2009 Malibu in offset crash against 1959 Bel Air

[Southern_Trendkill]

All in all...two less chevy's =

 

[Funnyman141]

that's when you update the classic's. Plus the malibu is front wheel drive so everything is up front to take the brunt of impact and that bel-air could of had an inline 6 i under the hood so the malibu had the transverse mounted motor plus the front wheel drive tranny and that belair could of had a rusted away frame, an inline 6 so the motor and tranny didn't get hit putting all of the force on the frame and the body panels which would collapse easier.
do you see what I'm getting at?
if they did a head on collision with a non rusted 50's-60's car the classic would of probably fared better.

 

[ZMan]

that's when you update the classic's. Plus the malibu is front wheel drive so everything is up front to take the brunt of impact and that bel-air could of had an inline 6 i under the hood so the malibu had the transverse mounted motor plus the front wheel drive tranny and that belair could of had a rusted away frame, an inline 6 so the motor and tranny didn't get hit putting all of the force on the frame and the body panels which would collapse easier.
do you see what I'm getting at?
if they did a head on collision with a non rusted 50's-60's car the classic would of probably fared better.

now you're trying to make excuses, and definitely making A LOT of assumptions.

I'm sure they used a good example for this test. This is a company that does these sort of tests every day, why would they waste their time using a piece of crap? They exist to give accurate readings and tell us how safe our cars are.

What does it matter if it has an inline 6 anyway? It has an engine, it drives, that means it can hit something while moving!

 

[Nhaz]

I suspect that car was pulled out of a boneyard and rusted the last 25 years somewhere.

I would seriously like to see a brand new bell-air that hasn't seen 50 years of rust and mistreatment.

And repeat the test. I suspect that while the bell-air's passengers still take some injury it will prolly plow halfway through the other car doing it.

But iI agree. Safety has come a Long way. The old cars without seat belts and crumple zones were very hard on the passengers.

 

[Toms01PSD]

You should have seen the video of the oversea's 4 door ranger crash test. It looked identical to that Bel-Air.

 

[Will]

Guess who wins?

http://wheels.blogs.nytimes.com/2009/09/17/a-2009-chevy-malibu-destroys-a-1959-bel-air-literally/

Notice the cloud of rust from the Bel Air. I wonder if that was a factor in the results.


AJ

It wasn't rust and it had an engine, according to THIS.

 

[Roger]

I'm fairly sure that car didn't come from a junkyard. The paint is nice, the trim is perfect... Maybe not a museum piece, but not a junker. I hate to see an old car destroyed, but the point is the safety of todays cars is so much better than any 59 model car. Consider also the weights of the two cars were almost even. The impact is the most common frontal impact, the insurance testing and manufacturers haven't been testing this impact for very long, maybe 10 years.

Yes, I saw the dust/rust fly. You would be surprised how much dust flies from a new car impact... FWD/RWD arguments aside, the 59 was a deathtrap compared to the 2009...

 

[Will]

Also, those old cars aren't as sturdy as bangin on the fender seems to indicate. They were not structurally designed to withstand an impact like modern cars are. See the door get pulled out, the A-pillar collapse and the windshield go frisbeeing off? The driver in the new car would have been wandering around in the road covered in white powder when the first responders arrived. The driver in the old car probably dislodged his brain from its moorings on the steering wheel, broke his neck when he collided with the ceiling and then broke everything else flopping around inside the collapsing steel of the car.

 

[Roger]

Reading the comments in the second article was still funny. Some people can't believe what they see as truth. How many of us wheelers are surprised by the amount of crap in nooks and crannies under our rigs? Even my old minivan had crap under it when I bought it. But cool has its price...

 

[85_Ranger4x4]

When my mom was a little girl in the late 60's their '58 Bel-Air was hit head on by a drunk going down the highway. Aside from my at the time infant uncle flying thru the windshield, a couple black eyes where the only injuries in the family of 6 that where in the car and nobody was wearing seat belts.

They had a heck of a time finding my uncle, he was in the road ditch and barely missed a fence post. It was a bad deal for him, he had a couple big surgeries to pick all of the glass of him.

It was a rust bucket too, holes in the floor and the tranny would slip if they tried going up too steep of a hill. It had at least one tire in the grave even before the bumper even got scuffed by the oncomming car. So they must not have been TOO bad of a car.

Not too big on the '58's, '57 was the apex of the Bel-Air IMO, earlier ones are dang nice too. Ford had nothing then that could compete with them for looks, although oddly they did outsell the '57 Bel-Air. (but not the '56 or '58)

 

[ZMan]

When my mom was a little girl in the late 60's their '58 Bel-Air was hit head on by a drunk going down the highway. Aside from my at the time infant uncle flying thru the windshield, a couple black eyes where the only injuries in the family of 6 that where in the car and nobody was wearing seat belts.

They had a heck of a time finding my uncle, he was in the road ditch and barely missed a fence post. It was a bad deal for him, he had a couple big surgeries to pick all of the glass of him.

It was a rust bucket too, holes in the floor and the tranny would slip if they tried going up too steep of a hill. It had at least one tire in the grave even before the bumper even got scuffed by the oncomming car. So they must not have been TOO bad of a car.

Not too big on the '58's, '57 was the apex of the Bel-Air IMO, earlier ones are dang nice too. Ford had nothing then that could compete with them for looks, although oddly they did outsell the '57 Bel-Air. (but not the '56 or '58)

how fast were both of the cars going? Thats definitely a bad deal for the infant, I'm surprised he wasn't killed.

 

[BlackBII]

That just looked like it would hurt. Ouch.

 

[lindsay_elaine]

People pull out in front of me when I'm driving the Ranchero ALL THE TIME. It's like they see it coming and think it has magical brakes (or is moving REALLY slow despite the fact that I'm moving with traffic) I try to keep my distance for obvious reasons.

 

[jranger86]

like a rock, it just sits there hahah

 

[85_Ranger4x4]

how fast were both of the cars going? Thats definitely a bad deal for the infant, I'm surprised he wasn't killed.

It was in the country, so probably 45+. I would guess 55.

Mom was only 6 or 7 and in the back seat when it happened, and my grandparents don't really care for the subject too much, so I don't really have a whole lot to go on as to what exactly happened.