50 Most Unsafe Cars You Should Never Drive Ranked
Modern cars are significantly safer than their predecessors, thanks to advancements in automotive technology and stringent safety standards. Today, most vehicles come equipped with essential safety features like airbags and seatbelts, and undergo rigorous crash-testing procedures. However, not all cars meet these high safety standards. Some vehicles have received notoriously low safety ratings from various testing organizations, highlighting severe deficiencies in occupant protection.
This article examines some of the worst-rated cars in terms of safety, based on results from organizations such as the Insurance Institute for Highway Safety (IIHS) and the European New Car Assessment Programme (Euro NCAP). From luxury SUVs to budget-friendly city cars, these vehicles have been flagged for their inability to provide adequate protection in the event of a crash. Understanding the safety risks associated with these cars can help consumers make more informed decisions and emphasize the importance of continuous safety improvements in the automotive industry.
50. Suzuki Baleno II
The second-generation Suzuki Baleno, which has been in production since 2015, is a small city car that has various petrol engines and a hybrid powerplant. In its most powerful variant, the Baleno can produce 110 horsepower and reach 60 miles per hour in 11 seconds. Despite its performance capabilities, the Baleno’s safety ratings were a cause for concern.
The Euro NCAP awarded the base model Baleno an alarming 3-star overall safety rating. However, the high-spec variant, equipped with the Radar Brake Support System, received a better rating of 4 out of 5 stars. This discrepancy in safety ratings underscored the importance of advanced safety features in enhancing occupant protection. Furthermore, the base model’s lack of side airbags and structural reinforcements significantly compromised its crashworthiness.
49. Ford Figo
The Ford Figo, a subcompact car based on the Fiesta hatchback, was primarily built and sold in developing countries. Launched in 2010, the first-generation Figo was assembled at Ford’s Chennai plant in India. To keep costs low, Ford only included front airbags as part of an optional premium package, with no rear seat airbags available at all.
As a result, the Ford Figo’s safety performance was severely lacking. The Global NCAP awarded it a zero-star rating for adult occupant safety, reflecting its inability to provide adequate protection in crash tests. This poor rating highlights significant safety concerns, making the Figo a risky choice for budget-conscious buyers in developing markets. Additionally, the lack of modern safety features such as electronic stability control and advanced braking systems further exacerbates its safety shortcomings.
48. Renault Kwid
The Renault Kwid, initially designed for the Indian market, was later expanded to other regions like Brazil and China. Launched in India in 2015 with a starting price of just $3,884, the Kwid featured extensive local engineering and production, with Renault claiming that 98% of its components and development were handled by local staff.
Despite its affordability, the Kwid’s safety performance was concerning. The standard model came equipped with only a driver’s side airbag, leading to a poor one-star safety rating from Global NCAP. This highlighted the vehicle’s inadequate safety measures, raising concerns about its protection capabilities for occupants in various markets. Moreover, the Kwid’s lack of advanced safety features, such as electronic stability control and side-impact protection, further compromised its safety profile.
47. Tata Nano
The Tata Nano, unveiled in 2008 and produced until 2018, was designed as an affordable, fuel-efficient city car. It won several awards in India, including Car of The Year by BS Motoring in 2010. However, a quick look at its design hints at its safety shortcomings.
The Nano lacked modern safety features, and when NCAP tested the base model equipped with no airbags, it received a 0-star safety rating. The body shell was also rated as unstable, highlighting significant safety concerns. Despite its affordability and fuel efficiency, the Nano’s inability to protect occupants effectively in crashes overshadowed its benefits. Additionally, the absence of advanced safety technologies such as electronic stability control and side-impact protection further compromised the vehicle’s overall safety, making it a risky choice for city driving.