Slashdot Mirror


'09 Malibu Vs. '59 Bel Air Crash Test

theodp writes "To celebrate their 50th anniversary, the Insurance Institute for Highway Safety crashed a 1959 Chevrolet Bel Air into a 2009 Chevrolet Malibu. Hate to spoil the ending of the video, but if you find yourself participating in a similar car-jousting contest, pick the Malibu over the Bel Air. (Not that you'll be complaining afterwards if you don't, or doing much of anything.) Guess there is something to those crumple zones after all."

5 of 496 comments (clear)

  1. the wunnerful 50's, not by Ancient_Hacker · · Score: 5, Informative

    Right around that year GM went to a wild X-frame design which allowed the door sills to be moved down several inches, making the cars easier to step out of. But the X was not very strong-- there were plenty of news photos showing Impalas broken in half by not very hard accidents.

    Also if you look at a 50's car, the bumpers are massive but held up by a couple thin pieces of mild steel stock-- a strong toddler could bend them out of place.

    1. Re:the wunnerful 50's, not by poopdeville · · Score: 5, Informative

      My observations were that I'd much rather be in an old tank like that in a minor accident. Anything major, and I'd rather be in a modern car with things like seatbelts, crumple zones and air bags.

      "Minor" accidents can be much more severe if your body is taking the jolt instead of the crumple zones. Injuries like whiplash are extremely common in "minor" accidents. You might be able to get your Ford's frame straightened, but you can't get your neck fixed anywhere as cheaply or easily.

      30 mph is not a minor accident, by the way. That's like falling out of a second story window (taking into account conservation of momentum leading to smaller forces on your body)

      --
      After all, I am strangely colored.
  2. And some follow up comments by TubeSteak · · Score: 5, Informative

    A few people were calling shenanigans, claiming there was no drive train or that the IIHS used a vehicle with a rusted out frame.
    So a writer for the NY Times caught up with "David Zuby, the senior vice president at the institute's crash-test center in Virginia"
    http://wheels.blogs.nytimes.com/2009/09/18/more-details-about-1959-bel-air-crash-test/

    --
    [Fuck Beta]
    o0t!
  3. Re:Classic Cars by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Informative

    http://wheels.blogs.nytimes.com/2009/09/18/more-details-about-1959-bel-air-crash-test/

    "We didn't want to crash a museum piece," Mr. Zuby said. "We were not looking for one that had been restored for museum or show quality." But the vehicle had to have a solid structure, although a little surface rust would be acceptable.

    They found what they wanted in Indiana. "The frame was sound and all the body panels were sound," he said. It had a 3.9-liter 6-cylinder engine and was in driving condition.

    The car was bought for about $8,500 and had about 74,000 miles on the odometer, which was broken. It was trucked to the test center in Virginia.

  4. Re:Classic Cars by los+furtive · · Score: 5, Informative

    They did: 09 Malibu and 59 Bel Air. RTFA and all that jazz.

    --

    I'm a writer, a poet, a genius, I know it. I don't buy software, I grow it.