Re: Crash Test 59 Chevy vs New Malibu
 

[ QUOTE ]
O.K. You just stated "flimsy sheet metal fender" Maybe you need to check the 09 vs the 59 fenders thickness. The 59 crumpled way too easy, in my opinon. There is more metal in the inter fender well of the 59 compared to both fenders in 09.

[/ QUOTE ]

The fender on the Malibu is for looks, it serves no other purpose. Behind that fender is where the strenght is. You remove the fender and the car performs the same in the crash test. On the other hand, the fender on the Impala is all youve got. Remove it and the Malibu smashes into the Impalas cabin.

Re: Crash Test 59 Chevy vs New Malibu
 

It's interesting that some are unable to grasp that the '59 is structurally unsafe by construction.

Re: Crash Test 59 Chevy vs New Malibu
 

WOW....Stop all the B/S and move on guys..life is getting shorter as you type away. Agree to disagree. https://www.yenko.net/ubbthreads/imag...mlins/wink.gif

Re: Crash Test 59 Chevy vs New Malibu
 

It's interesting YOU must be a expert, Grasped that!! I,m done.

Re: Crash Test 59 Chevy vs New Malibu
 

You're not done - this is your opportunity to show right-thinking North Americans what you know.

Now I don't profess to know about the structural integrity of cars, but as someone who is in the middle of the Bell Curve when it comes to intelligence, I can be objective (without a video, no less) and figure out that old cars aren't as safe as new ones. Your subjective outrage could be better used to ask why in the hell did they destroy a classic to prove a point we already know. https://www.yenko.net/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/bs.gif

Re: Crash Test 59 Chevy vs New Malibu
 

[ QUOTE ]
old cars aren't as safe as new ones

[/ QUOTE ]
NOW I HAVE TO DISAGREE New cars just are not as safe as the older heavy cars My wife is livlng proof of that
Back in 82 my wife had a chevy cavalier I had a 1970 Monte Carlo
One Sunday morning she got up early and decided to get some donuts.
I was still asleep in bed when I got the call that she was just rear ended
I got up got dressed grabbed my keys and went out only to find the cavalier
Out front but no Monte Carlo When I got there was my Monte Carlo really missed up https://www.yenko.net/ubbthreads/imag...emlins/mad.gif
My wife was ok . The cops told me there were chasseing girl for 10 blocks and told me that
My wife was stopped at a red light They also told me the girl was going at least 60-65 mph when she hit
My wife . https://www.yenko.net/ubbthreads/imag...lins/crazy.gif They also said that my Monte Carlo saved her life because if she were in a smaller car
Things would not have been good The problems with today’s cars is there is NO bumpers to say.
Yes they call them bumpers but they are nothing more than plastic junk
Now as fair as This Video Let them redo this test with a 59 Chrysler Imperial
My bet would be the Malibu would be the loser nothing more then a ball of steal
The 59 chevy X frame was not as strong BUT a lot stronger than a plastic un-body piece of Sh2344#
So as an Old auto mechanic and body man I do not buy this video I have worked on the old and new cars.
For me If I had the Choose of the 59 chevy to the Malibu I will take the 59 anyday as far as safety
as far as her cavalier I got rid of it that day and bought the bigest heavy car I could buy

One more thing I fixed the Monte Carlo and drove it for 10 more years
So when I see some thing like that video it means nothing to me

Re: Crash Test 59 Chevy vs New Malibu
 

In a front end impact would you rather be in the 59 or the 09?

Compare the fixed one-piece, steel, non-collapsible, metal spear-pointed horn buttoned, steering column to the collapsible column with multi stage airbag.

There is no surviving in the old cars when you hit those old non-collapsable steering wheel/column assemblies with the center of your chest.

Watch the interior shots of the crash and you see the dummy hit the 59's column just as it is being forced up into the driver's position. The dummy is traveling at 40 mph forward onto a steel spike traveling toward him at 40 mph. It's a steel projectile moving at 80 mph combined speed. The dummy just gets impaled and then catapulted away. Doesn't take too much imagination to picture what the internal organs would look like at that point. (no pun intended)

Re: Crash Test 59 Chevy vs New Malibu
 

First hand survivability example in an 59 or 60 Chevy Biscayne. 1966, my 40 year old father coming home from work. Guy blows a 4 way stop sign and barely clips the extreme left corner of my dads car going a reported 30mph. Probably $200 damage to the car. Even with newly intalled seat belts he breaks his neck against the drivers side window and window frame. Steering wheel rim is torn away from column. Give me all of those air bags any time!!!!

Re: Crash Test 59 Chevy vs New Malibu
 

[ QUOTE ]
In a front end impact would you rather be in the 59 or the 09?


[/ QUOTE ]

Easy answer: the '09.
1. The newer cars have air bags so your chance of survival is much greater.
2. You lose a disposable vehicle vs. a Classic! https://www.yenko.net/ubbthreads/imag...iggthumpup.gif https://www.yenko.net/ubbthreads/imag...mlins/grin.gif

Re: Crash Test 59 Chevy vs New Malibu
 

[ QUOTE ]
In a front end impact would you rather be in the 59 or the 09?




[/ QUOTE ] very easy answer the 59 for me all the way
When I worked at DHL whe had a lot of Ford E 250 Vans with a full frame NO air bags and those things were tanks
I have had more then one van that was hit and van's hitting other cars and the van allway's won
once had a vw jetta blow a red light and the driver t boned the guy The vw broke in two killed the driver of the vw The van I replaced the head light pulled the bumper out and sent him on the way
I know what they are trying to say that unbody air bags crumble zone ect is supost to be safer but I have seen way to many accidents and I am just not buying in to this and the same for the video I am not buy it
And my wife would not be here today if she was in that cavalier when she was hit That 1970 tank saved her no air bag no crumble zone just a big tank