1959 Bel Air VS. 2009 Malibu
Last Updated:
Amazing video.
Shatters what a lot of people think of older cars. “They were built like tanks”, “don’t make them like they used to” etc…
Thank God they don’t make them like they used to.
This movie shows how modern technology and engineering really saves lives.
As well as safety regulations, like it or not….
You are 105% CORRECT!
…and I do like old cars.
wow
Thanks to whom? A certain Ralph Nader comes to mind…
Me too. I love old cars.
A few years back, I had a 64 Cadillac and a 68 Chrysler.
Loved them both.
Me too. I love old cars.
A few years back, I had a 64 Cadillac and a 68 Chrysler.
Loved them both.
Yeah…Those old sliderules are not quite as accurate as a CAD/CAM computer.
I like the gangster white walls.
I don't feel so bad about my 2000 being so behind the "safety curve" anymore. 41 years of technology improvements still makes me feel confident even though I don't have ABS, Traction Control, ESC, Pass Airbag shut off, side impact airbags, head curtain airbags, frontal impact engine drop, lane departure warning, tire pressure monitoring system, Blind Spot Information System with Cross Traffic Alert, lane departure warning, daytime running lights, reverse sensing system, or a rear camera………oh crap.
Why don't I have at least half these features…the least of all ABS, yet I have a 4-disc cd changer, Auto A/C, and leather…I guess we have to ask DODGE about that one!
I hate it when ignorant pricks says that older cars are the safest.
One of my co-workers put his daughter in an early 80's Caprice saying it was built like a tank and REFUSED to believe that more mass isn't better. I told him that a Smart car was basically safer than what he bought her.
Maybe this video will change his mind.
I hate ignorance.
this isn't really a fair contest. while i agree that today's cars ARE safer than older cars, even a perfectly restored 50 year old car is going to suffer from a certain amount of metal fatigue. the only way to truly test the difference between cars of today and older models would be to somehow be able to go back in time. it's the same thing with sports stats when you try to compare someone like Jeter with someone from the 30s or 40s. stats don't tell the whole story, and this video doesn't really tell the whole story either.
again, i'm not advocating that old cars are as safe as new ones, with the way crush zones work, collapsible steering columns and the amount that science/mathematics have advanced along with computer-aided designs, of course new cars are safer. old cars were safe for their time though, beyond what this video purports to show.
It is all relative. Old cars are safe in their times because one driver would die instantly while the other driver died in a few days. LOL.
Seriously, it is comforting to know that when my babies are readied to drive, the technology will much better than it is now. I would love to be around when the IIHS celebrates its 100th anniversary with the crash of a 2009 against a 2059 vehicle. Unfortunately not 🙁
Is this a Chinese knockoff of a 59 Bel Air?
I kid, I kid!!!
TO: September 16, 2009 11:58 RE: 2000 Charger. Half of what you named was ALSO missing on most Lexus, BMW, Mercedes, EVEN CADILLAC in 2000! A lot has happened in the last 9-1/2 years!
"I told him that a Smart car was basically safer than what he bought her.
Maybe this video will change his mind.
I hate ignorance." -Yeeeaaaaahh,,,….right. … In a smart car your head comes to a stop in a fraction of the distance (and time) that it would take in a 2009 with a 6' long hood (aka crush zone); or even a 7-1/2' hood (like the poorly designed crush zone of the '59 BelAir) In a SMART your brain will splatter into the inside of your skull when you immediately STOP-N-SNAP BACK; rebounding due to the NON-EXISTANT hood/cruch zone. So you DIE INSTANTLY in a SMART (massive concussion) …in spite of still being buckled into your seat. A 1959 Bel Air with 13" tires and a 180 HP engine may not be as safe a 2009 Chrysler 300 with a 6.1 Hemi; but I sure wouldn't jump to the illogical conclusion that a Smart car with a hood shorter than 5" would magically be safer! -you must really hate yourself; being how you hate IGNORANCE! PS: Ya think that both the '59 BelAir & '09 BOTH had V6 engines? Would have been interresting to see a 09 CTS hit a -59 Fleetwood; both with V8's
"TO: September 16, 2009 11:58 RE: 2000 Charger. Half of what you named was ALSO missing on most Lexus, BMW, Mercedes, EVEN CADILLAC in 2000! A lot has happened in the last 9-1/2 years!"
Sorry you missed the joke! The only concerning thing is the lack of ABS in an Intrepid. My previous car from the late 80s had ABS. Something is just plain wrong with that picture.
It is not speed that kills…It's the sudden stop…LOL!
Correct…Your brain will turn to scrambled goo inside your skull with the instant infinite G force.
Agree with Casey, you just can't tell if the car they crashed against the Malibu was a rust bucket, it is 50 years old. If the insurance institute wants to run a real test they would need to build a bel air with 2009 steel.
There also is no denying that technology, especially computer modeling has brought safety to new heights.
"Anonymous said…
"I told him that a Smart car was basically safer than what he bought her.
Maybe this video will change his mind.
I hate ignorance." -Yeeeaaaaahh,,,….right. … In a smart car your head comes to a stop in a fraction of the distance (and time) that it would take in a 2009 with a 6' long hood (aka crush zone); or even a 7-1/2' hood (like the poorly designed crush zone of the '59 BelAir) In a SMART your brain will splatter into the inside of your skull when you immediately STOP-N-SNAP BACK; rebounding due to the NON-EXISTANT hood/cruch zone. So you DIE INSTANTLY in a SMART (massive concussion) …in spite of still being buckled into your seat. A 1959 Bel Air with 13" tires and a 180 HP engine may not be as safe a 2009 Chrysler 300 with a 6.1 Hemi; but I sure wouldn't jump to the illogical conclusion that a Smart car with a hood shorter than 5" would magically be safer! -you must really hate yourself; being how you hate IGNORANCE! PS: Ya think that both the '59 BelAir & '09 BOTH had V6 engines? Would have been interresting to see a 09 CTS hit a -59 Fleetwood; both with V8's
September 17, 2009 5:00 PM"
You must have missed the video where Fifth Gear or Top Gear smashed a Smart car into a concrete k-barrier at 70MPH. You could still open the doors.
Yes, I'd rather be in a Smart than this Bel Air.
You must have missed the video where Fifth Gear or Top Gear smashed a Smart car into a concrete k-barrier at 70MPH. You could still open the doors.
–And you must have missed their point: read what the tester's said about the likelyhood of anyone SURVIVING it. You're still belted in your seat with the smart–but you're dead as a doorknob– because your brain simplay cannot decelerate from 70 to 0 in 5" — it needs about 6 FEET of length to decelerate slow enough to prevent a FATAL concussion. You drive a SMART — you DIE.
Chances are you will be seriously mentally retarded after going 70 -> 0 in 6 feet…You will wish for death.
70 to 0 in six feet is like 5X worse than being hit in the face by Mike Tyson in his prime.
But all these arguments are moot unless you're someone who buys a car specifically to find something or someone to go collide into.