1959 impala vs 2009 impala crash test video

[aczlan]

Never said that the '59 was a safer car. Just pointing out that it's not a realistic test and it's my belief that it was skewed to favor the '09.

To a certian extent, yes it was skewed. The 59 is a car built on an X frame, strike one against it in a frontal offset crash. It has a longitudinally mounted engine, strike two. It was made before carmakers worried much about crash testing, strike three.

Strike one: if you look at the RH side of the 59 in the after pictures it is apparent that the front section of the frame was twisted to the left, the RF tire and front clip are also twisted to the left more than just bending would account for. Also, the RH front door area is bent OUT from th frame bending.

Strike two: A car with a transversely mounted engine will do better in a frontal offset crash test. The engine helps to spread the impact across the whole front of the car and the whole front of the car is denser than a car with a longitudinally mounted engine.

Strike three: Crash engineers have made a LOT of changes to get from the '59 to '09 FWD platforms that we have today.

Overall: Was the test slanted or rigged? Possibly, but not by any more than a real crash would be. Could it have been done better? Yes, they could have used a '59 Galaxie and a '09 Crown Vic or something similar, that way they could stay with a RWD, a longitudinally mounted engine and body on frame platform for both cars, that would have been a much better way to show how safety as advanced (or not) since then.

Aaron Z

 

[Wayne County Hose]

So you think they sat down and conspired to make a phoney test to favor the '09?

Conspired to? Possibly. Helps the Government morons that do all this stuff justify their existence. Got into the test and saw their car would lose in a FAIR test then skewed it? The most likely possibility. Anybody knows that crashes are rarely straight on and the brakes are almost always applied at the last second causing the nose to dive, which would make for a very different result. The lower sitting 09 would have been worse off with a little nose dive. The people that did this test were at best, unqualified to perform a real world crash test and at worst, committed fraud. This is also a waste of our taxpayer money. Purchasing these vehicles for the sole purpose of destroying them. But, they are the government and they print new money everyday so they don't care. Anyway, the money was in the budget and burning a hole in their pockets so they had to spend it.

 

[MossRoad]

Conspired to? Possibly. Helps the Government morons that do all this stuff justify their existence. Got into the test and saw their car would lose in a FAIR test then skewed it? The most likely possibility. Anybody knows that crashes are rarely straight on and the brakes are almost always applied at the last second causing the nose to dive, which would make for a very different result. The lower sitting 09 would have been worse off with a little nose dive. The people that did this test were at best, unqualified to perform a real world crash test and at worst, committed fraud. This is also a waste of our taxpayer money. Purchasing these vehicles for the sole purpose of destroying them. But, they are the government and they print new money everyday so they don't care. Anyway, the money was in the budget and burning a hole in their pockets so they had to spend it.

Fine. So if you ran them both head on into each other which one would you rather be in? The '59 with no crumple zones, airbags, seat belts, collapsible steering column, or anti-lock brakes (lets say you saw the '09 coming and braked to make the nose dive), or the '09 with those features plus a windshield that will most likely keep debris out of the cabin?

(psst.... the moon landing was real, too)

 

[m1greg]

Conspired to? Possibly. Helps the Government morons that do all this stuff justify their existence. Got into the test and saw their car would lose in a FAIR test then skewed it? The most likely possibility. Anybody knows that crashes are rarely straight on and the brakes are almost always applied at the last second causing the nose to dive, which would make for a very different result. The lower sitting 09 would have been worse off with a little nose dive. The people that did this test were at best, unqualified to perform a real world crash test and at worst, committed fraud. This is also a waste of our taxpayer money. Purchasing these vehicles for the sole purpose of destroying them. But, they are the government and they print new money everyday so they don't care. Anyway, the money was in the budget and burning a hole in their pockets so they had to spend it.

The Institute for Highway Safety is not a gov agency. Check em out at:
IIHS-HLDI: Crash Testing & Highway Safety

 

[Wayne County Hose]

The Institute for Highway Safety is not a gov agency. Check em out at:
IIHS-HLDI: Crash Testing*&*Highway Safety

Okay, I'm wrong. They are funded by insurance companies. I guess trustworthiness between the gov't and insurance companies is still a tossup.

Notice also they had to go back to 59 to find a car they could compete with. Why not a 69 or a 79?

I'm not gonna sit here all day in a food fight over this. You guys are right. It was a fair test. None of these organizations would ever cheat to get the results they desire. They would never go into a test biased. The check is also in the mail.

 

[aczlan]

Notice also they had to go back to 59 to find a car they could compete with. Why not a 69 or a 79?

I believe that they chose a '59 because the IIHS was founded in 1959.

In the 50 years since US insurers organized the Insurance Institute for Highway Safety, car crashworthiness has improved. Demonstrating this was a crash test conducted on Sept. 9 between a 1959 Chevrolet Bel Air and a 2009 Chevrolet Malibu. In a real-world collision similar to this test, occupants of the new model would fare much better than in the vintage Chevy.
Source: IIHS 50th anniversary

Aaron Z

 

[MossRoad]

I believe that they chose a '59 because the IIHS was founded in 1959.


Aaron Z

Thank you Mr. Obvious. You are a lifesaver!

 

[Egon]

I was thinking the 09 should have been crashed with a 49 Dodge Power wagon!

 

[MossRoad]

Okay, I'm wrong. They are funded by insurance companies. I guess trustworthiness between the gov't and insurance companies is still a tossup.

Notice also they had to go back to 59 to find a car they could compete with. Why not a 69 or a 79?

I'm not gonna sit here all day in a food fight over this. You guys are right. It was a fair test. None of these organizations would ever cheat to get the results they desire. They would never go into a test biased. The check is also in the mail.

Watch Saturday Night Live: Madeline Kahn/Carly Simon Video Clip - MovieWeb

 

[Wayne County Hose]

Thank you Mr. Obvious. You are a lifesaver!

If your goal was to win a food fight, congratulations. After all, serious discussion presenting facts and figures is becoming a rarity around here. What Saturday night live or the Youtube clip had to do with anything, I will never know. Seems like TBN is starting to stand for The Barnyard Network.