Crash test - 1959 Chevy Bel Air vs Modern new car

[speedog]

So for Jetta-2.0, Tik-Tok and nismo_fan - are ya saying that you'd feel safer in a 'new' early 60's sedan compared to a 'new' 2010 sedan? Just wondering.

[Proboscis]

I own three of those cars

[Tik-Tok]

Originally posted by speedog
Gotta disagree with some of last few posters as I've seen a few head-ons between older and newer cars and the people in the newer cars always came out better.

When I was 18, I hit a '96 Chev, with my '78 Dodge Aspen, drivers fender to drivers fender (slow speeds, no more than 30km/h probably), my Aspen had a ding in the chrome around the headlight about the size of a fingernail, the Chev had $3000 in damages.

Originally posted by speedog
Remember the first shoulder belts too - ya had to store them away by folding them into clips on the ceiling of the car. Also remember the gas tank being behind the seat in my Dad's 67 Chevy half ton - yeah, there was that layer of cardboard paper between the tank and the back of the seat, not sure what that was there for though.

My '74 GMC 1/2 ton didn't even have shoulder belts, and had "suicide tanks". (two tanks, but were on the OUTSIDE of the frame, lol). I just retired it last October, but I only used it once a month for the past few years for dump/reno runs.

Originally posted by speedog
So for Jetta-2.0, Tik-Tok and nismo_fan - are ya saying that you'd feel safer in a 'new' early 60's sedan compared to a 'new' 2010 sedan? Just wondering.

2010 Sedan obviously. However if the 60's behemoth were outfitted with modern seatbelts, and an SRS system, then I'd take the tank.

Edit: My original point/grievance was that the video is trying to show how "dangerous" old vehicles are, but are using a POS that was probably in a farmers field rusting away for the past 20 years. If you want to film a convincing test, spend the $50g on a well restored one, and do the crash over.

[revelations]

More modern crash of Old vs New

[Jetta-2.0]

lets just say money wise a new car u driving on a 10kmh u hit another car ur bumper is gone and im sure the metal behind the plastic bumper is ganna be bent = ur life savings lol while the old heavy metal car u hit a fall at 10kmh the wall falls

and another thing if ur going that fast and u hit another car then u shouldnt be driving and if ur driving fast and u lose control of ur car then u deserve to die

[Jeremiah]

STFU Jetta-2.0

[Jetta-2.0]

Originally posted by Jeremiah
STFU Jetta-2.0

\

ur cool asswipe ur as dumb as ur avatar pic

[Hakkola]

Originally posted by Jetta-2.0
\

ur cool asswipe ur as dumb as ur avatar pic

He's just saying that because you can't fucking write. That is some of the worst grammar/spelling I've ever seen on Beyond and it hurts to read. The funny part was when you were saying the guy is in Jr. High, or should I say, "jr hight."

You must be pissed drunk though, so whatever.

[Jetta-2.0]

Originally posted by Hakkola


He's just saying that because you can't fucking write. That is some of the worst grammar/spelling I've ever seen on Beyond and it hurts to read. The funny part was when you were saying the guy is in Jr. High, or should I say, "jr hight."

You must be pissed drunk though, so whatever.

Oh i know i suck at grammer but thats who i am but u suck at every thing and no hes a Jr HIGHT cuz he cat reach the car pedals and if my posts hurt ur poor lil eyes then maybe u shouldnt read what i write then we wont frag each other yeah cool its a deal then

[Jeremiah]

Originally posted by Jeremiah
STFU Jetta-2.0

[tom_9109]

Its not surprising. 50 Years of technology makes a huge difference. To say the car was rusty is why is ridiculous. The old car would do that right of the assembly line.

[Tik-Tok]

Originally posted by tom_9109
Its not surprising. 50 Years of technology makes a huge difference. To say the car was rusty is why is ridiculous. The old car would do that right of the assembly line.

Did you not see the vid I posted? They sure weren't folding like a candy bar wrapper in that one (same angle for a couple of the tests too).

Seriously, the frames back then were thicker and heavier than a brand new 1 ton truck now. There's no way another car would hit the frame and the whole car buckle like that.

[tom_9109]

Originally posted by Tik-Tok


Did you not see the vid I posted? They sure weren't folding like a candy bar wrapper in that one (same angle for a couple of the tests too).

Seriously, the frames back then were thicker and heavier than a brand new 1 ton truck now. There's no way another car would hit the frame and the whole car buckle like that.

» Click image for larger version

If you look at this picture you can see a lot of the damage is to the sheetmetal of vehicle to the left of the frame rail and caused by the vehicle penetration.

If you look at the shape of the wreck you can see the the left frame rail bucked up and towards the center at approximately the front axle. I'd imagine that frame buckle is very close to 45 degrees up and 25-30 degrees inward.

A frame isn't really meant to be a crash safety feature, neither then or now. the old car was not designed to be crashed. The impact forces sheet metal and frame in whatever direction in wants and in this car and most crashed like this new and old the force is directed to the firewall and the doors.

In new cars doors are designed to stay shut because if they open (like on the old bel-air) the structural integrity of the passenger compartment is compromised.

As for not folding like candy wrappers

1. in your video look at what they have instead of doors on most crashes. The doors are gone and a 1 inch piece of steel tubing is there instead. That bar would keep the passenger compartment in much better shape than the flimsy sheet metal doors.

2. The speeds and direction of impact is not equal between any of the crashes in your video.

3. You're one of the more intelligent posters on this board. Take an objective view of all the video info an I'm sure you'll see it for what it is.