Yank tank crash test - old vs. new

peasant

Just came across this on youtube.

Once you get over the regretable destruction of a classic car, it is interesting to see how the new car slices through the old one like a knife through butter.
(and nobody could accuse a '59 Chevy of being flimsy)

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=joMK1WZjP7g

maidhc

I think I said something similar in another thread. My capri is made of paper in comparison to even a new fiesta, not to mention the tank that is the mondeo.

The most noticable thing in new car design is the strength of the door frames, and the way the A pillar arcs into the roof without any join.

corktina

59 driver dead for sure with a face full of steering colomn...09 guy would have walked away I guess....waste of a nice chevy but a lesson to us all...

Im Only 71Kg

i hope to f*ck im never in a car crash.

Traumadoc

Amazing the differrence in the intrusion into the drivers compartment.
They should have had a camera looking at the footwells.
I used to see a lot of serious lower limb injuries in RTCs, modern cars are far more protective.

BostonB

Pretty impressive. How old is my car again....:eek:

BrianD3

Old news but still an interesting video.

As I said on another thread, I don't believe that a 69, 79 or 89 equivalent of the old Bel Air would fare a whole lot better in that crash. Modern (<15 year old) designs are not only much safer but are also very aggressive towards older ones in car vs car crashes. The passenger compartments of modern cars are very strong but the frontal crash structures are also much more substantial than they used to be. Even going back to 1990s cars, compare the "chassis" rail size of a Megane mk1 with those of a Megane mk3. The Mk1 is a 4 star rated car but I'm pretty sure it would be bulldozed by the new one in an offset crash.

What makes me :rolleyes: about these videos is the comments that get posted with them. Dumb people have these strongly held beliefs that big old cars are "tanks" while new ones are "weak plastic". Instead of taking on board the result of crash test they whinge, moan, look for excuses, spout conspiracy theories etc. The Renault Modus vs Volvo 940 video is full of this, pretty much every day some eejit comes out with the "revelation" that the Volvo had no engine, its chassis rails were cut, a Volvo 240 would have fared better and so on. Absolute bullsh1t.

It's not all good news for modern cars though, what happens if two modern cars of similar size hit one another and due to the angle or lack of compatibility between them, the crash structures do not get to do their job as well as might be expected. Maybe someone can sum up what's being said in this video as I think this is what it is about.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Uls4oWWBBWQ

peasant

BrianD3 wrote: »

It's not all good news for modern cars though, what happens if two modern cars of similar size hit one another and due to the angle or lack of compatibility between them, the crash structures do not get to do their job as well as might be expected. Maybe someone can sum up what's being said in this video as I think this is what it is about.

That's pretty much it ...the widthways safety elements of both cars miss each other, one drives under the other and the damage to both cars (and with it the risk to the health of the passengers) is much higher than it would be in a barrier test, especially as the very strong lengthways chassis rails of each car tear into the other one

Dartz

I wonder if these improvements to the design of cars as a whole and the falling out of use of old clunkers isn't a greater contributor to the falling number of road deaths than official statistics give credit for. How many accidents happen, as opposed to how many fatalities happen? That'd be an interesting statistic to see.

Even ten year old cars you can pick up for a song can have 5-star safety ratings (If you don't mind driving a Laguna 2). Compare that to even a 15 year old car or older.

It might also part explain why younger drivers tend to have more fatal accidents (rather than just more accidents). They tend to be stuck in the older boxes which just collapse on impact, because anything newer and safer would be too expensive to insure.

ION08

Basically, as they're two different types of car (family hatchback and supermini), upon impact, the safety elments(crumple zones) aren't as effective as they should be upon collision as the design of the cars arent compatible with one another

Traumadoc

The engineering of modern cars saved hundreds from death and serious injuryIMO. in the late 60s over 600 people were dying even though there were far fewer cars, now there are about 200.

T-Maxx

Yeah whatever...........

I'd much rather drive a '59 Bel Air than a '09 Malibu.

Traumadoc

As an owner of a 40 year old car, I would agree with you.