1959 Chevrolet Bel Air Vs. 2009 Chevrolet Malibu

[Dino Scuderia]

No, not in performance....safety.

Amazing.

[ame="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5CU-k0XmLUk"]YouTube - 1959 Chevrolet Bel Air Vs. 2009 Chevrolet Malibu IIHS Offset[/ame]

[f6fhellcat13]

NO!

[Dino Scuderia]

Be careful out on the road, Fleet!

[Timothy (in VA)]

A graphic demonstration of the advancement of vehicle safety. Very impressive. Very original. DON'T DO IT AGAIN!

[NicFromLA]

Alright, alright: I'll stop complaining about all the weight modern safety systems add to today's cars.

PS: How fast were they going?

[cmcpokey]

sad to see such a nicely preserved bel air destroyed, but an excellent reminder for those that drive older cars to be careful.

[fpv_gtho]

Technically, they shouldve just compared each impact against a brick wall. As they did it theyre introducing alot of other variables regarding their relative safety.

If you want real scary though, they shouldve compared both cars on side impact, or worse still, rear impact. Alot of new cars today still have a pretty weak rear crash structure, and alot of authorities dont even crash test for rear impacts.

[kingofthering]

So they destroyed a clean vintage Bel-Air to tell us the obvious?

[wwgkd]

So they destroyed a clean vintage Bel-Air to tell us the obvious?

It's not like the IIHS is widely regarded as a car enthusiast organization.

[G35COUPE]

It has taken over 40 years to make that little difference in cars. You would think by now they would have encouraged the development of accident-free cars.

[clutch-monkey]

god no. the last thing people need is the belief that no matter what they do some form of safety net will save them.

[nota]

Technically, they shouldve just compared each impact against a brick wall.

Its not always possible to have a technical accident

No, not in performance....safety.

Amazing.

Amazing indeed - notice that the base of the A-pillar strikes the roof rail!


Additional footage
[ame="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_xwYBBpHg1I"]YouTube - Crash test: 1959 Chevy Bel Air[/ame]

[johnnynumfiv]

I was just driving a '59 el camino a few weeks ago, glad I didn't get hit head on. Maybe being slammed to the ground would help in a collision.

[kingofthering]

It has taken over 40 years to make that little difference in cars. You would think by now they would have encouraged the development of accident-free cars.

Little difference? I think the difference between slightly injured and dead is quite large.

[LeonOfTheDead]

Alright, alright: I'll stop complaining about all the weight modern safety systems add to today's cars.

PS: How fast were they going?

both 40 mph

Technically, they shouldve just compared each impact against a brick wall. As they did it theyre introducing alot of other variables regarding their relative safety.

If you want real scary though, they shouldve compared both cars on side impact, or worse still, rear impact. Alot of new cars today still have a pretty weak rear crash structure, and alot of authorities dont even crash test for rear impacts.

This.
Testing each car against a similar car would have been a better idea. Of course it's less safe to drive an old car NOW than a new one, but back in 1959 this Bel Air would have never hit a 2009 Malibu, and I'm pretty sure the damages the Bel Air would suffer against another Bel Air would be inferior.
That said I also think crashing a Malibu against another Malibu would result in more damages than in this case, but less then in an accident against two old Bel Air'.

It has taken over 40 years to make that little difference in cars. You would think by now they would have encouraged the development of accident-free cars.

Little difference...yes.
Even assuming this difference is "little", that doesn't mean it was easy to achieve.