They Don't Build Them Like They Used To
- Thread starter SonOfThomp
- Start date
SonOfThomp
Well Known Member
This really, REALLY shook me up. I thoughy I was driving around in a Sherman tank.
"It was no way to treat a senior citizen: sending a 1959 Chevrolet Bel Air hurtling into a collision with a 2009 Malibu at 40 miles per hour. As the video produced by the Insurance Institute for Highway Safety shows, the outcome wasn’t pretty, either.
The windshield dislodges, the driver’s door opens and the front half of the Bel Air goes through something between crumbling and what looks like imploding as the dummy in the driver’s seat flies around like Peter Pan.
“The Bel Air collapsed,” said David Zuby, the senior vice president for the institute’s vehicle research center in Virginia. “The area in which the driver was sitting collapsed completely around him.”
The test was to mark the 50th anniversary of the I.I.H.S., a group funded by the insurance industry. The idea was to show how much automotive safety has progressed in five decades.
While some people still think that the big steel bodies and sturdy frames of old cars meant stronger vehicles and good crash protection, the institute’s crash test shows that that just isn’t the case, Mr. Zuby said. Sophisticated engineering and high-strength steel give modern vehicles a huge advantage.
Here’s how the institute described what happened to the Bel Air:
“This car had no seat belts or air bags. Dummy movement wasn’t well controlled, and there was far too much upward and rearward movement of the steering wheel. The dummy’s head struck the steering wheel rim and hub and then the roof and unpadded metal instrument panel to the left of the steering wheel.
“During rebound, the dummy’s head remained in contact with the roof and slid rearward and somewhat inward. The windshield was completely dislodged from the car and the driver door opened during the crash, both presenting a risk of ejection. In addition, the front bench seat was torn away from the floor on the driver side.”
The I.I.H.S. has crash-tested hundreds of vehicles, and Mr. Zuby said he doesn’t know of any that performed worse than the Bel Air.
The institute rates vehicles as Good, Acceptable, Marginal or Poor. The group looks at how well the structure of the vehicle held up and the likelihood of injuries to the head, chest and legs. The Bel Air got a Poor rating in every category.
The 2009 Malibu got Good in every category but the one for the left leg and foot, which was rated Marginal.
And what does this mean to owners of 1959 Bel Airs? Mr. Zuby said driving in a parade was probably safe because the speeds were slow and it was a controlled environment.
“I wouldn’t recommend that anybody use an antique car like this for their daily driving around,” he said."
"It was no way to treat a senior citizen: sending a 1959 Chevrolet Bel Air hurtling into a collision with a 2009 Malibu at 40 miles per hour. As the video produced by the Insurance Institute for Highway Safety shows, the outcome wasn’t pretty, either.
The windshield dislodges, the driver’s door opens and the front half of the Bel Air goes through something between crumbling and what looks like imploding as the dummy in the driver’s seat flies around like Peter Pan.
“The Bel Air collapsed,” said David Zuby, the senior vice president for the institute’s vehicle research center in Virginia. “The area in which the driver was sitting collapsed completely around him.”
The test was to mark the 50th anniversary of the I.I.H.S., a group funded by the insurance industry. The idea was to show how much automotive safety has progressed in five decades.
While some people still think that the big steel bodies and sturdy frames of old cars meant stronger vehicles and good crash protection, the institute’s crash test shows that that just isn’t the case, Mr. Zuby said. Sophisticated engineering and high-strength steel give modern vehicles a huge advantage.
Here’s how the institute described what happened to the Bel Air:
“This car had no seat belts or air bags. Dummy movement wasn’t well controlled, and there was far too much upward and rearward movement of the steering wheel. The dummy’s head struck the steering wheel rim and hub and then the roof and unpadded metal instrument panel to the left of the steering wheel.
“During rebound, the dummy’s head remained in contact with the roof and slid rearward and somewhat inward. The windshield was completely dislodged from the car and the driver door opened during the crash, both presenting a risk of ejection. In addition, the front bench seat was torn away from the floor on the driver side.”
The I.I.H.S. has crash-tested hundreds of vehicles, and Mr. Zuby said he doesn’t know of any that performed worse than the Bel Air.
The institute rates vehicles as Good, Acceptable, Marginal or Poor. The group looks at how well the structure of the vehicle held up and the likelihood of injuries to the head, chest and legs. The Bel Air got a Poor rating in every category.
The 2009 Malibu got Good in every category but the one for the left leg and foot, which was rated Marginal.
And what does this mean to owners of 1959 Bel Airs? Mr. Zuby said driving in a parade was probably safe because the speeds were slow and it was a controlled environment.
“I wouldn’t recommend that anybody use an antique car like this for their daily driving around,” he said."
Yes.......... but like it was said on another post..... all it caught was the fender of the '59..... but it hit the new one pretty close to the center.
Dave
Dave
Richard/SIA
Well Known Member
"Insurance Institute for Highway Safety", AKA lying lobbyist!
These holier than thou big brother liberals (nazi's) only exist to supplement insurance company profits and their own payroll!
:
They have been behind too many attacks on any sort of Fun car to count.
Some of their inane conclusions have led to higher rates for "Red or deep blue" cars.
Higher rates based on your zip code, not your driving habits, manual transmission, etc.
:
This set up hit-piece (Was there an engine in the 59? Impact outside the frame, no seat belts, etc.) will no doubt be used to manipulate "public opinion" (Congress) into enacting draconion legislation against our cars.
Probably a double whammy, tied to "Green" (RED Socialist!) activity. :eek:
Did I mention, "F" his nasty nazi, green, big gov., propaganda machine!:takethat
no1::eek: :takethat :takethat
These holier than thou big brother liberals (nazi's) only exist to supplement insurance company profits and their own payroll!
:They have been behind too many attacks on any sort of Fun car to count.
Some of their inane conclusions have led to higher rates for "Red or deep blue" cars.
Higher rates based on your zip code, not your driving habits, manual transmission, etc.
:This set up hit-piece (Was there an engine in the 59? Impact outside the frame, no seat belts, etc.) will no doubt be used to manipulate "public opinion" (Congress) into enacting draconion legislation against our cars.
Probably a double whammy, tied to "Green" (RED Socialist!) activity. :eek:
No, he would recommend that we all drive Penis, er, Prius clones!
Did I mention, "F" his nasty nazi, green, big gov., propaganda machine!:takethat
no1::eek: :takethat :takethat
Oh Please...:takethat
This is just a different spin on a "smoke and mirrors" angle for anything presented to us by commercialism.
The amount of weight / steel in the 59 is no match for what they show us. The "playing feild" has been compromised. Give me a break!
Spin Doctors get paid the big bucks. Arrrghh!
This is just a different spin on a "smoke and mirrors" angle for anything presented to us by commercialism.
The amount of weight / steel in the 59 is no match for what they show us. The "playing feild" has been compromised. Give me a break!
Spin Doctors get paid the big bucks. Arrrghh!
I've seen a few posts on this and won't even waste my time looking at the video. I always ignore such things. I will say that maybe we need to conduct that same test over. This time the right way.
Anyone have a 59 Chevy with rear body damage we can use? I certainly don't want to use (waste) a good car body.
Just think of the message that would send back in their face with that video posted next to theirs. LOL
Anyone have a 59 Chevy with rear body damage we can use? I certainly don't want to use (waste) a good car body.
Just think of the message that would send back in their face with that video posted next to theirs. LOL
SonOfThomp
Well Known Member
Look, I've got no agenda - I'm deeply disappointed that my lovely '61 isn't the 'tank' I thought it was. However, denial - rabidly angry or otherwise - does not mitigate the apparent reality that Mr Nader had a point all those years ago, and because of this, cars are much safer than they used to be.
I would be interested in hearing how that video was 'rigged', hopefully by folks who took the time to view it. I am definitely not happy with this new information concerning my dear old daily driver. n fact, I slept poorly over it last night.
Deeply Affected
SoT
I would be interested in hearing how that video was 'rigged', hopefully by folks who took the time to view it. I am definitely not happy with this new information concerning my dear old daily driver. n fact, I slept poorly over it last night.
Deeply Affected
SoT
I would get banged up a bit if I took a hit in the 62 Impala I'm sure, however I would really be concerned about a hit in a Street Rod. They scare the hell out of me just looking at them in a car show. 
Leo
Leo
I don't think anyone can argue that the new cars are safer. I think my '07 has about 6 air bags in it.....
I'm still not worried about our cars safety or the integrity of all the iron in them.... They can still be considered a tank and with good seat belts they are as safe or safer than any 5 year old car...... Brian got blind sided and walked away from a real hard hit with only a few bruises (thank God) ..........
The only thing that was a concern for me was the steering column. When I installed the 605 box and had to cut the column I incorporated a slide so that it will colapse quite a bit if hit hard.
I would bet that we are some of the best drivers anywhere and are just as safe overall......... idiots dialing cell phones or putting on their make up don't drive '58 to '64 chevy's.... or street rods...... we are well aware that they are out there and we are all watching for them................ any of us could get blind sided like Brian did but in a head on I would bet the 409 would end up in the back seat of the new car.
My '61 will not be a daily driver because of insurance reasons here. It's much cheaper to have pleasure use only instead of business use coverage. With pleasure use I can use it 6 days a month to go to work and it will be driven those 6 days ...... weather depending of course. We probably have one of the highest accident rates in North America........ we have a lot of those short little black haired people looking over the dash board through the steering wheel while they dial their cell phone...... they keep running into things.... and I'm not worried.
Dave
I'm still not worried about our cars safety or the integrity of all the iron in them.... They can still be considered a tank and with good seat belts they are as safe or safer than any 5 year old car...... Brian got blind sided and walked away from a real hard hit with only a few bruises (thank God) ..........
The only thing that was a concern for me was the steering column. When I installed the 605 box and had to cut the column I incorporated a slide so that it will colapse quite a bit if hit hard.
I would bet that we are some of the best drivers anywhere and are just as safe overall......... idiots dialing cell phones or putting on their make up don't drive '58 to '64 chevy's.... or street rods...... we are well aware that they are out there and we are all watching for them................ any of us could get blind sided like Brian did but in a head on I would bet the 409 would end up in the back seat of the new car.
My '61 will not be a daily driver because of insurance reasons here. It's much cheaper to have pleasure use only instead of business use coverage. With pleasure use I can use it 6 days a month to go to work and it will be driven those 6 days ...... weather depending of course. We probably have one of the highest accident rates in North America........ we have a lot of those short little black haired people looking over the dash board through the steering wheel while they dial their cell phone...... they keep running into things.... and I'm not worried.
Dave
These tests are totally engineered. The point of impact is never random and is carefully determined and planned based on whatever they are trying to demonstrate. The 59 was carefully studied and evaluated from a structural engineering standpoint to see where the weak spots and collapsible points are, and the desired point of impact determined accordingly. I can't tell if the engine is there or not, but you can be sure that if it isn't, then the entire front structure of the car is weakend. The X frame is also a problem as it will tend to fold back on itself if hit off center, (unlike a perimeter frame). That was, I'm sure taken into account when the point of impact was determined, to effect the desired outcome. As I said in the other post, The point of impact is with the left front frame horn on the malibu to the left front fender of the 59 outboard of the left frame horn where there is no structure other than the fender and inner fender, all the way to the A pillar. As the impact reaches the left front wheel, the bending moment on the arms causes the frame to fold back on itself. A direct, head-on hit would have had a very different outcome.
JMHO
:
JMHO
:
So I guess if someone is heading straight for my 62 I will make sure we hit dead center. I hope there in a 20 year old honda.
I hope there in a 20 year old honda.SonOfThomp
Well Known Member
I added Corbeau racing belts to my '61, seriously compromising the interior aesthetics and rendering the back seat effectively useless, save for the center lap belt - reserved for the car seat for my child. I thought that this, + the Bulk Factor, made us relatively safe. But the catastrophic implosion of the passenger area convinced me, in a heart-stopping, life changing, cathartic few seconds, that it is utterly irresponsible and perhaps even stark, raving mad to drive my beloved Bel Air when far, FAR safer transportation is so easily and cheaply available - even if it's a boring car. You guys are, of course, free to make the opposing choice, but I have heard no rational evidence to dissuade me. Angry denial is easy, but life is life, blood is blood, and I still, STILL hate this. Who knows - maybe ignorance is bliss after all, but I'm not willing to bet my life on it, or that of my wife and child.
HEY...........Send me your address and I'll come get that dangerous thing and get it out of your life....................
Richard/SIA
Well Known Member
We each pick our poisons.
My daily driver is a 78 El Camino, no airbags.
My soon to be daily driver while I do some clean up on the 78 will be a 57 Chevy Pick-up, no airbags.
My "W" project is a 59 El Camino, which will be driven as much as possible, no air bags.
Out of ten cars I currently own, NONE have air bags, only one has "Safety" bumpers, most do not have seat belts, and I am not worried one bit!
To Hell with the safety nazi's.
None of us are going to live forever, some prudence, and moderation in risk taken, are still good.
But I refuse to deprive myself of life's simple pleasures on the authority of bia$ed lobbyi$t with an agenda to justify!
Modern cars would kill me with boredom, I would no doubt fall asleep at the wheel and die.
:
S
Swiss Impala
Guest
SoT.
You should not be disappointed that our cars eventually could not be as
strong as we thought.
For me it is no problem. I always trusted in my Impala! It always was and it is more for me than just a car, it was and it is a good partner for the road!
Whoever it may be, but this is what they want.
To reach that we can't get insurances for classic cars or just to make
us afraid of using them!
Franz
You should not be disappointed that our cars eventually could not be as
strong as we thought.
For me it is no problem. I always trusted in my Impala! It always was and it is more for me than just a car, it was and it is a good partner for the road!
Whoever it may be, but this is what they want.
To reach that we can't get insurances for classic cars or just to make
us afraid of using them!
Franz
SOT,
When I was in High School, 1959-1961, we were shown films from the Ohio State Highway Patrol that would scare the bejueezus out of anyone. they were actual pictures and films of hair, teeth, and eyeballs from actual fatal accidents. It slowed me down, but didn't make me want to quit driving. I took a defensive driving course instead. You can get killed in any vehicle, no matter how many safety devices it has, you learn to defend yourself. When I started flying in 64, I got used to wearing a seat belt and wouldn't think of driving or flying without one. The biggest risk in driving is the other driver. You have to expect him to do something stupid and be prepared. When I approach an intersection, I expect the other guy to blow right on through the red light or stop sign and I'm ready to take evasive action.... always be looking for a way out. Just like I wouldn't fly up a blind canyon without knowing I had a way out.
These cars have survived all these years so far, and have many more left if they are treated with respect. Don't let a biased crash test get to you. I would wager that I could set up the same kind of test and have the 59 come out the winner with a different point of impact.
:SonOfThomp
Well Known Member
HEY...........Send me your address and I'll come get that dangerous thing and get it out of your life....................
http://austin.craigslist.org/cto/1382387492.html