kayak65cuda

Feb 23, 2011 at 7:41 pm

WOW - I'm not feeling to good... gotta lay down...

donjuan

Jan 23, 2011 at 11:04 pm

wow the 09 would have crushed driver of 59 a lil shocking but yes cars are soooo much better at protecting us now thankfully

Nightmare388

Dec 15, 2010 at 10:00 pm

cool. thanks for sharing

66chief

Jul 16, 2010 at 5:13 am

I Thought the old chev would have stood up better than it did

chevy66babe

Jul 3, 2010 at 3:26 pm

That was an eyeopener. And here I thought I was safer in my rolling all metal tank called Babe. I figured I'd squash most of the new cars like a bug. I won't be quite so confident now, but I don't ever want to put me or Babe to the test.

Hotrodbill

Jun 28, 2010 at 4:31 pm

Makes you wonder what the heck kind of tires where on the 09? Where they solid rubber, when have you seen big white walls on a 09 Malibu and those wheels are not a norm on one. Still would not want to be in any kind of car if this really happen! Drive safe and don't test this out!

vegavairbob

Jun 23, 2010 at 11:12 am

Check out the Smart Car hitting a brick wall at 60 (or more, I forget)
It bounces of the wall no penatration into the passenger compartment. Its like the new designs are solid (they dont crush that much and front end length doesn't matter. They've done something to replace the mass of older cars but these new ones are stronger almost like your H2.

ProphetOfZoom

Jun 19, 2010 at 11:14 am

Now try that with a '59 Dodge and see which one wins!

TOMS2001

Jun 18, 2010 at 10:19 pm

MAKES me feel better about owning my malibu.

dragon_chick_99

Jun 17, 2010 at 9:33 pm

WOW!! I thoguht the 59 would've taken that crash better than that, but it;s true on the newer cars having those crumple zones to protect the passengers. That's how Dragonbird was able to protect me, howelse would she have protected me from a full size dodge ram 1500 series dually pulling a trailer?

plum71

Jun 16, 2010 at 10:24 am

Well put Alwaysakid.

alwaysakid

Jun 15, 2010 at 10:24 am

I have to agree with plum71, as I remember a lot of highway deaths came from the engine and/or transmission landing in a person's lap, which you just don't hear anymore. But this is a helluva way to celebrate; kind of like the Humane Society celebrating its accomplishments by demonstrating what happens when two dogs fight to the death.

plum71

Jun 11, 2010 at 1:40 pm

By the way..as a PS on this, thetruthaboutcars.com blog did a little research that I just backed up. The car that was used in the test was purchased online for $8500 from Mr. Jim Snell out of Indiana. He was helping his friend sell the car. It was a good condition driver with a six cylinder three speed. (probably the reason some people thought it didn't have an engine. The car had 60,000 original mile and was not a rust heap. You can actually visit Jim's website jim59.com and see photos of the car as it was posted. The car also appeared at the NSTA (National Science Teachers Association) conference earlier this year in Philadelphia where it was on display, post mortem, with the engine still in the bay (albeit adjusted a bit from the impact). If you look at the interior footage and additional angles in Hi Def available on the web you can see the floor and dash surge upward in the middle the way they would if an engine and trans slid back under the passenger compartment. Here endeth the lesson.

plum71

Jun 11, 2010 at 12:19 pm

I'm sorry to blow everyones bubble here, but even the worst of new cars is safer than the best of old cars. What everyone is focused on is the mass of the cars. The effects of an accident does multiply the mass, but the engineers at every automotive works have continually developed ways to defeat the moving mass of a vehicle. Engine sheer points, crumple zones, impact deflection beams, lateral deflection points. These are all major advancements in automotive engineering. Look I love my old Dodge as much as anyone loves their classic and I love the Corvairs I grew up with as a kid. However, from research and more than a few personal experiences I can tell you that the new car wins. Let's take a look back at Indianapolis racing, where most technological advancement came from for many manufactureers over the years. In the 1950s through the mid 1960s, the "roadster" dominated the brickyard and speeds increased every year. These roadsters were heavy and build "strong" on solid frames. The cars simply did not come apart on impart. And that was part of the problem. Many many drivers were killed in that era. Today, when an indy car merely touches the wall it looks like an explosion that no one could live through. But that's the design. The car destroys itself and absorbs as much impact to its surrounding compnents as possible while keeping the "capsule" of the driver safe. The less intrusion to the capsule, the better. From collapsable steering columns to bumper position cars have gotten far better at protecting their occupants. A better car to use from 1959 would have been a Ford. On those the steering box was mounted in front of the engine on the k member with a long column running back to the firewall. Ask some old timers about those accidents. They normally ended up with a person sticking out of the roof impaled upon the steering wheel. Someone made a fact that new cars were crap because they get totalled too easy. That's part true. They are absorbing the force instead of you and your family. For that reason, they are seemingly disposable, but better the car that you.
I wouldn't care how much rust was on the old car if that is actually the case. It still doesn't change the fact that it is from an era that was not focused on the details of safety. Ford actuall lauched an ad campaign in 1956 where they touted the safey features on their new models. Immediately Ford sales dropped. When surveyed people said that Ford scared them out of buying their car because Ford told them that it "could" be in an accident. Denial ain't just a river in Egypt.

gearhead19

Jun 9, 2010 at 8:39 pm

dang that coud happen to anyon of us it does make u thik if u is real or not

critter2

Jun 9, 2010 at 8:32 pm

That's hard to belive? Metal Then Was made in The USA !!! lot of effect's There!!

69brrrd

Jun 8, 2010 at 11:15 pm

The '59 Bel Air driver would have died happy, but with STYLE! The high-tech auto-cad designed crumple zones of modern cars make crashes survivable but make cars look less like cars and more like cloned survival pods with wheels that have to be totaled even in minor mishaps. Ever wonder why they all look the same? Notice the passenger compartment of the Malibu afterward...or is that a Camry...or an Altima..or a BMW,..I can't really tell the difference anymore.....

3fan4ever

Jun 8, 2010 at 10:30 pm

THATS A SHOCK TO ME,I THOUGHT IT WOULD'VE BEEN THE OTHER WAY AROUND.I STILL THINK THE MALIBU IN A REAL TEST WOULD CRUMBLE LIKE A SODA CAN.I DONT TRUST THIS TEST,BUT THATS JUST ME.

colton77

Jun 8, 2010 at 8:16 pm

at first i really didnt expect that to happen but the new cars are designed to break in certain places in order to keep front end crashes out of the cabin of the car just like what happened to the 59 even at that one would think that the heavier old car would have just chewed the malibu up and spit it back out considering how light of metal its made of that was pretty cool....... bad waste of a 59 chevy

jebfastlane

Jun 8, 2010 at 6:18 pm

You are right the outcome of this not what I would have thought, but you have to look at the death toll coming down over the last 60 years.