Other Everything else not covered in the main topics goes here. Please avoid brand and flame wars. Don't try and up your post count. It won't work in here.

Very impressive Old vs New crash test

Thread Tools
 
Search this Thread
 
Old Oct 11, 2009 | 11:44 AM
  #16  
Spooler's Avatar
Registered User
 
Joined: Jan 2006
Posts: 5,902
Likes: 5
From: Claxton, GA
It's all about where the crumple zones are. With the new car the zone is before the windshield. In the older car the crumple zone is right where the driver is. The crumple zone is where all of the force is exerted/used. As far as only two bolts holding on, I doubt it.
Reply
Old Oct 11, 2009 | 11:45 AM
  #17  
Swarthy Dago's Avatar
Registered User
 
Joined: Jan 2007
Posts: 470
Likes: 1
wow, that old heavy car had a tremendous amount of kinetic energy compared to the new safer car.
Reply
Old Oct 11, 2009 | 06:49 PM
  #18  
Redleg's Avatar
I was banned per my own request for speaking the name Pelosi
 
Joined: Aug 2002
Posts: 1,908
Likes: 0
From: Bristol Michigan
Waste of a nice classic for PR.
Reply
Old Oct 12, 2009 | 08:39 PM
  #19  
96_12V's Avatar
Thread Starter
Registered User
 
Joined: Feb 2004
Posts: 663
Likes: 0
From: Northern Iowa
Originally Posted by Joseph Filippi
wow, that old heavy car had a tremendous amount of kinetic energy compared to the new safer car.

Very little differance in weight between the two - take a quick look up.

Recall that with all the wiring, safety structures, and airbag/safety componets weighing them down, modern cars are a lot heavier then they used to be.
Reply
Old Oct 12, 2009 | 08:40 PM
  #20  
96_12V's Avatar
Thread Starter
Registered User
 
Joined: Feb 2004
Posts: 663
Likes: 0
From: Northern Iowa
Originally Posted by RickCJ
I heard that video was rigged, the old car had no motor and the front only had a couple bolts holding it on.

Could your site that source for this info?

And - is thier information correclty sited, or just someone's guess.

People make assumptions about old products and safety. Quite often those assumptions turn out not to be facts.
Reply
Old Oct 12, 2009 | 08:41 PM
  #21  
96_12V's Avatar
Thread Starter
Registered User
 
Joined: Feb 2004
Posts: 663
Likes: 0
From: Northern Iowa
Originally Posted by Redleg
Waste of a nice classic for PR.

Why didn't you buy it when it was sitting for sale instead...?
Reply
Old Oct 12, 2009 | 09:21 PM
  #22  
03RAMBUNCTIOUS's Avatar
I watch wind blow...
 
Joined: Dec 2006
Posts: 1,390
Likes: 0
From: Red Dirt territory of TEXAS
This is why I drive a fairly big truck. . My friend lost her life in hers in august, BUT driving her great big ol 06 dually saved her three friends lives. . but there combined speed was about 168mph, twice as fast as this video. . .

be safe out there. .
Reply
Old Oct 12, 2009 | 09:34 PM
  #23  
96_12V's Avatar
Thread Starter
Registered User
 
Joined: Feb 2004
Posts: 663
Likes: 0
From: Northern Iowa
Originally Posted by Joseph Filippi
wow, that old heavy car had a tremendous amount of kinetic energy compared to the new safer car.
The 1959 Bel Air Curb Weight: 3622 lb (http://www.carfolio.com/specificatio...car/?car=44539)

The 2009 Chevy Malibu Curb Weight: 3,424 lbs.
(http://www.iihs.org/ratings/rating.aspx?id=885)

Pretty suprising, eh?
Reply
Old Oct 12, 2009 | 09:41 PM
  #24  
96_12V's Avatar
Thread Starter
Registered User
 
Joined: Feb 2004
Posts: 663
Likes: 0
From: Northern Iowa
Review that video once again if you still think it was rigged. It's amazing that the driver's seat (a bench seat) actually comes unbolted on the driver's side as the bolts themselves (most likey) simply sheared off with the force. Let's face it - even just bolts themselves, and the metallurgy and physics behind something as simple as that, has come quite a ways in 50 years.

Plus the damage you see is way too consistant to have been rigged. The windshield flying out is pretty revealing of our adhesive technology these days as well. Note that present-day windshields are structural - they are an intergral part of the structure now.
Reply
Old Oct 12, 2009 | 09:56 PM
  #25  
Fronty Owner's Avatar
'People of Wal-Mart' 2010 finalist
 
Joined: Feb 2005
Posts: 456
Likes: 0
From: Oklahoma/Texas
Originally Posted by 96_12V
Could your site that source for this info?

And - is thier information correclty sited, or just someone's guess.

People make assumptions about old products and safety. Quite often those assumptions turn out not to be facts.
Does Youtube count as siting information?

Originally Posted by 96_12V
The 1959 Bel Air Curb Weight: 3622 lb (http://www.carfolio.com/specificatio...car/?car=44539)

The 2009 Chevy Malibu Curb Weight: 3,424 lbs.
(http://www.iihs.org/ratings/rating.aspx?id=885)

Pretty suprising, eh?
no.

I have owned and driven several old vehicles. I have never been impressed with the performance or ride. They do have style and chassis durability.
Reply
Related Topics
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
NJTman
Other
22
Feb 24, 2012 06:43 PM
westcoaster
Other
14
Jan 17, 2007 08:53 PM
BigJohnston
3rd Gen High Performance and Accessories (5.9L Only)
9
Jan 8, 2007 11:15 PM




All times are GMT -5. The time now is 07:15 AM.