|
Originally posted by VX100The insurance highway institute crashed a 59 bel air at 40mph into a 09 malibu. http://articles.moneycentral.msn.com/Insurance/InsureYourCar/crash-test-1959-chevy-vs-2009-chevy.aspx First, it's a shame to wreck a classic to do the test, but still the test shows the classic car did not do such a good job protecting the passenger. It didn't even have seat belts as no one used them at the time anyway, but even if you disregard seat belts and air bags, you see the frame didn't hold up too well. We'd like to think how some of those old cars were so solidly built (and some were) but today's cars are designed for impacts and designed to sacrifice themselves to protect the passengers. Still, a shame to crash a classic...
That tripe was propaganda and staged. Now, I'm not saying that 50 year old cars are super safe but this test was far from fair.
1) They chose a car with known engineering flaw, x-frame.
2) They set up and angled the crash to take advantage of said flaw.
Somebody much more familiar with vintage cars and safety posted this:
This is a stupid PR stunt done by an Insurance Industry group to pat themselves on the back for lobbying the last 50 years. Think a bit about the vehicles involved, and the type of crash being done. It's very misleading and naive to take it at face value.
Yes, they used the x-frame until 64, when they switched to a regular full frame. Ford took shots at them over side impacts, and they switched at the end of the cycle
Again, it's a misleading test. They use a 59 to match the 50 years, but instead of tossing a 59 Imperial against a '09 Sebring, they do this test against probably the weakest design of its era. The front off-set crash is also one the 59 would fare the worst in, vs say head on.
Nobody is claiming late 50's cars were perfectly safe by any stretch of the imagination. Those cars from the 50's did have some ridiculously serious safety problems: seats not securely bolted down, often no dual cylinder brakes, no shoulder belts + poorly designed/secured lap belts (which were optional!), interiors covered in pointy metal/unpadded dashboards, steering columns that didn't collapse and instead shot through your chest like a javelin, non-safety glass, etc etc. Every single one of these things was corrected by law by 1968 at the latest. There's an enormous difference from 59 to 69, which brings me to:
The worst thing about this video, besides it being pointless, is it just means more idiots will rant about how dangerous any era 'old car' is, without a clue what they are talking about, or what safety features came along and when, etc. The same people who seem to think something like a 71 Caddy is an instant death trap in comparison to something like a 92 Cabriolet/Miata with an airbag, or the civic I linked earlier.
1000 frames per second makes for some pretty bad ass shots but take this one with a huge boulder of salt.__________________________________________
~Chris
03 SRT-4
|
)