The Truth About Cars Announces The Top Ten Automakers Of 2010

Bertel Schmitt
by Bertel Schmitt

Now that most of the large car companies have supplied their numbers, TTAC has compiled its annual table of the world’s largest automakers. In doing so, we have attempted to come as close as possible to the methodology used in the official OICA list, which will be published some time this summer. Here is the 2009 version as a reference. And here are TTAC’s Top Ten of 2010:

Top Ten Automakers 2010

Rank


2010
Name


Production 2010*Production 2009**Rank 2009Change


1 Toyota Group 8,557,3517,234,439118.29%2 General Motors Group 8,389,7696,459,053229.89%3 Volkswagen Group 7,140,0006,067,208317.68%4 Hyundai Motor Group 5,744,0184,645,776523.64%5 Ford 5,313,0004,685,394413.39%6 Nissan 4,053,7012,744,562847.70%7 Honda 3,643,0573,012,637720.93%8 PSA Group 3,602,2003,042,311618.40%9 Suzuki 2,892,9452,387,5371021.17%10 Renault 2,625,7962,296,0091114.36%

* According to data reported by companies, sources hyperlinked, see remarks


** According to OICA

The OICA list is the industry benchmark for motor vehicle production. Therefore, we have tried to replicate its methodology as closely as possible. This means:

  • Use the manufacturer groupings as in OICA 2009
  • Use all motor vehicles built by a manufacturer, from mini vehicle to heavy truck
  • Use production, not sales

The OICA methodology is debatable and is being constantly debated, but we are not here to change it. We are trying to come as close to the final ranking as possible. The idea of this list is not to put a new spin on matters. The idea is to give our readers data for which others have to wait half a year.

This list is as good as its sources. We have used official data delivered by the manufacturers only. The sources are hyperlinked. The only exception is Hyundai Group, it leads to an article where the official data from Hyundai and Kia are aggregated to comply with their joint OICA reporting.

Where we had a choice of production or sales, we took the production number, as required by OICA. The exacting Japanese are usually very precise in their data delivery. They carefully separate sales from production and give you tables that even capture CKD kits in transit. Other countries and companies are more opaque. If no production number is given, we need to take what we have. Where “deliveries” or “sales to wholesale” are specified, that number is usually close to “production.” Rarely does a manufacturer count a car as sold when it is actually sold to the end user.

For comparison, the 2009 production number and rank are given. They are single sourced from OICA.

The percentage change number is a calculated number for reference only. It measures the difference between the 2009 OICA number and the reported 2010 number. If manufacturers use different numbers than what they report to OICA, this calculated percentage will differ from theirs.

This list remains a work in progress. It is not unusual that a number appears in these year-end releases, then another number appears in the annual report, only to be followed by a different number at OICA. Even after OICA publishes a number, it does not remain cast in stone.

Nissan for instance reported to OICA an annual production of 2,744,562 units for 2009. In Nissan’s new 2010 production and sales release, that 2009 number rose to 2,953,216 units. That’s a good 200,000 more. Why? No idea.

Whether groups aggregate their numbers or not is up to the groups. If Nissan and Renault would report together, they would have unseated the Volkswagen Group from its #3 spot. But Nissan and Renault so far never reported together. They issued a joint press release though. Volkswagen and Suzuki could also pool their production, arrive at 10 million units and make that exercise utterly boring. (Speaking of which, message to the scribes who like to jump the gun: The Volkswagen number does NOT include Porsche yet. It most likely won’t include it in 2010 either.) If Fiat and Chrysler would report together, they would still be on the list, in most likely. But they don’t report together. When the manufacturers change their reporting, we will change with them. Before, we won’t.

The list itself needs no commentary, it speaks for itself. For easier reading, the position changes were marked green for up and red for down.

Bertel Schmitt
Bertel Schmitt

Bertel Schmitt comes back to journalism after taking a 35 year break in advertising and marketing. He ran and owned advertising agencies in Duesseldorf, Germany, and New York City. Volkswagen A.G. was Bertel's most important corporate account. Schmitt's advertising and marketing career touched many corners of the industry with a special focus on automotive products and services. Since 2004, he lives in Japan and China with his wife <a href="http://www.tomokoandbertel.com"> Tomoko </a>. Bertel Schmitt is a founding board member of the <a href="http://www.offshoresuperseries.com"> Offshore Super Series </a>, an American offshore powerboat racing organization. He is co-owner of the racing team Typhoon.

More by Bertel Schmitt

Comments
Join the conversation
2 of 26 comments
  • Th009 Th009 on Jan 31, 2011

    You could do at least five different tables for ranking production numbers: 1. Individual brands 2. Companies and subsidiaries with over 50% ownership (GM, VW etc) 3. Additional "groups as recognized by OICA" 4. All groupings with cross-shareholdings 5. Groupings with pro-rated production (ie add 38% of Kia to Hyundai production) In my mind, the first and last are the ones that make the most sense ...

  • Eldard Eldard on May 12, 2011

    Ford used to sell in the 6-7 million range several years ago. How the mighty have fallen.

  • SCE to AUX My first car was a 71 Pinto, 1.6 Kent engine, 4 spd. It was the original Base model with a trunk, #4332 ever built. I paid $125 for it in 1980, and had it a year. It remains the quietest idling engine I've ever had. 75HP, and I think the compression ratio was 8:1. It was riddled with rust, and I sold it to a classmate who took it to North Carolina.After a year with a 74 Fiat, I got a 76 Pinto, 2.3 engine, 4-spd. The engine was tractor rough, but I had the car 5 years with lots of rebuilding. It's the only car I parted with by driving into a junkyard.Finally, we got an 80 Bobcat for $1 from a friend in 1987. What a piece of junk. Besides the rust, it never ran right despite tons of work, fuel economy was terrible, the automatic killed the power. The hatch always leaked, and the vinyl seats were brutal in winter and summer.These cars were terrible by today's standards, but they never left me stranded. All were fitted with the poly blast shield, and I never worried about blowing up.The miserable Bobcat was traded for an 82 LTD, which was my last Ford when it was traded in 1996. Seeing how Ford is doing today, I won't be going back.
  • Jeff S I rented a PT Cruiser for a week and although I would not have bought one it was not as bad as I thought it would be. Pontiac Aztek was a good vehicle but ugly. Pinto for its time was not as good as the Japanese cars but it was not the worst that honor would go to the Vega. If one bought a Pinto new it was much better with a 4 speed manual with no air it didn't have the power for those. Add air and an automatic to a Pinto and you could beat it on a bicycle. The few small cars available today or in the recent past are so much better than the Pinto, Vega, and Gremlin. A Mitsubishi Mirage, Nissan Versa, and the former Chevy Spark are light years ahead of those small cars of the 70s.
  • JRED My dad has a 2005 F-150 with the dreaded 5.4 that he bought new. 320k miles on the original engine and trans and it's still not only driving, but driving well. He's just done basic maint, including spark plugs and ignition modules. Interior is pretty ratty now but who cares? Outlier I know, but that is a good truck.
  • MaintenanceCosts It is nearly 20 years later and this remains the most satisfying Hyundai product I've driven. It got a lot of middling reviews at the time but the 3.3 V6 was buttery, the transmission shifted well, and the ergonomics were fantastic.
  • Steverock PT Cruiser with the 2.4 turbo. I bought one new in 2004, and it was quick. It was kind of dorky, but it was fun to drive and had lots of room for stuff. My wife drove it to work one day with the parking brake on, and it was never the same after that. Traded it in on a 2005 Mazda6 wagon.
Next