in Michigan.

Hill said it would be difficult and costly for GM to downsize Chrysler’s extensive dealer network.

SOURCE: The Chicago Tribune