It's hard to be injured in a crash when your truck is in the service bay at the dealership all the time. Makes sense.

Where did Chevy come out? I would say GMC is on top because the tend to be driven by older slower drivers.

I realy do not know what to think of this report, being from the insurance institute an all, expecialy when I read in the report that the Kia Rondo 5, toyota carolla and Mrec/Benz CL 600? had the most injuries? it was the M/B CL 600 that gave me pause to believe anything in this report! That and the fact that the Chevy was not even mentioned at all! and we all know it is the same thing as the GMC!

Who researches and writes some of these articles? If you look at NHTSA the Ford F-150 takes top honors in crash testing and occupant safety! The Chevy/GMC/Fiat junk is rated "marginal" or "Poor". Almost sounds like HEMI V8 wrote this using one of his alter egos like Bob or Michigan Bob or whatever he calls himself!

This report is mostly about buyer demographics. Vehicles that sell in higher volume are more likely to be in accidents than vehicles that sell in lower volume. Vehicles accessible to younger drivers are more likely to be in accidents than more expensive vehicles like pickup trucks.

The report is merely a statement of the percentage of vehicles that happened to be in an accident regardless of who was at fault.

@FordTrucks77

You are one of the TYPICAL FORD GIRLY GIRL KNOW IT ALLS. The current Silverado NEVER received a poor rating to my knowledge in any crash test category. Roof crush may have been marginal, but THERE WERE NO POOR RATINGS. Rest assured, the newly redesigned truck is sure to get GOOD RATINGS ACROSS THE BOARD. Put that in your Ford girly girl pipe and smoke it.

For it to be accurate it would have to be weighted against market percentage.

Otherwise, and F-150 is six times more likely to be involved in an auto accident than a Tundra because there are six times more F-150's on the road. It's meaningless

Toycrusher: I agree with what you said, and I will say again, that the M/B CL 600 has a known history of ownership by rich old guys, of which there are neither hot rodders or crazy drivers, maybee a little bit too cautious if anything!

'Cause GMCs are primarily driven by old fahrts.

3 out of the 4 categories are rated less than good for Chevy/GMC. I'll take my chances elsewhere.

http://www.iihs.org/ratings/summary.aspx?class=70

Did Kickingtires.com crash one of these? If so, where's the video, if not, they suck!

QUOTE The study focused on "purely payments for people's medical bills," plus lost wages, Danise added. /QUOTE

Seems to be a flawed study. Could be linked to wealth, income, etc as some folks have better healthcare coverage and carry minimal auto medical coverage and vice verse.

@Ken - you beat me to it. "The study focused on "purely payments for people's medical bills," plus lost wages, Danise added."
Is that a true sign of safety?
Lets look at the "The Kia Rio5 (LX/SX), Toyota Corolla (L only), Mitsubishi Lancer Ralliart and Mercedes-Benz CL600"
Why just the Kia Rio LX/SX? and not the rest of Kia Rio line?
Why is the Toyota Corolla L rated worse than the other Corolla's?
Is it because these cars are base models and therefore is most likely to be driven by younger and more wreckless/unskilled drivers?
Mitsubishi Lancer Ralliart is a performance based 4 door that was just as fast as a Laborgini on Top Gear's track. A young man's performance car that is driven hard and more likely to get involved in a serious crash.
Young drivers often are more aggressive therefore involved in worse crashes and therefore larger injury claims. A long term disability also results in a larger insurance cost. A younger driver often survives a crash that will kill an older adult which also increases injury claims.
The Mercedes-Benz CL600, who buys those? Usually people with higher incomes. A lawyer earning 1,000 dollars an hour is going to acrew a larger payout than Bob selling vacuums at 5.00 per hour out of his company Impala while drivng a 1887 POS truck.

This study little bearing on how safe a vehicle is.

GM trucks are the cheapest to maintain and also insure. They are the best bang for the dollar spent. Keep building the best trucks available GM. You Ford and Dodge boys keep wasting your money on those dollar wasting Ford and Dodge trucks.

This just makes me laugh, as if their findings proves the GMC is better than another vehicle, this could change from week to week. Oh well, gives the peeps a place start to another truck bash fest LOL. At least i can tell my wife my GMC is better to own than her Ram, oh wait, i don't think they included the 3500 GMC, aww nuts. Hers is probably safer, it isn't on the road as much....

What about the pickup the one look like a box ....look big but build for small weekend job. Ho yes the ford ,

Got a '99 with 220K; but still donna like BS/BO.
GMC's have gotten too big, boxy and stupid looking.
So we bought an Avalanche, Which weighs close to 6000 lbs.
Hell for stout in an accident, however data shows the F150 to be the roof crush resistance king by a long shot, but they are even uglier than the GMC.

Would like a Thailand made Ford Ranger Diesel, but we aren't holding our breath.

Dodge Ram fires

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=E2-2IPWL8Lg

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cdClmGOaVDc

USAA gives discounts for safety features and such, so this bean counter logic lowers my insurance bill. I benefit even though I am quite sure my Ext. cab is not as protective as the Crew with a B pillar.
If this is their benchmark, I'm all for it!

GMC's have gotten too big, boxy and stupid looking.
So we bought an Avalanche,

@rr7mc, I tend to agree with that. I think the Avalanche is the best looking potential truck on the market. GM was pretty shortsighted to not have that be the Silverado 1500. As to the study, for one it's baseless in reality, and two, if a Sierra is safe so is a Silverado yet no mention? Every crash study I've read on both trucks has rated them some of the poorest in comparison to the competition. Crash test results reported on this very site.

GovtMoCo trucks are a US citizen Taxdollar WASTE! Only here to prop up CHINA BUICKS and GERMAN OPELS VIA Re-Badged Buick's in America for the Absolutely CLUELESS. NO company NEEDS TWO TRUCKS! I'm cool with Chevrolet but I HATE GovtMoCo.

GM trucks have gotton too big and boxy, so i bought an Avalanche.

The Avalanche is big and useless, as far as pick up capability is concerned. Load the bed with sand or dirt, empty bed, then fold down rear cab section to load ATV, drive down road and have residual sand or dirt swirling around in the cab now, ya great design.

@Saun way up at the top of the comments, maybe Ford didn't do so well because they are all driven by a bunch of late 20's early 30'somethings who are stuck in their teens and think their pickup is a racecar especially when towing trailers? Food for thought.