No, not in performance....safety.
Amazing.
[ame="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5CU-k0XmLUk"]YouTube - 1959 Chevrolet Bel Air Vs. 2009 Chevrolet Malibu IIHS Offset[/ame]
No, not in performance....safety.
Amazing.
[ame="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5CU-k0XmLUk"]YouTube - 1959 Chevrolet Bel Air Vs. 2009 Chevrolet Malibu IIHS Offset[/ame]
NO!
"Kimi, can you improve on your [race] finish?"
"No. My Finnish is fine; I am from Finland. Do you have any water?"
Be careful out on the road, Fleet!
A graphic demonstration of the advancement of vehicle safety. Very impressive. Very original. DON'T DO IT AGAIN!
UCP's biggest (only?) fan of the '74-'76 Mercury Cougar.
UCP's proudest owner of a '74 Cougar
My favorite color is chrome.
Alright, alright: I'll stop complaining about all the weight modern safety systems add to today's cars.
PS: How fast were they going?
"The Metric System is the tool of the Devil! My car gets 40 Rods to the Hogshead and that's the ways I likes it!" -Grandpa Simpson
sad to see such a nicely preserved bel air destroyed, but an excellent reminder for those that drive older cars to be careful.
Honor. Courage. Commitment. Etcetera.
Technically, they shouldve just compared each impact against a brick wall. As they did it theyre introducing alot of other variables regarding their relative safety.
If you want real scary though, they shouldve compared both cars on side impact, or worse still, rear impact. Alot of new cars today still have a pretty weak rear crash structure, and alot of authorities dont even crash test for rear impacts.
I am the Stig
So they destroyed a clean vintage Bel-Air to tell us the obvious?
I'm dropping out to create a company that starts with motorcycles, then cars, and forty years later signs a legendary Brazilian driver who has a public and expensive feud with his French teammate.
It has taken over 40 years to make that little difference in cars. You would think by now they would have encouraged the development of accident-free cars.
god no. the last thing people need is the belief that no matter what they do some form of safety net will save them.
Andreas Preuninger, Manager of Porsche High Performance Cars: "Grandmas can use paddles. They aren't challenging."
Its not always possible to have a technical accidentTechnically, they shouldve just compared each impact against a brick wall.
Amazing indeed - notice that the base of the A-pillar strikes the roof rail!
Additional footage
[ame="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_xwYBBpHg1I"]YouTube - Crash test: 1959 Chevy Bel Air[/ame]
I was just driving a '59 el camino a few weeks ago, glad I didn't get hit head on. Maybe being slammed to the ground would help in a collision.
"We went to Wnedy's. I had chicken nuggest." ~ Quiggs
I'm dropping out to create a company that starts with motorcycles, then cars, and forty years later signs a legendary Brazilian driver who has a public and expensive feud with his French teammate.
both 40 mph
This.
Testing each car against a similar car would have been a better idea. Of course it's less safe to drive an old car NOW than a new one, but back in 1959 this Bel Air would have never hit a 2009 Malibu, and I'm pretty sure the damages the Bel Air would suffer against another Bel Air would be inferior.
That said I also think crashing a Malibu against another Malibu would result in more damages than in this case, but less then in an accident against two old Bel Air'.
Little difference...yes.
Even assuming this difference is "little", that doesn't mean it was easy to achieve.
KFL Racing Enterprises - Kicking your ass since 2008
*cough* http://theitalianjunkyard.blogspot.com/ *cough*
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)