XeroK00L

Don't think I'm seeing any surprise here.

http://biz.yahoo.com/weekend/worst_1.html

mmarshall

One possible surprise.....while it is an extremely reliable car (one of Consumer Reports' 10 best), I'm surprised that the Mazda Miata (or other small convertibles) are not on the Least Safe list. The Miata is physically smaller and lighter than any other car on that list, including the Kia Rio, with even less sheet metal for protection, and while the Miata, of course, resists rollovers due to its low center of gravity, if you ever DO flip a Miata, you've had it....especially a taller person.
I would also expect the Lotus Elise and the Mini Cooper to rank very low in safety...but they probably have not been tested.

mooretorque

I found the residual value numbers particularly entertaining as well as the little iconic figure pushing the car off the cliff............

mm, I agree that rolling a 'vert is never a good idea and likely only survivable in the case of having one of the MB inspired instant erection hoops behind the seats. At least with the convertible, the average consumer knows that risk on the front end; I doubt most folks who buy a truck even consider the idea of rolling.........maybe they were left off the list in a rare display of common sense by the press.

Guess we don't want to get started on motorcycles and helmet laws; off thread topic, anyway...........

LexFather

Lincoln having trouble

With a projected reliability rating that is 181% lower than that of the average car, Ford's Lincoln Navigator sport utility vehicle is the least reliable car on the market, according to Consumer Reports.
According to the January/February edition of the Kelley Blue Book Residual Value Guide, V-6 models of Lincoln's LS sedan have the second-lowest projected residual value on the market.
Buy a new, entry-level 2005 LS V-6 now and in five years it will retain only 19% of its original value.

mmarshall

I know this is getting a little off-topic, but I want to point out a couple of things while we are on the subject of Lincolns.
Lincolns problems and high depreciation rate stem from both so-so build quality and lousy marketing. A perfect example of this was how they ruined the Town Car in 1998 by dumping the old model's squared-off look that was so popular with limo firms and senior citizens and essentially tried to make a Jaguar out of it. They not only took away the car's classic limo look but even decontented it as well....and then did not listen when their former customers complained. Then they introduced the LS in 1999, supposedly to compete with BMW's 5-series, and then marketed the 5-speed only on the V6, not the V8. AGAIN Ford did not listen to the complaints of those who liked the LS but wanted a REAL American competitor to the 5-series with a 5-speed V8....Cadillac has finally addressed that market with the CTS V-series. The LS build quality, also, has not been good....especially on the V6 models.
So, then the Navigator comes out....a BIG success, no question about it, especially with athletes and entertainers. Forces Cadillac to play catch-up with the first Escalade, a hurriedly re-done Chevy Tahoe...and then only a year-and-a-half later a properly designed one. So...HERE was a chance for Lincoln to exploit the one advantage it still had over Cadillac....and what happens? Navigators start falling apart....along with their cheaper brother Expeditions.
I personally hope that Lincoln-Mercury survives........Buick and Cadillac need American competiton. And.....I've said in other posts, I think L-M will outlast both Isuzu and Mitsubishi in the American market. But if I'm wrong and they don't, they have lousy marketing and poor quality to blame.

Thomas C

No surprises here. Most of them are Ford and all of them are american except for 1 Kia, 1 Sentra and 1 Mazda which is owned by Ford. The residual value on the Neon is a joke.