Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Crash test '59 vs '09

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Crash test '59 vs '09

    This is for all those people who still believe the old cars were much safer than new. Built like tanks they were, but you still would be dead.

    [ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_xwYBBpHg1I]YouTube - Crash test: 1959 Chevy Bel Air[/ame]

    More Details About 1959 Bel Air Crash Test - Wheels Blog - NYTimes.com

    More Details About 1959 Bel Air Crash Test
    By Christopher Jensen

    The Insurance Institute for Highway Safety released on Thursday a video of a crash test between a 1959 Chevrolet Bel Air and a 2009 Malibu to demonstrate how car safety has improved. Not to simplify matters too much, but the Malibu won. And several Wheels readers commented, saying that the test was unfair because the institute used a Bel Air that didn’t contain an engine.

    Armed with these conspiracy theories, I returned to David Zuby, the senior vice president at the I.I.H.S.’s crash-test center in Virginia. He explained that when the institute went looking for a 1959 Bel Air to crash test there was one thing the organization didn’t want and some things it did.

    “We didn’t want to crash a museum piece,” Mr. Zuby said. “We were not looking for one that had been restored for museum or show quality.” But the vehicle had to have a solid structure, although a little surface rust would be acceptable.

    They found what they wanted in Indiana. “The frame was sound and all the body panels were sound,” he said. It had a 3.9-liter 6-cylinder engine and was in driving condition.

    The car was purchased for about $8,500 and had about 74,000 miles on the odometer, which was broken. It was trucked to the test center in Virginia.

    Mr. Zuby said the cloud that shows in the crash video wasn’t rust. “Most of that is road dirt that accumulates in nooks and crannies that you can’t get it,” he said.
    "Live Long and Prosper"

    Bayswater Martial Arts and Yoga Centre

  • #2
    Crumple zones absorb the energy instead of your face smashing against the dashboard

    Isn't technology wonderful?

    Also how awesome were non-collapsible steering columns? You get impaled if you crash head on! Woo!

    Comment


    • #3
      thats amazing the difference :o it just goes to show how much safer todays cars really are
      RIP ADRIAN LEE
      16-12-1986 - 22-3-2007
      I had plenty of time to rub one out in space which was great but after awhile it was like living in a snowglobe - Peter Griffin

      Comment


      • #4
        They "dont buildem like they used to" cos with new cars it costs 3-5 grand to get a crappy plastic bumper resprayed - with the old steel and chrome you get it buffed out or beaten straight!

        It would have been interesting if it hit flush "straight on" nice cast steel engine would have done some damage!

        Take that and stick it in your crumple zone!

        Comment


        • #5
          Like I have explained to to many an old fogie who complained about how their cars "just fold like paper compare to their good old HQ", in the old days the softest part of the car was the driver.
          Can you help with foster care?
          http://www.perthstreetbikes.com/foru...needed-163289/

          Comment


          • #6
            Nooo!
            Why destroy destroy a classic?
            To prove that safety has improved over the last 50 years?...well, dah
            The Chev didn't look in bad condition, pretty restorable IMO (well before the crash test).
            Crash test as many new cars as you want they're building new ones every day, but they wont be building another '59 Chev.
            -JC-

            Comment


            • #7
              Originally posted by -JC- View Post
              Nooo!
              Why destroy destroy a classic?
              To prove that safety has improved over the last 50 years?...well, dah
              The Chev didn't look in bad condition, pretty restorable IMO (well before the crash test).
              Crash test as many new cars as you want they're building new ones every day, but they wont be building another '59 Chev.
              -JC-
              You would be amazed at how many older people are convinced new cars are unsafe because they crumple so easily in a crash. You can quote scientific data until your blue in the face to these people becase they are convinced it's some tactic to get them to but new cars after a minor bingle.
              Nothing speaks louder than video footage.
              Can you help with foster care?
              http://www.perthstreetbikes.com/foru...needed-163289/

              Comment


              • #8
                HQ Belmont versus Hyunday Getz?
                Both will be hurt but I wanna be in the Belmont tank with a seat belt!

                Comment


                • #9
                  Originally posted by Roger Explosion View Post
                  You would be amazed at how many older people are convinced new cars are unsafe because they crumple so easily in a crash. You can quote scientific data until your blue in the face to these people becase they are convinced it's some tactic to get them to but new cars after a minor bingle.
                  Nothing speaks louder than video footage.
                  Originally posted by Jamathi View Post
                  HQ Belmont versus Hyunday Getz?
                  Both will be hurt but I wanna be in the Belmont tank with a seat belt!

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Great vid.

                    So on the eight day, after wasting time faffing about with unimportant guff like heaven & earth & the waters & sky & creatures [& having a wee kip] & man.... God created PSB (GenesiSX-R1000)

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      ^^ Seconded.

                      Really puts it into perspective. I guess the basis of the "don't built 'em like they used to" arguement is those old cars used to literally be tanks. Now you get cars like the lil Volkswagon Golf, Hyundai Getz, Ford Focus amongst other small cars, put them into comparison and what do you get?

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        I'd still feel safer in the rusty tank than one of those shitty SMART cars...

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          Originally posted by polony View Post
                          I'd still feel safer in the rusty tank than one of those shitty SMART cars...
                          Are you sure about that?

                          [ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ju6t-yyoU8s]YouTube - smart car crash[/ame]

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            ...finally stops sobbing over the miindless destruction of a Belair

                            Don't care that classics are unsafe, handle like boats and destroy the environment...still love 'em. Wont be selling the Charger anytime soon.

                            If safety was a big concern, I probably wouldn't ride a bike.

                            -JC-

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              Almost makes me wonder if we'd survive an accident like that better than the car as we'd be thrown clear.
                              You put the c*nt in country run

                              Comment

                              Working...
                              X