Posted on 01/26/2016 4:51:12 PM PST by MtnClimber
If a 2009 Chevy Malibu got in a head-on collision with a 1959 Chevrolet Bel Air, which car would emerge with the least amount of damage? At first glance, you'd expect an old tank like the Bel Air to obliterate the Malibu, right? But nothing could be further from the truth.
(Excerpt) Read more at yahoo.com ...
Impressive video at link.
Do it again with a 1959 Bel Air.
Detroit Iron v. Detroit Aluminum.
The real question is which occupants would have the least damage
No friggin’ way....cars of the 50s were tanks!
Did they take the engine out of the ‘59?
IIRC the 1959 Chevy did not come equipped with seat belts. They also had steel dash boards.
It coulda been an I-6.
Run it again with a ‘58.
When I was in high school, my parents gave me their 1969 Chevrolet Bel Air to drive. At a stoplight, my best friend hydroplaned and slammed into me. Her car was totaled and yet,me and my fellow cheerleaders felt nothing more tHan a hard thump. My best friend had neck injuries, a totaled Chevette and the police were incredulous as they dusted the glass shards off of my unblemished bumper
The older car is wider, so while the new car takes the impact all the way to the center, it is off-center for the older car, meaning that it misses most of the mass of the straight six, but catches half of the engine mass of the newer car. A fairer test would have been straight on.
At least the old Chevy was a four door - wrecking a two door 1959 Impala would have been a crime against classic cars, if not humanity itself. That being said, the driver of the Bel Air would have been seriously injured if not killed. Modern cars are way safer in a crash.
I hate Consumer Reports, they are usually biased against American cars in their reporting. Anyway, why would they destroy a vintage 59 Chevy for this stupid test?
See my comment at post 11.
Modern cars have corrugations in the engine compartment so that it acts as a huge cushion. The old ones did not and the steel transferred the impact directly into passenger compartment.
A little bondo and the ‘59 will be good as new.
The ‘09...not so much.
I have a 79 K5 blazer that I toy with some. Always loved the Chevrolet grill up until the early 80s.
I had the pleasure of participating in a front collision crash test with my former employer. Talk about a cool way to blow $50,000 in 3 seconds.
The funniest part was, were testing a windshield adhesive. The Ford Taurus was considered difficult to pass. We bought a slightly used one but the dealer wouldn’t deliver it because the car needed new brakes to pass inspection. We had to send a letter from our attorney explaining that the car would spend exactly 3 seconds in transit before hitting a brick wall.
Passenger cockpit protection first became a think in the 1970’s with knee bolsters, seat belts, crumple zones etc. Airbags, IMHO aren’t worthwhile. I once read that a properly worn seatbelt was nearly as effective as a seatbelt and airbag. I had a friend who was an airbag engineer at GM who agreed with me on that.
My kid found that out recently. He was rear ended on the freeway and punted into the car ahead of him. His car was destroyed at both ends. For some reason, the airbag didn’t deploy. (Older Mercury Sable, same model as we destroyed)
Outside of being a little sore, he was uninjured even though it was a pretty violent hit. His laptop was damaged beyond repair though, as was the car. Being an engineering student, he needed a laptop. I picked him up at the crash scene, took him home to show mom he was OK (she really wasn’t all that worried) then of to the store for a new computer.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.