1959 impala vs 2009 impala crash test video

[Wis Bang]

The transverse engine is worked into the crumple zone design. Besides absorbing the crush better than a longitiudinal mounted engine, the energy absorbing action folds the engine down under the passenger compartment. I used to walk past the local wreckers garage on my way to school and saw alot of crashed vehicles parked there. The engine and steering column wer often inside the passenger compartment.

I also remember one local crash where the guy had a early 60's rambler station wagon. Day b/4 the crash I installed his snow tires and placed his two 'summer' tires and wheels into the back. Coming back from the 'cut your own x-mas tree' farm he was forced to the right by an oncoming driver and struck a concrete bridge sidewall. The engine block ended up in his wife's lap [fatal] and one daughter along w/ her neighbor girlfriend were killed by those tires. The father walked away w/ cuts & bruses while his other daughter was in a body cast [she was behind mom] so 3 out of 5 died and another had life threatening injuries.

Today the bridge wall has the 'modern' guardrail twisted to the ground so the impact wouldn't have been as severe and while the 63 or 64 Rambler [unibody] wasn't the tank a 59 Chevy or a 59 Ford was; it was still a bit more 'substantial' than a Toyota Corrola. today's designs are more liveable. Though I doubt if an '09 Impala will ever be a classic!

 

[cdaigle430]

I would like to see the 09 impala go against a 74 chevy impala with the 200 lb factory front bumper. I think the 09 would have fit in the trunk of the 74 after the crash test.

It wouldn't matter much in the end. New cars are designed to crumple and protect the occupants, in the old days, a crash was designed to protect the car. I will still take the 09 over the 74 any day.

 

[Ryan03]

It wouldn't matter much in the end. New cars are designed to crumple and protect the occupants, in the old days, a crash was designed to protect the car. I will still take the 09 over the 74 any day.

I think you are taking my comment way to much in the literal sense. New cars obviously have more crash safety features than ones of years past. In the end though, it still boils down to simple physics. Crash 2 things head on into one another, with each going close to the same speed, most of the force is transferred to the lighter object [shooting marbles].
Which one do you think weighs considerably more...... I'll give you a hint, it does not come with one year of free onstar.

From younger and dumber years of aspiring in vein to be a demo derby world champion, I will inform you that the 73 to 77 GM fullsize cars are highly coveted in the demo derby world , especialy the 74 Chevy Impala cars and wagons due to they're very stout frontend structure. They are second only to 63 Ford Galaxies and early 60's Chrysler Imperials.

 

[RickB]

I think you are taking my comment way to much in the literal sense. New cars obviously have more crash safety features than ones of years past. In the end though, it still boils down to simple physics. Crash 2 things head on into one another, with each going close to the same speed, most of the force is transferred to the lighter object [shooting marbles].
Which one do you think weighs considerably more...... I'll give you a hint, it does not come with one year of free onstar.

From younger and dumber years of aspiring in vein to be a demo derby world champion, I will inform you that the 73 to 77 GM fullsize cars are highly coveted in the demo derby world , especialy the 74 Chevy Impala cars and wagons due to they're very stout frontend structure. They are second only to 63 Ford Galaxies and early 60's Chrysler Imperials.

You are still missing the point. Saving the occupants has taken precedence over saving the vehicle. Crash tests are not qualifying events for demolition derbies.

 

[Ryan03]

You are still missing the point. Saving the occupants has taken precedence over saving the vehicle. Crash tests are not qualifying events for demolition derbies.

I beg to differ. This comparison is not comparing apples to apples IMHO. In an old car you may end up with spaghettios sitting in the drivers seat because of component intrusion, but the internal injuries suffered by the passengers of the newer, safer engineered car are still going to receive the brunt of the force because the newer vehicle is sinificantly lighter. Internal injuries, such as a closed head injury for example, to passengers of the lighter vehicle vehicle are still a very real possibility.

 

[RickB]

I beg to differ. This comparison is not comparing apples to apples IMHO. In an old car you may end up with spaghettios sitting in the drivers seat because of component intrusion, but the internal injuries suffered by the passengers of the newer, safer engineered car are still going to receive the brunt of the force because the newer vehicle is sinificantly lighter. Internal injury for such as a closed head injury, for example, to passengers of the lighter vehicle vehicle are still a very real possibility.

Differ away, but today's lighter vehicles absorb energy as they self-destruct around the protected passenger. Older, more rigid cars transferred significantly more energy directly to the passenger causing more serious trauma.

 

[Ryan03]

Differ away, but today's lighter vehicles absorb energy as they self-destruct around the protected passenger. Older, more rigid cars transferred significantly more energy directly to the passenger causing more serious trauma.

True, But we are not crashing two like year like size vehicles into one another. Looking beyond the Impala vs Impala disagreement, I stand by my position that the occupants of a much lighter vehicle are at a disadvantage when involed in a crash with a significantly heavier, in this case older, vehicle. The reasoning is straight forward, the lighter vehicle has the brunt of the energy transferred to it, and only a fraction of that energy can be dissapated by 18 or so inches of crush in the newer vehicle. Imagine going 45mph and changing direction 180 degrees in 18 inches, that will hurt, air bag or not.

 

[Egon]

Crash 2 things head on into one another, with each going close to the same speed, most of the force is transferred to the lighter object [shooting marbles].
Which one do you think weighs considerably more...... I'll give you a hint, it does not come with one year of free onstar.

What is the actual weight of the two cars?

 

[aczlan]

What is the actual weight of the two cars?

A quick Google search says that:
1959: Between 3570# and 3670#
2009: 3764#
Looks like the newer one is heavier by about 100#.

Aaron Z

 

[Egon]

Thanks for looking up the information Aaron.:thumbsup:

Now; we were saying that weight is the deciding factor?