Jump to content


1959 Bel Air vs. 2009 Chev Malibu Crash Test


  • Please log in to reply
28 replies to this topic

#21 Lorraine

Lorraine

    Dial-Up Diva

  • Members *
  • 42714 posts
  • Gender:Female

Posted 06 December 2017 - 11:40 AM

I don't remember seeing many of those cars back then.

Sponsored Post

#22 Fordgalaxy

Fordgalaxy

    The Professor

  • Members *
  • 3905 posts
  • Gender:Male

Posted 06 December 2017 - 01:35 PM

Crumple zones are much better for the occupants, but they are also why cars get "totaled" much easier these days. I bet insurance companies love that.

#23 That One Guy

That One Guy

    Straight Outta Sunnyvale

  • Members *
  • 22147 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Utah
  • Interests:Buyin' a Jeep Wrangler, getting that 5th Utah national park in, going to Scotland, returning to Canada, Devin Townsend, doin' good

Posted 06 December 2017 - 06:37 PM

 MMCXII, on 06 December 2017 - 11:03 AM, said:

cars today are intentionally designed to crumple but in '59 they were designed to withstand as much as possible.

some point along the way they figured it was more important to use the car to save the driver instead of just save the car..

the real question here is what in the fcuk did they really prove by destroying an old classic car.. I mean it's not a mopar but still..
How far automotive safety has come? It actually seems really easy to identify what they were going for.

#24 That One Guy

That One Guy

    Straight Outta Sunnyvale

  • Members *
  • 22147 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Utah
  • Interests:Buyin' a Jeep Wrangler, getting that 5th Utah national park in, going to Scotland, returning to Canada, Devin Townsend, doin' good

Posted 06 December 2017 - 06:38 PM

 Fordgalaxy, on 06 December 2017 - 01:35 PM, said:

Crumple zones are much better for the occupants, but they are also why cars get "totaled" much easier these days. I bet insurance companies love that.
No doubt. Necessary evil, financially.

#25 Lorraine

Lorraine

    Dial-Up Diva

  • Members *
  • 42714 posts
  • Gender:Female

Posted 06 December 2017 - 06:43 PM

It keeps car manufacturers and dealerships busy, but must be hurting body work shops.

#26 ozzy85

ozzy85

    The Professor

  • Members *
  • 3335 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:In the deep dark forest where the wolves run.
  • Interests:Metal. Beer. Powerbelching. \m/

Posted 07 December 2017 - 12:06 AM

A car can get totaled due to $$ of replacement parts. the cost of all those airbags going off and everything that breaks is factored into the value of the repair.

#27 MMCXII

MMCXII

    The God Of Balance

  • Members *
  • 6211 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Edmonton Alberta
  • Interests:Playing drums, creating art, building hot rods, sacred geometry and spirituality, Metal detecting, mountain biking, camping/canoeing, off roading, motorcycles.

Posted 07 December 2017 - 01:32 AM

 That One Guy, on 06 December 2017 - 06:37 PM, said:

 MMCXII, on 06 December 2017 - 11:03 AM, said:

cars today are intentionally designed to crumple but in '59 they were designed to withstand as much as possible.

some point along the way they figured it was more important to use the car to save the driver instead of just save the car..

the real question here is what in the fcuk did they really prove by destroying an old classic car.. I mean it's not a mopar but still..
How far automotive safety has come? It actually seems really easy to identify what they were going for.

How far auto safety has come? They need to prove this??  

Any way my post was sort of tongue in cheek.. I hate seeing nice old cars destroyed, even chevys!

#28 That One Guy

That One Guy

    Straight Outta Sunnyvale

  • Members *
  • 22147 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Utah
  • Interests:Buyin' a Jeep Wrangler, getting that 5th Utah national park in, going to Scotland, returning to Canada, Devin Townsend, doin' good

Posted 07 December 2017 - 01:34 AM

View PostMMCXII, on 07 December 2017 - 01:32 AM, said:

View PostThat One Guy, on 06 December 2017 - 06:37 PM, said:

View PostMMCXII, on 06 December 2017 - 11:03 AM, said:

cars today are intentionally designed to crumple but in '59 they were designed to withstand as much as possible.

some point along the way they figured it was more important to use the car to save the driver instead of just save the car..

the real question here is what in the fcuk did they really prove by destroying an old classic car.. I mean it's not a mopar but still..
How far automotive safety has come? It actually seems really easy to identify what they were going for.

How far auto safety has come? They need to prove this??  

Any way my post was sort of tongue in cheek.. I hate seeing nice old cars destroyed, even chevys!
At least it was a brown one ;)

'69 Charger R/T vs. '09 Charger R/T would've made people explode :lol:

#29 MMCXII

MMCXII

    The God Of Balance

  • Members *
  • 6211 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Edmonton Alberta
  • Interests:Playing drums, creating art, building hot rods, sacred geometry and spirituality, Metal detecting, mountain biking, camping/canoeing, off roading, motorcycles.

Posted 07 December 2017 - 07:59 AM

 That One Guy, on 07 December 2017 - 01:34 AM, said:

 MMCXII, on 07 December 2017 - 01:32 AM, said:

 That One Guy, on 06 December 2017 - 06:37 PM, said:

 MMCXII, on 06 December 2017 - 11:03 AM, said:

cars today are intentionally designed to crumple but in '59 they were designed to withstand as much as possible.

some point along the way they figured it was more important to use the car to save the driver instead of just save the car..

the real question here is what in the fcuk did they really prove by destroying an old classic car.. I mean it's not a mopar but still..
How far automotive safety has come? It actually seems really easy to identify what they were going for.

How far auto safety has come? They need to prove this??  

Any way my post was sort of tongue in cheek.. I hate seeing nice old cars destroyed, even chevys!
At least it was a brown one ;)

'69 Charger R/T vs. '09 Charger R/T would've made people explode :lol:

MY GOD man, Don't even joke.

Unless the duke boys are drivin the '69..
BO! look out! There's a dip in the road- Hang on cuz.. YEEEHAW!!!




0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users