Canadians often trust top-selling cars to protect their families, but some of the most popular models on the road are hiding troubling safety shortcomings. From weak crash test results to outdated tech and unpredictable driving behavior, these vehicles have earned reputations that don’t match their marketing. Despite attractive interiors, solid horsepower, and quick acceleration, these cars may put you at greater risk than you think. Here are 21 cars that Canadians thought were safe but aren’t:
Kia Forte
With a sleek design and peppy 147 hp engine, the Kia Forte is a smart, compact choice. It delivers a decent fuel economy of 6.9 L/100km combined and a surprisingly refined cabin for its price. But the Forte’s safety record in Canada isn’t as reassuring. Side-impact crash tests have raised concerns, and its lack of advanced driver-assist features in lower trims is a major drawback. Acceleration is slow at around 8.5 seconds to 60 mph. Although it feels stable, its structural integrity in collisions has come into question, something buyers often don’t discover until it’s too late.
Dodge Journey
For years, the Dodge Journey’s spacious interior and affordable pricing made it a go-to family SUV in Canada. Under the hood, it offered a 172 hp four-cylinder or optional V6, but performance was underwhelming, with sluggish acceleration of 9.4 seconds to 60 mph. Safety, however, is where the Journey falls short. It received poor ratings in frontal crash tests and lacked modern collision avoidance tech even in later model years. The fuel economy isn’t impressive either, at around 10.8 L/100km. Despite its minivan-like appeal, the Journey never delivered the protection Canadian families expected from a family hauler.
Mitsubishi Mirage
As one of Canada’s most affordable cars, the Mitsubishi Mirage sells on price and fuel efficiency, with just 6.2 L/100km combined. But its 78 hp engine struggles even in city driving, and it takes over 12 seconds to reach 60 mph. More troubling is its subpar crash test performance. Multiple safety agencies have flagged the Mirage for poor occupant protection and weak structural ratings. Its sparse interior lacks modern safety tech, and its lightweight build offers little resistance in real-world collisions. Many Canadians assumed the Mirage was a smart economy car but at a high safety cost.
Chevrolet Spark
The Chevrolet Spark may be city-sized and budget-friendly, but its small frame hides major safety concerns. The 98 hp engine offers just enough power for city traffic, with a 0–60 mph time of around 10.7 seconds. Fuel efficiency is solid at 6.2 L/100km, but its crash test scores are mixed, especially in side and small-overlap front impacts. Interior tech is basic, and while it offers some standard safety features, the Spark lacks the protective structure of larger rivals. Canadian drivers seeking value often underestimate the risks of such a small, minimally fortified car.
Jeep Compass
With rugged styling and a 180 hp engine, the Jeep Compass seems ready for Canadian winters. It offers respectable acceleration at 8.3 seconds to 60 mph and a fuel economy of 9.0 L/100km combined. However, safety is its weak link. In crash tests, the Compass scored below average in side impact and small overlap scenarios. Lower trims omit key driver-assist tech, and the interior, though comfortable, doesn’t make up for structural flaws. Jeep loyalists may overlook its shortcomings, but safety-conscious Canadians should think twice before trusting this SUV to protect their families.
Nissan Sentra (Pre-2020 models)
Older Nissan Sentra models, especially those produced before the 2020 redesign, struggled in critical safety categories. Equipped with a 124 hp engine and a slow 9.5-second 0–60 mph time, the Sentra lacked its competitors’ acceleration and advanced safety gear. Fuel economy is moderate at 7.1 L/100km, but crash tests revealed substandard side-impact and front overlap protection. The interior is spacious but outdated in terms of safety tech. While newer models have improved, many Canadians still drive or buy used versions that fall short of modern safety expectations, making them a risk on Canadian roads.
Hyundai Accent
The Hyundai Accent has long been a favorite in Canada’s budget car market, thanks to solid fuel economy (6.3 L/100km) and a low entry price. Its 120 hp engine delivers slow acceleration of around 8.8 seconds to 60 mph, but its limited crash protection really hurts this subcompact. Safety agencies flagged weaknesses in the side and minor frontal impacts. While the newer trims added more tech, the base model lacks advanced features like blind spot monitoring or automatic emergency braking. The cabin is comfortable enough, but the Accent may not hold up when it comes to serious accidents.
Ford EcoSport
The Ford EcoSport is neither eco-friendly nor sporty. Its base 123 hp engine delivers sluggish acceleration of 10.4 seconds to 60 mph, and fuel economy hovers around 8.4 L/100km combined. While the ride height appeals to Canadian drivers seeking SUV visibility, crash test results have been underwhelming, especially in side-impact and small-overlap front tests. The interior feels cramped and dated, and several trims lack essential safety features like adaptive cruise control or forward collision warning. Despite its urban appeal, the EcoSport isn’t a car that safety-conscious Canadians should rely on.
Fiat 500
Stylish and compact, the Fiat 500 turned heads on Canadian streets, but it also turned up poor safety data. With a 101 hp engine and a poky 10.5-second 0–60 mph time, the 500 underperforms even as a city car. Fuel efficiency is fair at 6.7 L/100km, but its small size compromises crash protection. Safety agencies noted significant weaknesses in side-impact and roof strength tests. While the interior offers quirky design and surprising tech for the price, the car lacks the physical protection Canadians need for highway driving.
Chevrolet Malibu (Pre-2019 models)
Though once a go-to midsize sedan, the pre-2019 Chevrolet Malibu now shows its age, especially in safety. Older models offered a 160 hp turbocharged engine with decent acceleration of 8.2 seconds to 60 mph, but they missed out on modern safety systems. The interior is roomy, but bare-bone trims skip features like lane-keeping assist and auto emergency braking. The fuel economy sits around 7.8 L/100km, but the outdated crash structure and poor small-overlap test scores make this sedan risky. Canadians driving used Malibus from these years may be surprised how far behind they are in safety.
Toyota Yaris (2-door hatchback models)
While Toyota has a solid reputation for safety, the discontinued 2-door Yaris hatchback didn’t live up to the brand’s standards. Its 106 hp engine offered poor acceleration of over 10 seconds to 60 mph, and though it sipped fuel efficiently at 6.4 L/100km, its compact size and low weight left it vulnerable to crashes. Side-impact and front-offset crash tests revealed structural weaknesses, and the base interior lacked critical safety tech found in rivals. Many Canadians assumed a Toyota badge guaranteed security, but the Yaris hatch proves even reliable brands can have blind spots.
Chrysler 200
Marketed as a premium midsize sedan, the Chrysler 200 came with bold styling and available V6 power of up to 295 hp. Despite its strong acceleration of 6.2 seconds to 60 mph, its safety record disappointed. Crash test ratings were inconsistent, and roof strength and rear-impact protection were both flagged by Canadian safety boards. The interior looked upscale but often felt cramped and lacked intuitive controls. With a fuel economy of 9.4 L/100km, it also wasn’t efficient. Buyers were drawn to its design, but many didn’t realize until later that the 200 compromised on structural safety in key areas.
Jeep Renegade
The Jeep Renegade brings off-road styling and capability to the subcompact SUV world, but not without trade-offs. Equipped with a 177 hp turbo engine, it offers good low-end torque and hits 60 mph in around 8.7 seconds. Fuel economy sits at 8.8 L/100km. However, safety is a sticking point as side-impact ratings are below average, and some trims don’t include forward collision warning or blind spot detection. The interior feels rugged but tight, with hard plastics throughout. Its Jeep badge and adventurous appeal often attract Canadians, but it trails the competition when it comes to crashworthiness.
Nissan Versa (pre-2020 models)
Before its 2020 redesign, the Nissan Versa was widely known for its affordability but not safety. With a 109 hp engine and slow 10-second 0–60 mph performance, the Versa didn’t offer much power. Fuel economy was decent at 6.5 L/100km, but its small, lightweight frame performed poorly in crash tests, especially side and small-overlap front impacts. Many trims lacked stability control and advanced safety systems. Inside, the cabin was basic and uninspiring, with limited passenger protection features. Canadians who bought used Versas expecting solid reliability were often shocked to learn how exposed they were in a collision.
Mazda2
The Mazda2 was marketed as a fun, efficient subcompact, but its safety record tells a different story. With just 100 hp and a slow 10.3-second 0–60 mph time, the car struggled with highway acceleration. It delivered solid fuel economy at 6.4 L/100km, but that came at the cost of weight and structure. The Mazda2 performed poorly in side-impact and small-overlap crash tests, raising red flags. Inside, the cabin felt well-designed for the price but lacked advanced safety tech. Many Canadians bought it for city driving ease, not realizing how exposed they’d be in even moderate collisions.
Hyundai Elantra (Pre-2017 models)
Earlier versions of the Hyundai Elantra, particularly those before 2017, fell short in critical safety areas. At the same time, newer models improved significantly, while older ones offered only basic safety features. Equipped with a 145 hp engine, it accelerated to 60 mph in about 8.6 seconds, with decent fuel economy at 7.2 L/100km. The interior was comfortable for its class, but structural weaknesses showed up in slight overlaps and side-impact tests. Without standard advanced driver assists like lane departure warnings or auto braking, these models left many Canadian drivers unknowingly vulnerable, especially in used markets where low prices concealed significant risks.
Chevrolet Aveo
Though discontinued, the Chevrolet Aveo still lingers in the Canadian used car market, and it’s not doing buyers any favors. With a 103 hp engine and sluggish 11.2-second 0–60 mph performance, it lacks speed and modern safety. Fuel economy was modest at 7.1 L/100km, but structural integrity in crash scenarios was far worse. The Aveo scored poorly in both side and frontal impact tests, and it lacks features like electronic stability control or airbags beyond the basics. Inside, the plastic-heavy cabin adds little reassurance, and it may seem like a deal for budget-conscious Canadians, but it could come at a steep cost.
Smart Fortwo
The Smart Fortwo is ideal for squeezing into tight urban parking spots but is far from ideal for a collision. Its 89 hp engine is barely adequate for highway merging, with a 0–60 mph time of over 11 seconds. While its fuel economy is excellent at 5.9 L/100km, its ultra-compact size puts occupants at high risk in multi-vehicle crashes. Crash test ratings showed promising results in some areas but weak protection in side impacts and high-speed collisions. The two-seat interior is basic, and driver-assistance features are virtually nonexistent, and Canadians who value economy over safety may regret overlooking this car’s limitations.
Scion iQ
Marketed as a microcar with a big personality, the Scion iQ never quite delivered where it mattered- safety. With a 94 hp engine and an 11.8-second 0–60 mph time, the iQ was never built for power. Its tiny frame helped it sip gas at 5.5 L/100km, but crash protection was limited by size and design. Side-impact and rear-collision tests revealed vulnerabilities, especially for rear passengers, despite its “four-seat” claims. The quirky interior lacked essential safety gear beyond airbags. While it turned heads for being unconventional, Canadians who bought the iQ may not have realized how compromised they were in real-world driving.
Dodge Caliber
The Dodge Caliber was meant to be a bold crossover alternative, but safety-wise, it missed the mark. Its 158 hp engine felt underpowered given the car’s weight, and its 0–60 mph time of 9.3 seconds didn’t impress. The Caliber struggled in crash testing, with below-average scores in frontal and side impacts. Interior materials felt cheap, and many trims didn’t offer modern safety aids like rear-view cameras or stability control. Canadians who bought it new or used often were disappointed by the drive and risks they didn’t anticipate.
Suzuki SX4
The Suzuki SX4 was a budget-friendly hatchback with all-wheel drive appeal for Canadian winters but came with hidden dangers. Its 150 hp engine offered slow 9.8-second acceleration to 60 mph, and fuel economy hovered at 8.3 L/100km. Crash tests highlighted structural concerns, especially in side-impact and roof strength areas. Inside, the SX4 felt dated even when new, and lacked modern safety features like lane assist or collision warnings, and with Suzuki’s exit from the Canadian market, parts and services can also be harder to find.
22 Times Canadian Ingenuity Left the U.S. in the Dust
When people think of innovation, they often picture Silicon Valley. However, Canada has a history of innovation, too. Whether it’s redefining sports, revolutionizing medicine, or just showing America up at its own game, Canadian inventors, thinkers, and dreamers have had their fair share of mic-drop moments. Here are 22 times Canadian ingenuity left the U.S. in the dust.
22 Times Canadian Ingenuity Left the U.S. in the Dust
