they spent 100's of thousnds on that video, wasted a nice car and a classic car to prove what we already know...lets ask ourselves again why our auto companies are in the situation they are in....hmmmmmm...nope it escapes me ... but I will figure it out......
If you can leave two black stripes from the exit of one corner to the braking zone of the next, you have enough horsepower. - Mark Donohue
Those are X-framed cars and an off-set impact like that stresses just how weak they are. That being said, I'm not going to argue that old cars are better or safer than new stuff.
Those are X-framed cars and an off-set impact like that stresses just how weak they are. That being said, I'm not going to argue that old cars are better or safer than new stuff.
Brian
Certainly not from a blanket standpoint.
But, excluding the beneficial effects of airbags, stability control, anti-lock brakes ('Yodas excepted, of course ;D), interior crash padding, recessed knobs, advanced restraint systems, and controlled crush zones, some larger and heavier older vehicles performed quite well in collisions "back in the day." For example, I recall my uncle was involved in a head-on crash at highway speeds in a massive 1960s Lincoln and escaped with only minor cuts and bruises.
Although the Chapter One pummeling of Chevolet's swing-axle Corvair got most of the press from Ralph Nader's "Unsafe at Any Speed," GM's weak X-frame cars received some Naderite "love" in a later chapter. Nader's trial lawyer buds apparently supplied him with information about cases involving early production X-frame cars that reportedly broke in half in severe "T-bone" crashes. Thus the modern crash test results were hardly surprising.
Comment