09 Chevy vs a 59 Chevy Crash test

[ShelbyDogg]

Anyone want to try this test to see how they compare?

MEK has a new and old one.

[dutch]

pretty awesome to see in slowmo,   but I think someone posted it last week....

[72hemi]

Wow, that was a great video. Not what I had expected to happen.

[torredcuda]

I would have thought that at least the full frame on the `59 would have held up better than that. 

[Bluemonster71RT]

  to crumple zones

[Super Blue 72]

   Wow!  I would've figured that the new one would do better but I didn't think the older one would have sustained such damage!!!

Just curious, did both cars have thier drivetrains in?  The front ends crumple so easily.

That '59 had so much nice chrome work.  It was painful to see it get destroyed... 

[tactransman]

That '59 had so much nice chrome work.  It was painful to see it get destroyed... 

[Rare_T_A]

I really thought the old one would have done better than the new. I though the full frame would hold pretty solid.

[NoMope Greg]

I really thought the old one would have done better than the new. I though the full frame would hold pretty solid.

The frame probably does hold pretty solid.  However, since it's a body-on-frame car and the body is bolted to the frame and it's the body that takes the energy, the strength of the frame is irrelevant to passenger survivability.

to crumple zones

Crumple zones, better passenger compartment rigidity (notice the A-pillar on the Malibu doesn't bend at all, whereas the '59 pillars distort enough for the windsheild to come out whole) and better passenger protection inside the vehicle (three-point seatbelts, airbags, collapsible wheel/column, padded surfaces without sharp edges) all contribute to vastly improved survivability in modern vehicles versus their older counterparts.

[72hemi]

I just remembered that it should be noted that Chevrolet from 1958-1964 on passenger cars used an "x-frame" design that was very weak and had the frame rail basically ran up the middle of the car, which is probably why that car was chosen for the test. I would like to see that test conducted with say a new Chrysler 300 versus an old 300 or imperial (which the imperials have been banned from most destruction derby's due to their strength).

[brads70]

I just remembered that it should be noted that Chevrolet from 1958-1964 on passenger cars used an "x-frame" design that was very weak and had the frame rail basically ran up the middle of the car, which is probably why that car was chosen for the test. I would like to see that test conducted with say a new Chrysler 300 versus an old 300 or imperial (which the imperials have been banned from most destruction derby's due to their strength).

  I like to that test on a 60-80's full size caddy! Or any big car with a full frame! Air bags double as body bags! Esp in Smart cars! Seriously they are good ( air bags) but they are no substitute for "cubic inches" of sheet metal! I believe cars are engineered to fall apart for economic reasons (ie. sell more cars because they don't last) They use our safety as the excuse!
P.S  didn't stroker ( Jason) post this a few weeks ago?

[cudadave72]

Back in day there are cases of cars that barely got damaged in a wreck but the driver died because the car was so stiff the person was crushed by the steering wheel or worse thrown out the windsheild!!!

[ShelbyDogg]

P.S  didn't stroker ( Jason) post this a few weeks ago? 

Sorry to double thread if Jason posted this already. I just got this in an e-mail yesterday so I sent it up.

[torredcuda]

I just remembered that it should be noted that Chevrolet from 1958-1964 on passenger cars used an "x-frame" design that was very weak and had the frame rail basically ran up the middle of the car, which is probably why that car was chosen for the test. I would like to see that test conducted with say a new Chrysler 300 versus an old 300 or imperial (which the imperials have been banned from most destruction derby's due to their strength).

I was thinking it did`nt hit the full frame of the `59 but knida glanced it as it was a corner to corner impact.I think a full head on might be different or has been said an old Chrysler might fair better.You still can`t beat the safety of todays cars though!

[tactransman]

Sorry to double thread if Jason posted this already. I just got this in an e-mail yesterday so I sent it up.

I missed it when Jason posted so thanks for posting Rob!